You have probably wondered why you have not seen the new CFI ACS (promised for the last 4 years) or any changes to the current standards? A Department of Transportation interpretation (December 20, 2018) classified the current (and proposed) Airman Certification Standards as “Official Guidance Material.” This DOT interpretation coupled with a presidential proclamation from the last administration, requires all ACS/PTS documents to refer directly to Federal Regulations for support. Consequently, any change or update to an ACS was subject to the NPRM process (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking). This is a year-long process requiring publication (with public comment and response) for any change. This draconian interpretation prevents any flexibility in the creation and/or updating of the flight training standards. This cumbersome process, preventing flexibility or rapid update of the standards, jeopardized 
the safety and the evolutionary improvement of the training process. These standards are were essentially “frozen” until just now; progress is finally being made with a legal workaround called “incorporation by reference.” (Glad I’m a pilot not a lawyer…) But it is about to get really weird for testing as these new standards are (incrementally) published and approved (more soon).
DOT advised the FAA that all future ACS or PTS documents, including updates, will require that the FAA either (1) remove any tasks and maneuvers not explicitly required by regulation; or (2) issue a rule that would make those tasks and maneuvers regulatory.
As is apparent in the Aviation Mechanic release above, we will probably see a confusing progressive release of future testing standards as they achieve approval after being published in the Federal Register (stand by for more). Fly safely out there (and often)!
Join SAFE and get great benefits. You get 1/3 off ForeFlight and your membership supports our mission of increasing aviation safety by promoting excellence in education. Our FREE SAFE Toolkit App puts required pilot endorsements and experience requirements right on your smartphone and facilitates CFI+DPE teamwork. Our CFI insurance was developed by SAFE specifically for CFIs (and is the best value in the business).
If you are a safety-minded pilot these legal minimums have very limited application. This *might* work for a slow single on a short leg to a well-known airfield (in non-hazardous terrain). Anything else would be crazy. Educators must make this point loud and clear to all pilots as well as emphasizing PIC responsibility for safety. Some applicants on flight tests specify 3 miles as their enroute visibility on cross counties. Obviously these pilots have never flown very far “VFR” in these conditions.
The NASA Artemis One “attempt” at launch last week was a perfect example of proper “safety mindset.” And today, NASA is carefully controlling expectations by saying we “might” have a launch *if* everything works according to plan. If a couple of minor things go wrong, perhaps delay and pivot to mitigate the risks. Pressing on with a plan in the face of obvious risks and dramatic environmental changes is just dangerous. We should always regard any planned aviation event as a *MAYBE* for safety; cultivate a 
How long should we continue to push on and persist? This is one of the hardest questions to answer. Hold the stock or sell, stay the course or divert? A personality trait which can be important to success like “grit/perseverance” can become a liability if carried to far. As long as a safe “Plan B” is in place and safety margins are maintained, we can afford a bit of “grit” and determination. But there is a point where it is also wise to “cut and run.” Three tries on an instrument approach is my personal limit (and that is only with changing weather or other objective justification) then it is time to go to the alternate.
The master of maneuver warfare, 
The first goal in learning any new and unique skill is unlearning. What?? Don’t educators teach people stuff (add knowledge)? A central understanding for success with adult learners, however, is that there is no “blank slate.” Adult learners come with “content” (
Unlearning as a necessary and positive learning tool is not addressed in the perfunctory 
Another critical fact is that this process of relearning requires actual physical time. This is why a three-week private pilot course absolutely cannot work well. It is neurologically impossible to myelinate new knowledge pathways and create lasting habits in that short a time. Learning to fly is a huge psychological change of how we relate to the world. Only extensive meaningful repetition can form habits (“muscle memory”) and correct behaviors. These have to be coded in and reinforced to be repeatable for more than just a short time. There are physical changes that have to happen in the brain for enduring learning to occur. Procedure trainers and chair flying do help a lot, but there is no magic…just hard work.
It is very important that the pattern you are creating with every new learner is perfect and consistently repeated over time, with as few variations as possible. This is why “drill and repetition” beats scenario training for all early skill learning. The “discovery method” of learning has been repeatedly proven to NOT work in this area – though necessary later when the higher-level processing takes over in the flying curriculum. This is like using the correct tools for each different job.
This chatter habit was created only for the FAA practical test, where verbosity is necessary to demonstrate knowledge to your pilot examiner. Talking continuously is NOT how we actually teach flying. In a quiet, undistracted environment, human communication is only about 20% efficient. In the cockpit your efforts are like the “dog watching television” and usually distract more than help. (Your student only sees your lips move and perhaps hears 5% of what you say). Teach only on the ground, and demonstrate (briefly) in the air. This allows time for your learner’s experimentation and exploration in the air. If brief verbal reminders are necessary in flight, carefully “chunk” your communication and deliver it only at undistracted times.
Get the 
When an applicant shows up for an FAA evaluation with a Desgnated Pilot Examiner (DPE), the first step is validating the applicant’s experience and endorsements; “qualification.” According to a gathering of 36 senior DPEs at Oshkosh, approximately 1/5th of scheduled flight tests never even start due to incorrect CFI preparation of the applicant. A DPE cannot legally accept the IACRA 8710 and begin a certification activity, unless all the applicant’s experience and endorsements are correct and meet the regulatory standards. We are wasting 20% of checkride opportunities! We could boost availability dramatically by just getting the qualification part correct.
As a frustrated DPE, I wrote the 
The real casualties of these errors are the scheduled test applicants preparing and suffering “test anxiety” but never getting an opportunity to demonstrate their abilities. Most DPEs (legitimately) charge for traveling and showing up (and wasting their time) so there is a financial hit to the applicants as well. One way to fix this problem is to download and use the