Biennial Flight Reviews (BFR's)

[Ash767]

Hi All,

After a reasonable absence from flying I am looking at becoming current again. I am current medical wise and now only need to do a BFR.

I have flown most of my hours in a Piper Arrow, so I would expect that I would need to do the BFR on a Piper Arrow retractable!

What does a typical BFR usually consist of these days?

Also, if I need to do my BFR on an Arrow, does anyone know of a flight school at either YSBK/YSCN that has a Piper Arrow for hire?

Ash767:ok:

[Arm out the window]

I'd go for a biennial review rather than a biannual - that way you only have to do it once every two years rather than twice a year!

Sorry mate, had to give the smart arse answer. Actually, I think they're calling them Aeroplane Flight Reviews and Helicopter Flight reviews these days, still biennial but.

[Ash767]

All changed! Thanks for pointing that out!

[VH-XXX]

1.0 hours minimum flight time usually.

Most schools are doing a little pre-test these days with around 20 or so PPL exam type questions including a weight and balance sample and weather questions. You probably can't "fail" this test but would be given the opportunity to address with the instructor.

My last one as I hadn't been with an instructor for 2 (the last AFR) years focused on air law, such as my responsibilities as the PIC, weight and balance, accurate flight planning, weather considerations in detail, TEMPO's etc. If you are the PIC then YOU are responsible for the flight and all paperwork and when you crash the coroner looks at YOU to make sure you have the answers.... that kind of thing, some scare tactics.

As far as the flight goes, I flight planned a trip, we temporarily entered CTA, departed for a CTAF, half way there diverted to another CTAF, did a flapless landing then a flapped, headed towards some tiny town that is hard to find by demonstrating my map reading abilities on the fly, using landmarks, estimating distance over time... that kind of stuff. On return, simulated engine failure glide approach from over-head.

There is a mob at Moorabbin quoting 2.5 hours plus 1.5 hours theory prior with a cost of $400 flat PLUS aircraft hire!

[PA39]

I usually have a discussion with the pilot on how current he is with the latest procedures, and of course how long since he has been in the saddle. I always plan the review on a short navex. If he or she is not up speed on to how to obtain the latest wx, notams, wt/bal endurance etc etc then i show them how it is done, interpreted and understood. We then plan our trip. I watch and help if necessary. We then lodge a flight plan and depart on our trip. On the way out i observe his/her aircraft and fuel management and ensure they are relaxed, comfortable and enjoying the experience. On reaching our destination I will have a few c/l with a short field landing, missed approach and flapless. On departure i will simulate an EFATO and on the way home ask for a demonstration of a clean and dirty stall, and spiral dive recovery. IF they goof up....well we go through what they are lacking until they've got it right. In the circuit at home i may or may not simulate radio failure with possible smoke/cabin fire.

Always remember it is a REVIEW and NOT a test. :):)

Good luck mate....you'll be fine.

[glenb]

If you have been absent from flying for some time. Possibly more important is what you cover on the ground than in the air. It may be two years since youve been in an aeroplane admittedly. But its probably many years since someone went through serious weight and balance charts, how to really extract what you need out of naips and really think about the weather. Go through some tips for being mentally and physical prepared. Weather diversion tips, etc, etc, etc, etc. This is just the tip of the iceburg. The flying will come back at a good pace. Get the practical ground stuff.


Seek out a school with a couple of crusty old fellas that still love their flying, are meticulous, and have your safety as their interest. They have no need to be chasing hours. They probably get paid $200 a day. So a reasonable margin
above that is what you should expext to pay for a day of theory.

With regards to the flight thats impossible to say. That takes as long as it takes. The primary concern is to make sure that you are safe and feel comfortable. Go into it with a real open mind and with the right instructor it will be an absolute pleasure with a reasonable financial cost attached to it.

If you feel you are paying a lot, make sure you push to get a lot. Good luck with it. Cheers.

With regards as to what it will entail

Extensive weight and Balance exercises
Take off and landing performance.
Beginning and end of daylight.
Maintenance Releases
Pax seating.
Interpreting TAFS etc
All procedural changes since you last few.
A read of the OPS manual if you will be flying with that organisation.
Thorough going over of the POH.
Weather avoidance tips.
Intro to the excellent resources coming out CASA and Airservivces ETC ETC

A must read is on the CASA website.

