Bi annual flight review

F

fudge80

Pre-Flight
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
85
Location
ND
Display Name
Display name:
fudge80
I will have my first one in a couple of months. I suppose it depends on the CFI you choose to go up with you but is it basically a checkride "lite" or just a short fly around with a CFI to make sure you aren't a danger to yourself?

Any good stories to share about ones you've had in the past?
 
Mine was a pretty basic flight with some of the checkride stuff and about an hour of ground.
 
Yes.

It's whatever you and the instructor come up with, within some rather wide regulatory bounds.

Many seem to focus on PTS because it's obvious. They don't have to.
 
fudge80 said:
I will have my first one in a couple of months. I suppose it depends on the CFI you choose to go up with you but is it basically a check ride "lite" or just a short fly around with a CFI to make sure you aren't a danger to yourself?

Any good stories to share about ones you've had in the past?
Click to expand...

mine was more like "checkride lite"...steep turns, ground reference maneuvers, 9-1-1 and so on. lasted about an hour in the air and about an hour on the ground. but the CFI has wide latitude. if you haven't flown in a while it might be to your advantage to get a few hours in otherwise you should be good to go.
 
Mine is tomorrow, usually is an hour ground and maybe 90mins in the air.

I list some things that I might not have done in a while like VOR work, soft field work etc. and we work on them.

Good for rust removal
 
and if there is anything YOU want to work on, bring that up. use this opportunity to brush up on something you may need some work on, xwind landings, whatever.
 
"Checkride lite" is fairly standard. If anything, there is an FAA "push" to make it more so, with the current emphasis on loss of control issues.

IMO the best flight reviews focus on either one of two things: exploring a new-to-you make or model (which is a great way to transition) or doing maneuvering you don't ordinarily do.

On the latter, unless you are one of the unusual folks who go up and practice things like steep turns, slow flight and other tasks that explore the envelope of your and the aircraft's abilities, most of our "regular" flying is simple. Takeoff, go somewhere, land. Maybe practice landings. When is the last time you did slow flight or hood work or steep turns or even a ground reference maneuver (other than the traffic pattern)? This is an opportunity to do them and re-learn them if necessary, and fits in nicely with the FAA's current emphasis.

Interesting to come up now. I was contacted a few days ago to do a flight review. My first question was, "is there anything you would like to cover?" His answer was exactly the one I would hope for - things he felt could use some work or that he hadn't done in along time.
 
As a CFI I inquire of what he typically flys and the type of flying he does. Hour of ground (W&T balance), minimum hour in the air. Usually track/intercept VOR radial (out or inbound from practice area), slow flight/MCA, couple stalls, steep turns, simulated forced landing, some basic hood work (assuming PPC), return to the airdrome for takeoffs and landings. Can add things the pilot wants to work on but is more of an evaluation flight, their knowledge of FARs, and a safe pilot. Oh and the 'Bi' has been dropped, just a Flight Review now.
 
I wonder why they dropped the "bi"? Was there a plan, at some point, to require them on something other than a biennial basis?
 
I'd have them take me to a close by airport, steep turns, some hood work and a couple stalls on the way over a few touch and goes and a missed approach, on the way back a simulated engine failure followed up with a short field landing with a slip. Plus a hour on the ground going over the chart, FARs he needs to know, some systems quiz out of his POH, etc.

I still call it a BFR too
 
Palmpilot said:
I wonder why they dropped the "bi"? Was there a plan, at some point, to require them on something other than a biennial basis?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure but I seem to recall coming across some material that indicated the change was prompted by a perception that the term "biennial" implied that pilots only needed recurrent training once every two years and the agency wanted to encourage more regular training. Also, there are so many ways to satisfy the flight review requirement it really wasn't "biennial" anyway.

But there was, in the early 1990s, a proposal to require an annual flight review, at least for certain pilots levels. It went away rather quickly.

James331 said:
I still call it a BFR too
Click to expand...
So do a lot of folks, including folks within the FAA.

I'm not sure when "biennial" was dropped it took place. The "biennial" flight review came into existence in 1974. The term "biennial" was gone from the reg well before the big 1997 Part 61 revision. But the term really never disappeared from the lingo. I'm pretty much a stickler for correct use of regulatory language, but complaining about people using "biennial" always struck me as a wee bit OCD.
 
More trainng the better for sure, but it's REQUIRED every two years for pt. 91 folks, so I like to call it a BFR.
 
James331 said:
More trainng the better for sure, but it's REQUIRED every two years for pt. 91 folks, so I like to call it a BFR.
Click to expand...
Technically you can do it once every 20 years. You just can't fly until you've done it after the first 2 (as you know). BFR makes its sound more like other countries that have an expiration on licensure (IMO).

Thats kinda the way I look at the semantics of it.
 
