Wings vs. BFR

Maxwell wrote:

Has a CFI ever been held responsable for the subsequent actions of a pilot
they have endorsed for a BFR ?

I don't know; do you want to be the first?

--Sylvain

"Sylvain" wrote in message
...
Maxwell wrote:

Has a CFI ever been held responsable for the subsequent actions of a
pilot
they have endorsed for a BFR ?

I don't know; do you want to be the first?

Maxie would have to ride in a real airplane just to get his private. Forget
about CFI.

FSDO routinely question CFIs regarding people they have signed off who
subsequently screwed up. If they find something amiss, they ain't gonna be
too happy. They can't easily pull the ratings of a CFI for the actions
pilot, but if they find deficient paperwork(which must be retained for 3
years by the CFI) they most certainly can. CFIs can also be sued by the
family members of the deceased, and yes these things do happen.

"Sylvain" wrote in message
...
Maxwell wrote:

Has a CFI ever been held responsable for the subsequent actions of a
pilot
they have endorsed for a BFR ?

I don't know; do you want to be the first?


No, actually the point is, will there ever be a first?

If a post incident flight review was made by the FAA, and they could cite
serious reasons to ground the subject pilot, they would have little to
actually complain about. If that were true, every time you file with a CFI
for any purpose, insurance check out, further skills development, tail time,
etc. - they would be responsible for you until they log dual time.

Sylvain wrote:
However, there are a couple of advantages with
the Wings program; for one thing, it is preferable for the CFI, for
liability reasons;

Setting aside the fact that in the U.S. anyone can sue anyone else for just
about any reason, I am unaware of any FAA regulation that would make a CFI
responsible for the actions of a pilot they had signed off on their BFR.

It would be helpful if you could cite case law or regulations that support
your claim.

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .
Sylvain wrote:
However, there are a couple of advantages with
the Wings program; for one thing, it is preferable for the CFI, for
liability reasons;

Setting aside the fact that in the U.S. anyone can sue anyone else for
just
about any reason, I am unaware of any FAA regulation that would make a CFI
responsible for the actions of a pilot they had signed off on their BFR.

It would be helpful if you could cite case law or regulations that support
your claim.

The CFI isn't responsible for the actions of a non-student pilot, however
they are responsible for fufilling all the requirements of the BFR and they
are responsible for accurate record keeping. So the applicable portion of
the FAR is 61.56 and 61.189.

It usually goes down something like this. A pilot does something stupid
like busts the class B or ADIZ and gets a free counseling session with the
FSDO. The FSDO guy looks at his logbook and says, "I see you got your last
BFR 3 weeks ago. Did your instructor say anything about airspace?"

To which the stupid pilot says, "No we really didn't talk at all. He just
looked at my logbook and we went flying."

"Hmmm, OK. I see the log entry says 0.9 hours. Is that how long you flew?"

"Oh yes, the FBO bills me for Hobbs time, so I'm sure that's correct."

So now the FSDO inspector has reason to believe the CFI didn't provide at
least 1 hour of ground training and 1 hour of flight training. Their next
call is to the CFI so he can get his free counseling session. The FSDO
reviews his records and sees that he logged 1.0 hours that day and that he
claims he provided 1 hour of ground training when clearly he did not. So
now the FSDO has him on 61.56, 61.189, and probably several other things
once they go over his records with a fine toothed comb and start talking to
other pilots he has signed off.

So the bottom line is if the CFI is doing everything he is required to do,
he has nothing to worry about if a pilot he gave a BFR screws up. However,
some CFIs that work for a FBO only get paid for flight time and not ground
training, so many of them have very little interest in doing something they
aren't getting paid for anyway. Also most CFIs I've met aren't the best
record keepers other than their own log. If the FSDO gets the impression a
CFI just pencil whipped a BFR, they aren't going to be too sympathetic
towards that CFI, and it's probably not going to be all that difficult to
find all the evidence they need to hang him. Even a minor violoation of
61.189 is enough to get a suspension and clearly willful violations can get
their CFI revoked indefinitely.

On Aug 2, 9:24*am, "Mike" nospam @ aol.com wrote:
"Jim Logajan" wrote in message

.. .

Sylvain wrote:
However, *there are a couple of advantages with
the Wings program; *for one thing, *it is preferable for the CFI, *for
liability reasons;

Setting aside the fact that in the U.S. anyone can sue anyone else for
just
about any reason, I am unaware of any FAA regulation that would make a CFI
responsible for the actions of a pilot they had signed off on their BFR..

It would be helpful if you could cite case law or regulations that support
your claim.

The CFI isn't responsible for the actions of a non-student pilot, however
they are responsible for fufilling all the requirements of the BFR and they
are responsible for accurate record keeping. *So the applicable portion of
the FAR is 61.56 and 61.189.

It usually goes down something like this. *A pilot does something stupid
like busts the class B or ADIZ and gets a free counseling session with the
FSDO. *The FSDO guy looks at his logbook and says, "I see you got your last
BFR 3 weeks ago. *Did your instructor say anything about airspace?"

To which the stupid pilot says, "No we really didn't talk at all. *He just
looked at my logbook and we went flying."

"Hmmm, OK. *I see the log entry says 0.9 hours. *Is that how long you flew?"

"Oh yes, the FBO bills me for Hobbs time, so I'm sure that's correct."

So now the FSDO inspector has reason to believe the CFI didn't provide at
least 1 hour of ground training and 1 hour of flight training. *Their next
call is to the CFI so he can get his free counseling session. *The FSDO
reviews his records and sees that he logged 1.0 hours that day and that he
claims he provided 1 hour of ground training when clearly he did not. *So
now the FSDO has him on 61.56, 61.189, and probably several other things
once they go over his records with a fine toothed comb and start talking to
other pilots he has signed off.

