How much do you fly to remain proficient?

[HeatherCFI]

What is the minimum amount of time you feel safe flying while remaining proficient? How long would you go without flying before having an instructor go up with you for a bit? We all know how important it is to keep our flying skills up and I'm guessing my questions here are totally subjective. I guess I'm curious as to what your personal minimums are.

 

[tonycondon]

usually over christmas break I would go 2 or 3 weeks without flying. that was plenty. the last few months i've been without regular students and tried to fly something at least weekly. now i've got a couple students so im flying about every day which is just fine with me.

 

[EdFred]

Well, I went a long time without flying. Flew on July 4, Labor Day, and beginning of October. Hadn't flown instruments since sometime in Summer of 2007. Hopped in the Comanche with the instructor flew a couple approaches, intercepts, couple manuevers he said "you're good, I don't need to see anything else" and signed me off on the IPC. Two days later I flew hard IMC solo with a GPS approach to 100' above minimums.

My personal mins are the FAA mins. I haven't neen night current for well over a year, but have no hesitation to go fly at night. I've noticed when I *don't* fly for a while, my landings get better - probably because I am a bit more focused and not in the mindset of "I've landed the plane 40 times this week, here we go again."

 

[Dr. O]

Been actively flying my entire life... I am determined to someday get good at it...

denny-o

 

[ScottM]

I strive for 10 hours and at least one approach per month. I try and sit with an instructor once a year. Mostly I am frustrated with the level of proficiency of instructors. Many can competently teach entry level private students, but are not really good for more advanced topics and are often at the same level of me. Guys like Bruce are hard to find and not a dime a dozen. Hence there are not many in the market.

 

[poadeleted20]

After long and careful consideration, I think that 50 hours a year is about the least the average light GA pilot can fly and maintain adequate proficiency to be safe in day VMC conditions. Add night/instrument to that, and the hours probably go up. However, at that level, the pilot has to use those hours judiciously, including some maneuvers training, some XC flying using pilotage/DR, some pattern work, etc. -- just doing 50 hours a year of 2-hours out/2-hours back GPS-direct XC's ain't gonna cut it.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I think, like many other matters in aviation, "it depends."

I think that if someone immediately post-private cuts their flying to once every couple of months, they're likely to lose proficiency quickly.

However, after flying about 150 hours/year for the previous 4 years, in the last 9 months or so (after my big trip) I've been doing pretty well with a highly curtailed flying schedule. I make sure to fly at least once a month (in our club the first $50 worth of flying each month is free), and I've done a few extra missions as well as some ratings in the meantime. But, in the last 6 months (since the ratings) I've done only 24.6 hours and 30 landings. I'm not quite as good as I was at the 150/yr pace, but I am safe and adequately proficient.

 

[tonycondon]

... but I am safe and adequately proficient.

how do you know?

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Another classic "hours" question. It isn't the number of hours, it's what you fly during some given hours and how good you get flying during a given time, and how long you can retain various perishable flying skills that really matters for competence.

 

[Lance F]

I agree with Ron...it's what you do with the hours as much as how many there are (This is a side beef I have with the insurance underwriters. They just care about total hours and time in type.)

 

[gprellwitz]

Does the number change if you're going to be flying single-pilot as opposed to dual pilot? If not, then it's twice as expensive for a couple to maintain proficiency.

 

[poadeleted20]

I agree with Ron...it's what you do with the hours as much as how many there are (This is a side beef I have with the insurance underwriters. They just care about total hours and time in type.)

I think they'd care about quality as well as quantity if there were a good way to quantify quality. Absent that, they do what they can with the numbers they can get.

 

[jesse]

Not nearly enough lately.

 

[Everskyward]

I agree with Ron...it's what you do with the hours as much as how many there are (This is a side beef I have with the insurance underwriters. They just care about total hours and time in type.)

I also think that what you do with your hours has a lot to do with your proficiency in that area. For example, if you spend all your time in the pattern practicing landings you're probably going to be pretty good at landings but maybe not so much at navigation. Also, I think recent time in type is more important than total hours especially if the types are very different.

