MEI Question

[Flyboy6420]

Hey A¢e,
That might be your interpertation, but that is also wrong. I get ramp checked every other weekend at airshows by the local FSDO's as a performer. These different inspectors have examined my flight log, and aircraft logs with no discrepancies.
Please explain why geographically seperate FAA offices have found this to be in compliance?

And I may be a "hero" to you, but I like to think of myself as an ordinary aviator. I appreciate the compliment though.

No you may go back to your pathetic instructors lounge and knaw on your popcicle.

Clearly you are ordinary, as demonstrated by your ordinary mistake. In reality, the error in failing to log the training time associated with your flight review comes down to your instructor. He or she should have made this entry.

While the instructor is responsible, I speculate that the root cause of this is you. Likely you have a reputation at your local airport, and there are only so many instructors to go around. I would bet that when your name shows up on the schedule your local CFI's flip coins, draw straws, spin the wheel of fate, whatever to see who has to deal with you this time. You likely are paired with the least experienced instructor, for the aforementioned reasons. Because this instructor is inexperienced, and you are a jerk, they are intimidated by you. They mistake your hubris for actual knowledge. So much so that they let you talk them into not making a simple entry in your record that they know is required.

Back when I started instructing, I might have let you do the same to me. Whatever would get you out the door, off my schedule, and me on my way home to have that beer I would have so richly deserved for that day of work.

 

[erj-145mech]

So, you're like 98% of the current instructors who are either too lazy or too stupid to write a lesson plan for a menial BFR, right?

Just like the others, you're ballast in the right seat, collecting for an hours ride for a log endorsement, to build the hours to go to the airlines or corporate aviation. The aren't many instructors out there that actually teach beyond the minimum requirements.

The professional CFI is a thing of the past.

 

[Flyboy6420]

The logbook entry for your flight review is still not correct, you should have it corrected by the instructor if you still can.

I refer you to the requirements of 61.51 for the logging of training time.

Fix it, don't fix it...totally up to you.

 

[Jrparne]

98% of the current instructors who are either too lazy or too stupid to write a lesson plan for a menial BFR.

NICE, real nice. Alot of people on this board are instructors, have been instructors, or will be an instructor. Some will do it for the hours, some will do it for the pleasure. You make think 98% of instructors are to lazy to care about bfr's, and you may have come across a few bad ones. But, I think you just offended many of the people on this board with that comment. A lot of us care about the way we teach, many of us with bfr's are trying to show you new things. Why do we show students new things?

Because nobody knows it all....

So next time that young instructor with so fewer hours than you tells you something new, just say thanks. It might not save your life, but at least it might get you thinking a different way.


And if you know he/she doesnt know something, help him out, because a lot of us here have gotten to great places from knowledge other people have given us.

Loose the chip, enjoy the instruction.

 

[Tired Soul]

What if they arbitrarily told me that I have to spend 20 hours performing an annual on your C-172

You probably should you have a sign-off list to follow
according to the manufacturers maintenance manual.
Unless you're one of those guys signing off on a 2 hr annual. Are you one of those A&P's saying.." I know this plane, been doing the annual for years and it only flew 5 hrs in the last year.."
"I am intimately familiar with this airplane so I can pencil whip this annual"
You one of those " Ace of the base" A&P's?

Probably not, but that is what you are accusing us of doing.
You're not a CFI my friend, you are a private pilot.
Leave our business to us, we'll leave yours to you.
You've been screwed over by a "sightseeing" BFR.
You should have learned something. Find another CFI next time who is up to the challenge and knows your plane better then you do.
And yes it is PIC and dual received.

You cap an attitude with me on a BFR and it's over, end of story, go somewhere's else.

 

[lawfly]

If a BFR is flight training and flight training requires appropriate category and class ratings on the CFI certificate, then the answer is "Yes". Another poster quoted that language from the reg and then inexplicably reached "No" as a conclusion.
Must be MEI. The pilot should take the review in a single if the CFI is not an MEI.
As for the bad attitude twin owner, yeah, I know of a BFR given to a twin owner who didn't think he should have to do much or review much for the review. Was before the one hour ground requirement and even before the one hour flight requirement. The review lasted about half an hour. About two months later, he was dead---crashed the twin. I am not saying his attitude toward the BFR was related to his fate, but it's an unfortunate coincidence, at least. The poster who commented on soft field, etc., as being excessive has something of a point: The review should consider
the type of flying usually engaged in by the pilot. In a way, an owner is easier to evaluate in that respect than someone who rents different types and/or doesn't fly much. Owners often fly to the same destinations repeatedly, same approaches, etc. In fact, the fellow I wrote about flew to a particular destination pretty often and perished during a night IFR circling approach there.

 

[340drvr]

If a BFR is flight training and flight training requires appropriate category and class ratings on the CFI certificate, then the answer is "Yes". Another poster quoted that language from the reg and then inexplicably reached "No" as a conclusion.
Must be MEI.

OK, the original question must've been edited, it was previously stated the other way. Read some of the other replies, too. (Don't know why I can't edit my own first post now, oh well.)

 

[igneousy2]

Although it is not necessary under the regulations I do not think if you are a CFI (no MEI) it is a good idea to give a BFR to a student that has an ME rating - I wouldn't.

61.56 states...

...

(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.

...

What this means to me is that you are opening up yourself to a tremendous ammount of liability if you sign someone off for a BFR without reviewing ME and if rated - instrument procedures.

