BFR revisited

[Richard]

Should a BFR be performed in the a/c the pilot most often flies? Michael's concerns as owner has no bearing on what I mean. My point is that to become so comfortable in one type by one mfg completely exclusive of other a/c is to invite a certain lethargy (not the right word) with respect to an airman's knowledge. Flying different types would expand the knowledge base of the pilot. Thoughts?

 

[Bones]

I see your point Richard. I suppose it would depend if I owned an aircraft or not. If I owned my own aircraft I think I would rather do my BFR in that aircraft since it would be the one I was flying most often. It would give me a vaild test of my skills in that aircraft and perhaps show me what I need to work on over the next year.

However if I did want to enhance my stick and rudder skills, and brush up all around, expand my knowledge and try something new, I think I would just choose a plane to get a good thorough check out with and try my hand at that aircraft....will that be a valid test of your overall skill. Perhaps not since you don't have time in that aircraft but it would expand your knowledge.

I suppose it all depends on what you want to accomplish, if you want to kill 2 birds with 1 stone get 10hrs in something you haven't flown and consider that a BFR.

A BFR is really only as good as one challenges themselves to be. Some instructors have weak BFRs and others are tooo stringent. Should it be taylored to the clients background....perhaps? Above all I think it should be fun, and should be valid...and it should keep the client coming back for their check-up that they often dread.

As a side note...I hated giving BFRs...never knew what you were going to get. Astronauts, Cowboys, or the Ace of the Base....you never knew.

 

[poadeleted20]

Should a BFR be performed in the a/c the pilot most often flies?

I think so, and the FAA seems to agree with me. The purpose of a flight review is not to develop new skills or expand one's horizons, but rather to ensure that one is up to speed for the flying they do. This is very clearly reflected in AC 61-98A, which talks about the process an instructor should go through to create an appropriate flight review plan for the individual pilot getting the review:

"The CFI must be aware that the flight review is not a test or check ride, but an instructional service designed to assess a pilot's knowledge and skills."

"...a pilot with an airplane single-engine land rating may have recently obtained a glider rating, but may still wish to consider obtaining a flight review in a single-engine airplane if the appropriate 24-month period has nearly expired."

"Before undertaking the review the CFI should interview the pilot to determine the nature of his or her flying and operating requirements:
Type of Equipment Flown
Nature of Flight Operations
Amount and Recency of Flight Experience"

"After reaching agreement on how the review will be conducted, the CFI should prepare a plan for completing the review. The plan should include a list of regulatory subjects to be covered, the maneuvers and procedures to be accomplished, the anticipated sequence in which the segments will occur, and the location where the review will be performed."

​

Some folks combine the flight review with things like an additional training endorsement for tailwheel or complex, and if that's the sort of plane in which you expect to be doing most of your flying for the next two years, that's a good plan. But if 90% of your flying is IFR XC's to big air carrier airports in a 36 Bonanza, a flight review in a J-3C at a little grass field will merely be a square-filler, not something of any real safety/training benefit to you.