Search for CAAPS and read the CAAP on Aeroplane Flight Reviews.

[QSK?]

Wow! I'm glad my annual IR renewal means that I don't have to do an AFR. Don't think I could pass an AFR anymore looking at all that review content (?)

[VH-XXX]

In the new-age world of a-rse covering, flying schools like to cover themselves and not have the finger (or bone) pointed at them when something goes wrong.

In my AFR the instructor was grilling me about how private flyers like me are the dangerous ones out there with no extra training and we only fly with an instructor once every 2 years and private guys are the ones that often want it done as cheaply and quickly as we can. He certainly has a point and is possibly right in many cases.

[girl with a stick]

And Schofield's at BK have an Arrow III and two Arrow IVs ...

Good luck with the review!

GWaS

[multime]

Mine tommorow, $165-00 plus aircraft. XXX think that other crowd are having a lend.? Sounds ridiculous. Still $165 for an hours work, pretty good $$.
M:ok:

[PA39]

VH-XXX

IMHO it is/was always about being safe. During my time as a CFI the candidate didn't have to be a "gun", sure they goofed up radio calls and were a little sloppy on the pedals, and no were not as polished as CPL/ATPL's but they were weekend warriors, and were entitled to be just that. As long as they were safe they were ok with me. Most are/were nervous and aprehensive and a little frightened of making a mistake for fear of failure, but its all about fixing deficiencies and making that rectification an enjoyable experience. I always started with a cup of coffee and a talk about our favourite topic.....aeroplanes and moved on from there. BTW, i only ever charged for aircraft time, never my time on the ground, i enjoy passing on my experience.....you can't buy experience.

I honestly believe the AFR should be a learning curve for those that need refreshing on all procedures be it wx, planning or basic flying skills.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Mine tommorow, $165-00 plus aircraft. XXX think that other crowd are having a lend.? Sounds ridiculous. Still $165 for an hours work, pretty good $$.
M

If you can get a "proper" review done in 1 hour, you either fly with the instructor regularly or he's an idiot for being willing to stick his name on your license for the next 2 years without doing anything at all.:=
Guarantee (and I've had it happen to me) if you stack it over the next two years, whoever stuck their name on the review is going to be one of the first people CASA and ATSB are going to be visiting to make sure that the reason you stuffed up was satisfactorily covered at the last review.

People, do not view an AFR as a chore.
It is an opportunity to bring your knowledge of the rules, regs and most importantly your flying abilities to a SAFE level. I wouldn't say I rant on about it, but XXX has the right impression in that how many PPLs honestly practise emergency procedures between reviews?
Remember, you can't just pull over to the side of the road and call the auto club when something goes wrong.
THIS S:mad:IT WILL KILL YOU IF YOU F:mad:CK IT UP!
That being said, IT IS NOT A TEST. You should treat this as an opportunity to learn something new, or at least a different way of doing something you already know.

Not drumming up business, but I will either charge for 3 hrs briefing (regardless of how long it takes, usually ~4 hrs) and whatever the dual rate on the company a/c is (about 1.5-2 hrs) or $300-350 if it's the customer's a/c. I find a frightening number of pilots whose last review consisted of 3 circuits. I have had no complaints about the amount of information provided and time that goes into keeping them current.

There is a CAAP on the topic and GAPAN also has some good information on the subject.

For PPL reviews, the Day VFR Flight Guide (available only online on the CASA site) is a bible.:ok:

[Horatio Leafblower]

Still $165 for an hours work, pretty good $$.

If a decent AFR takes less than 3 hours of an instructor's day, he hasn't done it properly.

This is often unpopular with those who think it should be a "rubber stamp" exercise but a couple of questions usually makes it clear that they need the review more than they need a rubber stamp.