When you sign off someone for a BFR you are stating that they are safe for all of the ratings that they have...not just the airplane that you gave them the review in. If I am giving a review to a ME Commercial rated pilot with an instrument rating then they can count on the fact that they will be doing a single-engine ILS in a ME airplane at a minimum.

I have met instructors who had students kill themselves (crash) and were hauled in by the FAA and had to provide there training records years after they ever gave the student any instruction. Pencil whipping BFR's is not a good idea and could cost you your career/lots of money.

If you don't like that - find another instructor.

Later

 

[avbug]

I've been flying this same airplane since 1989, have over 700 hours in it. There is nothing that I have not seen in it.

When is the last time that you intentionally spun a multi engine airplane? Unusual attitudes, not an issue in a 337.

Tell me, why would it take any longer to do a flight review, every flight regieme can be covered? Single engine, short, soft field, full stall series to include accellerated stalls. Anything longer simply pads the instructors wallet. Plain and simple.

This is a forum for regulation, and generally I try to confine my replies to the topic of legality. However, the above quoted statement is one of the most foolish and arrogant statements I've read on this site in some time.

Some years ago I flew for a company that owned three ag airplanes. The owners son had nearly fifteen thousand hours in them. One might suppose he knew them intimately enough to have an attitude like yours. The three airplanes were identical; he normally flew the blue one. One particular day, that airplane needed some maintenance, and he took the yellow airplane. I watched him take extra time in the runup area, extra time with the airplane, and then do a careful takeoff and conservative departure to the field to go spray. He'd flown each of the three airplanes for many thousands of hours.

I asked his father, an older and VERY experienced pilot, why he took so long in an airplane with which he was so obviouly familiar.

"Because he usually flies the blue airlplane." Came the reply. He went on to explain that each airplane has it's personality. The airplanes always operated close to the edge of their performance envelope with steep turns right to the stall buffet at 75', every sixty seconds throughout the day. Standard turns at each end of the field. This pilot recognized the value of reminding himself that even with his level of experience, he couldn't afford to think he knew it all, and he conservatively, carefully took the time to respect the subtle differences in seemingly identical aircraft.

You might take a lesson from him. His father surived a war, a number of combat missions, and over half a century of low level flying, to die peacefully in his sleep one night. The pilot in question suffered a heart attack years later...with an accident free history behind him. You may think you've got it all pegged...but your experience level doesn't now, and never will hold a candle to his. Or mine...and I take the same approach he did, in everything I fly.

Personally, I look forward to recurrent training. A year ago I went back to school for an airplane in which I already had a thousand hours. Certainly I could have taken the attitude that the facility had nothing to teach me, but I didn't. I decided I was going to wring every last bit of training out of them that I could. I spent time after class with instructors, took my meals and my evenings reviewing procedures, and then took my classmates through the procedures trainer for hours and hours so that we could each get everything possible from our time in school.

I received the same volumes for the same aircraft I have before...but I took copious quantities of notes, and filled my books with high-lighting, and packed the margin with notes and comments. I learned, and learned, and learned. We made it to the simulator, and every single session I found myself humbled as I learned more about the airplane, more about myself, more about my tendencies, bad habits, and limitations. I became discouraged, became elated, and no matter what the mood or the requirements at any given moment, I thoroughly enjoyed every moment of that training...as I always do.

You may feel you've got it pegged, you're dialed into your airplane after a whole seven hundred hours in it. I've had airplanes that I knew so intimately I wore them, and flew them into places you can't imagine, to do things that might give you nightmares. I never took them for granted, not then, not now...and an hour is hardly enough for a flight review in any airplane.

If you're not getting enough out of your flight review, look to yourself. Don't blame the instructor.

A few years ago, a company sent me to a recurrent training for their aircraft. When I showed up on the final evening to take the checkride, I was told all I need was a line flight; a takeoff, a landing, and something enroute. I pointed out that the employer was paying a lot of money for that training, and asked what we could do about it. We ended up spending a four hour session running through every procedure for the airplane, plus situational scenarios...wake turbulence, windshear, etc. The instructor was more than willing to provide the training, I was more than willing to take it. If you're not getting the training you want, then you need to look to yourself. The training relationship is a two way street.

Earlier this year I had a checkride for an operator, given in a small piston twin. I hadn't been in one for some time. I found the facility that the operator would be using, and arranged to spend a couple of hours with an instructor in the same type airplane, getting a review and some training. It cost me several hundred dollars. The young man who sat in the right seat had a fraction of the flight experience I do, much less certification than I do, and had been flying for a small percentage of the years I have. The money I spent on that flight, and on that instructor, was well worth the cost, well worth the time...and yes, I did learn something. I couldn't have compressed our session into an hour, and would have gone longer but for the schedule of the airplane and the instructor. The money I paid was some of the cheapest I've spent in a long time...how can I call it cost when I got so much in return?

I strongly suggest you take a long hard look at your own attitude and humble up, before it kills you one day. I say that in all sincerity upon a lifetime of experience...perishible experience which needs constant attention and recurrent training. None of us is above it...not even you.

 

[CloudyIFR]

Avbug,

Excellent response!

You should also have different instructors during IPC's, as one will shed light in different areas than others.

I fly the same 10 airplanes for the last 6 years, see my signature line, these same airplanes change as the years go by, just like humans do.

Curtis
Montana