Do I need a BFR?

T

Tmpendergrass

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Oct 10, 2012
Messages
224
Display Name
Display name:
Tmpendergrass
I recently received my instrument rating this April. I would be due for a BFR at the end of this month but I understand a new rating restarts the BFR clock. However chatting with a local CFI, he mentioned that for a new rating to count as a BFR, it was to be specifically signed off that way in my logbook by the examiner. However I can not find the verbage in the far aim saying this. Is this CFI mistaken or am I missing something? If he is right, I guess I'll have to do a BFR soon...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
61.56(d)
A person who has, within the period specified in paragraph (c) of this section, passed any of the following need not accomplish the flight review required by this section:
(1) A pilot proficiency check or practical test conducted by an examiner, an approved pilot check airman, or a U.S. Armed Force, for a pilot certificate, rating, or operating privilege.
...
​
The CFI is wrong.
 
That CFI sounds like he might've been looking for a quick customer.

Your IFR Ticket reset the clock 24 calendar months from the issue date.
 
Tmpendergrass said:
I recently received my instrument rating this April. I would be due for a BFR at the end of this month but I understand a new rating restarts the BFR clock. However chatting with a local CFI, he mentioned that for a new rating to count as a BFR, it was to be specifically signed off that way in my logbook by the examiner. However I can not find the verbage in the far aim saying this. Is this CFI mistaken or am I missing something? If he is right, I guess I'll have to do a BFR soon...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Congrats on the IR! The CFI was wrong. That said, if it had been a while since you were proficient in the normal VFR flying or would like to brush up on anything, it wouldn't hurt to spend some time on the areas you feel need it. One of the downsides to the flight review is it gives the false impression one is a safe, proficient pilot for two more years. That is certainly not the case if skills are left to tarnish.
 
whattauser said:
Congrats on the IR! The CFI was wrong. That said, if it had been a while since you were proficient in the normal VFR flying or would like to brush up on anything, it wouldn't hurt to spend some time on the areas you feel need it. One of the downsides to the flight review is it gives the false impression one is a safe, proficient pilot for two more years. That is certainly not the case if skills are left to tarnish.
Click to expand...

Thanks guys. That's what I figured just wanted to verify. Fortunately I fly a few hours a week and feel more proficient than I've ever been(hope I'm not being over confident).

Peace!
T


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Tmpendergrass said:
I recently received my instrument rating this April. I would be due for a BFR at the end of this month but I understand a new rating restarts the BFR clock. However chatting with a local CFI, he mentioned that for a new rating to count as a BFR, it was to be specifically signed off that way in my logbook by the examiner. However I can not find the verbage in the far aim saying this. Is this CFI mistaken or am I missing something? If he is right, I guess I'll have to do a BFR soon...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
This sounds like he's confused. Maybe was thinking about the old rule that applied to CFI practical tests until just a few years ago.

Yeah, as others said, he's mistaken. You are good to go.
 
Tmpendergrass said:
Thanks guys. That's what I figured just wanted to verify. Fortunately I fly a few hours a week and feel more proficient than I've ever been(hope I'm not being over confident).
Click to expand...
Glad that you stay proficient.
And I believe you might be UNDER confident. If you know the answer and know the CFI is wrong, tell him flat out. I know I would! :D
 
And if you want to impress him more, they are not called BFR's any more, just FR's.
 
Of course, they've never been anything other than (Biennial) Flight Reviews. Many years ago about the time they came up with the Recreational Pilot Certificate (something supposed to revolutionize aviation...har!) the flight instructor lobby claimed they were going to lose out on a lot of instruction revenue so the FAA through them a bone which was the proposal they were considering anyhow to make low time/non-instrument rated pilots do annual flight reviews. The rule never actually took effect. They kept rolling ahead the effective date until they finally just rescinded the whole thing.

Too bad the FAA ruined the Wings program. I gave the local FSDO guy an earful on that when he was collecting his meaningless statistics on my recent off-airport landing.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Actually, the post reads like the pilot did read it, was confused by what his instructor said, and asked if he was missing something.
Click to expand...

I took his uncertainty about it and his seemingly overly deferential attitude towards the CFI's opinion to indicate that perhaps he had not researched it thoroughly or had not thoroughly understood what he read. Reading the OP again, I am more inclined to believe it is simply a matter of an undue deference more so than him not reading the book and understanding it. He seemed to know he was right but at the same time did not want to believe the CFI was wrong. This sort of deference towards a CFI is not always the best answer. But I will say that he did the right thing in asking for the opinion of others when faced with a conflicting interpretation of the regs. That is always a good approach.
 
SkyDog58 said:
He seemed to know he was right but at the same time did not want to believe the CFI was wrong. This sort of deference towards a CFI is not always the best answer.
Click to expand...

I would like to thank whatever lucky stars I must have soloed under to have had a primary CFI and a number of them around that I didn't train with, but talked to, who pounded it into my head that if your CFI told you something, and they weren't holding the FAR/AIM in their hand reading it to you, you not only might want to, but should, go look it up for yourself and ask any questions that might arise.

