BFR and a qualified CFI

[15A]

Well, it's time for my BFR.

The CFI I had been flying with in the past is unavailable. So I scurry to the phone and start calling the local Flight Schools to set up an appointment to use my plane for the review. Everything is fine 'til I mention it's a 172 converted to a tail dragger. (I swear I could hear one guys knees knocking as he explained he wasn't comfortable using a tailwheel airplane ). OK, fine.

I found a CFI that wants me to take him for a ride first, and maybe let him do 3 t.o's and lndg's so he could endorse tail wheel pilots. (He says he had flown taildraggers 10 years ago, but might be a little rusty) My question is, after he flys with me and is able to complete 3 take-offs and landings, is he now qualified to give me my BFR? (of course, I told him this for that... )

Remarks???

[Robert Eilers]

The question to ask the CFI in question is whether or not he has a tailwheel endorsement. If he has no tailwheel endorsement don't use him - unless he can substantiate that he was "grandfathered" in.

[N2625U]

http://www.airnav.com/airport/7B3
http://www.hamptonairfield.com/
If this is not too far for you to go (about 40 miles north of BOS) they have good instructors for tailwheel birds. After the ride you can take a walk for some fried clams or have a hamburger there at the field.

[GAHorn]

... (He says he had flown taildraggers 10 years ago, but might be a little rusty) My question is, after he flys with me and is able to complete 3 take-offs and landings, is he now qualified to give me my BFR? (of course, I told him this for that... )

Remarks???

FAR 61.31 (i) Additional training required for operating tailwheel airplanes. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of a tailwheel airplane unless that person has received and logged flight training from an authorized instructor in a tailwheel airplane and received an endorsement in the person's logbook from an authorized instructor who found the person proficient in the operation of a tailwheel airplane. The flight training must include at least the following maneuvers and procedures:

(i) Normal and crosswind takeoffs and landings;

(ii) Wheel landings (unless the manufacturer has recommended against such landings); and

(iii) Go-around procedures.

(2) The training and endorsement required by paragraph (i)(1) of this section is not required if the person logged pilot-in-command time in a tailwheel airplane before April 15, 1991.


61.56 Flight review.
top
(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.

(b) Glider pilots may substitute a minimum of three instructional flights in a glider, each of which includes a flight to traffic pattern altitude, in lieu of the 1 hour of flight training required in paragraph (a) of this section.

(c) Except as provided in paragraphs (d), (e), and (g) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of an aircraft unless, since the beginning of the 24th calendar month before the month in which that pilot acts as pilot in command, that person has—

(1) Accomplished a flight review given in an aircraft for which that pilot is rated by an authorized instructor and

(2) A logbook endorsed from an authorized instructor who gave the review certifying that the person has satisfactorily completed the review.

(d) A person who has, within the period specified in paragraph (c) of this section, passed a pilot proficiency check conducted by an examiner, an approved pilot check airman, or a U.S. Armed Force, for a pilot certificate, rating, or operating privilege need not accomplish the flight review required by this section.

(e) A person who has, within the period specified in paragraph (c) of this section, satisfactorily accomplished one or more phases of an FAA-sponsored pilot proficiency award program need not accomplish the flight review required by this section.

(f) A person who holds a current flight instructor certificate who has, within the period specified in paragraph (c) of this section, satisfactorily completed a renewal of a flight instructor certificate under the provisions in §61.197 need not accomplish the 1 hour of ground training specified in paragraph (a) of this section.

(g) A student pilot need not accomplish the flight review required by this section provided the student pilot is undergoing training for a certificate and has a current solo flight endorsement as required under §61.87 of this part.

(h) The requirements of this section may be accomplished in combination with the requirements of §61.57 and other applicable recent experience requirements at the discretion of the authorized instructor conducting the flight review.

(i) A flight simulator or flight training device may be used to meet the flight review requirements of this section subject to the following conditions:

(1) The flight simulator or flight training device must be used in accordance with an approved course conducted by a training center certificated under part 142 of this chapter.

(2) Unless the flight review is undertaken in a flight simulator that is approved for landings, the applicant must meet the takeoff and landing requirements of §61.57(a) or §61.57(b) of this part.

[doug8082a]

Hey Joe,

You may have already tried them, but here are a couple suggestions...

Alpha One light School @ PYM rents a Citabria and has t/w instructors - Jon Greenlaw in particular is one I'd recommend.
Ed Urbanowski over @ Spencer might be a possibility (he instructs in a Cub)
I know Danielson (5B3) rents a Decathalon so they might be able to help
Hampton, NH as George mentioned, could be an option as well.

[15A]

Thanks George.

But in layman terms, can I hire a CFI with a tail wheel endorsement to conduct a BFR in my plane? It's a converted 172, so would he have to have the 25 hour minimum in type to be qualified?

It's my understanding that:

The aircraft category and class used for the flight review must appear on the fliight instructor's certificate.
The flight instructor is not required to have 5 hours of PIC flight time in each make and model of aircraft in which the BFR is being conducted in.

These statements are taken from the ASA-OEG-BFR3 Guide to the Biennial Flight Review.

I'm not looking for a "pencil-whipped" BFR. I would like to use the plane I always fly for the review.

Thanks again for the input.

[15A]

Thanks Doug!

Yes, Jon Greenlaw is the guy to go to! I've been in contact with him, but of course, the really good guys are always booked solid. He's working with me now to open a slot to help me out. And he's close to home!

[doug8082a]

Great! I hope you can work something out. Jon is a school teacher so he might have availability during the afternoons...

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

Thanks George.

