foxmoth

I probably should know this but am to busy to look it up at present.
If you are not (say) tailwheel cleared can you instruct someone in their tailwheel aircraft on something such as IMC that the tailwheel is not relevant for? If so, how would you log it since you are not qualified P1 on type?

Whopity

You cannot give instruction in any aeroplane if you are not qualified to fly it as PIC.

Imagine teaching IMC in a Twin if you were not twin qualified!

What about the recommended 5 hours on type before giving instruction?

foxmoth

Can't really see there would be much of a problem though teaching IMC in a Cessna 120 instead of a 150, or even a wobbly prop Piper instead of a straight Warrior, even if you were not wobbly prop cleared

I think the relevant point here is
recommended. For IMC instruction I think most instructors with decent experience should be able to cope pretty well with say a Cessna instead of a Piper after reading the manual and an hour or so in the air.
I do agree that the answer probably is that the rules are as you say, but I don't think above points are actually that pertinant.

3 Point

Foxmoth,

What a strange question! "If you are not qualified to do something can you do it anyway?"

While I see your point that teaching instrument flying in a C150 or a C120 is about the same, and I'm sure you could teach IF or indeed any basic flying technique equally effectively in a tail or nosewheel aircraft, the basic bottom line is that if you are not qualified to fly a particular aeroplane you can't teach anything on it because you can't fly it! Not only can't fly it in a legal sense but possibly also can't fly it in a practical sense if you've not been taught how!

I'm interested in your use of the word "cleared", I'd prefer to use "qualified" because if you've not been trained in the relevant differences for an SEP which requires difference training you're not qualified.

Would you expect to move from an A320 to an A321 without the required difference training? Dont think so.

Common sense really.

Happy landings

3 Point

hugh flung_dung

Tailwheel requires differences training so the answer is "No", you must be qualified to act as Captain.

No problem moving from one SEPL trike to another, even if you've never flown that model before; this is the point of a class rating.

HFD

FlyingForFun

I agree with the answer that, if you haven't received tailwheel differences training, you may not be captain of a tailwheel aircraft, therefore you can not instruct in one.

However, it's worth pointing out that no flying is required for tailwheel differences training. Although it would be extremely unusual, there is no rule preventing an instructor who has had tailwheel differences training from briefing you on the relevant points, and then signing your logbook to say that the training has been completed.

In these circumstances, the "training" might be a briefing along the lines of: "During taxying, take-off and landing, don't touch the controls, trust your student's ability. Also, appreciate that once I sign your logbook, you will legally be able to fly any tail-wheel aircraft, but please understand that this would not be a sensible thing to do without getting further instruction and some dual flying."

I'm not saying that this would necessarilly be sensible, nor that I'd be happy to sign someone's logbook without flying with them first, but as far as I am aware it is legal.

FFF
-------------

hugh flung_dung

FFF: I'm not sure you're quite right on that.
LASORS (2005) section F talks about differences training and says: You're probably thinking about familiarisation training:HFD

foxmoth

This is really the point of my post, if you were teaching IMC or aeros you would not be involved in the TO/LDG on a Tailwheel or the power settings on a VP prop if the person you were training was current, especially if it were the owner, but you would then be unable to teach the bits you want to.
(this was a bit of a "what if" post as there is actually not many areas it would apply personally).