So the bottom line is if the CFI is doing everything he is required to do,
he has nothing to worry about if a pilot he gave a BFR screws up. *However,
some CFIs that work for a FBO only get paid for flight time and not ground
training, so many of them have very little interest in doing something they
aren't getting paid for anyway. *Also most CFIs I've met aren't the best
record keepers other than their own log. *If the FSDO gets the impression a
CFI just pencil whipped a BFR, they aren't going to be too sympathetic
towards that CFI, and it's probably not going to be all that difficult to
find all the evidence they need to hang him. *Even a minor violoation of
61.189 is enough to get a suspension and clearly willful violations can get
their CFI revoked indefinitely.

I can't speak for other pilots, but I want the ^%*% BFR to make me a
safer pilot, and if the CFI wasn't tough enough I'd fire his ass. I
and another pilot do safety checks on each other every half year or so
for exactly the same reason -- the only time my airplane gets close to
FAA limits on pitch and bank is when he say "It's your airplane' when
I'm under the hood doing unusual attitude recovery work. I want at
least that much work from a BFI.

The idea isn't to get a log book entry, folks, the idea is to
demonstrate you know what you're doing to an objective observer. Don't
waste the opportunity.

"a" wrote in message
...
On Aug 2, 9:24 am, "Mike" nospam @ aol.com wrote:
"Jim Logajan" wrote in message


-The idea isn't to get a log book entry, folks, the idea is to
-demonstrate you know what you're doing to an objective observer. Don't
-waste the opportunity.

But that's not really the point. If a CFI doesn't do he job, and it's
discovered by the FAA by any circumstances, they will pay a price.

But that is unrelated to a CFI being responsable for the later incidents of
a pilot who has satisfied even the minimun requirement for a BFR.

On Aug 2, 11:54*am, "Maxwell" #@#.# wrote:
"a" wrote in message

...
On Aug 2, 9:24 am, "Mike" nospam @ aol.com wrote:

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message

-The idea isn't to get a log book entry, folks, the idea is to
-demonstrate you know what you're doing to an objective observer. Don't
-waste the opportunity.

But that's not really the point. If a CFI doesn't do he job, and it's
discovered by the FAA by any circumstances, they will pay a price.

But that is unrelated to a CFI being responsable for the later incidents of
a pilot who has satisfied even the minimun requirement for a BFR.

There are several themes to this thread -- the OP was interested in
getting opinions re ways of satisfying BFRs. My point is that we as
pilots who are paying the CFI should demand we get value for that
money. If I spend 90 minutes aloft with a qualified CFI I want to
learn something other than just that I satisfy minimum BFR
requirements -- even if it's not part of the regs.

In flying as in life, it's a lot better to learn from other people's
mistakes.

"a" wrote in message
...

I can't speak for other pilots, but I want the ^%*% BFR to make me a
safer pilot, and if the CFI wasn't tough enough I'd fire his ass. I
and another pilot do safety checks on each other every half year or so
for exactly the same reason -- the only time my airplane gets close to
FAA limits on pitch and bank is when he say "It's your airplane' when
I'm under the hood doing unusual attitude recovery work. I want at
least that much work from a BFI.

The idea isn't to get a log book entry, folks, the idea is to
demonstrate you know what you're doing to an objective observer. Don't
waste the opportunity.

You have the right idea that the FAA minimum requirements doesn't mean
you're a safe pilot. Personally I'm also doing a lot more than the 6
approaches every 6 months to keep myself IFR current also. But not all
pilots have that attitude. Many see the BFR as nothing more than a log book
entry, and there are CFIs out there who are more than willing to give a
drive by BFR.

On Aug 2, 12:56*pm, "Mike" nospam @ aol.com wrote:
"a" wrote in message

...

I *can't speak for other pilots, but I want the ^%*% BFR to make me a
safer pilot, and if the CFI wasn't tough enough I'd fire his ass. *I
and another pilot do safety checks on each other every half year or so
for exactly the same reason -- the only time my airplane gets close to
FAA limits on pitch and bank is when he say "It's your airplane' when
I'm under the hood doing unusual attitude recovery work. *I want at
least that much work from a BFI.

The idea isn't to get a log book entry, folks, the idea is to
demonstrate you know what you're doing to an objective observer. Don't
waste the opportunity.

You have the right idea that the FAA minimum requirements doesn't mean
you're a safe pilot. *Personally I'm also doing a lot more than the 6
approaches every 6 months to keep myself IFR current also. *But not all
pilots have that attitude. *Many see the BFR as nothing more than a log book
entry, and there are CFIs out there who are more than willing to give a
drive by BFR.

Nothing is a sure thing, but these kinds of reviews can be used to
change the odds a little bit in your favor. I'm getting old: one CFI
with a fresh outlook told me, since I fly a reasonable amount of long
XC at night, usually at 11,000 feet eastbound, it would be wise to use
oxygen at altitude even though it's not required. He got a gold star
for reminding me of something I'd forgotten about night vision. He's
the same guy who made some wise, off the books, suggestions about
pattern flying at non-controlled airports (low winged guys should be
at pattern altitude way out on the entry leg, "Where are your clearing
turns in entry, dammit!", fly a bit faster and a bit lower -- low
wing airplane, vis is better upward -- if there's no one ahead of you
all the way to late on final, less chance of someone marring your
paint job -- those kinds of things.

A couple of hours with someone like that, who makes a study of
airmanship, even though he had a thousand hours less than I did, is
both instructive and humbling!

The least important part of that BFR was his signoff -- I'm sorry he's
moved away.