"Section 43.7 limits the privilege to persons holding at least a private or sport pilot certificate..."

The quote is from AC 43-12A c. (1). But I see similar language elsewhere. Is a "sport pilot certificate" a literal or figurative thing? AOPA's website says you need a PPL or a FAA Form 8710-2, but EAA's site says you just need a Valid US State issued Driver Licence, cannot have failed your last physical, and cannot know of a disqualifying reason. (Which is redundant because holders of licenses cannot fly if they know of a disqualifying reason.) EAA's web page links to 4910-13, but that "final rule" is 493 pages written by lawyers.


I own a "maximum weight 1220 lb." (1300 lb. on floats) airplane, and have a private license. My girlfriend has a driver license. With proper training (because my plans to brainwash her into "the cult" would be seriously impeded were she to be seriously injured or killed destroying my airplane*) what should I do so can she exercise "sport privileges?" (Oooo, that sounds like fun.)


*Gross understatement said tongue in cheek

Th driver's license is only to satisfy medical requirements. I guess they figure it proves you can see and hear somewhat.

To fly a LSA as PIC you need an actual sport pilot certificate issued by the FAA, minimum. It's a literal certificate requiring minimum logged training and experience hours and a checkride.

Zzz wrote:Th driver's license is only to satisfy medical requirements. I guess they figure it proves you can see and hear somewhat.

To fly a LSA as PIC you need an actual sport pilot certificate issued by the FAA, minimum. It's a literal certificate requiring minimum logged training and experience hours and a checkride.

Thanks,

Sign of the times I guess, six or seven year old information is obsolete. If she has to get a third-class and log time with a CFI we might as well just obtain a private pilot license. That way she can fly the four place E-AB "Twin Cub" (think F-82, but yellow with four black lightning bolts).


The views and opinions expressed in this post belong to the author known as "Ubiquitous," a young man who feels he might have been born a century too late. They do not necessarily mirror the views and opinions of any sane person, let alone mirror safe practices in any endeavor. The "Twin Cub" does not exist. But, if you wish to finance its construction PM "Ubiquitious" and he'd be happy to get started on it. In case of any damages or other liabilities arising, readers foolish enough to take a twenty-two year old's advice deserve the situation they find themselves in. But drop by and we'll have a beer and a laugh about it.

Ubiquitous wrote:

Zzz wrote:Th driver's license is only to satisfy medical requirements. I guess they figure it proves you can see and hear somewhat.

To fly a LSA as PIC you need an actual sport pilot certificate issued by the FAA, minimum. It's a literal certificate requiring minimum logged training and experience hours and a checkride.

Thanks,

Sign of the times I guess, six or seven year old information is obsolete. If she has to get a third-class and log time with a CFI we might as well just obtain a private pilot license. That way she can fly the four place E-AB "Twin Cub" (think F-82, but yellow with four black lightning bolts).


The views and opinions expressed in this post belong to the author known as "Ubiquitous," a young man who feels he might have been born a century too late. They do not necessarily mirror the views and opinions of any sane person, let alone mirror safe practices in any endeavor. The "Twin Cub" does not exist. But, if you wish to finance its construction PM "Ubiquitious" and he'd be happy to get started on it. In case of any damages or other liabilities arising, readers foolish enough to take a twenty-two year old's advice deserve the situation they find themselves in. But drop by and we'll have a beer and a laugh about it.

I think you're still not getting it. The information isn't obsolete; perhaps just not complete in providing the answer you want. A sport pilot certificate has always been required since the rule took effect in 2004. That proves airman competence, arguably. The driver's license is only for medical requirements, meaning that a person can get their sport pilot certificate in fewer hours than a Private certificate, and never have to get a 3rd class medical certificate to exercise the privileges if they possess a DL.. It is a quicker and easier avenue to flying as PIC for sure.

Don't confuse it with Basic Med, which is a newer rule allowing previous holders of a medical certificate to get a less scrutinizing, one-time medical certificate allowing them to flying heavier aircraft previously requiring at least a 3rd class medical.

