Wings vs. BFR

I always thought taking a wings seminar was a simple way to get your BFR
out of the way. After a little Internet research it seems they require
three hours of dual flight instruction to qualify as a BFR. Is that
correct?

It would be much easier and cheaper to just do the BFR.. I don't see the
incentive for the Wings Program as a substitute for a BFR. (Other than the
education... )


--
Dallas

If you are proficient, WINGS is quicker and cheaper. If you can do the maneuvers
to PTS standards the first time your done. No three hours.


On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 16:04:20 -0500, Dallas
wrote:


I always thought taking a wings seminar was a simple way to get your BFR
out of the way. After a little Internet research it seems they require
three hours of dual flight instruction to qualify as a BFR. Is that
correct?

It would be much easier and cheaper to just do the BFR.. I don't see the
incentive for the Wings Program as a substitute for a BFR. (Other than the
education... )

GeorgeC

On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 17:40:50 -0500, GeorgeC wrote:

No three hours.

"Each phase of the Wings program requires three hours of dual flight
instruction and attendance at an FAA-recognized seminar within a 12-month
period."
http://myflightreview.com/other_resources.html

(I went to the actual FAA Wings site but it was so convoluted I couldn't
find anything.)

--
Dallas

Dallas wrote:

On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 17:40:50 -0500, GeorgeC wrote:

No three hours.

"Each phase of the Wings program requires three hours of dual flight
instruction and attendance at an FAA-recognized seminar within a 12-month
period."
http://myflightreview.com/other_resources.html

(I went to the actual FAA Wings site but it was so convoluted I couldn't
find anything.)


What you refer to is the old system; still described in the official doc
(AC61-91H) but no longer in force; and you are right, the official Wings
site is utterly confusing, but GeorgeC is right.

--Sylvain

Dallas wrote:

It would be much easier and cheaper to just do the BFR.. I don't see the
incentive for the Wings Program as a substitute for a BFR. (Other than
the education... )

You may want to look into it further (the three hours requirements have
changed a bit since the Wings program has been revamped, the problem -- I
did post something about it a wee while back -- is that the official doc --
i.e., AC 61-91H -- still describes the old system and has not been
superseeded yet... the new system is described at
http://www.faasafety.gov/ -- good luck making sense of it though, but it
no longer requires 3 hours, you can do it with less...)

In terms of costs, yep, you are right; a BFR will take less time and cost
you less. However, there are a couple of advantages with the Wings
program; for one thing, it is preferable for the CFI, for liability
reasons; when you sign somebody off in a BFR in a glider say, that person
is legal to go in any category and class for which this person is rated...
think about it for a second... and it is your backside on the line should
something happen to that dude during the next two years; no so much with
the Wings program; second, although not officially, I was told that the
FAA might look more favorably on a pilot who participates actively in the
Wings program in case you screw up at one point (up to a point that is,
but it might help).

...and then it can be fun; I mean, I end up flying more than three hours a
year with a CFI anyway (e.g., keeping IFR current, I know it doesn't have
to be a CFI, but that's how I do it; or just for the heck of it)

--Sylvain

My CFII and his chief instructor pilot like WINGS' because the examinee is held
to PST standards. I think the real reason is because he doesn't have to teach
ground school (FAA takes care of that) just fly.

I didn't think of the liable angle, go point.

I check my logbook and the flight time for my last WINGS was 2.2 hours. I was
rusty.

George

On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 11:10:49 -0700, Sylvain wrote:

Dallas wrote:

It would be much easier and cheaper to just do the BFR.. I don't see the
incentive for the Wings Program as a substitute for a BFR. (Other than
the education... )

You may want to look into it further (the three hours requirements have
changed a bit since the Wings program has been revamped, the problem -- I
did post something about it a wee while back -- is that the official doc --
i.e., AC 61-91H -- still describes the old system and has not been
superseeded yet... the new system is described at
http://www.faasafety.gov/ -- good luck making sense of it though, but it
no longer requires 3 hours, you can do it with less...)

In terms of costs, yep, you are right; a BFR will take less time and cost
you less. However, there are a couple of advantages with the Wings
program; for one thing, it is preferable for the CFI, for liability
reasons; when you sign somebody off in a BFR in a glider say, that person
is legal to go in any category and class for which this person is rated...
think about it for a second... and it is your backside on the line should
something happen to that dude during the next two years; no so much with
the Wings program; second, although not officially, I was told that the
FAA might look more favorably on a pilot who participates actively in the
Wings program in case you screw up at one point (up to a point that is,
but it might help).

..and then it can be fun; I mean, I end up flying more than three hours a
year with a CFI anyway (e.g., keeping IFR current, I know it doesn't have
to be a CFI, but that's how I do it; or just for the heck of it)

--Sylvain

GeorgeC

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