Can A CFI Cancel / Revoke an endorsement ?

36 Answers

1. 
   

   
   

   John D Collins on Dec 01, 2013

   I think the CFI has a little explaining to do. Either his original endorsement did not meet the regulations which suggests an oversight, incompetence, or fraud on his part, or the notice of withdrawal is intended as punitive. In any of these cases, I seriously doubt that the instructor can withdraw a solo endorsement and there is no precedent for doing so. If I were the student, I would report the issue to the CFI’s employer and if he was a freelance instructor, I would take the issue to the FSDO. IMHO, this is unacceptable behavior on the part of the instructor and he should seek a new line of work.

   -3 Votes 0 Votes  3 Votes

2. 
   

   
   

   Mark Kolber on Dec 01, 2013

   I’m a little on the other side of that fence than John. If we’re talking about the solo endorsement on a student pilot certificate, then I agree. What’s done is done. But, if we’re talking about the solo logbook endorsement, 61.89(A)(8) prohibits a student pilot from operating “In a manner contrary to any limitations placed in the pilot’s logbook by an authorized instructor.”

   Nothing there says “at the time the endorsement is given.” And the ability to limit a solo endorsement includes the ability to terminate it. I think John smells retribution which leads even judges to want to reach a decision to prevent it, so let’s change the scenario: a week after receiving his solo endorsements, a student breaks his leg and will be unable to fly for 6 weeks. Shouldn’t a CFI have the ability to say, “sorry about your accident, but you can’t solo again until I take you up,” and cancel the endorsement?

   In the case presented here, for whatever reason, the student and CFI have parted ways. Shouldn’t the CFI be able to say, “sorry, you can’t fly on my ticket when I’m no longer in a position to supervise you?”

   0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

3. 
   

   
   

   Kris Kortokrax on Dec 01, 2013

   I’m with John.

   If an inspector conducts a practical test and issues a certificate, he may not decide a week later that he shouldn’t have issued it and terminate it. The only person who may suspend or revoke a flying privilege granted by a certificate is FAA Legal Counsel.

   In the same manner, if an instructor is issuing an endorsement, he is attesting to the fact that at the time the endorsement was issued, the pilot (student or otherwise) met the regulatory requirements for the endorsement. If the pilot did not meet the requirements, the instructor falsified the record.

   The student would not be in violation of 61.89(a)(8) because there would have been no limitation placed in his logbook. An email sent after the fact would not be found to be part of the endorsement.

   As far as supervision goes, we endorse pilots for flight reviews, high performance, tailwheel, etc. They are not under our supervision and continue to fly forever based upon our endorsements. If a pilot you endorsed for a flight review has an accident, do you suppose you could rescind that endorsement?

   Also, consider flight instructors who issue a 61.31(d)(2) endorsement with no expiration date. The pilot receiving the endorsement may continue flying for the rest of his life on that endorsement (and no supervision).

   If the student has an accident, the FAA will become involved. Not only will the student come under scrutiny, the flight instructor will also be the beneficiary of surveillance from the FAA.

   There are no provisions for rescinding an endorsement.

   0 Votes 1 Votes  1 Votes

4. 
   

   
   

   Mark Kolber on Dec 01, 2013

   I’m not sure a temporary student pilot endorsement is similar to a flight review or IPC or the issuance of a certificate.

   0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

5. 
   

   
   

   Kris Kortokrax on Dec 01, 2013

   I believe you when you say you are not sure. The duration of the endorsement is the only difference.

   How do you feel about the wording of 61.87(p) which states that the instructor must have given instruction in make and model and must have determined that the student is proficient in all maneuvers in the make and model and that the endorsement is valid provided it is updated every 90 days?

   If the instructor seeks to revoke or cancel an endorsement, then it seems to be an admission that it should not have been issued in the first place. The idea that the instructor doesn’t like the student’s “attitude” is something that should have been detected before the endorsement was issued.

   There is nothing in Order 8900.1, 8900.2, any Advisory Circular or the regulations which describes cancelling or revoking an endorsement.

   If I were the student, I would continue flying until the 90 day endorsement expired and let the instructor pursue whatever course of action he might choose.

   0 Votes 1 Votes  1 Votes

6. 
   