Does the number change if you're going to be flying single-pilot as opposed to dual pilot? If not, then it's twice as expensive for a couple to maintain proficiency.

I think that depends on how much help your flying partner is giving you and if you always fly together or if you sometimes fly independently. Remember that when it comes time for a FR you will be expected to perform as a single pilot. I had a situation where a man was not doing well at an instrument competency check and he tried to use the excuse that his wife always used the radio and helped with navigation. His wife was a pilot but she hadn't been current or had a medical in years, besides, he had to be able to perform adequately on his own.

On the whole, I think the amount of time you need to fly to remain proficient is an individual thing which depends on a lot of factors. If you are exposed to flying a lot, that helps, even though you might not be the person flying or logging the time.

 

[Ted]

I did 200 hours last calendar year, 250 hours between my private check ride and my commercial multi check ride (1 year 3 days), and by the time the month is out will have flown about 30 hours the month of May.

The month of April, I flew... I don't know, 2 hours. Almost nothing. I'll go a month without flying and then have a month when I fly more than some people do in a year. After a month of not flying I don't really notice any issues. What will tend to screw me up more is getting used to one plane and then switching to another, since I'll tend to do all my flying in one plane, then all my flying in a different plane.

My flying tends to be relatively serious compared to a number of my other pilots I know, though, so I think that helps keep me sharp.

 

[HeatherCFI]

I guess you could say that the number of hours doesn't really matter, it's really the quality of flight time... but you could use that argument on the minimum flight time required to earn a certificate or rating as well? (I'm just saying...... )

I remember when I was building time to earn my commercial and spending 3 hours in the pattern at a time. I think after a certain point, it's overkill and you risk becoming complacent. Looking back now, I would've approached my time-building a little differently.

I am just getting back to flying and previously, I felt like 2 weeks was too long for me, so I always made it a point to fly at least once per week.

 

[HeatherCFI]

I strive for 10 hours and at least one approach per month. I try and sit with an instructor once a year. Mostly I am frustrated with the level of proficiency of instructors. Many can competently teach entry level private students, but are not really good for more advanced topics and are often at the same level of me. Guys like Bruce are hard to find and not a dime a dozen. Hence there are not many in the market.

I often feel the same way. I've flown with a few younger guys, and I get sick of the "hot shot" attitudes some of them have. Sometimes I just feel like saying "I'm already a pilot. You don't impress me." Grrrrrr.....

I like the idea of sitting with an instructor once per year. I never needed a flight review since I was always taking check rides. I always thought 2 years was too long to go without some sort of instruction.

 

[bbchien]

100 hours is baseline necessity. I make it count when I'm giving a BFR in an a/c in which I don't have much time.....it's pour over the POH for a day or two before....I've bought many ME POHs which just about costs the same as what I make on a BFR- so I have many such types.

Barons- most you can't slip to landing (tank is too long and too narrow) so the candidate HAS to do it with power.

A-Stars- Gotta have electrons or you can't get to the gas.

Barons/ Bonanzas- just TRY to crank the gear down by hand, single pilot in IMC. Remember yer cranking it down because of total electrical failure, so your autopilot doesn't work (i pulled the breaker....)

Bonanzas- the short field procedure is such that you really have only one FAST chance at getting the flare correctly. You can do it book- but you'd better move the yoke QUICKLY and only ONCE and GET IT RIGHT. There is NO energy left.

Cessna 310- It'll fly all day on one, but can you? Remember to take the trim out as you bring the dead engine back in, or you'll get physically exhausted.

Duchess- so benign that at approach power descending to the OM, the candidate frequently can't tell you killed one.

GA7- it'll stall before it rolls over. It just shudders and continues down at -400 fpm.

Arrows: the hairpin impossible turn: you'll find out whether the pilot is proficient with the gear auto dump (examine a/c log to see that it has or has not been reconected, the placard is ALWAYS missing).

Cherokees: you CANNOT do the falling leaf in an Archer or a 180. It just won't do it at forward CG.

Sierras: does the pilot have airspeed discipline?