Thanks again,

The actual regulations are quite confusing for the inexperienced to read, and the AOPA and EAA sure seem to disagree. But as you point out they are likely just highlighting different parts of the same regulation. It's not the money, or the time. (As PIC I can allow her to manipulate the controls all I want when she is up in the air with me. She is shorter than I am, but I can't figure out why IPs didn't like teaching in Cubs. I can see and feel every move she makes in front of me.) I just don't see much point in her learning about a Musketeer or Tomahawk.

I like to repeat things so I know I have it right. Looking at just the basics (details were edited out for brevity). Both say they require:
ground training from an instructor or approved home-study course.
FAA knowledge test on applicable aeronautical knowledge areas.
FAA practical test for the applicable light-sport aircraft privilege / private pilot license (a bit different I assume)
10 takeoffs and landings
Sport pilot certificate vs private pilot license:
20 hours flight time vs 40
15 hours from a CFI vs 20
5 hours solo vs 10
2 hours cross-country vs 5
Longest solo with inter. stops of 87 miles vs 173
2 hours prep for the practical test vs 3
The private requires (and sport does not):
3 hours of night including a 116 mile cross country
3 hours of instruments (the cub has "full instrumentation" a tachometer, airspeed, compass, altimeter, oil temperature, oil pressure gauge, it even has a gas gauge. So check.*)
3 full stop landings at a controlled airport (Call on cellphone, circle and wait for a steady green, right?**)

There are a lot of "advantages" to having a private license. But not many are relevant to a non-electric NORDO Cub, so that's more "down the road."

It looks like with a little planning she could get a sport first and then later use 100% of that experience for a private. The idea being to become really familiar with the J-3 before using something different for instruments, night, and controlled airspace. (I wish my old CFI was still around.)



* WHAT? That isn't enough? Do I really need a CHT too? There isn't a hole for one.
** It says "establish communication." I didn't see the word "radio." Just guessing and am most likely wrong.

The much easier thing, if she is not interested in her own license, is to teach her to fly or hire an instructor to teach her to fly. Learning to fly and getting a license to fly are not the same thing. There is nothing illegal about knowing how to fly. A license is required for insurance. I did a lot of flying with a pilot covering legal and insurance before I was old enough to get a license. It is technically illegal for her to manipulate the controls, but that would only be an issue after an incident or accident. You will not be pulled over and there are two sticks.

Ubiquitous wrote:.....3 hours of instruments (the cub has "full instrumentation" a tachometer, airspeed, compass, altimeter, oil temperature, oil pressure gauge, it even has a gas gauge. So check.*) .....

Pretty sure the "instrument time" means flight solely referencing the flight instruments, aka "hood time".
So you need a horizon & DG, and probably also turn-and-bank / turn coordinator.
I think getting a sport pilot ticket (instead of PP) makes a lot of sense if you're only gonna fly aircraft that meet the LSA guidelines (like a Cub).
The pluses are less hours required for training, and no medical certificate required.
I don't really see any minuses, for Cub flying sport pilot seems like a no-brainer to me.
There are provisions in the regs to get follow-on endorsements, for flight in controlled airspace and for radio coms,
so there's actually very few places you can't go into as a sport pilot.

https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aviation-intere ... t-aircraft?

I’d need to see photos of said cub and said girlfriend to say more

Also if you have a electric system I’d pop a G275 in, even instruction aside, just for the night ops, snow ops, etc stuff



As someone who learned to fly n tailwheel and most of their CFIing was in the back seat, I prefer a 0 timer learn in a tailwheel, that being said having a good horizon is just smart.

Per the min hours, if you like said girlfriend you’ll want her to get some night and instrument training too, especially if you read NTSBs, so real world it’s the same as a private minus the medical. Be good to also get her some IMC time, be it actual or in a sim, the transition from MVFR to IMC is a good thing to teach. “I won’t fly at night or go IMC” yeah well Murphy is a asshole and shit happens

Per the medical, if I wasn't putting food on the table flying, I’d go basic, sport is good too, but if you don’t see a issue getting that medical that one time, basic is better. The further you can keep yourself from the FAA the better

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/he ... ame/guide/

*just noticed you don’t have a electrical system, well you could install a venturi and basic vac gyros, or maybe just a iPhone mount and one of those Velcro on ADHRS things?
but honestly if you don’t get the importance of a new aviator having stupid basic instrument skills....isnt IIMC the #1 cause of death in GA still?

