Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Dunnunda, Godzone and the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Should a BFR be a "Flight Test"?

Wikiposts
Search
Dunnunda, Godzone and the Pacific An independent family of forums covering all aspects of the Australian/NZ aviation scene.

Should a BFR be a "Flight Test"?

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 1st Mar 2002, 11:29
  #21 (permalink)  
nzer
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

For what it's worth, a review of Pt 61 in NZ is recommending that the BFR (which we have had for a few years now) be replaced with what was in the old regime a "renewal" - it will be TEST, but training to proficiency will be allowable within the context of the Test - improved syllabi specification - basically a repeat of the issue syllabus for the licence held, OR completion of an AOC holder's recurrent training package will meet the reqmt - improved paperwork/monitoring of the "renewal" system. looks as though the move away from the pure "BFR" concept will have general acceptance.
 
Old 1st Mar 2002, 12:04
  #22 (permalink)  

I don't want to be the best pilot in the world - Just the oldest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

Helmet Fire,

Thanks for that insight. Better go and have a closer look at my log. Given that my last renewal was with an ATO and the appropriate "sticky lable" inserted in the front, I am continuing to presume that this negates the requirement for BFR.

regards. .IJ
Islander Jock is offline  
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.