How do you know when the flight review is good?

[PHXAvi8tor]

Hypothetical scenario: Pilot shows up on your doorstep and hasn't flown in about seven years. He's studied hard.

After 2 hours on the ground, you determine he knows all the current regs and airspace. So, you go fly. He knows his stalls. He can maneuver the plane safely. But, he just is terrible at radio procedures and cockpit management. He can't land the plane.

So, you ask him to come back for more takeoff and landing practice, and work in some radio procedures while your at it. He's more interested in learning "instrument procedures" and wants to work that in. You decline, saying the basics gotta be handled first, but offer to do some basic instrument attitude recovery with him. He obliges, reluctantly.

Let's say he does fine on the second visit with you. Would you sign him off?

 

[tonycondon]

Ben,

Its impossible to tell from a brief description. You flew with him. If you think he's safe and has sufficient knowledge, sign him off.

 

[PHXAvi8tor]

Yeah, that's my assessment, too. You have to know and feel the pilot is safe, and be confident of it.

Thanks, Tony.

 

[Areeda]

Yeah, that's my assessment, too. You have to know and feel the pilot is safe, and be confident of it.

Yes 100% your judgement.

A succesful flight review, IMHO is one where you and the pilot feel confident that knowledge, skill and judgement are good enough. If there ever was a "I can't define it but I know it when I see it" term "good enough" is it.

Joe

 

[colomtnflyer]

It's going to be your signature in his log book. You have to make that determination! And be certain it is the right one! If there is any doubt, advise him of such, and continue to work with him till he meets your expectation of proficiency!

 

[KennyFlys]

You said he wanted to learn instrument procedures. Does he have an IR now? If not, that would make no sense if he cannot master the aircraft in basic attitude including stable visual approaches.

He has some proficiency to work on from what you're saying. Hopefully, he'll move forward with this next flight and perform as necessary. I know some things are a tough call but you have to protect your ticket first if one is not performing as reasonably expected.

 

[Henning]

Hypothetical scenario: Pilot shows up on your doorstep and hasn't flown in about seven years. He's studied hard.

After 2 hours on the ground, you determine he knows all the current regs and airspace. So, you go fly. He knows his stalls. He can maneuver the plane safely. But, he just is terrible at radio procedures and cockpit management. He can't land the plane.

So, you ask him to come back for more takeoff and landing practice, and work in some radio procedures while your at it. He's more interested in learning "instrument procedures" and wants to work that in. You decline, saying the basics gotta be handled first, but offer to do some basic instrument attitude recovery with him. He obliges, reluctantly.

Let's say he does fine on the second visit with you. Would you sign him off?

Charge him extra, make him pay cash, sign with someone elses name and number...

 

[PHXAvi8tor]

Charge him extra, make him pay cash, sign with someone elses name and number...

Ha-ha! What's your old CFI number, again??

I'm glad to know my instincts are right on: No way I'm gonna sign him off unless I am confident he can fly the plane safely. Too much at stake -- his life mostly.

 

[Henning]

Ha-ha! What's your old CFI number, again??

I'm glad to know my instincts are right on: No way I'm gonna sign him off unless I am confident he can fly the plane safely. Too much at stake -- his life mostly.

Your CFI ticket mostly, then his passengers lives, then his.

 

[Baron 55]

Once I was at a fly-in, one of those the FAA puts on and the CFIs come from all over and fly with people for free. Everyone camps out, etc. Anyway, at the pre-start CFI briefing, an FAA inspector told us about a fatal crash which was leading to some lawsuits, etc. by the family of the pilot. The pilot hadn't flown in a while, got his flight review, shortly thereafter headed out in his plane on a cross-country and flew into some hills. Well, I mean he flew right into the side of a hill in some very marginal weather conditions.

The point was, the inspector said, the CFI who had recently signed the late pilot off on his flight review was now being grilled by the FAA, NTSB, and was looking at possible lawsuit action by the pilot's family...all with an eye to, for one thing, finding out exactly what the CFI did with the pilot on the review.

I don't know whether the story was true, completely, or the inspector was trying to make a point, or whether the flight reveiw had been thorough or slap-dash. I've made it a point to make my reviews fit the situation with the individual pilot, depending on how current he or she is, their normal flight profiles, etc., and to log carefully every single thing we did in the process of my deciding whether to sign off the review. This came in very handy once when I had a recent reviewee crack up a Skylane on a cross-country about a month after the review was completed. He wasn't hurt, and he had made some bonehead decisions [and he admitted it], but you can bet I was grilled quite thoroughly by the FAA as well as the club where I taught and from where the plane was rented. My logbook entry with the review details made a big difference and both the FAA and the club management ended up being satisfied that I had been careful and thorough in my conduct of the review. Whew.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

<snip>

I'm glad to know my instincts are right on: No way I'm gonna sign him off unless I am confident he can fly the plane safely. Too much at stake -- his life mostly.

IOW: You know he flew it well enough -THAT day...
The future flying performance of pilots they sign off, is the real gamble for CFIs.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Just a personal practical note for the flight review for a "haven't flown in years" pilot.

I tend to require a broader range of flight conditions with the pilot who hasn't flown in a few years. On a "normal" flight review where the pilot has flown at least semi-regularly, unless the pre-flight interview suggests some problem areas, my expectation is that the pilot has encountered the usual group of flight conditions or has personal minimums that avoid them.

But for the long-time non-flyer, I'm a little more concerned with exposing them to flight conditions that they will likely encounter to see if their skills are up to the task.

Perhaps the most common example for me is crosswinds. Our winds here tend to start the day in the southeast and move clockwise to the north as the day goes on. There is a definite period in the PM when 12-18 KT crosswinds are common. It we happen to do a "regular" flight review on a calm day, so be it; but with the recent returner, we just might wait until we have a good crosswind until the sign-off.

 

[PHXAvi8tor]

...
Perhaps the most common example for me is crosswinds. Our winds here tend to start the day in the southeast and move clockwise to the north as the day goes on. There is a definite period in the PM when 12-18 KT crosswinds are common. It we happen to do a "regular" flight review on a calm day, so be it; but with the recent returner, we just might wait until we have a good crosswind until the sign-off.

Mark,

Great minds think alike, sometimes.

Last weekend was very windy, and I wanted to see how my client's decision-making process worked. I was pleased to learn that he had set some personal minimums, which were reasonably below the maximum demonstrated crosswind component in the POH.

We wound up rescheduling the flight, but both agreed that some good crosswind landing practice would help sharpen him up.

Would like to run through a basic emergency procedure or two (engine failure, electrical malfunction), as well, before the review is complete.

The FAA puts out a pretty decent guide to conducting a flight review. I'm not talking about AC 61-98; rather a different publication found on faa.gov. This one emphasizes one other important area: Airspace and security in the Post 9/11 era: Particularly TFRs and NOTAMs. Good to review that with pilots, too.