Renewal of a flight instructor certificate counts for the ground portion of a flight review (no such thing as a BFR), as indicated in 14 CFR 61.56(f).
(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.
A flight instructor certificate is not a pilot certificate. While 61.56(d) allows that passing a proficiency check for a pilot certificate, rating, or operating privilege will cover the requirement for a flight review, a flight instructor certificate is not a pilot certificate. Therefore, certificate renewal (without a flight test) does not meet the full requirements of a flight review. However...
If a pilot undertakes to add a certificate or rating, passing the practical test for that certificate or rating constitutes meeting the requirements of a flight review under 61.56(d). The same applies for an operating privilege. If piloting skills are evaluated during a renewal flight, reinstatement flight, or practical test for an initial or add-on rating, then it may be credited as a flight review.
For clarification, the logbook should be endorsed as having completed a 61.56 flight review.
That's certainly prudent but not required. I ran into a situation at the FBO where I rent a 172. I've not had a flight review or BFR in over eight years. I've had ratings rides and Part 135/121 proficiency checks but they've never touched my logbook. The manager wanted written proof that I was current but airlines apparently don't give out copies of our Part 121 authorization certificates. So I just printed out a record myself stating the date of my last proficiency check and that satisfied the manager.
Avbug is correct, and everyone else is wrong. (TWA dude is asnwering a different question, you are correct, a 121 PC doesn't need an logbook endorsement to count as a flight review, but the question is about CFI checkrides, not air carrier PCs)
OK everyone, listen up, because this is important, and it could cause a LOT of grief for you.
A flight instructor checkride does NOT count as a 61.56 flight review.
61.56 says in part that you don't need to have accomplished a flight review if you have "...passed a pilot proficiency check....."
A flight instructor certificate is *not* a pilot certificate, and the Flight Instructor Practical Test is *not* a Pilot proficiency check.
OK, OK, I hear what you are saying...."your piloting proficiency is tested on a CFI checkride...." Yep, doesn't matter, it is not a
pilot proficiency check, it is an instructor proficiency check, nor is it a check for a "pilot certificate, rating or operating privelige" (91.56 (f)) it is a check for *instructor* priveliges.
I've included below a legal ruling from the Office of Regional Counsel, Eastern Region. It is hard to follow, and parts of the discussion seem a bit disjointed, but, it IS an official legal opinion from the FAA's Legal Counsel.
Here's the relevant part of the opinion:
"Accordingly, a CFI practical test will not per se fulfill the flight review requirement."
Per se is a legal term which means "by itself"
so there you have it, straight from the FAA's lawyers, a CFI checkride won't by itself fulfil the requirements for a 61.56 flght review.
At least for the Eastern region, the only opinions which would rule over this, would be from the Office of Chief Counsel, an NTSB Administrative Law Judge, or a real judge in a real court. I don't know what standig this has in other FAA regions, but, I think that it would be extremely unwise to assume that your region would consider things differently.
What you think is reasonable, what your instructor told you, what your DE told you, what your FSDO told you is all quite irrelevant. An enforcement proceeding against your certificates is based on the FAA's Legal Counsel's interpretation of a regulation. The only opportunity you have to reverse this is on appeal to an NTSB judge *after* your certificates have been suspended.
I'm not sure what standing a legal ruling from the Eastern Region has in other regions. I would encourage anyone who is interested (and I bet there are some who are very interested at this point) to write to your Office of Regional COunsel, or better still, write to the Office of Chief Counsel and request an opinion.
This is in response to your letter dated August 25, 2001, wherein you ask whether an airman can satisfy the flight review requirement under 14 C.F.R. (Federal
Aviation Regulation [FAR]) 61.56 by passing a practical test to become a certified flight instructor (CFI), as required by FAR 61.183.
Under FAR 61.56(c)(1), one may not act as pilot-in-command of an aircraft unless, within the preceding 24 calendar months, he has "accomplished a flight review
given in an aircraft for which that pilot is rated by an authorized instructor." Under FAR 61.56(c)(2), the airman must receive a logbook endorsement from the
authorized instructor certifying that he has satisfactorily completed the review. Under FAR 61.56(a), a flight review must include: (1) a review of the current general
operating and flight rules of Part 91; 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.
Under FAR 61.56(d), however, the flight review requirement of FAR 61.56(c)(1) does not apply to one who has "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."
The issue you raise is whether passing a practical test to become a CFI can fall within the exception to the flight review requirement that is provided by FAR
61.56(d). Under FAR 183(h), to be eligible for a flight instructor certificate or rating, the applicant must "pass the required practical test that is appropriate to the
flight instructor rating sought." The FAA Practical Test Standards (PTS) for the airplane flight instructor examiner (sic) requires that the examiner ensure that the flight
instructor applicant has the "ability to perform the procedures and maneuvers included in the standards to at least the commercial pilot skill level."