Each time I try to use a CFI,I have no history with. Also usually use a school rental plane instead of my own,two seater. Always a good time,money well spent.
 
Palmpilot said:
I wonder why they dropped the "bi"? Was there a plan, at some point, to require them on something other than a biennial basis?
Click to expand...
"Biannual" literally means semiannual or twice in one year. The FAA got tired of correcting people that is was a "biennial" flight review, meaning once every two years so they shortened it to "Flight Review."

It should be a review, not a checkride. If a CFI of mine sat there like a DPE not offering any instruction and waiting til the debrief to tell me he wasn't going to sign me off, I don't think I'd engage or even recommend that CFI to anyone for anything. If at the end of an instructional flight/flight review, he told me I needed some additional practice before he could sign me off for PIC duties for another two years, he'd likely have my respect and future business. I see a few pilots who pass a review who really, really, need some remedial training. I'm sure there are many who might need a little instruction, but are generally safe pilots and should pass a review with the instruction received during the review.
 
Last edited:
NJP_MAN said:
Technically you can do it once every 20 years. You just can't fly until you've done it after the first 2 (as you know). BFR makes its sound more like other countries that have an expiration on licensure (IMO).

Thats kinda the way I look at the semantics of it.
Click to expand...

You can't exercise your acting as PIC privilege but nothing says you can't fly with someone who acts as PIC for the flight. You can still log any time you're the sole manipulator of the controls as PIC. Don't even need a current medical as the other pilot who is acting PIC must have all his currencies.
 
Witmo said:
"Biannual" literally means semiannual or twice in one year. The FAA got tired of correcting people that is was a "biennial" flight review, meaning once every two years so they shortened it to "Flight Review."
Click to expand...
That sounds plausible.
 
My BFRs and now FRs, weren't twice a year. They were biennial not biannual. :)

Some ground, some flight, and usually the ground was focused on whatever the FAA felt was the "big focus item" for that year, that they communicate to CFIs, and the flight was usually basic airwork.

I'm one of those weirdos who does airwork every so often anyway, so I'm not chasing all over the sky attempting to do steep turns to standards, or isn't sure when the last time I stalled an airplane was. So the flight portion is usually pretty benign.

Most good CFIs will do the "the engine just quit, where are you going to put this thing?", too. Often it's to see if you're paying attention to navigation, since there's often a runway right next to or below you when the engine magically quits.

Another one a good instructor will be watching for is if you've gotten lazy about checklists.

Expect it to be a learning experience in a friendly environment, unless you're a total mess and need remedial training.

Oh and by the way, they don't mind as much that you're a hazard to yourself, but they're signing off that you're not a hazard to others, in your plane or on the ground, and that's really important.
 
NJP_MAN said:
Technically you can do it once every 20 years. You just can't fly until you've done it after the first 2 (as you know). BFR makes its sound more like other countries that have an expiration on licensure (IMO).

Thats kinda the way I look at the semantics of it.
Click to expand...
If you are going to go technical on us ;), technically, you never have to get one (or its equivalent). You just can't fly as pilot in command.
 
midlifeflyer said:
If you are going to go technical on us ;), technically, you never have to get one (or its equivalent). You just can't fly as pilot in command.
Click to expand...
I should have elaborated if I was indeed trying to be tech.
 
I still call it BFR. I refuse to contribute to the dumbing down the pilot ranks. :D
 
DFH65 said:
I still call it BFR. I refuse to contribute to the dumbing down the pilot ranks. :D
Click to expand...
And there's no statute or regulation requiring us to speak the way the FAA wants us to. Logbook entries specify a specific regulation number, so it's not like there's going to be any confusion where it counts.
 
I call it Flight Review, as does the FAA, since BFR is simply incorrect. I fly different types and categories of aircraft, and for some the requirement is every two years, for others every year (e.g. R-22/R-44 helicopters).
Before the name change, it was quite annoying, since I'd come for a BFR which is not "B", and I'd have to explain it to the confused receptionist, or try to find the correct page or form on a website, with some problems.
Now it's very easy and simple. Whether I do it for Helicopters, Airplanes (power) or Gliders, it's always just "Flight Review". And the cool thing is that I can do it in one category and it applies to all others (with an asterisk, since R-22/44 still need their own annually, but it works the other way around).
 
denverpilot said:
My BFRs and now FRs, weren't twice a year. They were biennial not biannual. :)
Click to expand...

I'm impressed we had eight posts before the "biennial" name issue was raised! I suspect the confusion between biennial and biannual was a factor in the FAA dropping it. But the fact remains, it's still a biennial Flight Review....must occur every two years, or biennially.
 
Last edited:
No thread is complete until we are arguing about the meanings of words! :)
 
RotorDude said:
I call it Flight Review, as does the FAA, since BFR is simply incorrect.
Click to expand...

