On Apr 14, 9:17*pm, Dave Doe wrote:
In article 6dddd429-0f97-4bd4-b2e4-
, says...



On Apr 14, 2:55*pm, Dallas wrote:
What's the bi-annual flight review all about?

I haven't been through one yet.. *how tough are they? *Is this like a
mini-practical test with stalls, engine outs and a tough verbal exam etc..
or is it more like an informal "Can he still fly an airplane and still
understands the basics?"

--
Dallas

The basic purpose of the review is simply to have an instructor take a
look at your flying, general attitude, and habit patterns to insure a
continuing competence.
For any pilot with no standout issues, the review should be no problem
at all.
My procedure for giving these reviews was to simply tell the pilot I
wanted to see how he/she approached and conducted a normal flight from
beginning to end. I told them to act normally and just to consider me
an "interested observer".
The instructor of course has a criteria that is followed but there is
no reason that this criteria should take the form of intrusion on the
flight unless it becomes necessary.
Just treat the flight as a normal check flight and you'll *do just
fine.
Dudley Henriques

Do you think that's sufficient?

Reason I ask, is that *every* BFR I've done I've been asked to enter the
low-flying-area and conduct some low flying guff ("exit from a blind
valley"/cloud bank ahead - type stuff), and of course, other things I'd
never be able to do in normal/real flight such as a FLWOP.

Indeed, as well as the fun of it, I consider such things to be, not only
a challenge, but essential to my best flying practices. *(I *wanna* know
I can still get myself into a field if I ever become a glider).

--
Duncan

By the time I watch an applicant pre-flight an airplane and taxi out
to the active, I usually have a pretty good handle on how the rest of
the flight will be performed.
I have the applicant proceed while assigning a few carefully chosen
"tasks". How far I take the applicant past those tasks is the direct
result of my observation of how those tasks are completed.
The items you mention can be introduced in an informal way and need
not be made to look like a "you do this right or you fail" scenario.
Each instructor handles a bi-annual review differently. I preferred
the "informal" approach. It relaxes the applicant. I want pilots to
look forward to doing a bi-annual instead of seeing it as an ever
present "hurdle" to be completed in order to keep their certificate.
It's toward that goal I dislike the "rigid" "formal" approach.
There is no reason whatsoever for an instructor to treat a bi-annual
check as a challenge. The very essence of the context involved with
pilot to pilot flight checks is to develop in a pilot a true and real
desire to remain proficient. I feel it is an instructor's
responsibility to create this attitude in each pilot they encounter.
In the world of display aerobatics, it was common for me as well as
other pilots to seek each other out on a regular basis and ask to be
watched and critiqued. I was always surprised at the little things my
fellow pilots picked up on and made known to me; not only surprised,
but grateful.
Dudley Henriques