Thus, the instructor has broad discretion in conducting a flight review. A CFI practical test encompasses the demonstration of various basic maneuvers that an
instructor is likely to cover in a flight review. Incorporating a flight review into the CFI practical test could be accomplished, therefore, with little, if any difficulty.
Accordingly, a CFI practical test will not per se fulfill the flight review requirement. A practical test for a CFI rating under FAR 61.183, taken within 24 months of a
prior flight review, can readily meet the flight review requirement of FAR 61.56(d), however, if the examiner is satisfied that a flight review endorsement can be
given. To ensure that the CFI applicant gets credit for successful completion of the flight review, however, he or she should ask the examiner to conduct the CFI oral
and practical test so as to satisfy the flight review requirements as well, and to make a logbook endorsement for the flight review upon completion of the examination.
If you have additional inquiries, please contact Zachary M. Berman of this office at (718) 553-3258.
This sounds like lawyer overkill to me. Nearly every practical test I took covered more than what the average flight review covers. Don't forget, regs interpretation are in the eyes of the beholder. Having said all that, I'd find it hard to believe if the average examiner would not be willing to sign off his/her practical as a flight review, wearing either his/her examiner hat or his/her CFI hat.
Yeah, everyone fly safe and CYA while you're at it.
>>>>>Nearly every practical test I took covered more than what the average flight review covers.
Yeah, certainly it does, but the regulation requires a "pilot proficiency check" and the CFI Practical Test is not a "pilot proficiency check"
Don't like it? nope, neither do I. Think it should count? Yep, so do I, but until the words of the regulation are changed, those are the words of the regulation.
>>>>Don't forget, regs interpretation are in the eyes of the beholder.
Yep that's true, but to paraphrase George Orwell, some beholders are more equal than others. In this case it's the FAA's legal counsel who is the beholder, and thy're going to be-holding your pilot certificte, tearing it into little pieces.
BTW here's the addresses for the Office of CHief Counsel and the Regional Counsels if anyone wants to request a clarification. Personally, I'd write directly the Chief Counsel, an opposing opinion from a differnt Regional Counsel would only muddy the issue and the CHief Counsel's offic should be more likely to know of relevant case law. I think if they get a couplpe of requests from different people, they might be more motivated to respond.
Office of the Chief Counsel
Federal Aviation Administration
800 Independence Ave. S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20591
Attention: Office of the Chief Counsel
Offices of Regional Counsel
FAA Alaskan Region
222 W. 7th Avenue, #14
Anchorage, AK 99513-7587
ATTN: Regional Counsel, AAL-7
FAA CENTRAL REGION
DOT Regional Office Building
901 Locust St
Kansas City, MO 64106-2641
Office of Asst. Chief Counsel (816)329-3760
Northwest Mountain Region
Office of the Regional Counsel, ANM-7
Federal Aviation Administration
Northwest Mountain Region
1601 Lind Ave. SW
Renton, WA 98055-4056
Office of the Regional Counsel ASO-7
FAA Southern Region
P.O. Box 20636
Atlanta, Georgia 30320
Office of the Regional Counsel
Federal Aviation Administration
Southwest Region Headquarters
Fort Worth, Texas 76193-0007
Great Lakes Region
Office of the Regional Counsel, AGL-7
Great Lakes Regional Office
2300 E. Devon Avenue
Des Plaines, IL 60018
I still feel this is lawyer overkill. But, I am a pragmatist. Therefore, how 'bout this idea? When your instructor signs you off for your CFI practical, ask him/her to also sign off a flight review for you. In training for your certificate, you will have more than fulfilled the 1 hour of ground time and 1 hour of flight as required by 14 CFR 61.56 (a). You won't have to ask the examiner to sign off the flight review for you.
i'm very sure that CFI checkride do count towards the flight review. just to clarify the matter i've written a mail to the local FSDO as sometimes things don't seem the way they are. FAR 61.56(d) clearly states that a person who has passed a pilot proficiency check conducted by an examiner for a pilot certificate ,rating or operating privilege need not accomplish the flght review requird by the section. CFI check ride is a profeciency check whether u like it or not. FAR 61.181 states that for flight instructor certificate yo have to be profecient in the area's specified and you have to pass the practical test FAR 61.183(h) for the rating sought. For passing a practical test you have to be proficient as you have to demonstrate standerds upto commercial level. hope this could help otherwise i'll be back when i get a reply from the FSDO.
