Flight Review: “New things in Aviation” ideas

Arob16

Arob16

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
157
Location
Fort Worth TX
Display Name
Display name:
Arob16
Hey team -

I have recently conducted a few flight reviews (formerly BFRs) with very, very experienced pilots. Although we cover what is required by regulation during the ground portion, I find that it is not extremely productive for the client pilot. So I'd like to start incorporating some topics to catch more experienced pilots "up to speed" with what's happened in aviation over the past several months/years if they were not paying attention. (example, had an ex-ATP who wasn't 100% familiar with new ADS-B requirements in smaller airspace, since she was used to operating in major international terminal areas over the years). I would spend 10 minutes or so covering these topics. I wanted to ask this group if they had any good ideas for topics of this nature. ADS-B comes to mind since it is relatively fresh. Another thought is new avionics technology. Accident case studies could also fit this, anything else?


Adam
 
BasicMed and Sport Pilot. The landscape of medicals is a lot more complicated now.
 
Best flight review I've had in 10 years focused on non-powered descents and landings, S-turns to lose energy, slips, descent rates, etc.

Commercial maneuvers would be good here too.

As far as what's happening in aviation? We're all kind of paused right now. Not sure a current events review is good.
 
What's an ex-ATP? I hope I don't become one of those...

Based on the recent history of GA accidents and fatalities, I'd say some discussion of low-speed maneuvers and energy management would be a good subject.
 
ADS-B isn't all that hard. With small exception, it just follows the mode C rules. If they're retired, you might suggest they understood what basic med might do for them.
If they've only been flying the big stuff, I might want to review basic VFR charting and GPS procedures (when can you use GPS to sub for DME or ADF, etc...).
 
Review the latest final accident reports or FAAST, NASA reports that have just come out that may be relevant, especially since some of them are from fellow ATPs.

Review the latest EFB iteration and its new features.
 
When a new AIM comes out, there is a list of changes that were made. Reviewing that beforehand seems like a good way to get some material.

Also, look up recent* NTSB reports for accidents in the type of aircraft the client regularly flies. When I last did this, the last 4 accidents were all caused by exactly the same sort of things that you should be covering during the flight portion of a FR - so it was great, real-life example of why this stuff is important (in this case, it was in a twin and the recent accidents were - not maintaining above Vmc and rolling, attempted single-engine go-around, not staying on glideslope when he thought he saw the runway (but it wasn't), etc.)

* Although of course a 20-year old accident could be just as pertinent, there's something about the recency that really drives the point home - the fact that this accident just happened last year in the same airplane with likely very similar equipment, makes it more real somehow, and avoids the thought that "well, training/safety systems/procedures/etc. are much better now, so that could never happen to me".
 
flyingron said:
ADS-B isn't all that hard. With small exception, it just follows the mode C rules.
Click to expand...
ADS-B Out isn't all that hard.
ADS-B In, on the other hand, might make a good discussion for a flight review (what different ways can you get it, what can it do for you, what are its limitations, etc)
 
Also, I'd cover the DC SFRA/FRZ rules (or at least that if you're going to go anywhere near there you need the special training).
 
Maybe some discussion of the rules around EFBs could be helpful.

If you spend a few minutes on Basic Med, be sure they know that it's now legal for flying in Mexico. Canada is still a holdout.

You might have some discussion about what "preventive maintenance" an owner is able to do on his own, in light of the Coleal letter. https://www.faa.gov/about/office_or...2009/Coleal - (2009) Legal Interpretation.pdf Many pilots may be surprised to learn they're not limited to the specific items in Appendix A of 14 CFR part 43.

And you could explain why the Temporary (?!) Flight Restriction over Disney World has remained in place even while the parks were closed for months during COVID-19. I'd sorta like to hear that rationale myself.....
 
Half Fast said:
And you could explain why the Temporary (?!) Flight Restriction over Disney World has remained in place even while the parks were closed for months during COVID-19. I'd sorta like to hear that rationale myself.....
Click to expand...
Because when Disney bought the land secretly he also bought the airspace- duh.
 
Did the pre flight review course and the DC course before flying. Slow flight was a key point during the flight.
 
I wished there were more advanced courses that covered the flight review and then some given extras..elective courses lets call them. Advanced training as a package deal with the flight review... drill Power loss on take off and other gotchas that keep getting us...
 
