Josh just wanted to say thanks for making all these videos! I just passed my Private written exam with a 97%!!! 🎉 Any time I didn’t quite understand a topic I would check your channel and you usually had a good detailed video about it. Thanks again!!
I've known Seymore for many years and I can affirm that he has always maintained his aircraft to the highest standards. The Butts family are good people
This is fantastic. These videos are leaps and bounds more entertaining and informative than others from flagship pilot training channels imo. I’m training to get my PPL with hopes of joining the ANG (since getting my citizenship and bachelor’s). Had a rough flight lesson today but these videos help remind me why I enjoy aviation.
I have watched most of the 57 PPL lessons, I love the many funny short video clips Josh used to get certain points crossed! I also appreciate very much these free pilot training videos Josh meticulously prepared for the many viewers who aspire to be pilots one day! Today is Christmas, my sincere prayers and best wishes for Josh and your family! Also wish you and your family a bumper year in 2024!
This is amazing I have been through two Ground Schools and they did not go into these kind of details so you are doing such a great job and really training people, good for you, keep up the wonderful work you are doing and God bless you.
YES! Im getting ready for my checkride in a few weeks and this is the video I needed exactly! your content has helped me tremendously throughout my training! Thank you
Great video Josh. Thank you for doing such a great job at making this stuff easier to understand and remember. Keep up the excellent work. Safe skies 🇺🇸🛩️
This was a great lesson and a good review for any pilot. The only suggestion is that word used to maintain the aircraft to prevent possible issues in the future is "preventive" not "preventative." The references show in the video use the correct version of the word. This is a very common usage, and almost everyone uses "preventative," but using the correct version is preferred by picky people like me. It may be that someone my age, (I received my multi-engine commercial license in 1970), is more sensitive to the use of "preventive." Thanks again for a fantastic series and I appreciate that you can jump between a C-130 and small GA aircraft with ease. I was an aircraft commander in the WC-135 many years ago, along with the EC-47 I flew over Laos.
Lol. I made the voiceover for this video then realized that there are actually two ways to spell it. The crazy thing is that they mean the same thing. I spelled it the way it’s written in the FAR but I was hoping no one would catch the pronunciation. lol bonus point to you sir! I love flying the C-130 and GA. They both have fun things about them. Both of the planes you flew sound pretty cool too!
As a long time subscriber and fan, I’ve noticed a change in the format of your channel. Your videos are longer. Almost like a real class. I like how thorough they are. You really don’t leave anything unanswered. Please don’t move to Alaska!
that AD Example gave me chills, I was flying with my wife FR KCLW to kBvy, Florida, as I was landing, at the Flare Fase, I pitched the nose at the horizon line, my seat went all the way back, putting me on a scary situation, I lost the visual OF the runway,luckly I was able to touch Down with no problems, but I had to take off and head back to kCLW. I was prepared, and it did happen again o n the takeoff this time, which, it did not happen, when I took OFF from KCLW earlier.
I’ve said this before, but thanks for offering this information for free… Also, I’ve subscribed, liked, & just bought a Yeti shirt & yeti/wings sticker to help support…
I wish I could do more.. I’m just starting my journey into aviation @ 46, so it’s a little overwhelming. Especially the price of everything… I’m trying to pass the written test by myself & save what little $$ I do have on airplane rental & the CFI… I’ve bought the Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, found a couple podcasts & videos, but I’m a visual learner, so your videos are irreplaceable… by the time I take the test, I’ll try to get a few more shirts… thanx
@@LtKrunchy You have been awesome! I appreciate everything you’ve done! Have you checked out my Adventure Men channel yet? I don’t have many vids over there yet, but I’m hoping to start making lots of flying videos over there as well. th-cam.com/video/QemyT1Yd-aY/w-d-xo.html
I would like to thank you for the amazing content. I’ll be taking my written soon and your videos has been great for understanding the concepts. Greetings from the Dominican Republic 🫡.
Your snippet video of the guy jumping out of his plane got that guy in major trouble with the FAA. He did it as a youtube stunt and lost his ticket. He may also be facing criminal charges for endangering people on the ground since he preplanned the stunt and the subsequent crashing of the plane.