   
   

   Steve D on Dec 01, 2013

   The CFI must be able to remove his endorsement. Conditions can change that we’re not present at the time of the initial endorsement. I believe it should be in the logbook however, although with no other choice an email should be able to be used in theory, but attorneys might have a field day with that one. The CFI needs a legitimate reason however. Attitude problem, unless it is affecting the students ability to act as pic safely, really isn’t a good reason to rescind it.

   0 Votes 1 Votes  1 Votes

7. 
   

   
   

   Jon Solanu on Dec 01, 2013

   I’ve heard of this happening once, I don’t know the whole story but essentially a student failed his practical during the oral portion then proceeds to break several regulations such as night flight without an endorsement, cross country without an endorsement, demanding do be signed off for a repeat practical without the required training, basically not thinking the rules applied to him.

   I’m sure there was another side to that story but would there have been a more appropriate action to take than telling the student his endorsement was being revoked. It seems like the student solo endorsement is fundamentally different than a rating or something like a tail wheel endorsement.

   0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

8. 
   

   
   

   Kris Kortokrax on Dec 01, 2013

   I’m curious. If you send a student an email cancelling/revoking an endorsement and he decides to continue flying on your endorsement, what would you do?

   A CFI is not able to remove an endorsement. The only recourse you would have would be to go to the FSDO. You would need to provide some substantial reason for questioning the student’s qualifications. The FSDO would then determine what action, if any, to take.

   0 Votes 1 Votes  1 Votes

9. 
   

   
   

   Wes Beard on Dec 02, 2013

   Of course you can rescind an endorsement. All endorsements have to be in the logbook so take the students logbook page with the endorsement and rip it out of the logbook.

   I’m being funny here. The FARs are pretty clear… Must be in the logbook. Once there cannot rescind. The limitation on the logbook should state the student must talk with me beforehand when soloing the airplane.

   John and Kris are correct.

   0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

10. 
    

    
    

    Matthew Waugh on Dec 02, 2013

    So when the relationship between the CFI and the student has broken down to the point that they can’t be in the same room then you got a problem.

    But if the relationship is still amicable are we saying I cannot amend or supersede an endorsement in a student’s logbook by making a written entry in that logbook? That once written it cannot be altered? That doesn’t seem right to me.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

11. 
    

    
    

    Mark Kolber on Dec 02, 2013

    Interesting that A number of you equate an endorsement that allows for limitations with endorsements that do not.

    Mat, you’re right. Not being able to rescind a student pilot endorsement or add limitations to it based on later events makes no sense from either a regulatory or reality standpoint.

    Those of who you who disagree are welcome to let a student who crashes an airplane and simply buys another to continue to fly with your explicit approval.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

12. 
    

    
    

    Kris Kortokrax on Dec 02, 2013

    So, let me see if I understand.

    Your student has an accident.
    The FAA completely abdicates its responsibility to investigate the student and the accident.
    You come to the rescue and send the student an email cancelling his endorsement.
    He decides to ignore you and keep flying.

    What exactly do you do?

    0 Votes 1 Votes  1 Votes

13. 
    

    
    

    Mark Kolber on Dec 03, 2013

    What else do I have to do?

    Let me turn it around and ask you without an extreme example. On a post-solo flight, you see your student has taken a step back and isn’t handling crosswinds as well as he had earlier. Your position is that you can’t add or modify a crosswind limitation and are stuck with relying solely on your student’s good judgment until the next 90-day period comes up?

    We can toss these examples back and forth all day. Bottom line is we simply disagree on what the regs permit. I read the authorization for solo limitations in the regs as permitting interim modifications or rescission. You don’t.

    I prefer to make the logbook change or the email if I don’t have contact with the student and end up being wrong while having a record that I no longer approve solo flight by this student in the event of a later mishap.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

14. 
    

    
    

    Kris Kortokrax on Dec 03, 2013

    I hardly think it is an extreme example. It was your example in the prior post.

    Most students learning are in the controlled environment of a flight school. If there is a problem, the school can easily deny rental of their aircraft until the situation is rectified. I would have already placed a reasonable crosswind limitation on his 90 day endorsement. If he had troubles with winds at that limit, I would give the student with additional training.

    If it is a student who owns his own aircraft, I would have a talk with him and if no resolution can be reached, I would contact the FSDO and let them handle the situation.

    There is nothing in the regulations describing amendment or withdrawal of endorsements.