Mooney: Check out whether the 132 knot gear mod has been done or you might be in a world of hurt (those piano hinges and gear door fillets ain't cheap). In manual gear Mooneys, don't try to finish gear retraction above 90, or you'll be getting shoulder arthroscopy. If the wheels touch above 75 mph.....you don't know what you're doing and will surely destroy the nosegear in the porpoise, unless you are quick with the power.

Luscombe 8A- penalizes you if you think your Cessna 140 and Citabria time is adequate. Bring your best game.

Beech 17- bring up the power SLOWLY on the TO roll, or you will see weeds out BOTH windows....

Centurion: if the guy can avoid a trim stall (go around) he'll survive, in my book. That one's at the limit of my physical power w/o trim. I can do it- but only once this trip.

It DEPENDS on what you do with your time.

 

[Shipoke]

I Agree it's the quality not the amount of time flying. I'll be the first to say we did our Special Needs Fly-in on May 2, and i didn't fly for almost 2
month before,I was scared that i would screw up my landings but that didn't happen. Most landing where greasers, where i had problems was with the radio's. I had forgot some of the terms and got tongue tied on the first few flights. then it all came back to me. And even had a couple kids say that was the best flight they have been on.But that could be because i try to let the kids fly the plane with some help (only in flat and level). BTW i did 9 flights(20 min. flights) and flew 9 kids,4 adults and 1 Dog (Sreach and rescue dog).I try to fly atleast once a month but since i'm VFR only the Wx and work screwed me up thats why i didn't fly that month before. All in all i think i did OK .

Dave G.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

I guess you could say that the number of hours doesn't really matter, it's really the quality of flight time... but you could use that argument on the minimum flight time required to earn a certificate or rating as well? (I'm just saying...... )

I remember when I was building time to earn my commercial and spending 3 hours in the pattern at a time. I think after a certain point, it's overkill and you risk becoming complacent. Looking back now, I would've approached my time-building a little differently.

I am just getting back to flying and previously, I felt like 2 weeks was too long for me, so I always made it a point to fly at least once per week.

From what I've seen in hundreds of pilots, the minimum number of hours required by the FAA for a rating or endorsement or currency is about right, IF the quality of the flight/instruction is high.

 

[EdFred]

Bruce, looks like I need to get you some Comanche time.

 

[gismo]

Barons- most you can't slip to landing (tank is too long and too narrow) so the candidate HAS to do it with power.

Many if not most Barons have baffled main tanks which will allow an aggressive slip longer than any final I've ever flown. Without the baffles the problem can occur but only when the tanks are nearly empty (13 gallons or less).

Barons/ Bonanzas- just TRY to crank the gear down by hand, single pilot in IMC. Remember yer cranking it down because of total electrical failure, so your autopilot doesn't work (i pulled the breaker....)

3)
Actually the failure is the electric motor in something like 95+% of the failures (I've had this twice so far) so the autopilot would still be working unless you were really unlucky (assuming it was working just before the gear motor failed). That said I agree it's a very good idea to practice lowering the gear by hand without using the autopilot. At the very least it should convince most pilots that there's not much point in any attempt to continue an approach when the gear fails to extend normally.

And FWIW, there are two "tricks" to employ that make the job easier. 1) Slow down. The effort decreases exponentially with airspeed reduction. 2) The handle must be cranked about 50 turns but don't try to do it in one long cranking session. Ideally make about 10 turns, retrim, repeat.

There are also some important safety issues. 1) Whether or not the failure is simulated, make certain that the motor CB is opened. It's very common for the motor to start working when you crank if the power is on and the results can include broken wrists AND BROKEN EMERGENCY HANDLES. 2) There are two CB's for the gear. One is for the motor and one for the indicator lamps. Make sure you know which is which. 3) Don't stop cranking when the gear down indicator(s) illuminate, keep going until you hit the hard stop. 4) Make certain the gear selector (switch) is put in the down position. More than one pilot has successfully cranked the gear down then retracted it on the ground when they pushed the motor CB in with the switch still in the up position.

Finally, since the electric motor is by far the most common failure point, and these failures tend to be intermittent at first a quick solution to most extension (or retraction) failures is to verify the switch in the down position, pull the motor CB, crank one or two turns, then push the CB back in. Chances are pretty good that the motor will finish the job.