Should we challenge and give regular car mechanics the option to be a small plane and recreation mechanic for planes. Are we wastingbare time for the future of Aviation?
From my personal experience. Inspection and repair should also depend on the area, season , plane type and plane description. Some should via inspected more than others specially recreational and personal.
Non-ambiguous English is an area where the FAA tends to struggle (even from a lawyer perspective), a fair number of their regulations are contradictory or use conflicting definitions (Hell they have at least 3 separate ways of defining night operations). Yes, a pilot "operates" the aircraft and should be double checking some amount of maintanence logs and doing the final preflight, but the intent of 91.403 is in the sense of a certified operator that is leasing aircraft by the month. In other words the party that is contractually responsible for the aircraft in the owner's absence (when the true owner isn't approving each flight). This operator can be a pilot in some cases, but on the other hand an airline pilot is not the intended meaning of operator under this regulation and thus the airline pilot is not the party *primarilly* responsible for the maintenance of all of the airframes that he may fly in the company fleet. (I suppose one could argue that the pilot is responsible for reveiwing the overall maintenence and logging system for the company that they will be working with as a substitute for constant full reveiw of every aircraft.) The line about a pilot with or without legal control doesn't really change the above, it is just meant to close a loophole for somebody taking an aircraft either without authorization or without asking the operator if they have had required maintenence. (The FAA better get it together though, the supreme court has set some new case law very unfavorable to vague or ambiguous rules created by federal agencies. Such that it now favors the civilian when there is question in a lawsuit. They haven't completely overturned Chevron deference yet for all civil cases but they are moving that way, and for criminal cases there has always been long standing rule of lenity where a rule can be interpreted multiple ways.)
That is very true. There is an advisory circular that explains that “operator” was added so owners were not the only individuals responsible for their aircraft. I may own an aircraft and you have an open invitation to fly it, but maybe I didn’t tell you that the annual was due. I shouldn’t have to alert you when something needs to be done. The operator needs to look at the forms and see that it’s due
On a Hobbs meter, one hour equals one hour. On an engine tachometer, the time varies according to the speed of the engine. Most tachometer are set to give you one hour at normal operating speed. That means at idle or above idle you may actually have one hour 10 minutes go by and the tachometer would only read one hour. A good example of why the engine tach never equals the Hobbs would be let’s say, you were doing stall training, and you reduce the engine speed to idle for a power off stall. Or if you were idling on a taxi way waiting for takeoff. In the old days they used to multiply the tachometer hours by 1.2 and that’s what they would charge the rental when there was no Hobbs meter installed.
Bro, first, thanks so much. I’m taking it on the teeth with regards to pressure, altitude, temperature, and density and how they relate to another. I saw your lesson on weather. I don’t know that I quite understood the relationship amongst all those things. Help sir
I saw on a reputable video that a mechanic other than an AI can perform an annual inspection (A/P).However, the AI has to supervise and be the mechanic signing the logs.
I use the acronym A AV1ATE, to include ADs. Also, do you have a preflight check video that goes more in-depth to things to look for then just the basic checklist. Thanks!
I have to disagree where you say that a transponder with a lapsed 24 month inspection should be able to be used when VFR. Even when you are flying on a 1200 VFR code and not talking to ATC, they still see you and issue traffic advisories on you to IFR aircraft. It has to be accurate for them to be able to guarantee adequate separation to IFR aircraft.
Hey, I really appreciate your comment. So, I think this brings up a really great conversation. The C-130 actually has a radar system that will actually allow you to paint aircraft without a transponder. It’s called the skin paint feature. When we get these radar signatures, it gives us No Altitude indications whatsoever and the signal can easily drop off the radar when the aircraft moves. I’m no expert, but I’m guessing this is very similar to what ATC sees when we turn off our transponder. That’s probably why they give you the “traffic 2 o’clock, altitude unknown” advisory sometimes. So, they get a really unreliable signal. Is that better than a transponder that is out of its inspection cycle? Even though I will follow the rules and keep it turned off, I would argue that it is not. In addition to that, what kind of separation is provided for aircraft operating IFR in Class E? I don’t have the AIM right in front of me, but I believe ATC only provides separation from other IFR aircraft in those areas, so if they don’t know an appropriate altitude, they may not even advise you since it’s obvious that the aircraft is flying VFR if it’s transponder is off. Once again, great conversation though. I’d love to get a controllers take on this.
