Rough Ground Flight Review

Jaybird180

Jaybird180

Final Approach
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
9,034
Location
Near DC
Display Name
Display name:
Jaybird180
I just did a nearly 2hr ground review. Yes there are quite a few things I need to brush up on. Things went downhill after the CFI didn’t accept my answer about 100hr inspection requirements. This was early in the session and the rest became an exercise in holding composure.

He then said “there is no difference.”

After looking up some things, I still disagree on the basis of who can sign off for each and that the FAR requires an Annual and is annotated in the maintenance log; the language is specific and a 100hr cannot substitute, despite the physical requirements might be the same.

I’m going to have to deal with him a lot in the future. Our personality types could conflict where we disagree. I’m looking for advice on how to handle situations like this when the instructor is misinformed. Anything other than “you’re wrong” is preferable, but I’m certain that he has no hesitation in saying it.
 
"I understand differently but I'll go back and look again ..."

I used this on a CFI recently who was insistent that a transponder was required in class Delta. They called me later to tell me "thanks" for the correction.
 
Jaybird180 said:
I just did a nearly 2hr ground review. Yes there are quite a few things I need to brush up on. Things went downhill after the CFI didn’t accept my answer about 100hr inspection requirements. This was early in the session and the rest became an exercise in holding composure.

He then said “there is no difference.”

After looking up some things, I still disagree on the basis of who can sign off for each and that the FAR requires an Annual and is annotated in the maintenance log; the language is specific and a 100hr cannot substitute, despite the physical requirements might be the same.

I’m going to have to deal with him a lot in the future. Our personality types could conflict where we disagree. I’m looking for advice on how to handle situations like this when the instructor is misinformed. Anything other than “you’re wrong” is preferable, but I’m certain that he has no hesitation in saying it.
Click to expand...

Might help us to know what your answer was.
 
Pretty much ask to see it in writing... about all you can do.

Once he references EXACTLY what he is talking about in the AIM/FAR... then ya know.
 
First, regulations concerning 100 hour inspections are not something that I would expect to be an issue or subject on a pilot flight review. Maybe a subject for private pilot ground school, but not a flight review. At least not one of much concern. But I’m not a CFI, so what the heck do I know.

But, here is how I would explain it.

The scope and detail of an annual and 100 hour inspection are the same. Please see Part 43, Appendix D. A part of the regulations by the way, pilots are not expected to necessarily know or know well.

However there are differences in who is required to have them done. 91.409 covers that.

And there is a difference in who can do them. Annual requires an AP/IA, while the 100 hour just needs AP.

But what exactly the CFI was asking is unknown to me. Was he asking just about the scope and detail in which case, his answer of there being no difference is correct. If he was asking the broader question, then there are differences and he is wrong.
 
SkyDog58 said:
First, regulations concerning 100 hour inspections are not something that I would expect to be an issue or subject on a pilot flight review. Maybe a subject for private pilot ground school, but not a flight review. At least not one of much concern. But I’m not a CFI, so what the heck do I know.

But, here is how I would explain it.

The scope and detail of an annual and 100 hour inspection are the same. Please see Part 43, Appendix D. A part of the regulations by the way, pilots are not expected to necessarily know or know well.

However there are differences in who is required to have them done. 91.409 covers that.

And there is a difference in who can do them. Annual requires an AP/IA, while the 100 hour just needs AP.

But what exactly the CFI was asking is unknown to me. Was he asking just about the scope and detail in which case, his answer of there being no difference is correct. If he was asking the broader question, then there are differences and he is wrong.
Click to expand...
Why would you think knowing about 100 hour inspections or annuals are not applicable to a flight review? Wouldn’t you like to know if you are renting from a flight school if the plane is signed off?
 
As a CFI, I've never treated any part of a flight review, but especially not the ground part, as anything close to confrontational. That surprises me.

I mean, if I was asking about 100-hours and annuals, and we disagreed, my response would be "well, let's look it up" right there. And maybe we'd both learn something.

At least in my opinion, it's a ground "review", not a ground "test". There should be nothing to "go downhill" about.
 