Some good points, Nine Three Kilo, and admirable interest in instrument training. A couple of extra points, however. It takes a monetary commitment to keep pilot and aircraft current, and currency is a big part of safety in transition from marginal VMC to IMC. This transition, much more dangerous than 0-0 ITO, is the big killer. The safety of 0-0 ITO is that there is no transition. The only really safe way to make transition safe is to have two pilots, one VMC and one already on the gauges. Cessna's VFR pilot 180 degree return out of inadvertent IMC in pre POH (Operator's Manual) airplanes was fairly safe as well because the transition was simply to put our hands in our lap and use rudder only to keep the turn needle (old turn and bank) halfway between the center and one of the doghouses. That would be half standard rate turn. Yes, we can turn with rudder only. Aileron is the killer in inadvertent IMC. Basic instrument training is adequate for VFR pilots if they remain current in using that dangerous aileron in simulated IMC. Licence to learn means get with you, the CFII, and fly some actual instrument (basic, no need to do approaches and such.) ATC will work with you in low traffic areas.

Light sport at $150,000 for a new airplane has all lots of IMC capability, but old Cubs are really nice as old Cubs. And old Taylorcrafts, and old Champs, and old Luscombes, and old Ercoupes. Yes, Porterfield, but that would show my age.

Anyway, keep up the good work.

With nothing but respect to the older and wiser pilots here. The way I read the regulations, as the licensed current PIC under Part 91, I can let her manipulate the controls because it explicitly states that no person may manipulate the controls unless the aircraft has dual controls and an appropriately rated pilot is seated at the second set of controls. I can teach her everything that I know. It just ins't official because I don't hold a CFI rating.

By contrast Part 135 is very clear: It's simply forbidden unless you are the check airman and the trainee is on flight status with the same company, or "the Administrator" authorizes it.

Neither of us see a reason that she would be flying my airplane without me in it-- right now. But I think it would be nice if she was allowed to. (Remember it is my plan to "brainwash her into the cult of fabric and tubular steel.") No radios, no electrics, hold door frame with left hand, bounce and push with the right hand... Starts right up every time. Simplicity itself, even balancing on the Edo.

It's a fun ship, we aren't flying high enough, fast enough, or far enough from known alternatives to deal with IMC. No electrics, and airfields open only during daylight hours means no night flying. It's prioritizing, not money or desires, "right now" it's my feeling that any time be spent towards proficiency at what we actually do. (And, "number two," official recognition that she is proficient to do it.)

Right now the biggest issue is finding a CFI who knows more about flying a Cub than I do (or she does). The instructor I had six years ago has retired and moved to Florida. I've had some pretty comical conversations with people who say some really ridiculous things regarding tailwheels and floats.

EDIT: Sudden thought, I should see how hard it would be to get a CFI myself...

SECOND EDIT: Apparently, I already have the prerequisites. All I'd have to do to get a Sport CFI is take a test. Perfect. Down the road, with maybe 30 more hours of instruction I could obtain a CPL and full CFI. This would probably be a good time to see if my experience being unable to find a tailwheel friendly instructor is typical. There could be an opportunity here...

Ubiquitous wrote:With nothing but respect to the older and wiser pilots here. The way I read the regulations, as the licensed current PIC under Part 91, I can let her manipulate the controls because it explicitly states that no person may manipulate the controls unless the aircraft has dual controls and an appropriately rated pilot is seated at the second set of controls. I can teach her everything that I know. It just ins't official because I don't hold a CFI rating.

By contrast Part 135 is very clear: It's simply forbidden unless you are the check airman and the trainee is on flight status with the same company, or "the Administrator" authorizes it.