Not exactly. It has to get certified as an experimental aircraft at that point. I’m not sure on the process, but I know that it has to have a conditional inspection and the aircraft must be test flown.
I would like your opinion please. My a&p purchased a rebuild carburetor from aircraft spruce. Installed it for $1000 dollars and low and behold it turned out to be defective. Rebuilder tempest. Returned the defective carburetor to aircraft spruce had to wit 5 weeks for the supplier to determine it was defective. So was sent another carburetor ( probably inspected this one before sending) a&p installed number 2. Carburetor for another $1000 . Question, who is responsible for the defective carburetor, aircraft spruce says certainly not us we just take your money we don’t send you money. Tempest no same answer. Such bs this is their so called policy maybe it’s time to address your policy. What’s your thoughts. Is aircraft spruce responsible for the defective part labor included? Personally I will never do business with them again, am I wrong? Thanks for you time
How confident are you about the interpretation of the definition of operator? I always understood it to be the flight school who is leasing the aircraft is the operator. Meanwhile, the PIC (student renting the aircraft) is responsible for "ensuring the aircraft has been maintained" (don't have exact regulation number at hand, on phone)
Okay, so here is where I am confused: it makes no sense to include operator in that regulation according to your definition. So, if I am preflighting the aircraft as PIC and I find that the aircraft is unairworthy and I choose to not fly it, I would not be an operator at that point. I am not flying the plane or causing it to be flown if I deem it unairworthy. So how could I then be held accountable for maintaining the airworthiness if I am not an “operator”? Your interpretation basically says that if I try to rent from my local FBO and I find something that makes the airplane unairworthy, I now (having no affiliation with the FBO) would have some legal responsibility to restore the airworthiness?
@@alfredkinchen3113 i believe this wording has been recently updated because if you do choose to take the aircraft, you become and operator, and you have a responsibility of checking that aircraft before flight. If you find something wrong on your pre-flight and you don’t take it then you no longer have any responsibility, in my opinion
@@FreePilotTraining so then what’s the point of including the term operator in the reg if that’s the case? If it’s airworthy, I fly the plane and don’t have to worry about maintaining airworthiness. If it’s unairworthy, I will not fly the airplane and still don’t have to worry about restoring the airworthiness. In both cases the responsibility does not fall on me. Therefore, I am never going to be responsible for keeping the plane airworthy. So what point is there in including operator in the regulation if that is the definition? Does that make sense?
@@jamalkinchen6311 they made that reg so you are responsible if you take an un-airworthy aircraft out and crash it. The owner can’t be the only one to blame of the aircraft isn’t up to specs
@@christophergagliano2051 yes, that is part of the problem too, but good luck purchasing one even if you have the money. Often there’s a 2 year wait and scalpers have them on order so they can resell as soon as they hit the market
@@FreePilotTraining Yes I know, I worked at Learjet a few years back and that company actively recruited individuals to sign up for delivery positions knowing full well that they would never take delivery and reassign that position to someone with more money. Oh by the way, my dad and uncle bought a brand new 172 back in the mid '70s from the factory for $13.5k 😋
26:27 - time stamp , looks like Seth had a brain fart when installing the placards because he royally messed up on the date and hours section , or is it supposed to read 09/26/71 when all the others read 04/10/23
So, that particular AD is not a reoccurring inspection. It should have been done about that time. Now, this sheet could definitely have some mistakes, because I’m actually in the Philippines at the moment and I don’t have my aircraft logbooks in front of me. For one, Seth isn’t an A&P, but he can verify that the AD was accomplished by someone else
Thats actually the date the AD was complied with. This is just a demonstration of an AD list and not something that's an actual aircraft record though. However, an actual AD record would have the same date as the AD was complied with back in the 70s. The only ADs that would have current dates are new ADs or reoccurring ADs that have been complied with recently. Hopefully that clarifies things.
Need a FAST Answer? Try these CHAPTERS:
Chapters:
0:48 Pre-flight Inspections
2:07 Who's Responsible for Maintenance?