Bonanzas- the short field procedure is such that you really have only one FAST chance at getting the flare correctly. You can do it book- but you'd better move the yoke QUICKLY and only ONCE and GET IT RIGHT. There is NO energy left.

Isn't this true for any airplane if you limit the energy to what's barely necessary for the flare?

Duchess- so benign that at approach power descending to the OM, the candidate frequently can't tell you killed one.

I'll bet most take notice when they try to go around!

On the original subject, I have two comments. The rate that your skill level fades with time is rather dependent on your experience level, the less experience you have the faster your skills atrophy. Whatever you don't do often will become uncomfortable eventually.

 

[rottydaddy]

I have not really been able to maintain any kind of regimen, so I've had a chance to see how I do in the various scenarios of time on/time off/different type/etc... I really do think it depends on many things.
If I owned a plane and relied on it for travel, particularly if I had the IR, I'd try harder to fly regularly, and cover what's appropriate on those flights. And of course if you are paid to fly in any capacity, you have to stay "in training" as it were. But in my situation, I can be a little less hardcore about it, and still remain safe.... if I take the variables into account.

The key, I think, is common sense. If you've been doing nothing but pattern work and milk runs on fine days to familiar fields, even if you've been doing that every day for the last year, you may not quite be ready for a long X-C, with the chances of changing weather, waning daylight, or nibbling at fuel reserves. Then there's fatigue, get-there-itis, etc.
On the other hand, if you've only been dashing off from A to B, you might not be ready for a situation that requires MCA flight or a spot landing. Then there's the pilots who are always "in the system" and are uncomfortable operating at an uncontrolled field, and vice-versa.
The specifics of a given flight can make a huge difference.

I haven't soloed anything in over a year, haven't even soloed the glider yet, but I know I could take a familiar powered type around the patch a few times in fair winds without any trouble. I'd probably even make some good landings. In not-so-fair winds, I'd probably still do OK, but it would not be pretty. Having all the glider time and quite a few turns at the controls in others' planes would make a difference, but it's hard to say how much.
The one dual flight I made during my long hiatus went fine, after almost 2 years of no flying at all- the instructor didn't need to intervene, and I felt quite comfortable. And when I dove back in for a FR over a year after that, again, my basic skills were not so bad... but the other stuff had atrophied for sure. Planning, rules and regs, weather, emergencies... all the same stuff more active pilots tend to slack off on.

So I certainly wouldn't set off on a long trip or tackle adverse winds without working up to it, and without thinking and studying some beforehand.
And the next time I do fly alone in a powered aircraft, I will be practicing. That's my usual M.O. after a hiatus: MCA, stalls, maybe a power-off approach. Reciting emergency checklists, and seeing what the hands remember. And I like to leave time for more landings than is "necessary".

It's wise to do an exercise or two, or at least do something differently than usual, even on that short breakfast fly-in flight... quality of time definitely counts more than quantity, I don't care how many total hours you have, or how often you fly. Thinking of yourself as a student, always ready to learn something, is much more useful.

 

[Ted]

I guess you could say that the number of hours doesn't really matter, it's really the quality of flight time... but you could use that argument on the minimum flight time required to earn a certificate or rating as well? (I'm just saying...... )

In my experience it's possible to do better than what minimums are, but for the vast majority of people those minimum numbers are pretty appropriate, and many people I know can't do it in minimum time anyway. It seems to me the FAA figured out what the time required for someone who's got some natural aptitude and set the minimums there. Not unreasonable in my book.

I remember when I was building time to earn my commercial and spending 3 hours in the pattern at a time. I think after a certain point, it's overkill and you risk becoming complacent. Looking back now, I would've approached my time-building a little differently.

Three hours in the pattern I don't think teaches someone who knows pattern work anything useful. By far the most valuable flying time to me is going out and practicing emergency situations and going out and making long trips to new places. The educational value of long XCs (like 1/3 of the way across the country or further) can't be overstated.