Neither of us see a reason that she would be flying my airplane without me in it-- right now. But I think it would be nice if she was allowed to. (Remember it is my plan to "brainwash her into the cult of fabric and tubular steel.") No radios, no electrics, hold door frame with left hand, bounce and push with the right hand... Starts right up every time. Simplicity itself, even balancing on the Edo.

It's a fun ship, we aren't flying high enough, fast enough, or far enough from known alternatives to deal with IMC. No electrics, and airfields open only during daylight hours means no night flying. It's prioritizing, not money or desires, "right now" it's my feeling that any time be spent towards proficiency at what we actually do. (And, "number two," official recognition that she is proficient to do it.)

Right now the biggest issue is finding a CFI who knows more about flying a Cub than I do (or she does). The instructor I had six years ago has retired and moved to Florida. I've had some pretty comical conversations with people who say some really ridiculous things regarding tailwheels and floats.

EDIT: Sudden thought, I should see how hard it would be to get a CFI myself...

SECOND EDIT: Apparently, I already have the prerequisites. All I'd have to do to get a Sport CFI is take a test. Perfect. Down the road, with maybe 30 more hours of instruction I could obtain a CPL and full CFI. This would probably be a good time to see if my experience being unable to find a tailwheel friendly instructor is typical. There could be an opportunity here...

Get your CFI!

Teaching is great fun, also excellent for networking, it is the hardest ride of ones aviation career, but worth it

Don't be your girlfriend's instructor. For relationship reasons.

Good point Zane. I'm getting so old I have forgotten about relationships. My wife just tells me what to do.

Ubiquitous wrote:With nothing but respect to the older and wiser pilots here. The way I read the regulations, as the licensed current PIC under Part 91, I can let her manipulate the controls because it explicitly states that no person may manipulate the controls unless the aircraft has dual controls and an appropriately rated pilot is seated at the second set of controls. I can teach her everything that I know. It just ins't official because I don't hold a CFI rating.

By contrast Part 135 is very clear: It's simply forbidden unless you are the check airman and the trainee is on flight status with the same company, or "the Administrator" authorizes it.

Neither of us see a reason that she would be flying my airplane without me in it-- right now. But I think it would be nice if she was allowed to. (Remember it is my plan to "brainwash her into the cult of fabric and tubular steel.") No radios, no electrics, hold door frame with left hand, bounce and push with the right hand... Starts right up every time. Simplicity itself, even balancing on the Edo.

It's a fun ship, we aren't flying high enough, fast enough, or far enough from known alternatives to deal with IMC. No electrics, and airfields open only during daylight hours means no night flying. It's prioritizing, not money or desires, "right now" it's my feeling that any time be spent towards proficiency at what we actually do. (And, "number two," official recognition that she is proficient to do it.)

Right now the biggest issue is finding a CFI who knows more about flying a Cub than I do (or she does). The instructor I had six years ago has retired and moved to Florida. I've had some pretty comical conversations with people who say some really ridiculous things regarding tailwheels and floats.

EDIT: Sudden thought, I should see how hard it would be to get a CFI myself...

SECOND EDIT: Apparently, I already have the prerequisites. All I'd have to do to get a Sport CFI is take a test. Perfect. Down the road, with maybe 30 more hours of instruction I could obtain a CPL and full CFI. This would probably be a good time to see if my experience being unable to find a tailwheel friendly instructor is typical. There could be an opportunity here...

This thread is hilarious, hopefully it's a trolling attempt rather than the actual thought process of someone who has a pilot's certificate already.

Your girlfriend can't legally fly an airplane without a certificate, solo endorsement from a CFI, or a CFI on board. How is that hard to understand? If you want to let her manipulate the controls while you're on board, who is going to stop you, legal or not?

Right now the biggest issue is finding a CFI who knows more about flying a Cub than I do (or she does). The instructor I had six years ago has retired and moved to Florida. I've had some pretty comical conversations with people who say some really ridiculous things regarding tailwheels and floats.