3:49 Aircraft Inspections
4:12 Annual Inspections
5:00 Aircraft Logbooks Explained
10:34 100 Hour Inspections
14:25 Experimental & Light Sport Inspection Requirements
15:28 Altimeter Inspections
16:45 Transponder Inspections
19:30 ELT Inspections
20:30 Airworthiness Directives Explained
26:29 Alterations, Repairs, Modifications, and STC's
29:48 Preventive Maintenance
32:13 Inoperative Equipment
Thanks for doing what you do.
You’re welcome! Thanks for being here!
Josh just wanted to say thanks for making all these videos! I just passed my Private written exam with a 97%!!! 🎉 Any time I didn’t quite understand a topic I would check your channel and you usually had a good detailed video about it.
Thanks again!!
Awesome! Congratulations! I’m so glad I could help you! Now, on to that check ride!
I've known Seymore for many years and I can affirm that he has always maintained his aircraft to the highest standards. The Butts family are good people
😂 I’m always hoping that someone will notice those little details lol
This is fantastic. These videos are leaps and bounds more entertaining and informative than others from flagship pilot training channels imo. I’m training to get my PPL with hopes of joining the ANG (since getting my citizenship and bachelor’s). Had a rough flight lesson today but these videos help remind me why I enjoy aviation.
Thanks Tom! That means a lot! The ANG is a great option! I’ve been in and ANG, AF Reserves and Active Duty. ANG is an excellent choice!
This channel is a great source of information, thank you!
Thanks! I appreciate that! Thanks for being here!
I have watched most of the 57 PPL lessons, I love the many funny short video clips Josh used to get certain points crossed! I also appreciate very much these free pilot training videos Josh meticulously prepared for the many viewers who aspire to be pilots one day! Today is Christmas, my sincere prayers and best wishes for Josh and your family! Also wish you and your family a bumper year in 2024!
Thank you so much! That means a lot! Merry Christmas!
I'll second this comment!
This is amazing I have been through two Ground Schools and they did not go into these kind of details so you are doing such a great job and really training people, good for you, keep up the wonderful work you are doing and God bless you.
Thank you so much!
Thanks for all the comprehensive videos man! I passed my written with a 97 and your videos definitely helped with a lot of the review!
You’re welcome! So glad I could help! Excellent score!
Can't wait for the next video. Always informative for a student and a pilot that wants to buy a plane. Thanks 👍
Thank you! I’m so glad these are helpful!
Love your videos and the fact you changed your shirt after realizing there were spots on it.
😆 thanks!
YES! Im getting ready for my checkride in a few weeks and this is the video I needed exactly! your content has helped me tremendously throughout my training! Thank you
Awesome! I’ve been waiting to push it out just for you! 😏 thank you so much! That means a lot
Awesome job Man
Keep it up.
Keep making videos
I enjoyed a lot😊
Thanks!
Awesome video again! Thanks!
Thanks James!
Great video Josh. Thank you for doing such a great job at making this stuff easier to understand and remember. Keep up the excellent work. Safe skies 🇺🇸🛩️
Thanks Kevin!
This was a great lesson and a good review for any pilot. The only suggestion is that word used to maintain the aircraft to prevent possible issues in the future is "preventive" not "preventative." The references show in the video use the correct version of the word. This is a very common usage, and almost everyone uses "preventative," but using the correct version is preferred by picky people like me. It may be that someone my age, (I received my multi-engine commercial license in 1970), is more sensitive to the use of "preventive."
Thanks again for a fantastic series and I appreciate that you can jump between a C-130 and small GA aircraft with ease. I was an aircraft commander in the WC-135 many years ago, along with the EC-47 I flew over Laos.
Lol. I made the voiceover for this video then realized that there are actually two ways to spell it. The crazy thing is that they mean the same thing. I spelled it the way it’s written in the FAR but I was hoping no one would catch the pronunciation. lol bonus point to you sir! I love flying the C-130 and GA. They both have fun things about them. Both of the planes you flew sound pretty cool too!
wow, that's a long and detailed video explanation! Thank you so much for doing this! With your examples, it helps a lot to understand and remember.
You’re welcome!
Thank you for another great video!
You’re welcome!
Very enjoyable and very informational, as always. Keep up the good work.
Thanks John!
