Hello everyone. I just passed my flight test for my recreation pilot permit here in Manitoba, Canada last week and the only endorsement we're allowed to have with the rec permit is a float endorsement. My dad owns a 46 Aeronca champ on floats that I grew up in. I am planning on getting a float endorsement done in the champ this summer but would like to fly with my old man a bit more before I do so. My two questions are :
1. Am I able to log any flight time with my dad in the champ without an endorsement? He's not a CFI just a private pilot.
2. Am I able to legally solo the plane prior to an endorsement or is the endorsement more for insurance purposes registering the plane under my name one day?

Thanks and looking forward to what you have to say!

- Kyle

Your not going to like the answer to either of those two questions, enough said on that one.

That would be no, to both questions. However, you can go flying with your Dad and have as much fun as you like, and if your Dad has good habits and practices that flying may prove useful when you do go to get your float rating.

Thanks for the responses, it’s kind of what I figured the answer would be. I was only unsure as for floats it’s an “endorsement” vs a “rating” like night flying or multi. I wasn’t sure if there was any difference.

Safe flying everyone!

Just realized you're in the US and I'm answering you from Canada so I actually don't know what the rules are over there. Looks like the Mapleflt is hinting the same thing though.

Fraser Farmer wrote:Just realized you're in the US and I'm answering you from Canada so I actually don't know what the rules are over there. Looks like the Mapleflt is hinting the same thing though.

I'm in Canada as well, so I guess a "grain of salt" is required for my response also. As being a rating or endorsement the "qualification" is required to be legal so there's that part. If not "qualified" your insurance will be laughing all the way to the bank if you should need to make a claim.

Mapleflt wrote:

Fraser Farmer wrote:Just realized you're in the US and I'm answering you from Canada so I actually don't know what the rules are over there. Looks like the Mapleflt is hinting the same thing though.

I'm in Canada as well, so I guess a "grain of salt" is required for my response also. As being a rating or endorsement the "qualification" is required to be legal so there's that part. If not "qualified" your insurance will be laughing all the way to the bank if you should need to make a claim.

I read that he’s doing his training for his rec pilot in Manitoba. So he is in Canada. So your answers are appropriate for him.

A1Skinner wrote:

Mapleflt wrote:

Fraser Farmer wrote:Just realized you're in the US and I'm answering you from Canada so I actually don't know what the rules are over there. Looks like the Mapleflt is hinting the same thing though.

I'm in Canada as well, so I guess a "grain of salt" is required for my response also. As being a rating or endorsement the "qualification" is required to be legal so there's that part. If not "qualified" your insurance will be laughing all the way to the bank if you should need to make a claim.

I read that he’s doing his training for his rec pilot in Manitoba. So he is in Canada. So your answers are appropriate for him.

You are correct. I think I read that in his first question, forgot I read that when I read his response and saw the St. Paul on his profile and thought Minnesota instead of Manitoba.