Pilots, CFIs, DPEs, hell the Administrator him or herself, get things wrong from memory -- no matter how long they've been doing it.

The text on the page never lies, as long as you're working from a current version. Which is a whole different problem.

AND the whole silliness of law being "interpreted" in letters that are NOT published in the books makes for a whole new set of traps for young and old players, alike. That entire concept is just completely broken. Try to find a place in the FAR or AIM that points to the Chief Counsel's website as a reference point.
 
denverpilot said:
I would like to thank whatever lucky stars I must have soloed under to have had a primary CFI and a number of them around that I didn't train with, but talked to, who pounded it into my head that if your CFI told you something, and they weren't holding the FAR/AIM in their hand reading it to you, you not only might want to, but should, go look it up for yourself and ask any questions that might arise.

Pilots, CFIs, DPEs, hell the Administrator him or herself, get things wrong from memory -- no matter how long they've been doing it.

The text on the page never lies, as long as you're working from a current version. Which is a whole different problem.

AND the whole silliness of law being "interpreted" in letters that are NOT published in the books makes for a whole new set of traps for young and old players, alike. That entire concept is just completely broken. Try to find a place in the FAR or AIM that points to the Chief Counsel's website as a reference point.
Click to expand...
This is inherent in the FAR being law that gets interpreted by lawyers and ALJs.
 
whattauser said:
This is inherent in the FAR being law that gets interpreted by lawyers and ALJs.
Click to expand...
Nope, it's just inherent that people remember and believe things that aren't necessarily true. DPEs are perhaps THE WORST on this in my experience. The fact that they had the political connections to get their designations often goes to their head and they feel they are blessed with unique ability to interpret the regs when all it does is given them limited ability to hand out temporary certificates.
 
When I just got my CFI reinstated, the DPE asked if I'd like it signed off as a Flight Review as well. I said sure, even though I had had one about a month prior.

I don't think it occurred to either of us that it might be superfluous.
 
This is an area where the regs make a lot of sense. If you've done and passed an IR ride with a DPE then there's no point in having you go up with a CFI to show that you still know how to fly a plane (at least for another 24 months).

Sounds like the CFI might need a BFR that focuses on a ground lesson reading the FAR-AIM!
 
FastEddieB said:
When I just got my CFI reinstated, the DPE asked if I'd like it signed off as a Flight Review as well. I said sure, even though I had had one about a month prior.

I don't think it occurred to either of us that it might be superfluous.
Click to expand...
As of about three years ago that issue was fixed in 61.56(d)(2), so a CFI checkride counts towards resetting the clock.
 
denverpilot said:
AND the whole silliness of law being "interpreted" in letters that are NOT published in the books makes for a whole new set of traps for young and old players, alike. That entire concept is just completely broken. Try to find a place in the FAR or AIM that points to the Chief Counsel's website as a reference point.
Click to expand...
Try to find a place in ANY body of law that says legal interpretations define the law...it's by no means exclusive to aviation.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Try to find a place in ANY body of law that says legal interpretations define the law...it's by no means exclusive to aviation.
Click to expand...

Mmm interesting point. The difference then is that the ALJs rarely go against said interpretations whereas a normal judge might be persuaded?

It'd be exceedingly rare for a judge to say something like, "We will let the DA rewrite the law to fit his or her case and reconvene after they've published a letter that they did so, on their website."
 
[QUOTE="denverpilot, post: 2157353, member: 6717]
It'd be exceedingly rare for a judge to say something like, "We will let the DA rewrite the law to fit his or her case and reconvene after they've published a letter that they did so, on their website."[/QUOTE]
Got an example of that on the faa side?
 
Not to get flamed, does a CFI need to have a flight review every two years from a CFI? Or does him/her sending enough students for a checkride count?
 
In my opinion a CFI need to get a flight review just like any other pilot.

I don’t see anything in the FARs that say otherwise.
 
tree96 said:
Not to get flamed, does a CFI need to have a flight review every two years from a CFI? Or does him/her sending enough students for a checkride count?
Click to expand...
Yes a CFI needs a BFR but they don't need to do the ground portion.
 
MauleSkinner said:
So you gonna whup him with an iPad, a laptop, or a desktop computer? :D
Click to expand...
7cdbf35f279ba330d2e095d2d17ddb33.jpg
 
denverpilot said:
Mmm interesting point. The difference then is that the ALJs rarely go against said interpretations whereas a normal judge might be persuaded?

It'd be exceedingly rare for a judge to say something like, "We will let the DA rewrite the law to fit his or her case and reconvene after they've published a letter that they did so, on their website."
Click to expand...
Real judges rarely go against agency interpretations also. Before the Pilots Bill of Rights, the NTSB was required by statute to accept the FAA's interpretation. The exceptions were very narrow. In fact, in what many consider one of the most horrendous cases of the breed, the Merrel decision, the NTSB rejected an FAA interpretation and was promptly reversed by a panel of "real" Court of Appeals judges,

Now, the NTSB uses a similar legal standard as "real" judges. But that's still, by a long history of SCOTUS and other upper level appellate law, a legal bias in favor of upholding agency interpretations of the meaning of their own regulations. Stripped of a lot if legal technicality you'll find in the case law, they are upheld so long as the language of the regulation is susceptible to that interpretation, is not ridiculous when looking at the subject of the regulation, and is not contrary to existing law.

