What an excellent question, with well presented thoughts from both sides OldH.
I agree with you that both options are good ideas. As a grade 1, who has done many BFRs I think it is both.
1. It is a training flight where you bring up to date the pubs, maps, thinking and the skills, but:
2. You are also assessing this person for the continued use of their relevant licence.
I see the main difference as, if it were a test and you had to make an input as a testing officer well the applicant has failed. So it is really both, but with a changing emphasis. At the beginning its assisting and training with an eventual change of emphasis to the assessment that the licence holder is at the required standard to safely fly the aircraft.
As an overall assessment of the question, I think the current arrangement is correct.
It is sometimes hard enough to get people to book and do the BFR, if we call it a test that will get harder. At least at the moment every two years we can get a look at people and have a chance to bring them back up or improve the standard.
A test would certainly ensure a standard and most probably improve the overall standard. But I don't think it will be well received by the average PPL.
Another thing that would be of benifit is a test form (assessment form) which would ensre all aspects of the flight are covered and an assessment standard is achieved. I think the current method is a bit too much left to the individual and I would think an improvment in this are is needed.
60/40 with the BFR (not test)in the lead.
I hope to see some other points of view as well.
[ 27 February 2002: Message edited by: AMRAAM ]
[ 27 February 2002: Message edited by: AMRAAM ]</p>