As a long time subscriber and fan, I’ve noticed a change in the format of your channel. Your videos are longer. Almost like a real class. I like how thorough they are. You really don’t leave anything unanswered. Please don’t move to Alaska!
Thanks Mark! I’m always trying to improve and make my videos better!
Thank you for this information, love you.
You’re welcome!
that AD Example gave me chills, I was flying with my wife FR KCLW to kBvy, Florida, as I was landing, at the Flare Fase, I pitched the nose at the horizon line, my seat went all the way back, putting me on a scary situation, I lost the visual OF the runway,luckly I was able to touch Down with no problems, but I had to take off and head back to kCLW. I was prepared, and it did happen again o n the takeoff this time, which, it did not happen, when I took OFF from KCLW earlier.
That’s scary. It makes sense why they came out with that AD. You hate to be the first person that something like this happens to
I’ve said this before, but thanks for offering this information for free… Also, I’ve subscribed, liked, & just bought a Yeti shirt & yeti/wings sticker to help support…
I appreciate all the support! It means a lot!
I wish I could do more.. I’m just starting my journey into aviation @ 46, so it’s a little overwhelming. Especially the price of everything… I’m trying to pass the written test by myself & save what little $$ I do have on airplane rental & the CFI… I’ve bought the Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, found a couple podcasts & videos, but I’m a visual learner, so your videos are irreplaceable… by the time I take the test, I’ll try to get a few more shirts… thanx
@@LtKrunchy You have been awesome! I appreciate everything you’ve done! Have you checked out my Adventure Men channel yet? I don’t have many vids over there yet, but I’m hoping to start making lots of flying videos over there as well. th-cam.com/video/QemyT1Yd-aY/w-d-xo.html
Another great lesson. I look forward to the next video. Thanks
Thanks Scott!
Thankyou for your videos ,I'm learning alot
You’re welcome! Thanks for watching!
I would like to thank you for the amazing content. I’ll be taking my written soon and your videos has been great for understanding the concepts.
Greetings from the Dominican Republic 🫡.
You’re welcome! Thanks for watching!
Great learning resource you are creating.
🌏🇭🇲
Thank you!
Good stuff
Thanks!
Your snippet video of the guy jumping out of his plane got that guy in major trouble with the FAA. He did it as a youtube stunt and lost his ticket. He may also be facing criminal charges for endangering people on the ground since he preplanned the stunt and the subsequent crashing of the plane.
Yes, he definitely messed up
Great video
Thanks!
Should we challenge and give regular car mechanics the option to be a small plane and recreation mechanic for planes. Are we wastingbare time for the future of Aviation?
1:29 it wasn’t the engine that took a dump in this video, it was his brain 😂
Very true 😂 I was giving him the benefit of the doubt. Lol
Awesome. Have a checkride in a week 😯
Thanks! Good luck! 🤞🏻
@@FreePilotTraining appreciate it
From my personal experience. Inspection and repair should also depend on the area, season , plane type and plane description. Some should via inspected more than others specially recreational and personal.
Remember to be nice to your mechanic!
That’s a fact!
Non-ambiguous English is an area where the FAA tends to struggle (even from a lawyer perspective), a fair number of their regulations are contradictory or use conflicting definitions (Hell they have at least 3 separate ways of defining night operations).
Yes, a pilot "operates" the aircraft and should be double checking some amount of maintanence logs and doing the final preflight, but the intent of 91.403 is in the sense of a certified operator that is leasing aircraft by the month. In other words the party that is contractually responsible for the aircraft in the owner's absence (when the true owner isn't approving each flight).
This operator can be a pilot in some cases, but on the other hand an airline pilot is not the intended meaning of operator under this regulation and thus the airline pilot is not the party *primarilly* responsible for the maintenance of all of the airframes that he may fly in the company fleet. (I suppose one could argue that the pilot is responsible for reveiwing the overall maintenence and logging system for the company that they will be working with as a substitute for constant full reveiw of every aircraft.)
The line about a pilot with or without legal control doesn't really change the above, it is just meant to close a loophole for somebody taking an aircraft either without authorization or without asking the operator if they have had required maintenence.