[multime]

Chill out guys, i fly 1000 hours plus a year on average. Not an ab-initio pilot. With ppl,s yes i would grant, more time and briefings are required.
A chat over a coffee, few regs and rules, then a flight, it,s a tick in the box and a casa / insurance requirement. If instructors are too padantic it,ll only push prospective clients away. Food for thought.?
M

[Tankengine]

If anyone wants to charge me over 3 hrs for a BFR they can go jump!
The regs say at least one hour, if I meet the standard in one then that is what I pay for or go elsewhere!:ugh:
Back when I was a Grade 1 I did many BFR in one to two hours, some need much more but that is OK too.:ok:

[solowflyer]

You need what you need. If your doing 1000hrs like mutime then it is safe to say you are probably more current than most instructors however if uo have not flowen much latley get as much time as you need untill you feel like you are up to speed.

As for flying an arrow use the oppertunity to fly somthing different and get a new rating or endorsment at the same time such as a tail wheel rating, NVFR, Aerobatics or what ever tickels your fancy no need to do it in the type you already know.

[PA39]

"no need to do it in the type you already know".
.......Oh yes there is.....!! The CARs clearly state that a flight review must be conducted in the aircraft in which the pilot had flown the most flight time during the last ten flights undertaken. In most
circumstances this would probably represent the flying activities
that the pilot generally conducts.
However unique situations may occur where, for example, a pilot
may have completed one flight of 5.5 hours in one aircraft type and
5.0 hours on nine other flights in another type. The person
conducting the review may choose to use the latter aircraft for
convenience or aircraft availability. The decision about which
aircraft to use can be made by the flight instructor, ATO or FOI.

[werbil]

Well IMO - it is a money making exercise for flying schools.

Yesterday I asked our FIO about doing my BFR with him as he was on site and I had I had four sectors including water work, a controlled airspace entry and departure, two dead legs (able to perform emergency procedures on them) and one non revenue leg to complete. As I completed my last BFR with him, I was staggered when the the answer he relayed from his supervisor was that I would have to do it with a grade one instructor because flying schools were complaining that when FIOs did it would take work away from them.

So instead of doing it the type of aircraft I usually fly, I will end up doing it in a 172. Even if I could find a grade one instructor with access to an amphibious caravan and any semblance of currency in amphibians, the commercial hiring rate of the aircraft ($2600 per hour) plus an instructor is prohibitive. Even less likely is possibility of finding an instructor with access to an amphibious Beaver - the only other type of aircraft I have flown in the last four years, and in all probability the only two types that I will fly in the next two years as well.

Add to the fact that the nearest grade 1 fixed wing instructor is over a 150km drive away just adds insult to injury. Value for the BFR - a stamp in the log book which will almost keep me legal and a ground review of a procedures.

SHAME CASA SHAME

[andrewr]

CARs clearly state that a flight review must be conducted in the aircraft in which the pilot had flown the most flight time during the last ten flights undertaken

...unless the person [conducting the flight review] otherwise approves having regard to the circumstances of the case...

The CARs also clearly state that the person conducting the flight review can approve doing the review in a different aircraft type. It doesn't specify what the circumstances might be, but seeking additional training seems reasonable.

[parkbrake]

I have read through some of your posts and agree with some points.
One thing that does concern, is a comment made that someones wife who held a SPL some years ago, still receives the mag!! What a waste of money! I wonder how many "once were flyers" are in the same boat.

I also agree that there are a lot of ads. But then, lets be honest, how do you expect to get a free mag if its not subsidised by advertising? :ugh:

There are a lot of gimmicky things sent out by CASA and included in the magazine. Take the recent plastic card for example!! Waste of money!! Or the D&A calendar last year that had the month of May missing!!!

But then lets look at the content of the magazine itself. I think that its got some good articles in there. They may me recycled from the "crash comics" that you talk about But then for someone like me who has had a comparatively short aviation career, these stories are new to me and I personally find them useful. There are articles in there for all pilots at various stages in there careers, from the beginner to the airline captain. I love the IFR quiz. It keeps me thinking and pushes me to actually read my AIP, rather than just file the ammendments without bothering to look. And when it comes to an airline interview, I hope that my brain will be ready for the questions they may ask.

I can see where some of your frustrations come from. But from the perspective of someone else......is it really that bad??