Check that its three greens.....
it appears that you haven't read the previous posts, or if you did, you must not have understood them. Let me explain it again:
You can rabbit on all you want to about how your proficiency is checked in a flight instructor prractical test. Yes, it is. The thing that you don't seem to understand is that it doesn't matter. What matters is that 61.56 (d) specifies a *pilot* proficiency check, and a CFI Practical test is not a pilot proficiency check. Take your instructor certificate out of your pocket and look at it. Notice that it on the line where it says "...exercise the priveliges of" it says *flight instructor* not *pilot*.
>>>>CFI check ride is a profeciency check whether u like it or not.
umm, yeah, it may be a proficiency check, but it's not a *pilot* proficiency check, it's a *flight instructor* proficiency check. and it's not a matter of what I do or don't like. Personally I *don't* like it, but that's irrelevant.
You can argue all you like, but here's the deal: The opinion posted is an official legal opinion from the FAA's Legal Counsel. Are you really foolish enough to believe that what you think rules over an official legal ruling by FAA legal counsel? You need to understand that FAA Legal Counsel's opinion is the opinion which is going to be used in an FAA enforcement against you.
You also need to understand that what you get from your FSDO is completely meaningless. The FSDO is not authorized to issue legal opinions. If you do get a different opinion from your FSDO, it has absolutely no official standing, and is completely meaningless in the face of an official legal opinion from FAA Legal Counsel.
There are only 3 ways you can prevail in this issue.
1) Show some evidence that what I have posted above is not a legal opinion from FAA Legal Counsel. (It's unlikely, but possible, that this is a fabrication, and I'm unwittingly passing it on)
2) Show a superior legal opinon which reverses this opinion. The only place a superior opinion can come from is the FAA's Office of Chief Counsel.
3) Show a court decision which reverses this opinion, either from an NTSB court, or a real court.
Please, don't come back with something from your FSDO. Whatever they say has no official standing and is a waste of time to even post. If you want an opinion that matters, write to the Office of Chief Counsel. I have posted the address above.
You need to understand that as far as the FAA is concerned, this is the official interpretation of 61.56. Unless you have 1, 2, or 3, you're wasting your time arguing how you think things *should* be. This is the way things are, deal with it.
All four of the FAA people that I know will vouch for the fact that the only FAA opinion that carries regulatory force is that of the Chief Counsel. I can get four differing opinions from these men, and all or none may be "correct".
Luckily, lack of a BFR puts me in no jeopardy, since I regularly participate in the WINGS program, which DOES substitute for the review. In fact, I participate every year. I recommend it.
A squared, you said in your previous post that a CFI checkride does not count as a BFR because,
"What matters is that 61.56 (d) specifies a *pilot* proficiency check, and a CFI Practical test is not a pilot proficiency check. Take your instructor certificate out of your pocket and look at it. Notice that it on the line where it says "...exercise the priveliges of" it says *flight instructor* not *pilot*. "
If you continue to read 61.56(d), it says "passed a pilot proficiency check conducted by an examiner, an approved pilot check airmen, or a U.S. Armed Force for a pilot certificate, rating or operating privilege, need not accomplish the flight review required by this section."
As indicated on the flight Instructor certificate, one is "qualified to exercise the privileges of Flight Instructor."
Just because a flight instructor certificate is not a pilot certificate, that doesn't mean that a flight instructor is not a pilot
A flight instructor is obviously a pilot so getting a flight Instructor certificate means you have passed a pilot proficiency check for an "operating privilege."
you cannot sign off your own flight review, according to 14 CFR 61.195(i):
(i) Prohibition against self-endorsements. A flight instructor shall not make any self-endorsement for a certificate, rating, flight review,authorization, operating privilege, practical test, or knowledge test that is required by this part. (emphasis added)
You're talking apples and oranges, and eating neither one.
A flight instructor is required to hold a pilot certificate. However, a flight instructor certificate is NOT a pilot certificate. That is why a flight instructor must hold ratings and privileges on a PILOT certificate in addition to the appropriate ratings on a flight instructor certificate.
A flight instructor is not paid as a pilot, but as an instructor. A flight instructor may conduct flight instruction without a current medical, flight review, or flight currency or appropriate recency of experience, so long as he or she is not acting as pilot in command.
A pilot must have a current medical certificate, flight review, appropriate recency of experience, etc, prior to acting as PIC, SIC, or in any other capacity as a required crewmember of an aircraft. Clearly the restrictions and privileges and requirements of a flight instructor certificate differ bountifully from that of a pilot certificate.
The privileges accorded a pilot are dependent upon his or her ability to remain current, including any proficiency checks required. A flight instructor has no such requirement, and may exercise the privileges of the flight instructor certificate without respect to recency of experience or flight review. A flight instructor may renew indefinitely without ever setting foot or butt cheek in a cockpit. Not so for the holder of a pilot certificate. There is a clear difference.