But in layman terms, can I hire a CFI with a tail wheel endorsement to conduct a BFR in my plane? It's a converted 172, so would he have to have the 25 hour minimum in type to be qualified?

When you speak of 25 hours I think you may be speaking of a clause in your open pilot clause of your insurance policy. As insurance goes I'm sure there is also verbiage that says that the coverage is in effect while named pilots are receiving training.

It's my understanding that:

The aircraft category and class used for the flight review must appear on the flight instructor's certificate.
The flight instructor is not required to have 5 hours of PIC flight time in each make and model of aircraft in which the BFR is being conducted in.

These statements are taken from the ASA-OEG-BFR3 Guide to the Biennial Flight Review.

I'm not looking for a "pencil-whipped" BFR. I would like to use the plane I always fly for the review.

Thanks again for the input.

Here is what FAR 61.193 says:

Sec. 61.193 - Flight instructor privileges.
A person who holds a flight instructor certificate is authorized within the limitations of that person's flight instructor certificate and ratings to give training and endorsements that are required for, and relate to:
(a) A student pilot certificate;
(b) A pilot certificate;
(c) A flight instructor certificate;
(d) A ground instructor certificate;
(e) An aircraft rating;
(f) An instrument rating;
(g) A flight review, operating privilege, or recency of experience requirement of this part;
(h) A practical test; and
(i) A knowledge test.

I note that at the beginning it says a flight instructor is authorized within the limitations of that person's flight instructors certificate and ratings. It does not say authorized within the limitations of the instructors endorsements. Authorization to operate a conventional gear aircraft is an endorsement. Unless you believe the word ratings in the first paragraph covers endorsements as well.

From FAR 1.1: Rating means a statement that, as a part of a certificate, sets forth special conditions, privileges, or limitations.

I seem to remember having this discussion before but do not recall the conclusion. I seem to recall that George might have gotten the opinion of his local FDSO guys. I'm sure we will hear more.

BTW
Note also that is 91.163 does not say the instructor needs to be current in the aircraft either. Nor does the instructor need to have a current medical. Of course there has to be PIC for the flight so if the Instructor can not be the PIC then the person receiving the annual review must be qualified to act as PIC.

[15A]

Thanks Bruce!

It's all becoming clear as mud!

I had read that last paragraph in the review book. The instructor does not need to be current in that aircraft nor hold a current medical. As long as I am authorized as PIC, the instructor in question seems to 'fit-the-bill'.
Altho, the school that is supplying him claims it's a saftey issue. (But he still wants to go for a ride anyhow... )

[GAHorn]

(My comments made in this color are subsequently shown to be incorrect. Keep reading.)

It's my understanding that the CFI administering the Flight Review must be qualified in the category and class of aircraft to administer the review, to include tailwheel qualifications. (The CFI is valid only when accompanied by his pilot certificate.) If the applicant is not CURRENTLY qualified in the category/class then the CFI must be CURRENT, including a valid medical certificate.

(If you are not yet expired, and if you are otherwise qualified to act as PIC, then the CFI is not required to be current nor must he possess a valid medical, but he must otherwise have all the qualifications necessary to be PIC in that aircraft, including tailwheel endorsement and/or grandfathered due to PIC experience in tailwheel airplanes prior to April 15, 1991.)

So even if the only experience he has is logged PIC resulting in a groundloop before April 15, 1991...the FAA considers him qualified to perform the flight review. The question is: Do you?

[15A]

Yes,

I'm still qualified to exercise my privilege as single engine land PIC with a valid BFR, certified airworthy aircraft, current 3rd class medical, insured airplane, mode C, 3/4 tanks 100LL, 7 quts. 20W-50, clean glass, parked in a hanger ready to go!

[GAHorn]

Perhaps I should have asked, "Regardless of the FAA's view of the CFI described..... do YOU consider such a CFI to be qualified?" (I wasn't referring to your own qualifications, Joe.)

[15A]

George,

My head's been rattled for a couple of days, so I may not even walk straight!

But, I just got off the phone with the Flight School and was informed that this particular instructor has been certified for over 30 years, towed gliders with Citabrias, owned Bonanazas, instructs twins, just never flew a side by side taildragger before.
I'm taking him for a ride Friday afternoon to give him a little feel for my plane. If he's satisfied, it'll count towards my BFR!

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

George I believe we pretty much said the same thing except that you believe the CFI must have a tail wheel endorsement. I would think the same but the FARs don't clearly say that in my mind.

Many times what seems to make sense doesn't always hold true with the FARs. Some times you have to look at the intent. Notice you only have to get one flight review in a category and class so if I get a flight review in a tricycle gear single engine land airplane I don't have to get another in a conventional gear single engine land airplane or a retractable gear single engine land airplane. A flight review in my Cub counts to allow me to fly my friends Lancair 4P assuming I have the correct endorsements yet being able to fly one has no bearing on whether I could fly the other.

Remember 61.56(a)(2) says "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". No where does it say takeoffs and landings must be evaluated and so why would the CFI have to be endorsed to do so.

Ever wonder why you can't fail a flight review? I think because the intent of 61.56 is that pilots get some kind of recurrent training or at least a review of basic competency by someone other than a oneself. And that the review not be so detailed that the applicant has to show proficiency in every maneuver for every aircraft for which they are rated and endorsed and intend to exercise those privileges. That is why there is no specific criteria that applicants are judged against.

Are you sure we haven't had this discussion before?

OK now if you are looking for training (which might include a flight review) and specifically takeoff and landing training, then by all means it sure makes sense to go with someone who is at least endorsed to do so.