When I went for my tail wheel endorsement many moons ago one of the first things the instructor did was take me over where a C-172 and a Champ were parked. He then said, "There is no difference in these airplanes."

I puzzled over that for a moment when he clarified by saying, "They will both do exactly what you tell them to do." I got it and I understand that sometimes it's the same thing ... only different. ;)
 
After reading the initial post several times, I suspect that there may be some misunderstanding or poor phrasing of responses by both the student and instructor. What was the question asked and each person’s response?
 
jordane93 said:
Why would you think knowing about 100 hour inspections or annuals are not applicable to a flight review? Wouldn’t you like to know if you are renting from a flight school if the plane is signed off?
Click to expand...
If you are renting (without an instructor involved), the 100 hour rule doesn't apply to you. It might screw up the school for subsequent instruction if you time out the 100 hour, but your operation doesn't require it.

Frankly, even if this is relevent, you don't "fail" a flight review because you get questions wrong.

Flight instructors, and even DPEs are hardly experts. I had a DPE pontificating in the FBO lounge the other day about why you couldn't fly helicopters if you only did your FR in an airplane and even more oddly argued you could do it the other way around (get an FR in helicopter and be OK to fly fixed wing).
 
flyingron said:
If you are renting (without an instructor involved), the 100 hour rule doesn't apply to you. It might screw up the school for subsequent instruction if you time out the 100 hour, but your operation doesn't require it.

Frankly, even if this is relevent, you don't "fail" a flight review because you get questions wrong.

Flight instructors, and even DPEs are hardly experts. I had a DPE pontificating in the FBO lounge the other day about why you couldn't fly helicopters if you only did your FR in an airplane and even more oddly argued you could do it the other way around (get an FR in helicopter and be OK to fly fixed wing).
Click to expand...
I agree there’s no pass or fail and it shouldn’t be a “gotcha” moment. I also think that knowing about airworthiness is a pretty common thing a pilot should know. When I was instructing full time, I’d just tailor the flight review to the student. Some parts are applicable aren’t so applicable.
 
I also think that knowing about airworthiness is a pretty common thing a pilot should know.
Click to expand...
What has this to do with airworthiness? It's not an airworthiness issue unless you are an instructor who is providing the aircraft with instruction.
 
RussR said:
As a CFI, I've never treated any part of a flight review, but especially not the ground part, as anything close to confrontational. That surprises me.
.....

At least in my opinion, it's a ground "review", not a ground "test". There should be nothing to "go downhill" about.
Click to expand...
Until you said so, I wouldn't have thought to use that word. I had just thought of him as a bit curmudgeonly.

RussR said:
I mean, if I was asking about 100-hours and annuals, and we disagreed, my response would be "well, let's look it up" right there. And maybe we'd both learn something.
Click to expand...
It hadn't occurred to me that we could look things up in those instances. /doh
 
Jaybird180 said:
Until you said so, I wouldn't have thought to use that word. I had just thought of him as a bit curmudgeonly.

It hadn't occurred to me that we could look things up in those instances. /doh
Click to expand...

Your comment about it "going downhill" and "became an exercise in holding composure" implied to me that it became more of an argument than a learning experience. If that's not the case, then good. If that was the case, well, that's not how a FR is supposed to be, at least IMO. My FRs (at least from my perspective :D ) are friendly chats about aviation stuff.
 
It can be important for a pilot to know the differences between a 100 hour and an annual. If you go to rent or fly an airplane that had an annual more than 12 months ago, but had a 100 hour last month and only 10 hours ago is the airplane legal?

What if the airplane has gone 110 hours since 100 hour but had an annual a month ago?

See, it makes a difference, even for a pilot.
 
It can be important for a pilot to know the differences between a 100 hour and an annual. If you go to rent or fly an airplane that had an annual more than 12 months ago, but had a 100 hour last month and only 10 hours ago is the airplane legal?
Click to expand...
100 hours do not matter to the renter, just annuals. An aircraft isn't airworthy unless it has had an annual in the last year.
What if the airplane has gone 110 hours since 100 hour but had an annual a month ago?
Click to expand...
For the renter, the only thing that matters is the annual. (For those who need worry about 100 hours, they don't care either. The rules say that it has to have a 100 hour OR an annual within the past 100 hours).