A flight instructor certificate is not a pilot certificate. A Squared has already provided a legal interpretation, which is binding in civil, criminal, and administrative court and in appeal before the Board, and is fully defensible as the true interpretation representing the Administrator of the issue in question. Personal viewpoints and even opinions proffered at the FSDO level are not relevant, nor constructive toward the issue.
Passing a flight instructor practical test does not necessarily test one as a pilot. Most certainly piloting skills are always assessed, however it is NOT a pilot proficiency check, but a check of one's abilities to instruct, to recognize errors, and to correct them. A flight instructor may instruct without being pilot in command, and has no requirement to be pilot in command except for specific cases. The assumption that a flight instructor practical test is a pilot proficiency exam is in error.
Specifically, look to 61.56(f), which states: "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."
61.56(f) refers us to 61.197. This section covers renewal of flight instructor certificates. It speaks to all the methods of renewal, including flight checks. Therefore all methods of renewal are encompassed in the reference provided in 61.56(f), including flight checks. Unless specifically signed off as a flight review, the renewal of a flight instructor covers the hour of ground required by 61.56, but not necessarily the flight portion.
It is very reasonable to assume that different maneuvers and requirments may easily be required during the flight portion of a flight review, and the flight portion of a flight instructor practical test; especially a renewal.
Detailed discussion of the merits and weaknesses of the subject is interesting, but pointless. The legal aspects of the subject have already been given, and tearing them apart for reexamination will not change them. The legal interpretation is binding, and one need look no farther than that for the answer.
The following passage from the legal interpretation provided by A Squared is the telling one:
"Accordingly, a CFI practical test will not per se fulfill the flight review requirement. A practical test for a CFI rating under FAR 61.183, taken within 24 months of a prior flight review, can readily meet the flight review requirement of FAR 61.56(d), however, if the examiner is satisfied that a flight review endorsement can be given. To ensure that the CFI applicant gets credit for successful completion of the flight review, however, he or she should ask the examiner to conduct the CFI oral
and practical test so as to satisfy the flight review requirements as well, and to make a logbook endorsement for the flight review upon completion of the examination. "
The FAA has spoken with authority. What more is required?
I am pasting this excerpt from the FAA FAQ 61, 141 website.
QUESTION: The particular question is whether a flight instructor who passes a flight instructor practical test (for initial issuance or a CFI rating addition or for a reinstatement) is or is not exempt from needing a §61.56 Flight Review for the next two years, since the reg. specifically says PILOT proficiency check.” §6l.56 d - allows this exemption for a person who has"... passed a PILOT proficiency check.." not needing to accomplish a flight review for the next 2 years.
ANSWER: Ref. §61.56(d); If the examiner also evaluates the applicant’s piloting skills then YES, “. . . a flight instructor practical test (for initial issuance or a CFI rating addition or for a reinstatement) . . .” would meet the requirements of a §61.56 Flight Review. However, to make sure the applicant gets credit for successful completion of the Flight Review, the examiner should record that the §61.56 Flight Review was satisfactorily completed in the applicant’s logbook.
(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.
Have you not understood ANYTHING that's been posted?
How many times do you need to be told?
It is an official legal opinion from FAA legal counsel.
There are 3 ways that can be overruled. I have listed them in a post above.
As far the Part 61 FAQ page....ummm so what? Did you happen to notice the bit printed at the top of the FAQ page?
It says: Disclaimer Statement: The answers provided to the questions in this website are not legal interpretations. Only the FAA's Office of Chief Counsel and Regional Chief Counsel can provide legal interpretations.
I honestly don't know why you keep on with this. Do you need Jane Garvey to personally come over to your house and tell you that an instructor checkride doesn't count as a flight review?
I'm sorry for my tone, but I am just astonished that someone can post an official legal interpretation from FAA legal Counsel, yet people keep arguing that it's wrong.
Maybe we should direct the discussion to how to CYA if you find that you've been mistakenly depending on a CFI check for a flight review. Any ideas anyone? What's the best way to deal with this. Falsify your logbook? Pray it never comes up?
A squared: Ms Alkalay is certainly entitled to her opinion, but it is an opinion, not a legal interpretation of the regulation in question. Her opinion is binding only upon those FAA employees within the Eastern Region who might have reason to enforce the regulation in question. It has not been endorsed by the FAA Chief Counsel, so has no application outside the Eastern Region. In practical terms, the weight of her opinion is much the same as the weight applied to the FAA position during an enforcement proceeding. If appealed to the NTSB, her opinion has no more credence than a countering opinion from a defense attorney. Personally, I find her interpretation very interesting and look forward to seeing it tested in court. I suspect it will be overturned much the same as many of her other legal positions have been overturned in the past. The Eastern Region has a well-deserved reputation for over-reaching their authority, and their findings have routinely been overturned by NTSB law judges.