CFI practical not counting as a BFR

[tjvpa28]

I see how my "the clock is reset because of a new issue date" is faulty, because there are times when a new issue date does not reset the clock. I was trying to make it simple, but yeah I guess that is more confusing. I think tgrayson said it best, it resets the clock because 61.56(d) says it does. And yeah this subject has been beat to death and the regs on it are very clear. But hey, I love to :deadhorse:

 

[Guy]

Also, there are a lot that can fall under:

"for a pilot certificate, rating, or operating privilege need not accomplish the flight review required by this section."

in 61.56(d) other than obtaining a new certificate or rating.

 

[Douglas]

Funny because a CFI renewal course will count towards the ground portion of a BFR.

Just to be more clear to people - any flight instructor who has renewed his flight instructor certificates through any means (by course or by sign-offs) within the preceding 24 months, does not need to do that hour of ground.

Interesting.

And train, thanks for that information. Nice to know I just need to do the flight portion here in another month.

Ten bucks says that the random flight instructor at a random flight school won't believe you that you don't need to do an hour of ground. 61.56 (D)

The longer I do this, the more I hate instructors.

 

[TwilightFan91]

Yes they are testing yor ability to act as a CFI, and one of the things you have to do as a CFI is demonstrate the required maneuvers. I've had a student bust a CFI ride because he straight up fubared a Lazy-8. If he can't do a lazy-8 on the checkride, then how does the faa know he can teach it? If you weren't being tested on your piloting skills then why even have a flight portion of the practical?

Do you think a commercial checkride should automatically count as an IPC because the applicant did one approach and maybe 0.1 hours under the hood?

 

[poser765]

Do you think a commercial checkride should automatically count as an IPC because the applicant did one approach and maybe 0.1 hours under the hood?

No. But then I have to ask (and I may not really know where you are going with this) do you really think someone should pass a CFI practical test if they can't properly execute turns around a point?

 

[mshunter]

I love when people argue "well it SHOULD reset the clock because of this and this and this..."

That just doesn't work. The regs don't change themselves just because you think they should.

It should be counted, because although it's not necessarily a pilot's certificate, you must have a commercial pilot certificate to fly as an instructor, and take the test, and you have to fly to commercial standards to pass. If you do slow flight in your CFI ride, and go to 130' off of target, do you think your going to pass?

No. But then I have to ask (and I may not really know where you are going with this) do you really think someone should pass a CFI practical test if they can't properly execute turns around a point?

Bingo! This is what I mean.

 

[Roger, Roger]

What you THINK doesn't matter. What matters is what the regs and the FAA interpretations say. At least until your opinion becomes legally binding, we all have to suck it up and deal with the way the regs are.

 

[mshunter]

What you THINK doesn't matter. What matters is what the regs and the FAA interpretations say. At least until your opinion becomes legally binding, we all have to suck it up and deal with the way the regs are.

I understand that my opinion doesn't matter. And I am not arguing that it does. But if you read the whole thread, you'll see that I have written a letter as to why it has to be preformed to the commercial pilot level, than I would like a better explanation of why is shouldn't count other than the Levy letter.

Basically what I tried to communicate in my letter was that I had found an error in either the regs, or the PTS. I was bored, and I'd like to see what the response will be.

BTW, one of the guys here at the local FSDO (an Inspector) doesn't agree with the interpretation of the regulation, and is also trying to get a CFI checkride to reset the clock as a FR.

 

[Roger, Roger]

BTW, one of the guys here at the local FSDO (an Inspector) doesn't agree with the interpretation of the regulation, and is also trying to get a CFI checkride to reset the clock as a FR.

Good. That would make sense (to me anyway). I'm not holding my breath though.

 

[tgrayson]

BTW, one of the guys here at the local FSDO (an Inspector) doesn't agree with the interpretation of the regulation, and is also trying to get a CFI checkride to reset the clock as a FR. .

Then he needs to get the regulation changed, not the interpretation. I would hate to see "pilot certificate" reinterpreted to include "flight instructor certificate". The Inspector will almost certainly fail no matter which he tries, since I doubt that a random inspector has any political influence whatsoever.

 

[mshunter]

Good. That would make sense (to me anyway). I'm not holding my breath though.

Yeah, neither am I, but it sure would be nice.

Then he needs to get the regulation changed, not the interpretation. I would hate to see "pilot certificate" reinterpreted to include "flight instructor certificate". The Inspector will almost certainly fail no matter which he tries, since I doubt that a random inspector has any political influence whatsoever.

Sounds to me like you need to work for the Feds instead of flight instructing. But it may just be a simple matter of adding some verbage.

 

[TwilightFan91]

No. But then I have to ask (and I may not really know where you are going with this) do you really think someone should pass a CFI practical test if they can't properly execute turns around a point?

A proper flight review should include a lot more than just TAPs.

It requires math skill to master physics. That doesn't mean a physics degree should automatically count as a math degree as well.

It boils down to this: A flight review should consist of 1 hours worth of review of piloting skills. A CFI checkride is not that. Yes some review of flight maneuvers occur, but not enough to justify a BFR.

A flight review that includes just a takeoff and a TAP and maybe a chandelle is not a complete flight review. Most CFI checkrides are not wall to wall maneuvers, which is what a flight review should be.

An IPC should be wall to wall instrument refresher maneuvers, not one approach and 0.2 of tracking a VOR under the hood. This is why commercial checkrides do not count as IPCs.

If you want to argue that a failed CFI checkride should nullify your last BFR because you've just proven that you can't maneuver an airplane properly anymore, then you may have a case.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

It requires math skill to master physics. That doesn't mean a physics degree should automatically count as a math degree as well.

...and, I'd bet a Physics prof could teach high school math classes just fine.

 

[poser765]

A proper flight review should include a lot more than just TAPs.

It requires math skill to master physics. That doesn't mean a physics degree should automatically count as a math degree as well.

It boils down to this: A flight review should consist of 1 hours worth of review of piloting skills. A CFI checkride is not that. Yes some review of flight maneuvers occur, but not enough to justify a BFR.

A flight review that includes just a takeoff and a TAP and maybe a chandelle is not a complete flight review. Most CFI checkrides are not wall to wall maneuvers, which is what a flight review should be.

An IPC should be wall to wall instrument refresher maneuvers, not one approach and 0.2 of tracking a VOR under the hood. This is why commercial checkrides do not count as IPCs.

If you want to argue that a failed CFI checkride should nullify your last BFR because you've just proven that you can't maneuver an airplane properly anymore, then you may have a case.

At this point i am not really sure what we are discussing anymore. I think my original point is that you will be responsible for demonstrating the maneuver on a CFI...and really at that stage of the game you should be able to do it. now weather that counts as a flight review or not I don't really care. The regs say no, and that's good enough for me. Really how hard is it to get your instructor to sign off for a flight review while training for the ride?

A flight review should not really always be wall to wall maneuvers. A flight review must include whatever you feel they pilot needs to demonstrate his proficiency and safety flying the plane. If that involves a cross country, or a few approaches that's fine. No laws broken, and you have met the requirements of 61.

An IPC should not be wall to wall instrument maneuvers either. It should be whatever is outlined in the PTS. At no point can one approach and .2 tracking satisfy the requirements for an IPC. Commercial checkrides don't count as an IPC because the regs don't allow for it. that's all. Just like the reqs don't allow for a CFI to be used as a flight review.

 

[Mike H]

Really how hard is it to get your instructor to sign off for a flight review while training for the ride?.

Unless you really need a FR to be legal for the checkide, why not do it after the checkride?

That way, you're a colleague, not a student.