See, it makes a difference, even for a pilot.
Click to expand...
Nope. It matters only for someone giving flight instruction in a plane that he provides.
 
RussR said:
Your comment about it "going downhill" and "became an exercise in holding composure" implied to me that it became more of an argument than a learning experience. If that's not the case, then good. If that was the case, well, that's not how a FR is supposed to be, at least IMO. My FRs (at least from my perspective :D ) are friendly chats about aviation stuff.
Click to expand...
It means I had to be okay with giving a wrong answer with poise.
 
flyingron said:
100 hours do not matter to the renter, just annuals. An aircraft isn't airworthy unless it has had an annual in the last year.

For the renter, the only thing that matters is the annual. (For those who need worry about 100 hours, they don't care either. The rules say that it has to have a 100 hour OR an annual within the past 100 hours).


Nope. It matters only for someone giving flight instruction in a plane that he provides.
Click to expand...

And if you don't know what it is, then how would you know that? o_O
 
flyingron said:
What has this to do with airworthiness? It's not an airworthiness issue unless you are an instructor who is providing the aircraft with instruction.
Click to expand...
Unless you are planning to never receive instruction in a rental ever again in your life it’s relevant. So yes Ron. You are correct. A pilot that will never receive instruction in a rental doesn’t need to know about 100 hours and their relevance.

I also include when they are required as a basic review of airworthiness requirements during flight reviews.
 
flyingron said:
What has this to do with airworthiness? It's not an airworthiness issue unless you are an instructor who is providing the aircraft with instruction.
Click to expand...
Because in some cases, if the plane doesn’t have a 100 hour, you can’t fly it. Review of basic inspections like a 100 hour and annual are pretty relevant, especially when you don’t own your own airplane. I realize POA is an exception to the rule since most people own here but it’s still a relevant lesson to teach.
 
In a good flight review ground session, a CFI will prioritize topics that are of the most importance to the pilot, particularly with respect to safety.

In a mediocre flight review ground session, a CFI will quiz you on the topics that he happens to know off-hand, trivia questions that are in the front of his mind because he had to go look them up recently, maybe somebody recently corrected him on. There's an unfortunate tendency to revert to "game show mode" where the CFI feels the need to identify things that he knows and that you don't.

In any case, a discussion over regs should be done with "the book" on the table between you.
 
jordane93 said:
Because in some cases, if the plane doesn’t have a 100 hour, you can’t fly it. Review of basic inspections like a 100 hour and annual are pretty relevant, especially when you don’t own your own airplane. I realize POA is an exception to the rule since most people own here but it’s still a relevant lesson to teach.
Click to expand...

In 25 years of instructing and working with many different places. I can tell you zero is the amount of times that a renter has come in and asked about the annual or 100 hour, asked to see the logbooks, etc. All the renter cares about is the rate. If the annual isn’t done, or the 100 hour is overdue it really does fall on the business renting the plane is the renter mentality.
 
If a CFI asked me a question like that and I didn't know the answer. I do on this one. I would say good question not sure let me look it up and pull out my phone. A flight review isn't a test it is about knowing where to find the information not memorizing it all. If the CFI thinks he is a DPE find another CFI.
 
TommyG said:
In 25 years of instructing and working with many different places. I can tell you zero is the amount of times that a renter has come in and asked about the annual or 100 hour, asked to see the logbooks, etc. All the renter cares about is the rate. If the annual isn’t done, or the 100 hour is overdue it really does fall on the business renting the plane is the renter mentality.
Click to expand...
I don’t disagree. I’ve seen the same. Doesn’t make it right.
 
I'd find a way to not *have* to deal with him more in the future.
 
What is your goal? To be right or to get past this hurdle to getting your license?