    The problem is that if we were to say that flight instructors may amend or withdraw endorsements, it sets up opportunities for abuse such as were described in the original poster’s narrative. A flight instructor (taking the student’s money) was unhappy because the student expected him to be on time for lessons and to not cancel lessons. Because of the student’s displeasure, he threatened to cancel the student’s solo endorsement.

    Where do we draw the line? If I endorse a pilot to fly tailwheel airplanes and later see he is having trouble with crosswinds, can I remove that endorsement?

    0 Votes 1 Votes  1 Votes

15. 
    

    
    

    John D Collins on Dec 03, 2013

    Looking at the regulations governing flight instructor endorsements, it appears to me that the privileges given to a flight instructor do not specify any means of withdrawing an endorsement, only to issue them as it does not state “issue or cancel” or something to that effect. Furthermore, the issuance of any limitation is a pre-condition of the endorsement as it is listed in the sub section following the words “may not endorse a: (1) Student pilot’s certificate or logbook for solo flight privileges, unless that flight instructor has–“. I quoted the relevant regulations below in greater detail:

    Sec. 61.193 Flight instructor privileges.

    A person who holds a flight instructor certificate is authorized within the limitations of that person’s flight instructor certificate and ratings to train and issue endorsements that are required for:
    (a) A student pilot certificate;

    Sec. 61.195 Flight instructor limitations and qualifications.

    A person who holds a flight instructor certificate is subject to the following limitations:
    (a) …
    (b) …
    (c) …
    (d) Limitations on endorsements. A flight instructor may not endorse a:
    (1) Student pilot’s certificate or logbook for solo flight privileges, unless that flight instructor has–
    (i) Given that student the flight training required for solo flight privileges required by this part; and
    (ii) Determined that the student is prepared to conduct the flight safely under known circumstances, subject to any limitations listed in the student’s logbook that the instructor considers necessary for the safety of the flight.
    (2) Student pilot’s certificate and logbook for a solo cross-country flight, unless that flight instructor has determined the student’s flight preparation, planning, equipment, and proposed procedures are adequate for the proposed flight under the existing conditions and within any limitations listed in the logbook that the instructor considers necessary for the safety of the flight;
    (3) Student pilot’s logbook for solo flight in a Class B airspace area or at an airport within Class B airspace unless that flight instructor has–
    (i) Given that student ground and flight training in that Class B airspace or at that airport; and
    (ii) Determined that the student is proficient to operate the aircraft safely.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

16. 
    

    
    

    Kris Kortokrax on Dec 03, 2013

    I’ve seen another example of creative endorsing. A flight instructor gave a flight review in a single engine airplane to a pilot rated in other categories. The instructor endorsed the flight review, but placed a limitation on it that it was valid only for flight in a single engine airplane. He clearly didn’t understand 61.56.

    0 Votes 1 Votes  1 Votes

17. 
    

    
    

    Philip Abernathy on Dec 03, 2013

    Guys, I have a simple fix here. I’m a holder of two type of FFL’s/Class III SOT and am in the process of getting my PPL. I’ve found that if I have any problems or issues with ATF’s rules, I simply pick up the phone and call my Field Representative for clarification.

    With that said, can’t you call the FAA and ask an inspector for a true ruling? I’d also report it to the FAA or better business bureau for investigation as well.

    Just my two cents worth.

    Philip

    +1 Votes 1 Votes  0 Votes

18. 
    

    
    

    John D Collins on Dec 03, 2013

    I would trust the opinion of most of the instructors on this thread over the opinion of a local FSDO inspector. Time and again, I have gotten bad advice from them, only to have it overturned by the FAA Chief Counsel.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

19. 
    

    
    

    Kris Kortokrax on Dec 03, 2013

    Phillip,

    FAA inspectors come from industry and have no special intelligence bestowed upon them merely by virtue of being employed by the FAA. They tend to view things through the prism of their own experience (or lack thereof). If you ask ten different inspectors, you are likely to get ten different answers.

    0 Votes 1 Votes  1 Votes

20. 
    

    
    

    Wes Beard on Dec 03, 2013

    What I like about the FAR John mentioned is this: 61.195(d)(1)(ii) states “subject to any limitations listed in the student’s logbook that the instructor considers necessary for the safety of the flight.”.

    Any limitations. I would place a limitation on the certificate especially if the student was the airplane owner that they must get approval from me before any solo flight. Text message back and forth to provide documentation is all that is needed.