What a joke. The fact you think you know more about cubs (and floats?) than most instructors yet you don't know you need a certificate to fly an airplane? Dude get over yourself, there are instructors all over the country with thousands of hours in cubs and a billion other types. There's a list of them ON THIS WEBSITE. It's a J3 for god's sake. Literally anyone with a tailwheel or float endorsement could fly it proficiently.


Was this post mean? Yes and honestly it was meant to be. If you're going to be a pilot, step up your shit.


Edit: Just went back and saw your comment about your cub having "full instrumentation" to meet the 3hrs instrument time. You're a clown.

asa wrote:

Ubiquitous wrote:With nothing but respect to the older and wiser pilots here. The way I read the regulations, as the licensed current PIC under Part 91, I can let her manipulate the controls because it explicitly states that no person may manipulate the controls unless the aircraft has dual controls and an appropriately rated pilot is seated at the second set of controls. I can teach her everything that I know. It just ins't official because I don't hold a CFI rating.

By contrast Part 135 is very clear: It's simply forbidden unless you are the check airman and the trainee is on flight status with the same company, or "the Administrator" authorizes it.

Neither of us see a reason that she would be flying my airplane without me in it-- right now. But I think it would be nice if she was allowed to. (Remember it is my plan to "brainwash her into the cult of fabric and tubular steel.") No radios, no electrics, hold door frame with left hand, bounce and push with the right hand... Starts right up every time. Simplicity itself, even balancing on the Edo.

It's a fun ship, we aren't flying high enough, fast enough, or far enough from known alternatives to deal with IMC. No electrics, and airfields open only during daylight hours means no night flying. It's prioritizing, not money or desires, "right now" it's my feeling that any time be spent towards proficiency at what we actually do. (And, "number two," official recognition that she is proficient to do it.)

Right now the biggest issue is finding a CFI who knows more about flying a Cub than I do (or she does). The instructor I had six years ago has retired and moved to Florida. I've had some pretty comical conversations with people who say some really ridiculous things regarding tailwheels and floats.

EDIT: Sudden thought, I should see how hard it would be to get a CFI myself...

SECOND EDIT: Apparently, I already have the prerequisites. All I'd have to do to get a Sport CFI is take a test. Perfect. Down the road, with maybe 30 more hours of instruction I could obtain a CPL and full CFI. This would probably be a good time to see if my experience being unable to find a tailwheel friendly instructor is typical. There could be an opportunity here...

This thread is hilarious, hopefully it's a trolling attempt rather than the actual thought process of someone who has a pilot's certificate already.

Your girlfriend can't legally fly an airplane without a certificate, solo endorsement from a CFI, or a CFI on board. How is that hard to understand? If you want to let her manipulate the controls while you're on board, who is going to stop you, legal or not?

Right now the biggest issue is finding a CFI who knows more about flying a Cub than I do (or she does). The instructor I had six years ago has retired and moved to Florida. I've had some pretty comical conversations with people who say some really ridiculous things regarding tailwheels and floats.

What a joke. The fact you think you know more about cubs (and floats?) than most instructors yet you don't know you need a certificate to fly an airplane? Dude get over yourself, there are instructors all over the country with thousands of hours in cubs and a billion other types. There's a list of them ON THIS WEBSITE. It's a J3 for god's sake. Literally anyone with a tailwheel or float endorsement could fly it proficiently.


Was this post mean? Yes and honestly it was meant to be. If you're going to be a pilot, step up your shit.


Edit: Just went back and saw your comment about your cub having "full instrumentation" to meet the 3hrs instrument time. You're a clown.

Easy killer lol

For one unless you know the dude, who knows how much time in a cub he has, lots of old timer guys don’t bother to stay versed in certificate vs license or pt61 requirements for a new certificate.

I still call it a BFR and refuse to call a student a “learner”

As for CFIs, depends on where he is, I’m in one of the largest aviation communities and I have heard of folks having a hard time getting a tailwheel CFI, ether the CFIs don’t have time, are a long ways away, or only instruct in their extra 300 charging a gazillion bucks a hr (for depreciation of their toy), or only fly in the flight school plane.
In AK or the like I’d wager it’s easier, but location can make finding folks who speak tailwheel hard.