Specifically, you have asked for clarification regarding the time requirements for a biennial flight review in 14 C.F.R. § 61.56(c).
***
Based on the facts that you have presented, a biennial flight review accomplished on April 2, 2002, would not lapse until May 1, 2004.​
2012 Harvey Interpretation (asking about the FR calculation). There are plenty more FAA references that use it

Several commenters wanted the FAA to allow for simultaneous training and checking, and to allow all SFAR training to satisfy requirements for the biennial flight review.​
2008 Final Rule in the Federal Register dealing with the SFAR for type-specific MU-2 currency.

Those two were very quick to find. There are plenty more from after the change.

So the FAA is apparent not all that OCD about the language :D
 
midlifeflyer said:
Specifically, you have asked for clarification regarding the time requirements for a biennial flight review in 14 C.F.R. § 61.56(c).
***
Based on the facts that you have presented, a biennial flight review accomplished on April 2, 2002, would not lapse until May 1, 2004.​
2012 Harvey Interpretation (asking about the FR calculation). There are plenty more FAA references that use it

Several commenters wanted the FAA to allow for simultaneous training and checking, and to allow all SFAR training to satisfy requirements for the biennial flight review.​
2008 Final Rule in the Federal Register dealing with the SFAR for type-specific MU-2 currency.

Those two were very quick to find. There are plenty more from after the change.

So the FAA is apparent not all that OCD about the language :D
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that the FAA itself is still confused about this issue, and I suspect there is plenty of old examples, but I believe that formally it's now FR, not BFR, and therefore also covers the annual flight reviews, as for the R-22/44. Problem is nobody has a broad enough view nowadays.
 
My last one was pretty much a non event. Might have told the CFI more than he told me.
 
RotorDude said:
I have no doubt that the FAA itself is still confused about this issue, and I suspect there is plenty of old examples, but I believe that formally it's now FR, not BFR, and therefore also covers the annual flight reviews, as for the R-22/44. Problem is nobody has a broad enough view nowadays.
Click to expand...

Actually, I have a feeling that formally, it has always been a "flight review." I don't think it has ever been a proper noun. The word "biennial" has always been a simple modifier, not the "proper name." It was created in 1973. Here is the very first version of the reg that went in to effect in 1974:
§ 61.57 Recent flight experience: Pilot in command. (a) Flight review. After November 1, 1974, no person may act as pilot in command of an aircraft unless, within the preceding 24 months, he has (1) Accomplished a flight review given to him, in an aircraft for which he Is rated, by an appropriately certificated instructor or other person designated by the Administrator; and (2) Had his log book endorsed by the person who gave him the review certifying that he has satisfactorily accomplished the flight review.​
Not a "biennial" in there. I'm not sure since I don't have the full history, but I would't be surprised if the word "biennial" was never part of the regulatory language. "BFR" just became part of the informal lingo of aviation to refer to the 24 months that is still in the basic reg.

IMO, "with you," "any traffic please advise" and "pass the salt, please" are far more significant than whether one refers to the flight review as a "BFR."
 
I had texted my friend/CFI last week and asked if he would be willing to knock out my first BFR before August when it came due, and he said "sure." I happened to be taxiing out to take off this past Saturday and his voice came over the air..."hey 89J, I'm landing in 15 minutes if you want to knock out that BFR." Ummmm......okay. I had thought I might brush up on a few things first, but what the heck. I picked him up and he said "okay, make the takeoff a soft field." Hadn't done that one in a while but it was fun. Then came the slow flight (after clearing the airspace), power-off stall, power-on stall, and then steep turns. Then he chopped the throttle, made sure I knew the ABCDE's of an in-air emergency (including the frequencies, radio work, best glide speed, locating the best place to land, yada, yada, yada). We made the field and he had me do a go around rather than mess up the nice farmer's beans. He kept asking the ground school questions as we flew, and we headed back to the airport for some landings. As I was overflying the field at 3500ft MSL to descend down and back into the 45-degree downwind (our pattern altitude is 2400), he chopped the throttle on me again and did one of his "uh oh....what now??" So, I got to call out over the CTAF a simulated engine-out-to-land, held my best speed, left the flaps alone, did a large enough circle away from the airport to line up but not large enough that I would miss the asphalt, and brought her in just past the numbers - which made my day! We did one more takeoff and a short-field landing (I forgot to lose the flaps before pulling the yoke back and braking, but I was able to stop before our designated point - I was irritated with myself but had not practiced a short-field landing in a while). Then we called it a day. Along the BFR he would take the controls and show me a few pointers on little things that helped me out, which is why I always enjoy going up with a CFI on occasion just to shake the dust off and learn a few things.

Anyway, sorry for the longer write-up but it just happened so was kinda timely to your request.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top