    —————–
    I have threatened one student who wanted stretch his boundaries with my ripping out his solo endorsement from his logbook and that I didn’t have to give him any other endorsements (i.e. practical test). The student didn’t know I couldn’t really do what I said (rip out the endorsement) but I was able to get across the importance of the boundaries I setup.

    —————–
    I understand that most people exaggerate the situation when they are telling the story and we don’t really know what transpired between that CFI and student the OP mentioned. But any CFI, in my opinion, who would try to rescind an endorsement over email isn’t very professional. (Student to FAA “What email?…. I didn’t get anything to that effect!”)

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

21. 
    

    
    

    Brian on Dec 03, 2013

    I sit on the side with Mark for this one. It is my standing that, where the instructor has a right to provide limitations, he/she also has a right to void their endorsement. What seems to be the question here is: Where do we draw this line?

    My answer is simple, when the limitations are no longer valid. I’ve voided endorsements to increase limitations. Why can I not void an endorsement to decrease them. Better yet, what if the student blatantly disregards limitations on an endorsement or regulatory? What if it’s more than once? For instance, decides he wants to take up a passenger or fly in a 15 knot crosswind without calling the instructor as required in his limitation. Fellow instructors of mine voided an endorsements for these reasons.

    These endorsements are offered with the option for us to provide limitations. That, in itself, makes them different from any other endorsement we give post private. Furthermore, they are subject to the rest of the regulatory restrictions posed on a student pilot. Who, while operating with an instructors endorsement, is expected to adhere to. If a student of mine won’t follow my limitations, or those required of him/her by part 61 I wouldn’t think twice about writing void across my solo endorsement. Followed, of course, by an explanation, my signature, and a call/e-mail to the FSDO.

    So far I know of two cases where endorsements were void. Each of these instances fell into the ‘not following the rules,’ one an instructor limitation and the other regulatory (mentioned above). In both cases the FSDO’s were contacted afterward for the instructor’s security sake. Neither CFI was told they took incorrect action.

    —

    This being said, in the case the OP presents I’d need more information before I jumped on that boat. Sounds a lot like punishment. I’m all for voiding a sign off at the request for the students next instructor to give their praise. Heck, we do that anyway. Unless you all let any guy/gal walk in your door and rent a plane on their last instructors endorsement from their pilot mill in Florida. 🙂

    An aside, if we are talking new airport then the sign off isn’t valid anyway. So what’s the difference if it has void at KXYZ written next to it with “moved to new location” just so the desk person renting the plans doesn’t accidentally sign out an airplane to a student that misunderstood a conversation you had with them about not soloing there until… Considering I had to get on the radio to a student who rented a plane in 400 foot and a half mile back from doing his run up *YIKES* I don’t see the previous scenario being an impossible one.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

22. 
    

    
    

    Mark Kolber on Dec 03, 2013

    Philip,

    Despite our differences on this particular issue, Kris an I are in complete agreement on the unreliability of any opinion given by a FSDO inspector. As an example, I’ve had the fun or representing a client in an enforcement action where two FSDO inspectors disagreed on whether what my client did was a violation at all. There are plenty of other examples.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

23. 
    

    
    

    Brian on Dec 03, 2013

    “With that said, can’t you call the FAA and ask an inspector for a true ruling?”

    As Mark pointed out, FSDO’s are not a reliable source as they are opinion based when no legal opinion is given. However, you can ask for a legal opinion by writing to the FAA chief counsel. When they get to your letter they will write up a letter of interpretation (LOI) which, for all intensive purposes, is similar to a supreme court ruling. Mark can correct me if I’m giving these LOI’s too much backbone.

    You can check up on the LOI database for many issues here: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/

    None exist on this topic that I’m aware of.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

24. 
    

    
    

    Kris Kortokrax on Dec 03, 2013

    Brian,

    I don’t understand your logic. You talk about two students, one who disregarded a crosswind limitation (a regulatory violation) and another who carried passengers (also a regulatory violation). Part of your solution is to void his endorsement. If the student disregards regulations, what makes you think he will be bothered by your voiding his endorsement? Sounds more like a CYA move. Contacting the FSDO was the correct response. Passenger carrying by a student will result in a revocation of the student certificate. Flying contrary to limitations should also carry a penalty.

    0 Votes 1 Votes  1 Votes

25. 
    