[PA39]

Andrewr.....yes, it does say "unique situations" but IMHO its open to common sense. If a candidate has the last 10 in a C172 and would like to do his AFR in a Tomahawk in which he had no time, that was ok with me as long as he was prepared to study the AFM, POH and the operating procedures of the aircraft, tech specs of the engine and airframe etc etc, and be quizzed on their contents. Upper airwork and c/l would be part of the conversion training whilst completing his AFR. It may or may not take a little more time, however that would have been made clear to he/she from the outset. FWIW try doing AFR's on ag pilots (15000+ hrs with 3000at night) who get a nose bleed over 100'. These guys are the best pilots I've ever flown with but usually the worst on procedures...........horses for courses. Their flying skills kept them alive, but their procedure work had them stumped. Great flying with them!!

[185skywagon]

PA 39,
of course, these days the HOFO can do the Annual prof check for Part 137 ops on his own pilots. Difficult to get check for the checker though. Who guards the guards etc.
AFR, APC's, BFR's whatever you want to call them, are just hard to get done in the inland , full stop. DDAQ cannot handle anyone on short notice.
185.

[andrewr]

The CAAP says "unique situations" but the CAR just says "having regard to the circumstances of the case". All I'm arguing is that it is permissible to do it in a different aircraft (as in your example) if the reviewer approves.

I agree that doing it in a different type is likely to take longer (and probably be more difficult), but overall it may provide more value to the reviewee and may also give the reviewer a better idea of their abilities.

In many ways it makes more sense to do it in the most complex aircraft you expect to fly in the near future. If you have been flying a C152 but are about to purchase a Warrior, it would make sense to do the AFR in a Warrior, even though you could argue that you are entitled to do it in the 152.

[PA39]

Good to see DDAC so busy....gee they have been going a long time. Showing my age now, do they still have any Tomahawks?

To be honest I had more fun doing AFR's than IFR renewals. It was usually the weekend warrior who only flew 25hrs per yr at most, nervous as hell but usually safe and capable pilots who loved their flying, and mature enough (read... wise enough) to listen and learn.

[Ash767]

Thanks all, for your discussion and advice. I have been able to get a good idea of what is needed to be done re the BFR to become current again.

I now need to brush up on the reg's side of things!

Can't wait to get back into the air!

Ash767:ok:

[Unhinged]

The regs say at least one hour

Where ??

..

[Mike Litoris]

Does anyone know if there is a difference between a AFR for a CPL as opposed to a PPL?

My CPL medical was expired at the time of my AFR last month, this was noted in my logbook by the instructor conducting the AFR. I was advised that as soon as I get my class 1 current, then I can exercise the privileges of my CPL.

So, if there is no difference between a CPL vs PPL AFR, then why would it have to be noted in my logbook? Surely anyone who has gone through the study to get a CPL will be able to remember they must have a class 1 medical to use it....:ugh:

[bentleg]

Does anyone know if there is a difference between a AFR for a CPL as opposed to a PPL?

CAAP 5.81-1 (http://www.casa.gov.au/download/CAAPs/ops/5_81_1.pdf) at Para 16 "Difference between PPL and CPL/ATPL" suggests -


16.1 When conducting a flight review an assessor must be clear to
determine the different standards required of PPL and CPL or
ATPL holders.
16.2 A private pilot should demonstrate that control of the aircraft
or procedure is maintained at all times but if the successful
outcome is in doubt corrective action is taken promptly to recover
to safe flight.
16.3 A commercial or air transport pilot should demonstrate that
control of the aircraft or procedure is maintained at all times so that

the successful outcome is assured.



why would it have to be noted in my logbook?

The same CAAP recommends the examiner should sight -

applicant’s licence and medical certificate as evidence of identity and authorisation to pilot the aircraft.If you didn't have a current medical, I guess he could have decided to not sign you off, but he did the right thing and noted the review that you were OK to go once you had a current medical. Seems a reasonable approach to me.

[bentleg]

The regs say at least one hour

Where ??



Not a regulation but CAAP 5-81 recommends -


10.1 A flight review for a licence, which does not involve
navigation, should take a minimum of about two hours.......