Flight Review

[martymayes]

If you need to take a review a second time by law, then you "failed" to pass that review the first time. (as I see it)
(I know how it works)

Nothing says a flight review has to be accomplished in a single flight, so I don't know what law is being referenced.

As far as I know, the only time a second review is required by law is 24 months following the first review. That doesn't mean the applicant failed the review the first time; it just means the first review reached the end of it's valid period.

Reviews were not required when I got my certificate. Back then there was about 800,000 pilots.
Now 500,000 or something. Active pilots probably 100,000. Some aircraft are hard to get reviews: Single seat, odd type, etc.
Other pilots are going to ultralights for no review. I know several that went to ultralight.

The flight review is a fairly recent addition to the regs, codified in 1974 (44 yrs ago). That year there were ~730,000 pilots (~6% held a CFI certificate). In 1980, the pilot population peaked around 825,000 (~7% of those held a CFI certificate). In the ~35 yrs since the pilot population peaked, there has been a steady decline. Hard to pin that on any single cause (pretty sure it's not because of the flight review reg), shift in cultural behavior is a good a reason as any.

[DaleB]

Yes, as you noted and as I've been saying all along, it is MY OPINION. An opinion is an expression of thought or of an idea. It is NOT a statement of fact requiring evidence based support or is it a belief. An OPINION does not require "something that supports(it)." So stop wasting your time searching the regs trying to disprove a point that I am NOT making!!!

It's not a waste of time as long as someone learns something, and at least I did. Besides, you did say back in post #11, and I quote, "I already said I have no idea if there's a reg or not. You show me a reg that say's you're right." I was simply trying to provide information for which you yourself asked.

Go do something else that will improve the human race.

Right back at ya, buddy. I have and continue to do so, thanks. Relax, have a beer, we're all friends here.

Regarding my opinion of your opinion... you opine (paraphrasing here) that flight reviews (and whatever) should be done by impartial third parties, not relatives. My opinion is that who gives the instruction, examination or sign-off is immaterial. How they do it is everything. Just like having a close friend or relative do a condition or annual inspection on your airplane. If it's pencil-whipped, it's worse than worthless -- it's dangerous, and probably illegal. If it's done to the standards to which it should be done, then who does it matters not.

[Buster747]

Good discussion, the only thing I can add is that “I sure am glad you guys don’t have anything to do with mine.”
This is just crazy arguing over.

[malexander]

When my daughter flies with my brother or me, she and he/I learn from each other. She's relatively new at it, and my bro & I have had our PPL since 1977. She shows us how to use all the neat electronic gadgets and we show her some of the "seat-of-the-pants" stuff that we learned from our CFI way back when. Really makes for some cool family bonding while we're at it.

[Bill Berson]

Nothing says a flight review has to be accomplished in a single flight, so I don't know what law is being referenced.

As far as I know, the only time a second review is required by law is 24 months following the first review. That doesn't mean the applicant failed the review the first time; it just means the first review reached the end of it's valid period.



The flight review is a fairly recent addition to the regs, codified in 1974 (44 yrs ago). That year there were ~730,000 pilots (~6% held a CFI certificate). In 1980, the pilot population peaked around 825,000 (~7% of those held a CFI certificate). In the ~35 yrs since the pilot population peaked, there has been a steady decline. Hard to pin that on any single cause (pretty sure it's not because of the flight review reg), shift in cultural behavior is a good a reason as any.

Are you saying a pilot seeking continuous privileges is not required to take a second flight review if the first flight was found not acceptable?
It looks like you are saying the pilot must take as many flights as the instructor feels are needed. Or seek another instructor.
As I mentioned, some pilots I know used the only available light sport instructor available in the state, and after bad relations decided to quit flying. Hard to know what caused aviation decline because no one queries exiting pilots opinion, as far as I know.

[martymayes]

It looks like you are saying the pilot must take as many flights as the instructor feels are needed. Or seek another instructor.

That is correct.

[Joda]

Nothing says a flight review has to be accomplished in a single flight....

This statement right here is key. Everybody thinks of a flight review as a single flight with an instructor. And yes, many times that's how it works out. However, there are many times when a single flight isn't enough. Just because more than one flight is necessary doesn't mean that the pilot "failed" the flight review. It just means that the review isn't completed yet. Unlike a practical test, where there are specific actions called out in the regulations that must be followed when someone fails, the flight review has no such consequences. Nowhere in the regulations does it mention what to do is someone "fails" a flight review. There is no failure mode. The pilot simply needs to complete a review. There are minimums that must be met, but no maximum. The sad part is, most pilots want to just do the minimum and call it good, and they get upset when they are required to do more. But the truth is, the instructor won't require more unless it's needed for safety. So rather than being upset, the pilot should be grateful. Yeah, I know.....

[CarlOrton]

The FAASTeam program WINGS provides the means to maintain currency, and therefore satisfy the intent of BFR (BFR isn't so much to force a review as it is to keep pilots current) whereby a pilot takes 3 instructional webinars, classes, etc., for which the FAA awards credit (like a number of the EAA webinars), then has 3 flight activities where said pilot works on standard items like slow flight, stalls, etc., and as a result of completing the 3 flight activities (in ignorance, I *think* these could be combined in a massive 3 hr flight), said pilot has deferred the need for a BFR.

https://www.faasafety.gov/WINGS/pppi...ntDetails.aspx

[Bill Berson]

This statement right here is key. Everybody thinks of a flight review as a single flight with an instructor. And yes, many times that's how it works out. However, there are many times when a single flight isn't enough. Just because more than one flight is necessary doesn't mean that the pilot "failed" the flight review. It just means that the review isn't completed yet. Unlike a practical test, where there are specific actions called out in the regulations that must be followed when someone fails, the flight review has no such consequences. Nowhere in the regulations does it mention what to do is someone "fails" a flight review. There is no failure mode. The pilot simply needs to complete a review. There are minimums that must be met, but no maximum. The sad part is, most pilots want to just do the minimum and call it good, and they get upset when they are required to do more. But the truth is, the instructor won't require more unless it's needed for safety. So rather than being upset, the pilot should be grateful. Yeah, I know.....

This is interesting stuff that I didn't know. I never failed a review yet, but getting older, so who knows.
So regarding "the minimums that must be met", is the pilot allowed to know in advance what these required minimums are?

[CarlOrton]

Bill, I would assume it's the same as the WINGS program where the goal is to perform at/above the PTS.