    
    

    Brian on Dec 03, 2013

    “one who disregarded a crosswind limitation (a regulatory violation)”

    Unless we are speaking part 25 aircraft crosswind is not a regulatory limitation. Part 23 aircraft publish demonstrated, not limited, crosswinds. Perhaps this is my misreading, but it’s sparked a random pet peeve of mine. 23.233 requires a demonstration not less than 0.2 Vso for taxi, takeoff and landing. In a typical 172 that’s 9 knots (0.2 * ~45 KCAS). Demonstrated in many models of the 172 is 12-15 knots. In 23.1585 (a)(2) requires the manufacturer to publish the crosswind that was demonstrated on that day of flight testing. Again the cross wind conditions that day need only comply with 23.233.

    It so happens that in a 172R it was 12 knots that day, but it could have been 9, or 15, or 28. It wasn’t, it was 12. The aircraft was never tested to a limiting airspeed, and you most certainly can land a 172 in greater than 12 knots of crosswind safely.

    The only regulatory portion of the POH is section 2, limitations. The rest is just there to give you worthwhile guidelines. Need another example? You can land a typical 172 in ~700 feet over a 50 foot obstacle on a standard day. I can anyway, and I’m no super pilot. In fact, I’m certain others can do better. That sure smokes the 1200+ listed in section 5. So 1200 is or isn’t the limiting capability of the airplane? 😉

    Back on track now Kris (mind you most of the above was not for you, I’m fairly certain you knew that stuff before I did anyway), the crosswind limitation I refer to is the one given in the endorsement by the instructor. Not regulatory unless I’m missing something?

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

26. 
    

    
    

    Mark Kolber on Dec 04, 2013

    >> Mark can correct me if I’m giving these LOI’s too much backbone.

    Too much backbone. The US Supreme Court is the final word on the interpretation of a federal statute or regulation. Formal agency interpretations are generally “the law” within the agency and are entitled to “deference” by other agencies and the courts. In the case of the FAA, the NTSB (at least since the Pilots Bill of Rights) and the courts are not required to automatically follow the FAA’s position.

    +1 Votes 1 Votes  0 Votes

27. 
    

    
    

    John D Collins on Dec 04, 2013

    Brian, as you point out, there isn’t a crosswind limitation on a C172, so it is not regulatory. However, the limitation an instructor puts in the logbook at the time of the solo endorsement must be complied with according to 61.89 excerpted in part below or they are in violation of this regulation.

    Sec. 61.89 General limitations.

    (a) A student pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft:
    …
    (8) In a manner contrary to any limitations placed in the pilot’s logbook by an authorized instructor.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

28. 
    

    
    

    Kris Kortokrax on Dec 04, 2013

    Brian,

    John got it.

    Biran,

    As we had been talking all along about endorsements and the limitations placed on them, and you spoke of “a student of mine who won’t follow my limitations”, I thought it would be clear to all that when I spoke of the regulatory violation pertaining to a crosswind limitation, I as referencing the limitation contained in an endorsement.

    Also, Mark is quite correct that the Supreme Court is the final word and that until the NTSB or an appeals court judge or the Supreme Court redefines rule, the interpretation from the FAA Legal Counsel stands.

    0 Votes 1 Votes  1 Votes

29. 
    

    
    

    Brian on Dec 04, 2013

    Gentlemen, thank you for the clarification. I see my error clearly now. 🙂

    PS It’s nice to see what could be an incredibly poor heated discussion play out in such a respectable manner. My hats off to you guys. As always, was fun and I learned something.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

30. 
    

    
    

    ccwebb on Dec 05, 2013

    There are a lot of good suggestions, examples and different scenarios being used here. As instructors we are keepers of privileges in the name of safety. Without getting into specific here, I will absolutely revoke an endorsement of mine if a STUDENT PILOT proves my previous evaluation wrong.

    (Private/Commercial/ATP is different because all I have to provide is the pilot was proficient on our flight if something goes wrong later on down the road.)

    I will take the students logbook and write, very clearly and boldly, VOID across my endorsement. No matter where they go, the voided endorsement goes with them. If you try to email or text, there is no way of proving the student ever received it. Even worse, the flight school renting an airplane out wouldn’t even know to ask.

    Courts, jury’s and judges do not give instructors very much room with student pilots. A Private pilot or above, they tend to look at the pilot more than an instructor from 2 years ago.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

31. 
    