 

[nyoung]

Right after I got my license, I had flown enough that I felt comfortable in the plane (even though I only had ~60 hrs). Subsequent to getting my license I went through a period of several years where I frequently went many months without flying. For my return, I would schedule a BFR or checkout with an instructor, and then fly solo about every 2 or 3 weeks. I never felt like a fighter ace, but still felt that I had positive control of the plane. Of course, at the time, I also was pretty conservative with the days that I flew, making sure to have nice VFR and light crosswinds.

For the last ~9 years, I have generally flown the same plane at least weekly, and my flights have varied from 15 minute VFR flights for breakfast to 8 hr long IFR XCs. During that time, there have been several occasions where I have not flown for 3+ weeks (weather, biz travel, maintenance). On the return flight after the layoff, I can tell I am not performing at my usual level for the first few minutes. It seems to be the little things, like a checklist flowing a bit slowly, forgetting to turn on the XPNDR, or having to think about a crosswind correction vs just doing it naturally. After 30 minutes in the plane or a few takeoffs/landings, my brain catches up, and I am back to 'normal.

 

[HeatherCFI]

After 30 minutes in the plane or a few takeoffs/landings, my brain catches up, and I am back to 'normal.

This is right where I'm at right now. After not flying for 9 years, I feel behind the airplane. I know what needs to be done, just that my brain isn't quick enough! I guess that will come back as I fly more. I really don't like feeling behind the airplane at all. I was always 10 steps ahead of the plane, so it's a different feeling for me!

 

[ScottM]

I often feel the same way. I've flown with a few younger guys, and I get sick of the "hot shot" attitudes some of them have. Sometimes I just feel like saying "I'm already a pilot. You don't impress me." Grrrrrr.....

i teach scube and teach up to and including the instructor level. I run into that same attitude with the younger guys. I find it laughable. The agency I teach for has a lot of specialty certifications for diving. I keep threatening to write a course outline called 'Testosterone Diver' for the young guys.

 

[Jay Honeck]

I think the answer to that question changes somewhat over time.

I have endeavored to fly twice per week since learning to fly in '94. In reality, this has ended up being more like 1.5 times per week, on average, due to weather, scheduling, etc.

In my first 500 hours, I would feel rusty after just a couple of weeks without flying. I would have to think about stuff that should be instinctive, and everything felt more mechanical than it should. Landings were especially influenced by not flying regularly, and I felt an internal pressure to fly often for fear of becoming unsafe if I did not. (Part of this may be related to the fact that I didn't learn to fly until I was 35. Perhaps a 17-year-old newbie wouldn't have this problem?)

During my second 500 hours, this phenomenon started to abate somewhat. I could remain proficient flying just once per week, although I still aimed for (and often achieved) twice per week. I'd feel rusty after ~3 weeks without flying, give or take. Luckily that didn't happen often.

Now well into my third 500 hours, flying two planes regularly, I don't seem to feel rusty, even if I go a few weeks without flying. I still try to fly twice per week, but procedures and methods have become ingrained into "muscle memory" now. Landings remain fluid and smooth regardless of whether I flew yesterday or last month.

So, the long answer is: I think the minimum you should fly is weekly, especially if you've got less than 500 hours. Anything less than that, and your skill level may diminish over time. YMMV.

 

[SkyHog]

My answer is simple: I fly when I want to fly. Flying is really easy, the hard part is keeping up with the rules and whatnot.

Sure, you get a bit rusty, but a few landings is all it takes to break the rust off. Navigating never goes away.

My personal minimum to feel safe would be about 5 hours a year.

 

[EdFred]

My answer is simple: I fly when I want to fly. Flying is really easy, the hard part is keeping up with the rules and whatnot.

Sure, you get a bit rusty, but a few landings is all it takes to break the rust off. Navigating never goes away.

My personal minimum to feel safe would be about 5 hours a year.

Must be that Navy training!

 

[el con]

The other day returning from up north,3 hr.10 min's of flying all ho hum, EXCEPT the few quality minutes of the two landings in very stiff cross winds . The worst part of the trip was the best for practice.
3 Hrs 8mins not much skill built,2 minutes were priceless.

