Thanks for the reply, Salty. Here's a thought. Instead of my take on flight reviews vs. yours or anyone else's, why don't we take a look under the hood and get an idea of what the FAA is interested in promoting. The Administration provides us with
AC 61-98D as well as the "
Conducting an Effective Flight Review" via FAASafety.gov.
From Conducting an Effective Flight Review:
"The purpose of the flight review required by Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 61.56 is to provide for a regular evaluation of pilot skills and aeronautical knowledge. AC 61-98A states that the flight review is also intended to offer pilots the opportunity to design a personal currency and proficiency program in consultation with a certificated flight instructor (CFI). In effect, the flight review is the aeronautical equivalent of a regular medical checkup and ongoing health improvement program. Like a physical exam, a flight review may have certain “standard” features (e.g., review of specific regulations and maneuvers). However, just as the physician should tailor the exam and follow-up to the individual’s characteristics and needs, the CFI should tailor both the flight review and any follow-up plan for training and proficiency to each pilot’s skill, experience, aircraft, and personal flying goals."
From AC 61-98D:
"Pilot Proficiency. Studies have shown that LOC usually occurs when pilots lack proficiency. Conditions exceeding personal skill limitations can present themselves at any time and can occur unexpectedly. In this event, the pilot should be able to avoid being startled, make appropriate decisions in a timely manner, and be able to exercise skills at a proficiency level he or she may not have maintained or attained since acquired during initial training. This makes personal currency programs and proficiency training essential."
and...
"For the reasons previously discussed, a flight instructor should not develop a flight review plan of action based on regulatory minimums. Instead, a flight instructor should develop a plan based on achieving a flight proficiency and knowledge level that meets regulatory requirements."
Also from Conducting an Effective Flight Review:
"Managing Expectations: You have probably seen it, or perhaps even experienced it yourself: pilot and CFI check the clock, spend exactly one hour reviewing 14 CFR Part 91 operating rules, and then head out for a quick pass through the basic maneuvers generally known as “airwork.” The pilot departs with a fresh flight review endorsement and, on the basis of the minimum two hours required in 14 CFR 61.56, can legally operate for the next two years. This kind of flight review may be adequate for some pilots, but for others – especially those who do not fly on a regular basis – it is not. To serve the aviation safety purpose for which it was intended, therefore, the flight review must be far more than an exercise in watching the clock and checking the box. AC 61-98A states that the flight review is “an instructional service designed to assess a pilot’s knowledge and skills.” The regulations are even more specific: 14 CFR 61.56 states that the person giving the flight review has the discretion to determine the maneuvers and procedures necessary for the pilot to demonstrate “safe exercise of the privileges of the pilot certificate.” It is thus a proficiency based exercise, and it is up to you, the instructional service provider, to determine how much time and what type of instruction is required to ensure that the pilot has the necessary knowledge and skills for safe operation."
A read-through the AC makes it pretty obvious that a thorough and properly administrated flight review is going to take more than an hour and it
should be more than just a simple review. And yes, that goes for me, too. I do checks in many models of light piston airplanes, teach in light piston airplanes, fly business jets for a living and for my own personal use I zip around in my little Twin Comanche. Guess what gets the least exercise of all? My single pilot IFR skills... I probably do less than 50 hours of that per year. As such a FR for me would be designed around my personal aircraft exercising those skills which I use least, attacking any SRM issues I've gotten via negative transfer from most of my IFR being in multi-crewmember operations in highly automated aircraft. Yes, I definitely need the workout and there's no way I can get it done in a couple of hours.
Food for thought, thanks for contributing to the conversation.