If you look at the FlyteNow stuff you can see a lot if that with FlyteNow arguing that the restrictions on pilot ridesharing violate the Constitution (contrary to law) and that the FAA is not entitled to deference because it it creating an interpretation of "common carriage" which is not a regulatory phrase (it existed for centuries before the Wrights took flight).

No, they don't talk about the letters as creating law. It's worse than that. The FAA (other agencies too) gets to argue for a brand new interpretation in an enforcement proceeding without any notice of their position before you did the deed. From that perspective, those letter interpretations are, "since you asked, this is the position we would take if we went after you" is a pretty decent heads up

DAs aren't agencies interpreting their own regulations, so a different creature. OTOH, a good number of state agencies that do write regulations also get to interpret them.
 
Last edited:
Let me recall my recent experience.

I wanted to renew my CFI. I thought that since I was doing it in a Light Sport no medical was required.

My DPE said otherwise, and pointed me to a regulation that made it pretty clear a CFI checkride required a medical.

But I called Atlanta FSDO, who called me back a couple days later and said that while the FAR certainly seemed to say that, the intent was that the person taking the checkride was qualified to act as PIC for the checkride, and since I was flying a Light Sport I was good to go. My DPE got the same interpretation from the Miami FSDO.

Took the ride, sans medical, in my Sky Arrow and rejoined the ranks of CFI's.

Just pointing this out as a case where the FAA looked towards the intent of a regulation, and interpreted it in favor of the pilot.

As an aside, my DPE had trouble submitting the IACRA form online - it, too, was demanding the medical field be filled in. He had too force it manually somehow, which seemed to work.
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
Real judges rarely go against agency interpretations also
Click to expand...
Which is because of the actual law rather than judicial temperament. The agency that writes the regulation is given deference for interpreting it. You have to show some particularly persuasive Constitutional issue or that the regulation is at odds with actual law to prevail.
 
Quick question on FR ...tomorrow the 17th is 2 years to the date I took my last FR, am correct in thinking I have until the last day of the month to complete my next FR ?

Thanks
 
Xscaliber said:
Quick question on FR ...tomorrow the 17th is 2 years to the date I took my last FR, am correct in thinking I have until the last day of the month to complete my next FR ?

Thanks
Click to expand...
Yes. 24 calendar months. You haven until the end of the month.
 
FastEddieB said:
Let me recall my recent experience.

I wanted to renew my CFI. I thought that since I was doing it in a Light Sport no medical was required.

My DPE said otherwise, and pointed me to a regulation that made it pretty clear a CFI checkride required a medical.

But I called Atlanta FSDO, who called me back a couple days later and said that while the FAR certainly seemed to say that, the intent was that the person taking the checkride was qualified to act as PIC for the checkride, and since I was flying a Light Sport I was good to go. My DPE got the same interpretation from the Miami FSDO.

Took the ride, sans medical, in my Sky Arrow and rejoined the ranks of CFI's.

Just pointing this out as a case where the FAA looked towards the intent of a regulation, and interpreted it in favor of the pilot.

As an aside, my DPE had trouble submitting the IACRA form online - it, too, was demanding the medical field be filled in. He had too force it manually somehow, which seemed to work.
Click to expand...
Eddie, Thank you for trying to help me. I do very much appreciate it. My problem is to fly a sport airplane using your drivers license as medical requires that your state you have no medical condition.....there is a list of conditions if a person is flying with one of them they are cheating...for example has ADHA your were lucky that your healthy and I do hope you stay that way....enjoy your instructing....Scotty
 
Scotty said:
Eddie, Thank you for trying to help me. I do very much appreciate it. My problem is to fly a sport airplane using your drivers license as medical requires that your state you have no medical condition.....there is a list of conditions if a person is flying with one of them they are cheating...for example has ADHA your were lucky that your healthy and I do hope you stay that way....enjoy your instructing....Scotty
Click to expand...

You're welcome.

But from the FAA, if using a driver's license, the criteria is "Not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make that person unable to operate a Light-Sport Aircraft in a safe manner".

Not that you have NO condition. Reference: https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/airmen_certification/sport_pilot/media/LSPBrochure.pdf

Where is this list you're referring to?

edited to add: None of this applies if you actually lost or were denied a medical. Then, you're kinda hosed.
 
FastEddieB said:
You're welcome.

But from the FAA, if using a driver's license, the criteria is "Not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make that person unable to operate a Light-Sport Aircraft in a safe manner".

Not that you have NO condition. Reference: https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/airmen_certification/sport_pilot/media/LSPBrochure.pdf

Where is this list you're referring to?

edited to add: None of this applies if you actually lost or were denied a medical. Then, you're kinda hosed.
Click to expand...
Your right, it is all in the wording...my medical was called back by the FAA after I had a stint put in my artery I agree that any or NO is different. thank you for trying....Scotty
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top