(The FAA better get it together though, the supreme court has set some new case law very unfavorable to vague or ambiguous rules created by federal agencies. Such that it now favors the civilian when there is question in a lawsuit. They haven't completely overturned Chevron deference yet for all civil cases but they are moving that way, and for criminal cases there has always been long standing rule of lenity where a rule can be interpreted multiple ways.)
That is very true. There is an advisory circular that explains that “operator” was added so owners were not the only individuals responsible for their aircraft. I may own an aircraft and you have an open invitation to fly it, but maybe I didn’t tell you that the annual was due. I shouldn’t have to alert you when something needs to be done. The operator needs to look at the forms and see that it’s due
Great videos. Are all these videos very US specific, or is most of it applicable internationally?
Thanks! I am not well versed on ICAO procedures but a lot of stuff is very similar
On a Hobbs meter, one hour equals one hour. On an engine tachometer, the time varies according to the speed of the engine. Most tachometer are set to give you one hour at normal operating speed. That means at idle or above idle you may actually have one hour 10 minutes go by and the tachometer would only read one hour. A good example of why the engine tach never equals the Hobbs would be let’s say, you were doing stall training, and you reduce the engine speed to idle for a power off stall. Or if you were idling on a taxi way waiting for takeoff. In the old days they used to multiply the tachometer hours by 1.2 and that’s what they would charge the rental when there was no Hobbs meter installed.
I didn’t know that. Thanks for the information! That’s awesome
Bro, first, thanks so much. I’m taking it on the teeth with regards to pressure, altitude, temperature, and density and how they relate to another. I saw your lesson on weather. I don’t know that I quite understood the relationship amongst all those things. Help sir
You’re welcome! I explain it best in this video right here: th-cam.com/video/RMitIgzeSgo/w-d-xo.html
I saw on a reputable video that a mechanic other than an AI can perform an annual inspection (A/P).However, the AI has to supervise and be the mechanic signing the logs.
Yes. That’s very true. An A&P can do the inspection, but an IA has to sign off on it saying that it’s good
I use the acronym A AV1ATE, to include ADs. Also, do you have a preflight check video that goes more in-depth to things to look for then just the basic checklist. Thanks!
I’ve seen that. I do t know why I’ve never used that, but I should. I don’t have a video on that yet. I need to make one
I have to disagree where you say that a transponder with a lapsed 24 month inspection should be able to be used when VFR. Even when you are flying on a 1200 VFR code and not talking to ATC, they still see you and issue traffic advisories on you to IFR aircraft. It has to be accurate for them to be able to guarantee adequate separation to IFR aircraft.
Hey, I really appreciate your comment. So, I think this brings up a really great conversation. The C-130 actually has a radar system that will actually allow you to paint aircraft without a transponder. It’s called the skin paint feature. When we get these radar signatures, it gives us No Altitude indications whatsoever and the signal can easily drop off the radar when the aircraft moves. I’m no expert, but I’m guessing this is very similar to what ATC sees when we turn off our transponder. That’s probably why they give you the “traffic 2 o’clock, altitude unknown” advisory sometimes. So, they get a really unreliable signal. Is that better than a transponder that is out of its inspection cycle? Even though I will follow the rules and keep it turned off, I would argue that it is not. In addition to that, what kind of separation is provided for aircraft operating IFR in Class E? I don’t have the AIM right in front of me, but I believe ATC only provides separation from other IFR aircraft in those areas, so if they don’t know an appropriate altitude, they may not even advise you since it’s obvious that the aircraft is flying VFR if it’s transponder is off. Once again, great conversation though. I’d love to get a controllers take on this.
So if I take a f16 wing and put it on the body of a Cessna 150 it becomes a experimental airplane
Not exactly. It has to get certified as an experimental aircraft at that point. I’m not sure on the process, but I know that it has to have a conditional inspection and the aircraft must be test flown.
13:25 my girl after coming home from bottomless mimosas 😩
Lol
I would like your opinion please. My a&p purchased a rebuild carburetor from aircraft spruce. Installed it for $1000 dollars and low and behold it turned out to be defective. Rebuilder tempest. Returned the defective carburetor to aircraft spruce had to wit 5 weeks for the supplier to determine it was defective. So was sent another carburetor ( probably inspected this one before sending) a&p installed number 2. Carburetor for another $1000 . Question, who is responsible for the defective carburetor, aircraft spruce says certainly not us we just take your money we don’t send you money. Tempest no same answer. Such bs this is their so called policy maybe it’s time to address your policy. What’s your thoughts. Is aircraft spruce responsible for the defective part labor included? Personally I will never do business with them again, am I wrong?