Instrument wise, who knows, if it has a electrical system a single GI275 would knock that out, or a old Venturi system, it’s not common on a cub, but looking at some of the cub clones (carbon cub) it’s not unheard of ether.

I'm 22, so at least I have an excuse if I say something ignorant.

Actually, so do the CFIs around here. They are mostly 25 or so, having worked for a FBO fueling airplanes and cleaning them to pay for their training, and teaching to build time. There is nothing wrong with that. It's an honest days work for a day's pay but it doesn't make you an expert on the FARs.

My private pilot license is older than some of theirs are. I have more total hours than a few of them (99% of it in two place tailwheel or float equipped aircraft.) A CFI rating is just a piece of paper. (In fact I just printed off the forms to obtain one myself.)

Only one or two CFIs around here have a meager few hours on floats compared to my 350 hours. Sure, they know Skyhawks, Arrows, Tomahawks, and Skippers inside and out. But a J-3 Cub is similar to a Klingon's UFO in their book.

Their spiel is the same ridiculous crap. You can't ____ (fill in the blank it's all the same). These guys can't seem to find the bathroom without a glass panel telling them where it is. I like real airplanes, six gauges is more than enough. If you are too chicken to hand prop, you should go live in an office cubical.

It's like folks who say that Cubs and Pietenpols aren't bushplanes. Heck, when they were first built there were hardly any airports. Every 1930s plane was a bush plane. Oh, maybe not as capable as a HT-295 or a PA-18-160, but my Cub has no idea what asphalt is.

Yeah, when I got my private license five years ago I flew a Citabria with an ADF and a VOR. So it's with tongue firmly in cheek I say that I have "full instrumentation" in the Cub. But CFIs around here think you "need" ASD-B or QRX-7 to be legal (they even make up non-extant regs). One asked how I would "see traffic without ASD-B." I dunno, my Cub has A-C-R-Y-L-I-C W-I-N-D-O-W-S and I have E-Y-E-S.

Some folks remind me of my college business professor. He told me I was naive and couldn't X, Y, and Z. I quit school and started a business doing X, Y, and Z. Now I own (as in own, not as the bank owns and I am making payments on) a house on a nice lake with a dock and a ramp, a couple cars, and a really nice yellow Cub that sometimes sits on floats at that dock.

So I guess I'm sorta a jerk 'cause I don't accept "no" without evidence.

asa wrote:You're a clown.

Might I suggest actually reading my post.

Ubiquitous wrote:I'm 22, so at least I have an excuse if I say something ignorant.

Actually, so do the CFIs around here. They are mostly 25 or so, having worked for a FBO fueling airplanes and cleaning them to pay for their training, and teaching to build time. There is nothing wrong with that. It's an honest days work for a day's pay but it doesn't make you an expert on the FARs.

My private pilot license is older than some of theirs are. I have more total hours than a few of them (99% of it in two place tailwheel or float equipped aircraft.) A CFI rating is just a piece of paper. (In fact I just printed off the forms to obtain one myself.)

Only one or two CFIs around here have a meager few hours on floats compared to my 350 hours. Sure, they know Skyhawks, Arrows, Tomahawks, and Skippers inside and out. But a J-3 Cub is similar to a Klingon's UFO in their book.

Their spiel is the same ridiculous crap. You can't ____ (fill in the blank it's all the same). These guys can't seem to find the bathroom without a glass panel telling them where it is. I like real airplanes, six gauges is more than enough. If you are too chicken to hand prop, you should go live in an office cubical.

It's like folks who say that Cubs and Pietenpols aren't bushplanes. Heck, when they were first built there were hardly any airports. Every 1930s plane was a bush plane. Oh, maybe not as capable as a HT-295 or a PA-18-160, but my Cub has no idea what asphalt is.

Yeah, when I got my private license five years ago I flew a Citabria with an ADF and a VOR. So it's with tongue firmly in cheek I say that I have "full instrumentation" in the Cub. But CFIs around here think you "need" ASD-B or QRX-7 to be legal (they even make up non-extant regs). One asked how I would "see traffic without ASD-B." I dunno, my Cub has A-C-R-Y-L-I-C W-I-N-D-O-W-S and I have E-Y-E-S.