Also a pilot at our field was flying his Ultra Lite the other day. On take off right as he rotated a coolant hose blew, coolant all over the windshield. He kept flying,went out ,turned 180, landed at very high speed with the wind,went off the end of the runway within 2 ft of a 50 ft. drop off and stopped. Turned off the engine ,sat for a minute , restarted, taxied to the hanger put it in left the beacon on ,main, etc., closed the hanger and drove home.
I think he was in shock the whole time from when the line blew, he could have stopped before he was off the ground.
That kind of time in the air,well, I don't know. He used to fly GA certified aircraft, singles ,twin's ,how does this happen????
Lucky he's alive
I don't know what he learned, I hope something.

 

[ScottM]

My personal minimum to feel safe would be about 5 hours a year.

That much huh?

I would think that with use of flight sim you could cull that 5 hours down to 1 hour with 3 or 4 landings.

 

[Larryo]

Many if not most Barons have baffled main tanks which will allow an aggressive slip longer than any final I've ever flown. Without the baffles the problem can occur but only when the tanks are nearly empty (13 gallons or less).

True, but the same for the Bonanza, and you can slip the hell out of either, if wanted, but just isn't necessary.

Isn't this true for any airplane if you limit the energy to what's barely necessary for the flare?

Agreed, and it one is cutting it that close, the field is too short.

As for the cranking the gear.... use the checklist religiously, like one would for any emergency.

 

[Larryo]

As for remaining current.... either sim or flight training once a year, and perhaps some short reviews or training every half year. 100 hours a year is plenty.

 

[Clark1961]

That much huh?

I would think that with use of flight sim you could cull that 5 hours down to 1 hour with 3 or 4 landings.

Would that be 3 or 4 landings on one trip around the pattern or would you prefer more?

Log every bounce, that's what I say!

 

[ScottM]

Log every bounce, that's what I say!

You betcha!

 

[bbchien]

Baron & slip

Lance:

Not in this big engine short Baron in which I gave an BFR: see just above "oxygen requirements", it's a limitation.

 

[Larryo]

Re: Baron & slip

Lance:

Not in this big engine short Baron in which I gave an BFR: see just above "oxygen requirements", it's a limitation.

Bruce,

But you could for 30 sec, which is plenty if one wanted to demo a slip, however totally unnecessary in this plane.

 

[bbchien]

Re: Baron & slip

When I give a BFR /IPC in an owner's aircraft in which he has 400 times as much time as I, I tend to respect their wishes (within the limits of teaching). And I don't expect to be told after requesting a maneuver to be told, "it's placarded against that".

So, yes, I know I can slip for 30 seconds, but check this out when you don't do that...... http://www.purpleboard.net/forums/showthread.php?t=12944&page=2

You do want to be invited back, to teach some more. The Purpleboard's is a case of an aircraft NOT placarded, in which they did things generally correctly, and still screwed the pooch. Now imagine if I requested such counter to a limitation.....

This photo is of a formerly beautiful Baron 58 (local owner) which was landed gear up after a total electrical failure by solo pilot, who was in IMC during the failure. He failed to put the gear down promptly, ran low on electrons, and didn't think about the gear until he broke out...the skin over the left wing is wrinkled; it was totalled.

Short Field: Yes the field is too short when the flare barely has enough energy to get it done. But if you teach the book short field that is what you get. I think that's why most Bonanza pilots never do short field landings.....Mooniacs, too....the book was made for part 23, but you do teach to the pilot's weaknesses.....

OTOH I can just sit there and teach nothing for an hour.....but I don't do that. Pilots need to get value for their $. As a result I own a ton of POHs.

 

[jesse]

Re: Baron & slip

This photo is of a formerly beautiful Baron 58 (local owner) which was landed gear up after a total electrical failure by solo pilot, who was in IMC during the failure. He failed to put the gear down promptly, ran low on electrons, and didn't think about the gear until he broke out...the skin over the left wing is wrinkled; it was totalled.

Personally, in a total electrical failure in IMC, the last thing I'd want to do would be waste a bunch of power dropping my gear. I'd much rather just save the energy for the instruments that can get me to the runway. Gearing up is the least of my concerns.