If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
On 19 Jul 2004 02:57:03 GMT, Andrew Sarangan
wrote: "fly low" wrote in : The BFR does not have to include any Instrument Currency component as long as the Pilot is current, correct? Whether you are instrument current or not has no bearing. What I care about is whether you plan on flying IFR. If the answer is yes, then I would insist on some instrument work during a flight review. I have had a case where an instrument rated pilot had not flown IFR in many years and said that he had no intention of ever becoming current. In that case, I elected to not do any instrument work for the flight review. BTW, the phrase BFR is no longer used. It is Flight Review (FR). Just as "Oshkosh" will always remain "Oshkosh" and not "AirVenture" to most of us, so to will the BFR remain a BFR, regardless of what the FAA calls it. It is after a flight review done on a biennial basis and technically is a "biennial", flight review. And as to the issue of instrument work, I'm not currently... current, but I fully expect to see instrument work on the next BFR. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com " ... If you are Instrument Current and due for a BFR, are you required to or should you also be tested on Instrument Approaches, Holds, etc? A flight review consists of a minimum of an hour of ground and an hour of flight instruction by FAR. An instructor may conduct the flight review in any way he pleases as long as it meets these parameters. I have known instructors who would not do a flight review in less than 16 hours. It is whatever the instructor feels comfortable in signing you off for. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message . 158... BTW, the phrase BFR is no longer used. It is Flight Review (FR). Wrong. It was always flight review. BFR, like FBO, does not appear in the FARs. :-) There is no legal definition of BFR or FR. BFR is the commonly accepted usage and will continue to be until it is required at some period other than every two years. Honestly, trying to stamp out "BFR" is as nutty as the attempt to artificially restrict the definition of "upwind" to a special case was awhile ago. It matters not that AIM shows a line labeled "upwind." As long as towers and aircraft have existed, departing traffic has been referred to as "upwind" by both towers and pilots. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"C J Campbell" wrote in message ... It matters not that AIM shows a line labeled "upwind." As long as towers and aircraft have existed, departing traffic has been referred to as "upwind" by both towers and pilots. They have? I always thought that was the departure leg. And likewise I've always thought that "upwind" is the opposite side of the runway from "downwind". |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
. I have known instructors who would not do a
flight review in less than 16 hours He is milking the pilot big time |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Roger Halstead wrote:
If an instructor really goes in for a 16 hour BFR it's time to run the other way and find a competent instructor. I've done long stretches of instruction (10+ hours) that ended in the student getting a flight review endorsement, but usually in the context of learning some new skill. For example, my club requires a 10 hour checkout for our retracts. At the end of that time, I sign the person off for both the club checkout and BFR (and, if appropriate, a complex/high-performance endorsement, and maybe an IPC too). I suppose by some narrow definition, you could call that a 10 hour BFR. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Hankal" wrote in message ... . I have known instructors who would not do a flight review in less than 16 hours He is milking the pilot big time I did not say they were good instructors. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
fly low wrote:
If you are Instrument Current and due for a BFR, are you required to or should you also be tested on Instrument Approaches, Holds, etc? Not required to, but it can't hurt! :-) Matt |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 06:01:55 -0400, Matt Whiting
wrote: fly low wrote: If you are Instrument Current and due for a BFR, are you required to or should you also be tested on Instrument Approaches, Holds, etc? Not required to, but it can't hurt! :-) Matt It's interesting that the minimum 1 hour is mentioned for the BFR. I checked out in Honolulu in January (MY previous BFR was 1998 as I have a UK licence which is current but not the FAA certificate). Ground school was well over the hour as I needed to understand the local procedures but the flight was virtually finished after 45 minutes. The instructor said we needed a little longer to be legal so we will do some additinal steep turns and a second partial PFL to make up the time! David E-mail (Remove Space after pilot): pilot |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
I always request that my FR be tilted toward IFR since that's where
I always need the most review work and I don't fly much IFR. It's my attitude that the FR is the opportunity to spend time with a CFI to improve my flying. So why not work on that which I'm the least proficient at? "fly low" wrote in message ... If you are Instrument Current and due for a BFR, are you required to or should you also be tested on Instrument Approaches, Holds, etc? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|