    
    

    John D Collins on Dec 05, 2013

    ccwebb, if you were my instructor and I fired you for any reason, there is no way you would be given access to my logbook.

    On the other hand, if I trusted you and planned on keeping you as my instructor, it would be absolutely unnecessary for you to void a previously issued solo endorsement. All it would take is a statement that prior to further solo flights, you wanted me to obtain additional instruction and I would have no problem with you so stating in my logbook. Instructors do this all the time with or without noting it in the logbook. At the end of the instruction, you can write any appropriate limits in my logbook and I am obliged to comply. Most students who are having a problem will seek out the additional instruction and won’t need an autocratic style and in your face VOID written across their endorsement.

    I personally would recommend that any student who has an endorsement revoked as you suggest, that trust between them and their instructor has broken down and they should seriously consider a new flight instructor. I would not be surprised if you have never actually written VOID across a previous endorsement of yours, in real life that is.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

32. 
    

    
    

    ccwebb on Dec 07, 2013

    John, as I stated in my comments, there is countless scenarios here. Let me paint one:

    Student you endorse for a solo cross country, flies to an incorrect airport and picks up his brother. The flies to another airport for touch-n-goes, just to complete this scenario, you endorse him for full stop landings only. Then flies to another airport in which he leaves the airplane running, parking break on, chalked wheels, and goes to lunch. (allowing the hobbs meter to run) You get a phone call.

    After driving to that airport you meet the student at the plane. The students only response is, “So, I would do it again.” Obviously you will not want to train this student anymore, however, with your endorsements he can go to another field and rent a plane.

    No matter how silly this made up scenario sounds, the instructor is the protector of sky. We give out privileges once the students meet standards. To answer the question from the beginning, Yes. We should be able to revoke a privileges if the student has no regards of the rules and safety we taught.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

33. 
    

    
    

    Kris Kortokrax on Dec 07, 2013

    You are correct. The scenario is silly.

    The student’s actions which you describe all involve regulatory violations.
    It is the FAA, not the “protector of the sky”, who is charged with dealing with these violations.

    If you fail to notify the FAA and your student has the attitude you describe and owns his own airplane, your voiding his endorsement would be meaningless. He would fly without it.

    If he tried to rent an airplane from another school, it would have to be the same make and model and he would be subject to a checkout flight and quite likely the instructor conducting the checkout would give enough instruction to endorse solo and would endorse him. If you fail to notify the FAA and the new school knows nothing of his violations, he would continue flying.

    Your scenario has nothing at all to do with the original question. It dealt with a student who believed that his instructor should be on time for lessons and not cancel lessons. The instructor interpreted this as an “attitude” problem and sent an email attempting to cancel the students endorsement. That instructor was way over the line.

    0 Votes 3 Votes  3 Votes

34. 
    

    
    

    John D Collins on Dec 08, 2013

    I checked both “Sec. 61.193 Flight instructor privileges” and “Sec. 61.195 Flight instructor limitations and qualifications”, but I could not find “Protector of the Sky” as one of them. In your scenario, the student has already violated at least the first provision of 61.83 and presumably it was part of his required training.

    There is an outfit that has the mission statement that reads: “Our continuing mission is to provide the safest, most efficient aerospace system in the world.” I think it is their responsibility. If you can’t put the fear of god into your student when they transgress the rules as in the example you gave, then by all means report it to the local FSDO for proper handling.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

35. 
    

    
    

    Mark Kolber on Dec 09, 2013

    It’ snot about “protector of the sky”. It’s about limitations on student pilot privileges, which CFIs are charged with. You can add all sorts of limitations to student pilot endorsements. The question simply comes down to whether you can add them after you give an endorsement or have to wait until the 90 day period is up. I say yes, others say no and the FAA has, so far says nothing.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes

36. 
    

    
    

    Gary S. on Mar 07, 2015

    Browsing through this site I ran across Jim MacKay’s question and found it very interesting. I read all the “answers” but before doing so I was already of the opinion that an instructor could, and should, be able to revoke solo privileges. I have changed my mind.

    If a student is issued an endorsement by an instructor in good faith, and the post-solo student willfully goes out and breaks regulations, that’s NOT the responsibility of the instructor. At that point, it’s an FAA enforcement problem, period. If I was the one who made the endorsement and I knew about the violation(s) it would be my duty to let FSDO know, then refuse to be his instructor from that day forward.

    0 Votes 0 Votes  0 Votes