For the ground portion, you’ve hit a couple of big changes folks could learn about.

For flight, the ACS tasks are always a good place to go. How many pilots can’t fly to the standard of their certificate? Can they hit the short field landing within the limits of their certificate the first time? Soft field technique brushed up? Etc.

Can do it as a “you choose one you like and I’ll choose one” thing if you like that approach.

If they hold an instrument rating, chat with them about adding an IPC and a solid workout in an airplane they intend to fly IMC with whatever avionics and handheld gadgetry they plan on using, too.

Fastest growing accident cluster is loss of control on the ground after landing. Make the landings crosswind if possible and full stop. Make sure those control deflections as they slow are full and appropriate. Reverse the accident trend.

That’s all I’ve got. Hopefully helpful ideas.
 
as a rusty low time 300 hour PPL holder, it's hard for me to answer from the ATP perspective
but for me a couple things that were not covered in the Rusty Pilot program that I thought should have been were
a bit more on EFB's, use, requirements, etc.
and new avionics

I can imagine either of these might be helpful for folks used to airline procedures and equipment
especially avionics in that it seems is in a hyperspeed change rate and I'd imagine different from the FMS systems they would be used to
I suppose the EFB's though they are pretty familiar with....but maybe some aspect of them re. small airport operations?

Another thought, focus on pure visual seat of the pants stuff. Establishing best glide without airspeed indicator, visual nav, small airfield stuff,....

and then there's a sideline discussion that could be had on Dan Gryder's push on DMMS and the comparison between GA and airline training...might be interesting to explore their opinions of the differences.... seems like that opens up lots of areas in that he is encouraging exactly what you are thinking....reviewing things that matter rather than checking the boxes
 
Huckster79 said:
I wished there were more advanced courses that covered the flight review and then some given extras..elective courses lets call them. Advanced training as a package deal with the flight review... drill Power loss on take off and other gotchas that keep getting us...
Click to expand...
That’s just (or should be just) coordinating with an instructor ahead of time.
 
MauleSkinner said:
That’s just (or should be just) coordinating with an instructor ahead of time.
Click to expand...

I get it can be done...

Just would be a neat marketing angle to offer “flight review plus advanced training in xyz” w instructors there specialize in certain areas.
 
Huckster79 said:
I get it can be done...

Just would be a neat marketing angle to offer “flight review plus advanced training in xyz” w instructors there specialize in certain areas.
Click to expand...

It *is* done. It’s not a new idea.

At least three instructors around here with access to aerobatic aircraft and plenty of experience, throw in FRs with aerobatic or spin or “upset” training.

Others just talk folks into expanding their skills with a new rating. Resets the clock. Why not?

Another common one here is to do a day or two of intense mountain training and add in the FR requirements.

Etc. Really common here.

I worry if someone isn’t seeing that, they’re not very in tune with the really active instructors in their area... or there just aren’t many. I get it when someone is in the styx, but in most major metros there’s a lot of this sort of thing going on.
 
denverpilot said:
It *is* done. It’s not a new idea.

At least three instructors around here with access to aerobatic aircraft and plenty of experience, throw in FRs with aerobatic or spin or “upset” training.

Others just talk folks into expanding their skills with a new rating. Resets the clock. Why not?

Another common one here is to do a day or two of intense mountain training and add in the FR requirements.

Etc. Really common here.

I worry if someone isn’t seeing that, they’re not very in tune with the really active instructors in their area... or there just aren’t many. I get it when someone is in the styx, but in most major metros there’s a lot of this sort of thing going on.
Click to expand...

I’ve not seen any marketing of such things in my area... I’ll do some research. I don’t think I thought it was totally novel- I just haven’t seen a lot of marketing for it.

I find as a whole GA isn’t real into marketing...at least in my area...
 
Huckster79 said:
I’ve not seen any marketing of such things in my area... I’ll do some research. I don’t think I thought it was totally novel- I just haven’t seen a lot of marketing for it.

I find as a whole GA isn’t real into marketing...at least in my area...
Click to expand...
The other problem is that an instructor has to feel the need to be “expert” in something before they’ll think about marketing it...most instructors are marking time and choose not to go beyond the minimum they need to do (like most pilots, quite honestly).
 