You should have answered:

“Huh! Interesting. Guess you learn something new every day. Thanks! I’ll remember that.”

 
jordane93 said:
Because in some cases, if the plane doesn’t have a 100 hour, you can’t fly it.
Click to expand...
You better explain that, because according to the regulations it's not true. Again, as far as a renter is concerned, a 100-hour inspection is meaningless. It's neither required nor sufficient for legal and safe operation.
 
flyingron said:
You better explain that, because according to the regulations it's not true. Again, as far as a renter is concerned, a 100-hour inspection is meaningless. It's neither required nor sufficient for legal and safe operation.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I just looked it up, you're correct. I would've got that wrong.​
 
flyingron said:
You better explain that, because according to the regulations it's not true. Again, as far as a renter is concerned, a 100-hour inspection is meaningless. It's neither required nor sufficient for legal and safe operation.
Click to expand...
I think we’re talking past each other. I know a 100 hour is not necessary if you are just going to rent the plane. The point I was trying to make is it’s not unreasonable for someone to know when /what basic inspections are required wheb conducting a flight review. It’s just basic airworthiness knowledge.
 
Last edited:
Seems as if Ron has the clearest picture of the regulations regarding this issue than most others answering on this thread. He is absolutely correct.

flyingron said:
If you are renting (without an instructor involved), the 100 hour rule doesn't apply to you. It might screw up the school for subsequent instruction if you time out the 100 hour, but your operation doesn't require it.

Frankly, even if this is relevent, you don't "fail" a flight review because you get questions wrong.
Click to expand...
flyingron said:
100 hours do not matter to the renter, just annuals. An aircraft isn't airworthy unless it has had an annual in the last year.

For the renter, the only thing that matters is the annual. (For those who need worry about 100 hours, they don't care either. The rules say that it has to have a 100 hour OR an annual within the past 100 hours).

Nope. It matters only for someone giving flight instruction in a plane that he provides.
Click to expand...
 
SkyDog58 said:
Seems as if Ron has the clearest picture of the regulations regarding this issue than most others answering on this thread. He is absolutely correct.
Click to expand...

This debate isn't interpretation of a regulation. It's whether it's knowledge that's required, or not. Considering the private pilot knowledge test asks about 100-hour inspections, I think it's more than fair game.
 
TommyG said:
In 25 years of instructing and working with many different places. I can tell you zero is the amount of times that a renter has come in and asked about the annual or 100 hour, asked to see the logbooks, etc. All the renter cares about is the rate. If the annual isn’t done, or the 100 hour is overdue it really does fall on the business renting the plane is the renter mentality.
Click to expand...

But if you were to believe people here, they seem to be doing a complete records review every time they rent a plane. At least that is the implication.

How else would they know it is legal to fly?
Does it have a valid annual?
Does it have a valid 100 hour?
Does it need either if on a progressive?
Are all of the ADs complied with?
Is the ELT battery good?
Have the 91.411 & 413 checks been done?
Were all majors repairs approved?
Were all major alterations approved?
Are all maintenance entries done IAW 43.9?
Are all inspection entries done IAW 43.11?
Etc. etc. etc.

Not one renter that I know of does this. I don’t even do this. Unless I have a reason to suspect shoddy maintenance or an unairworthy condition, I trust the system is working.

Does anyone think that even an airline captain checks the maintenance records? Typically all they check is for any open items in their journey log and for open MEL/CDL items. They don’t check for the annual/100 hr equivalent inspection or maintenance items in the 121 world. They have people for that.
 
TommyG said:
In 25 years of instructing and working with many different places. I can tell you zero is the amount of times that a renter has come in and asked about the annual or 100 hour, asked to see the logbooks, etc. All the renter cares about is the rate. If the annual isn’t done, or the 100 hour is overdue it really does fall on the business renting the plane is the renter mentality.
Click to expand...
Sounds like we as instructors are dropping the ball on this.
 
SkyDog58 said:
Does anyone think that even an airline captain checks the maintenance records? Typically all they check is for any open items in their journey log and for open MEL/CDL items. They don’t check for the annual/100 hr equivalent inspection or maintenance items in the 121 world. They have people for that.
Click to expand...
I would say it’s not so much having people for that as having a process in place to ensure that things are done.
 
So my question is : Can one fly personal AC not for hire more then 100 hours a year with out a 100 hr. Inspection ?
Say you pass 100 hours and the annual is not due for another month.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top