Thanks for you time
Sorry to hear you’re having those issues. I’d say the manufacturer is to blame on that one.
Do you need a CFI if you're training somebody for free
That’s debatable. Yes, but you would still have to receive training from a CFI and have him sign you off for the written exam
How confident are you about the interpretation of the definition of operator? I always understood it to be the flight school who is leasing the aircraft is the operator.
Meanwhile, the PIC (student renting the aircraft) is responsible for "ensuring the aircraft has been maintained" (don't have exact regulation number at hand, on phone)
I’m confident in the word Operate. I quoted that directly from FAR 1. I would say that an operator is someone who “operates.”
Okay, so here is where I am confused: it makes no sense to include operator in that regulation according to your definition. So, if I am preflighting the aircraft as PIC and I find that the aircraft is unairworthy and I choose to not fly it, I would not be an operator at that point. I am not flying the plane or causing it to be flown if I deem it unairworthy. So how could I then be held accountable for maintaining the airworthiness if I am not an “operator”? Your interpretation basically says that if I try to rent from my local FBO and I find something that makes the airplane unairworthy, I now (having no affiliation with the FBO) would have some legal responsibility to restore the airworthiness?
@@alfredkinchen3113 i believe this wording has been recently updated because if you do choose to take the aircraft, you become and operator, and you have a responsibility of checking that aircraft before flight. If you find something wrong on your pre-flight and you don’t take it then you no longer have any responsibility, in my opinion
@@FreePilotTraining so then what’s the point of including the term operator in the reg if that’s the case? If it’s airworthy, I fly the plane and don’t have to worry about maintaining airworthiness. If it’s unairworthy, I will not fly the airplane and still don’t have to worry about restoring the airworthiness. In both cases the responsibility does not fall on me. Therefore, I am never going to be responsible for keeping the plane airworthy. So what point is there in including operator in the regulation if that is the definition? Does that make sense?
@@jamalkinchen6311 they made that reg so you are responsible if you take an un-airworthy aircraft out and crash it. The owner can’t be the only one to blame of the aircraft isn’t up to specs
100 hours, abit of an overkill. Wouldn't be so much if the inspection was more often than a yearly inspection. Maybe it's just me.
Well, like I said, the inspection isn’t quite as serious at 100 hours
@@FreePilotTraining that kind of worries me.
Actually I want to go get $100 hamburger at gross burgers in Danville Illinois
That’d be fun
First 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
Awesome! Thanks for getting here early!
And this is why ultralights are so popular...
Yes, that’s the exact reason why everyone likes experimental aircraft
@@FreePilotTrainingthat is true, but don't forget a brand new 172 cost north of 400K,
@@christophergagliano2051 yes, that is part of the problem too, but good luck purchasing one even if you have the money. Often there’s a 2 year wait and scalpers have them on order so they can resell as soon as they hit the market
@@FreePilotTraining Yes I know, I worked at Learjet a few years back and that company actively recruited individuals to sign up for delivery positions knowing full well that they would never take delivery and reassign that position to someone with more money. Oh by the way, my dad and uncle bought a brand new 172 back in the mid '70s from the factory for $13.5k 😋
26:27 - time stamp , looks like Seth had a brain fart when installing the placards because he royally messed up on the date and hours section , or is it supposed to read 09/26/71 when all the others read 04/10/23
So, that particular AD is not a reoccurring inspection. It should have been done about that time. Now, this sheet could definitely have some mistakes, because I’m actually in the Philippines at the moment and I don’t have my aircraft logbooks in front of me. For one, Seth isn’t an A&P, but he can verify that the AD was accomplished by someone else
Thats actually the date the AD was complied with. This is just a demonstration of an AD list and not something that's an actual aircraft record though. However, an actual AD record would have the same date as the AD was complied with back in the 70s. The only ADs that would have current dates are new ADs or reoccurring ADs that have been complied with recently. Hopefully that clarifies things.
@@SethLakeDPE thanks for the clarification Seth