Requirements to enter Class A; B; C; D

nimdabew said:
Ehh, no. A flight review is a flight instructors chance to do flight instruction with a pilot once every two years. There are no standards that the student had to meet. There is even a section in the Flight Review Handbook, HERE , that is about managing expectations. There is no requirement for meeting pts stanrs, there is no requirement for covering ANY topic. There is just the minimum one hour of ground, one hour of flight training. There are suggestions for topics to cover in the flight review handbook.
Click to expand...
From Step 5:
If the pilot did not perform well enough for you to endorse him or her for satisfactory completion of the flight review, use the PTS as the objective standard to discuss areas needing improvement, as well as areas where the pilot performed well. Offer a practical course of action – ground training, flight training, or both – to help him or her get back up to standards. If possible, offer to schedule the next session before the pilot leaves the airport.
Click to expand...
I realize that the CFI has a lot of discretion about what should be covered, and that the review isn't a test, that the standard is a bit lower than that for, say, an IPC. I think that's why the guide you linked to doesn't come out and say explicitly that the purpose is to get you up to PTS standards, but it's certainly a fair thing for the CFI to require, and I think it's the strongly implied idea, reading between the lines.

Do you think a pilot without basic instrument skills is in a position to operate safely in all weather conditions where you wouldn't reasonably expect to wind up needing to be on the gauges? In my experience, weather happens, often beyond the ability of forecasters to predict. If you don't have the skill to recognize when it's happening and get out of it before it's too late, you are likely to end up as a statistic.
 
MAKG1 said:
That's a bit overstated.

See 14 CFR 61.56(a)(1).

There is wide latitude given to the instructor, but it's true that PTS is not required for a BFR. Safety, however, is required.

And the PTS is indeed fair game under 61.56, and it is very widely used. It's just not required for the instructor to use. The reg clearly places the choice in the instructor's lap, not the PIC's.

Several of the posters in this thread need to reread the reg, as Class A does not always require an instrument clearance. See 14 CFR 91.135(d). It does always require a clearance of some sort, except under 14 CFR 91.3(b) (e.g., a strong mountain wave encounter).
Click to expand...

There is no list of things to cover. There are suggested things to cover and outlines and guidelines, but there is no list.

azure said:
From Step 5:

I realize that the CFI has a lot of discretion about what should be covered, and that the review isn't a test, that the standard is a bit lower than that for, say, an IPC. I think that's why the guide you linked to doesn't come out and say explicitly that the purpose is to get you up to PTS standards, but it's certainly a fair thing for the CFI to require, and I think it's the strongly implied idea, reading between the lines.

Do you think a pilot without basic instrument skills is in a position to operate safely in all weather conditions where you wouldn't reasonably expect to wind up needing to be on the gauges? In my experience, weather happens, often beyond the ability of forecasters to predict. If you don't have the skill to recognize when it's happening and get out of it before it's too late, you are likely to end up as a statistic.
Click to expand...

I work as a flight instructor. Wide l attitude is given to flight instructors to cover things at their discretion to tailor the review, read: not test, and the only requirements are the hour of ground and hour of flight training.

That being siad, I am considered are novel instructor doing .2 of simulated instrument on my flight reviews at a minimum if not more because of the reasons listed above. Don't try and read between the lines with things when it comes to the government, only the printed word is required.
 
nimdabew said:
I work as a flight instructor. Wide l attitude is given to flight instructors to cover things at their discretion to tailor the review, read: not test, and the only requirements are the hour of ground and hour of flight training.

That being siad, I am considered are novel instructor doing .2 of simulated instrument on my flight reviews at a minimum if not more because of the reasons listed above. Don't try and read between the lines with things when it comes to the government, only the printed word is required.
Click to expand...
We seem to be in violent agreement about what is *required*. I'm only reading between the lines as to the INTENT. The way I read Step 1 and the "managing expectations" section, it seems pretty clear they acknowledge that the minimum requirements are legally sufficient but are NOT encouraging instructors to limit themselves to them. Again, they cite the PTS standards as an objective standard in Step 5 in a context that tells me that the instructor has full latitude to require that level of proficiency. It's not as if it's a very high bar to meet... :mad2:
 
MAKG1 said:
14 CFR 91.56(a)(1) is not a suggestion or a guideline. You must cover current Part 91 rules.
Click to expand...

You are correct. That is the only stipulation in the Flight review.

Read the actual text, it also includes maneuvers at the discretion of the flight instructor. When I give flight reviews to other working flight instructors, it is a lot different than a private pilot that has not flown for 3 years and only has 75 hours.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...e3dddc38b&mc=true&node=se14.2.61_156&rgn=div8

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (f) of this section, a flight review consists of a minimum of 1 hour of flight training and 1 hour of ground training. 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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top