MauleSkinner said:
The other problem is that an instructor has to feel the need to be “expert” in something before they’ll think about marketing it...most instructors are marking time and choose not to go beyond the minimum they need to do (like most pilots, quite honestly).
Click to expand...

Or you end up an “accidental expert”. You do a bunch of stuff and realize it’s actually something marketable.

Been mountain flying since I was 19. Can’t say I thought it was anything special until much later in life.

Even then, the concepts aren’t rocket science, but I learned they’re not the norm for the flatlanders.

Rule number one. Don’t hit the big rocks. :)

Same with one CFI I know who never thought tailwheel was any big deal. It’s just what he always flew and taught in.

It’s the old “How do you get experience?” thing. By doing it and making mistakes. If the mistakes don’t kill you... :)
 
Arob16 said:
... Although we cover what is required by regulation during the ground portion, I find that it is not extremely productive for the client pilot.
Click to expand...

Interesting....why do you say this? Did your clients just tell you that? What did you sense?

I am of the camp to mostly cover things in the ACS where my client may not exercise in normal planning or flying. Usually chart reading, navigation, emergency procedures for ground and slow flight, stalls, ground reference maneuvers, emergency procedures and landings for flight. These topics easily go the 1hr/1hr requirement. If I feel they are satisfactory, I sign them off. Always, they've learned a lot by this alone.

Out of respect for my client's pocketbook, I don't impose on them to go further. But I do ask them whether there is something more they'd like to cover. If the answer is yes, then we continue as a post-review discussion or flight.

I've always been on a budget but have had too many instructors who just continued to barrage me with what they thought would be useful things for me to know just because they felt a flight review needs to provide extra instruction or value beyond the minimum. "OK, that'll be for 4 hours ground, a bit long, but I gave you lots of stuff." Right. Or did you just hustle an extra 3 hours from me?
 
I just noticed this in the OP...
Arob16 said:
Although we cover what is required by regulation during the ground portion, I find that it is not extremely productive for the client pilot.
Click to expand...
The reg is extremely vague/broad as to it's requirements:
The review must include:

(1) A review of the current general operating and flight rules of part 91 of this chapter; and

(2) A review of those maneuvers and procedures that, at the discretion of the person giving the review, are necessary for the pilot to demonstrate the safe exercise of the privileges of the pilot certificate.
Click to expand...
What are you anticipating doing that can't be shoehorned into either (1) or (2)? If what you're doing isn't productive for the client pilot, you need to up your game as an instructor.
 
I do very little "quizzing" during the ground part of my FR's. If we sit there for an hour, and I quiz the applicant, and they answer everything right, then they didn't need the review I provided and it was therefore not valuable to them.

Instead, I work to create scenarios that we can talk about, reason through, figure out how to resolve, etc. Yes, any discussion will touch on some part of Part 91, so it meets the requirements, but asking "what altitude do you need to have oxygen on" is not very thought provoking. Better is "We're flying from here to Gunnison, CO and back. How are we going to get there?" and then the discussion will by necessity touch on oxygen use, density altitude, MEAs, weather effects, how to get the weather, climb performance at altitude, takeoff distance, ODPs, airspace along the route, etc. etc. etc.... Heck, that one scenario could be the full hour right there.
 
I hate giving flight reviews to those dudes. The "Let's get this farce over with" patronizing smirk really gets under my skin. It's not like I wrote the regs.

I usually find something worth engaging on by choosing a topic that invites more religion than science, and aviation is choc-a-bloc with em. Skew-T weather has been a good time-killer. LOP vs ROP. Singles/Twins. Are Cirrus drivers realllllly pilots? Why do insurance companies write policies to age 70+ pilots? What would you change about the FAA?

The regs don't say it has to be an enlightening hour of ground instruction. Go to the local airport cafe, order a "mandatory to-go" iced tea from the waitress in the hazmat suit, go sit on a bench six feet or more away from her and talk hangar trash for an hour while being paid. Don't force it if the typical cloud clearances review of the rusty past-middle-age "life happened" 80 hour wonder private will be a waste of time for you both.

$0.02 :)
 
Last edited:
It’s now a year or so old, but the review the new AC on Non-towered airport operations. Specifically recommended pattern entries, and recommended radio procedures.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top