Current Medical for BFR ?

jdwatson

jdwatson

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
943
Location
Cary, NC
Display Name
Display name:
JDW
After 3 years, 8 months and 14 days, I went flying. KLHZ had a Wings Weekend at the airport. I hadn't planned on renewing my medical until after my annual physical with my personal MD. I got some conflicting information about whether or not I could complete the BFR flying portion with an expired medical.

I had thought a pilot could get a BFR with an expired medical but had to renew their medical before exercising the privileges of their certificate. Can someone point me to the relevant passage in the FAR/AIM ?

I didn't fly up to my own standards and even with a current medical & a BFR in hand I would seek more flight time under the watchful eye of a CFI.

I knew I had been away too long when I found out the runway numbers had changed as well as the name of the airport.
 
jdwatson said:
After 3 years, 8 months and 14 days, I went flying. KLHZ had a Wings Weekend at the airport. I hadn't planned on renewing my medical until after my annual physical with my personal MD. I got some conflicting information about whether or not I could complete the BFR flying portion with an expired medical.

I had thought a pilot could get a BFR with an expired medical but had to renew their medical before exercising the privileges of their certificate. Can someone point me to the relevant passage in the FAR/AIM ?

I didn't fly up to my own standards and even with a current medical & a BFR in hand I would seek more flight time under the watchful eye of a CFI.

I knew I had been away too long when I found out the runway numbers had changed as well as the name of the airport.
Click to expand...

You are correct - so long as the CFI has his medical. It's not written in the FAR/AIM implicitly because the FARs are all written on what you CAN'T do. 61.53 says what you can't do when you are without a medical, but you aren't acting as PIC in your case.
 
Last edited:
Just remember that there are CFI's who don't have medicals, so unless you're doing this in a Light Sport Aircraft, make sure the instructor understands that you don't have a medical -- before you get in the plane.
 
Ron Levy said:
Just remember that there are CFI's who don't have medicals, so unless you're doing this in a Light Sport Aircraft, make sure the instructor understands that you don't have a medical -- before you get in the plane.
Click to expand...

And once you get flight reviewed, you can fly under the S.P. rules until you get around to the medical.
 
jdwatson said:
After 3 years, 8 months and 14 days, I went flying. KLHZ had a Wings Weekend at the airport. I hadn't planned on renewing my medical until after my annual physical with my personal MD. I got some conflicting information about whether or not I could complete the BFR flying portion with an expired medical.
Click to expand...

I flew with a CFI a few years ago who would not give a BFR to a pilot without a current medical. It isn't that he didn't have a medical himself, but something to do with his personal philosophy as CFI. He felt that if he signed someone off after a BFR, they should be legal to be PIC in every way, which they obviously wouldn't be if they didn't have a medical.

But as others have said, there is no legal requirement for a pilot to have a medical to do a BFR, as long as the CFI can be legal PIC for the flight part.
 
azure said:
I flew with a CFI a few years ago who would not give a BFR to a pilot without a current medical. It isn't that he didn't have a medical himself, but something to do with his personal philosophy as CFI. He felt that if he signed someone off after a BFR, they should be legal to be PIC in every way, which they obviously wouldn't be if they didn't have a medical.
Click to expand...

That's not obvious to me.

Would he sign off someone without a comercial, IFR, or multi (etc.) rating? Without those (and many others) someone isn't legal to be PIC in "every way"...
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
That's not obvious to me.
Click to expand...
In context I think it would have been. We were talking about flying airplanes that require a medical to fly, not LSAs or sailplanes.

Would he sign off someone without a comercial, IFR, or multi (etc.) rating? Without those (and many others) someone isn't legal to be PIC in "every way"...
Click to expand...
Poor choice of words on my part. I just meant having everything you need to be legal to exercise the privileges of your ratings.
 
Last edited:
azure said:
In context I think it would have been. We were talking about flying airplanes that require a medical to fly, not LSAs or sailplanes.
Click to expand...

I got my last flight review in a (rented) medical required to PIC aircraft.
It wasn't until afterwards that I went and picked up my SP eligible aircraft.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Would he sign off someone without a comercial, IFR, or multi (etc.) rating? Without those (and many others) someone isn't legal to be PIC in "every way"...
Click to expand...
If the flight review is to be conducted in a twin, then the reviewee must have a multiengine rating.
14 CFR 61.56 said:
(c) Except as provided in paragraphs (d), (e), and (g) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of an aircraft unless, since the beginning of the 24th calendar month before the month in which that pilot acts as pilot in command, that person has--
(1) Accomplished a flight review given in an aircraft for which that pilot is rated by an authorized instructor;
Click to expand...
Certificate level and instrument ratings are not an issue, but instructors are not permitted to sign off a flight review unless the reviewee holds all applicable category, class, and type ratings (the Chief Counsel's definition of "rated").
 
I appreciate all the discussion. I've been planning to renew my medical this year, but the Wings Day occurred before I had started that process.

I informed the CFI at our initial meeting that my medical was expired and that he would be the legal PIC. I'm not sure he was all that happy about it. He also said that he couldn't sign-off on the Wings credit and the BFR because I didn't have a current medical. He quoted from a ASA PTS. I wanted to argue that I already had the certificate and the eligibility requirements didn't apply because I wasn't an applicant. In the end, I just enjoyed the time in the air.
 
If he wrote in your logbook the manuevers you did, and that you met PTS - I'll give you the WINGS credit.

That instructor is OK to say "I don't give BFRs to folks who cannot ACT as PIC", but that's his CHOICE, rather than what the rules require.
 
TMetzinger said:
If he wrote in your logbook the manuevers you did, and that you met PTS - I'll give you the WINGS credit.

