BFR

"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.

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

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

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?

"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".

The best I can tell there is no requirement for any specific
curriculum in a flight review, other than the "time requirements"

From FAR 61.56:

The review must include:

(1) A review of the current general operating and flight rules of part 91 of
this chapter; and

(2) A review of those maneuvers and procedures that, at the discretion of the
person giving the review, are necessary for the pilot to demonstrate the safe
exercise of the privileges of the pilot certificate.

OtisWinslow wrote:
"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".

Nope he's right. Upwind is the same as departure but I hear upwind used
more, much more. If I need to refer to someone flying the upwind leg
but on the dead side of the pattern then I have to explain that. "He's
upwind, north of the runway."

. I have known instructors who would not do a
flight review in less than 16 hours

He is milking the pilot big time

So again.. nothing SPECIFIC... just discretion and general rules..

Dave

Barry wrote:
The best I can tell there is no requirement for any specific
curriculum in a flight review, other than the "time requirements"


From FAR 61.56:

The review must include:

(1) A review of the current general operating and flight rules of part 91 of
this chapter; and

(2) A review of those maneuvers and procedures that, at the discretion of the
person giving the review, are necessary for the pilot to demonstrate the safe
exercise of the privileges of the pilot certificate.

On 19 Jul 2004 23:44:14 GMT, (Hankal) wrote:

. I have known instructors who would not do a
flight review in less than 16 hours

He is milking the pilot big time

That goes wayyyy beyond milking :-))

OTOH the pilot may have been incompetent. Some do lose their
judgemental ability, but there is still no reason for the BFR to go 16
hours. If the pilot were that bad it would be quite evident and it
then would become "remedial training", or just plain dual.

If an instructor really goes in for a 16 hour BFR it's time to run the
other way and find a competent instructor.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com