Some folks remind me of my college business professor. He told me I was naive and couldn't X, Y, and Z. I quit school and started a business doing X, Y, and Z. Now I own (as in own, not as the bank owns and I am making payments on) a house on a nice lake with a dock and a ramp, a couple cars, and a really nice yellow Cub that sometimes sits on floats at that dock.

So I guess I'm sorta a jerk 'cause I don't accept "no" without evidence.

I won’t give ya a amen, but that’s a solid 7/10 lol

You don’t need much for instruments for the PPL, and frankly as a firm believer that shit happens having a horizon is a good thing.

If you have the pre reqs to get your CFI no reason you couldn’t get your CFI if you think you’d be a good teacher, the good CFIs don’t go yelling and screaming, so personally I wouldn’t have a issue training someone I care about, if anything I’ll be more friendly but also hold them to very high standard.

That said, saying a PPL is the same as a CPL/IFR/CFI is not factual, what you went through to get your PPL is nothing compared to a initial CFI, the level of knowledge you need to demonstrate for the CFI (it’s much more a ground ride than a flying ride) is vast compared to a PPL. So on that side I’d check the ego a wee bit.

Being a “bush plane” has much more to do with the pilot than the airframe, I’ve seen six figure carbon cubs eat up tons of runway at a class C field, I’ve also seen videos of guys landing in some pretty back county back country in mooneys and the like.

Don’t use 22 as a excuse, we stretch childhood out far too long in this country, you’re a grown man, there were teens on the beach of Normandy, you got time to learn, but with where you are understand in the big picture of aviation you don’t know shit, surround yourself with people who make you feel small in the industry and be a humble sponge.

Electronics aren't my thing. I'm not (exactly) saying they are evil, but a whole lot of people that I interact with use them as a crutch to avoid doing things in what i consider to be "the right way."

Everything in life is a trade off. Starting on the date of my first flying lesson, I have logged over 200 hours per each succeeding 365 day period. If I found a "gizmo" no matter how useful, and the cost to buy it, install it, and pay for five hours of flight time learn to be proficient in it's use was $2000, then the trade is 70 hours of fuel, maintenance reserve, and insurance cost on the Cub. Considering my mission profile I'd choose the extra 65 hours of experience. "Dave," a mythical pilot, may choose the gizmo and he may well be correct for his mission profile.

Apparently the same rules existed back when I trained, but I was not aware of them. It seems that there are at least two different CFI certifications. One allows you to train people for a PPL-- it requires an IFR rating and a CPL, which also requires complex certification (does a Mite count?). The other is a "Sport-CFI" which has different requirements and only permits the holder to teach towards a "Sport License." For the "Sport" no CPL or IFR rating is required-- I have neither.

"the-Adam," BCP member Adam Rosenberg, (http://the-adam.com/adam/index.html) seems to think a Cherokee 140 is a back country airplane. He has hundreds of experiences, many older than I am, to support this proposition.

My great-grandfather, and my grandfather were my age when they RETURNED from the ETO, and Vietnam (the average age of a US soldier in Vietnam was 19). Compared to them, I have no experience in life and I know nothing. Compared to so many pilots here I am still very wet behind my ears.

But as someone with over 650 hours in "proper" aircraft with the third wheel 170 or so inches back where God himself intended for it to be, I have to giggle-- or laugh out loud-- when a CFI with 450 total hours tells me that "it's too difficult to learn to fly in a tail-dragger."

You have 650 hours, NPD, 2 cars, AND a house on a lake? Shit balls, didn't know I was shit talking Jeff Bezos.

I'm literally homeless when I get back from ak in october so I'm happy to fly out and teach your gf to fly floats, tailwheel, whatever. My grammar is not as good as yours but on the other hand my grammar is not as good as yours.

A CFI rating is just a piece of paper. (In fact I just printed off the forms to obtain one myself.)

Please say that to your DPE when you take your CFI checkride.