That instructor is OK to say "I don't give BFRs to folks who cannot ACT as PIC", but that's his CHOICE, rather than what the rules require.
Click to expand...

Tim, what's the consensus on getting a new endorsement? Like tailwheel? Do you NEED to be legal to act PIC to earn the endorsement? (not to exercise it later, of course)
 
Doggtyred said:
Tim, what's the consensus on getting a new endorsement? Like tailwheel? Do you NEED to be legal to act PIC to earn the endorsement? (not to exercise it later, of course)
Click to expand...

How can you be legal to act as PIC before you earn the endorsement? (And yes, I am fully aware of the difference between acting and logging).

So, the answer is clear: You do not need to act as PIC in order to earn an endorsement like TW, HP or Complex.
 
jdwatson said:
I informed the CFI at our initial meeting that my medical was expired and that he would be the legal PIC. I'm not sure he was all that happy about it. He also said that he couldn't sign-off on the Wings credit and the BFR because I didn't have a current medical.
Click to expand...
"Couldn't" is a regulatory issue; "won't" is a personal decision.

If it's the latter, that's his right. And it's yours to go elsewhere.

He's just plain wrong if it's the former. And it's your right to go to a CFI with a better understanding of the rule if it's important to you.
 
Doggtyred said:
Tim, what's the consensus on getting a new endorsement? Like tailwheel? Do you NEED to be legal to act PIC to earn the endorsement? (not to exercise it later, of course)
Click to expand...
Why are you asking for a consensus on a question that has a correct answer? :confused:

What's the consensus on whether 1+1=2?
 
midlifeflyer said:
Why are you asking for a consensus on a question that has a correct answer? :confused:

What's the consensus on whether 1+1=2?
Click to expand...

largevalues.jpg
 
There are only 10 types of people in the world — those who understand binary, and those who don't!
 
midlifeflyer said:
"Couldn't" is a regulatory issue; "won't" is a personal decision.

If it's the latter, that's his right. And it's yours to go elsewhere.

He's just plain wrong if it's the former. And it's your right to go to a CFI with a better understanding of the rule if it's important to you.
Click to expand...

Hey Mark !!
It wasn't important to me to get the sign-offs. I've flown with some very good CFIs and consider myself very lucky. This is the 1st CFI that I had doubts with.

After my first steep turn, I knew I couldn't meet the PTS standards after nearly 4 years absent from flying. I did fly better than I thought I would, especially considering it was in a ailing 172M.

172M is a model I've never flown. It had a in-op vacuum pump. So, no AI or DG to rely upon. It has been a long while since trying to navigate with only the whiskey compass. Recovering from unusual attitudes under the hood were especially fun.

His 'instruction' of a short-field landing was basically come in low and slow well behind the power curve. He warned to not hit the ILS lights (rabbit) while on approach.

That's not how I was taught to do a short-field landing. For me, short-field means: approach starts higher, steeper descent, near MCA airspeed, simulated hard braking, dumping flaps to kill lift and use aerodynamic braking too. In the end, I chickened out of his way... I just hate 'dragging' the plane across the threshold behind the power-curve.

The Wings Day did lift my spirits and renewed my passion for aviation. I have a renewed motivation to renew my medical and become a proficient pilot once again. Cost is such a huge factor right now.
 
JD - what you're describing is a Short-Field over an Obstacle (and they're often practiced together since they often occur together).

If there's no obstacle, however, then the goal of a short-field landing is to touch down as early as possible on the landing surface with as little energy as possible. Lots of ways to accomplish that.

You can do that from a normal approach with a slower speed on final, power off from the pattern altitude, if you're very familiar with the airplane. Just cut the power at the appropriate place and ride it in keeping it at minimum controllable airspeed all the way down final. BOY THAT SOUNDS SO SIMPLE - NOT. It IS a good practice exercise, though with a CFI on board and being primed to go around.

Or (and the way I normally teach it) you fly your normal approach, just 5 knots slower on the various phases. You don't have the "normal" cushion against the stall so this is not for blustery days. And if there's an obstacle it's not too much different - just delay the final descent and slip a little to increase the descent rate without picking up too much energy.

Or (and I don't like this), you can be way on the back side of the power curve, drag it in and cut the power as your wheels touch down. But if you have an engine failure it's just like one on takeoff - you've got to be prepared to push FORWARD to avoid the stall.
 
Tim,
Your description sounds a lot like the precision power-off 180, doesn't it ? That was my favorite commercial task. I agree there's a lot of ways to skin the "short field" cat. I've employed combination of all of techniques. Landing environment can be very fluid.

That day was blustery but the prevailing wind was right down the runway. Good times !
 
jdwatson said:
Tim,
Your description sounds a lot like the precision power-off 180, doesn't it ? That was my favorite commercial task. I agree there's a lot of ways to skin the "short field" cat. I've employed combination of all of techniques. Landing environment can be very fluid.

That day was blustery but the prevailing wind was right down the runway. Good times !
Click to expand...
It does, except that the power off 180 doesn't call for minimal energy at touchdown. It only calls for hitting a certain spot. Adding the minimal energy requirement takes the maneuver to a higher level, in my opinion, because you can't "save" energy in case you're a little short.
 
TMetzinger said:
It does, except that the power off 180 doesn't call for minimal energy at touchdown. It only calls for hitting a certain spot. Adding the minimal energy requirement takes the maneuver to a higher level, in my opinion, because you can't "save" energy in case you're a little short.
Click to expand...

Good point !!
 
Ron Levy said:
Just remember that there are CFI's who don't have medicals, so unless you're doing this in a Light Sport Aircraft, make sure the instructor understands that you don't have a medical -- before you get in the plane.
Click to expand...

Seems to me like it would be the CFI's responsibility to make sure those ducks are in a row.

Yeah, Yeah, I know.

But still......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top