Maximum Flight Review

The Commonwealth of Virginia requires motor vehicles to undergo annual safety inspections. An authorized mechanic checks the lights, horn, brakes, tires, steering, suspension, etc., to make sure they're within service limits (sound familiar?). In neighboring Maryland, on the other hand, just one safety inspection is required, when a vehicle is initially registered. After that, it's up to the owner to keep track of treadwear, brake pad thickness, headlight alignment and many other items receiving scrutiny in Virginia.

Certainly there are Maryland drivers who stay intimately familiar with their vehicles' condition and adhere rigorously to scheduled service intervals. But if we had to guess, we'd bet the percentages driven on bald tires with loose ball joints and bum taillights aren't identical in both jurisdictions. It's human nature, or at least many humans' nature, to let things slide until forced to bring them up to code.

Which is at least part of the reasoning behind the flight review required in FAR 61.65: If the FAA can't assure our skills always meet the checkride standards, at least it can see that we regain nominal proficiency once every other year. So the question is, since you're stuck with it anyway, would you rather just go through the motions? Or should you take the opportunity to get an objective assessment of your airmanship, address the weak spots, brush up on techniques you haven't practiced recently and maybe learn something new? Might the chance to become a better pilot than you were 24 months ago even be worth spending a few extra bucks?

In case you've forgotten—people do!—a flight review isn't a checkride. You can't fail it, or pass it for that matter (though passing a checkride also satisfies the flight-review requirement in the vast majority of cases). If the instructor concludes you've shown the level of knowledge and proficiency appropriate for your certificate, she'll endorse your logbook with some variation on "Flight review completed." If not, the time gets logged as dual received, and you'll be invited to schedule a follow-up in the near future.

And while FAR 61.56 establishes a legal minimum for the amount of training required (see the sidebar on the opposite page), there's no upper bound. The standard is performance- rather than time-based; you keep at it until your CFI's satisfied. If you're rusty or have developed especially bad habits, expect to require some extra time— particularly if you're returning to flight after a long layoff. A rough rule of thumb is to budget an extra hour of both ground and flight time for every year you've been away. That said, a strategic approach to preparation and planning can help keep the time requirements under control while maximizing the returns in increased safety, improved airmanship and, yes, fun.

The surest way to wrap up the ground time in the mandatory hour is to hit the books beforehand. If it's been a while since you looked at details like weather minimums and communication requirements in airspace classes you don't frequent, relearning those at home will be less expensive than having them explained to you at fifty-some dollars an hour.

If you're not commercially rated, make sure you understand what the FAA considers "compensation or hire;" if you are, we'd suggest reviewing the definition of "common carriage." Rules on minimum altitudes and obstacle clearances, equipment requirements and the right-of-way hierarchy are all fair game. The sharper your understanding of the limits and obligations of your pilot-in-command authority, the sooner you'll be able to move from parsing regs to something more interesting...like aerodynamics, aircraft systems and procedures, and flight-planning considerations, all of which you can expect to come up. (And if you're instrument-rated, reviewing lost-comm procedures certainly couldn't hurt.)

Similar considerations apply to the flight portion. Rather than passively waiting to see what the instructor throws at you, you'll save time (and impress your CFI) by bringing a list of things you want to work on. Think about what makes you uncomfortable when it probably shouldn't—Crosswinds? Ground reference maneuvers? Stalls?—and what you haven't practiced recently. If you've done anything that scared yourself or your passengers, think about that, too (especially if one of those screaming in terror was another pilot).

Whether you own or rent, there's absolutely nothing wrong with making an assessment flight ahead of time to size up your strengths and weaknesses. Better yet, identify trouble spots by booking an advance session with an instructor. There's no such thing as too much dual in your logbook.

If you habitually fly with the same CFI, this might be the time to enlist a fresh set of eyes. Someone who's not familiar with your history and quirks is less likely to overlook or forgive tendencies to fly ever-widening patterns or touch down flat, and breaking out of familiar patterns of communication can shed new light on old shortcomings.

Whether you're looking for a new perspective or don't have a regular instructor, think about which qualifications you value. While it's natural to crave the insights and imperturbability of the grizzled veteran who introduced Wilbur to Orville, a freshly minted CFI is likely to be especially attentive, not to mention current on publications and regs, and sharp from recent drilling on all the required maneuvers.

More important is to choose someone with reasonable makeand-model experience in the aircraft you'll be flying, especially if it has unusual characteristics. While a Cherokee specialist probably won't get into too much trouble in a Skyhawk, a flight review in an early-model Bellanca Viking is better conducted by someone familiar with the intricacies of its fuel system. Experience with takeoffs, landings, go-arounds and stall behavior is particularly important if you're the aircraft owner. Pairing up with an instructor short on time in type risks dangerous ambiguity. If the CFI assumes the owner knows his airplane while the pilot trusts the instructor to keep them out of trouble, catastrophic excursions from distant corners of the flight envelope can result.

You're the customer (remember?), so in addition to whatever the instructor requires, you can impose some requirements of your own. If you want to spend time polishing your lazy eights, fine—but the short list of maneuvers we recommend covering every time rate high in both practical value and accident potential:

Crosswind and short-field takeoffs and landings—If you can handle these, operations involving neither shouldn't present a problem. Soft-field work is optional for pilots who only fly off-pavement.

Traffic patterns and non-towered pattern entries—"Legal" isn't always "safe," and vice versa.

Stall recognition and avoidance—If the CFI wants to see a full break, okay, but the bigger safety benefit is in reducing the angle of attack before that happens. Acquaintance with accelerated and potential cross-controlled stalls (at altitude) is especially valuable.

Emergency procedures—Rapid descents, simulated engine-outs and off-field approaches, electrical failures, backup gear extensions in retracts, and single-engine approaches and landings in twins.

Hood work—If you're not instrument-rated, current and sharp, insist on brushing up your attitude instrument flying until you can hold altitudes and headings well enough to follow ATC vectors out of IMC. While we'd prefer you be able to do this by hand, using the autopilot (if any) is also appropriate—after all, that's probably how you'd cope with an actual emergency.

Helicopter pilots should substitute normal, steep and shallow approaches for the takeoffs and landings, put in time practicing autorotations and low-rpm recoveries, and approach any simulated hydraulic failures with considerable caution. Exploration of the limits of tail rotor effectiveness should only be attempted at altitudes that provide the option of lowering collective and flying out of any resulting spin, say, 700 feet or higher. Hood work isn't helpful in ships without gyroscopic attitude instruments.

It doesn't take instructors long to size up new clients. If your skills are sharp enough to knock off the must-do list in 20 minutes (see the sidebar on the opposite page), there's no shortage of ways to help your instructor fill the remaining 40.

Has it been a while since you've practiced chandelles and steep spirals or done turns around a point? Have at it. You might take the opportunity to explore edges of the flight envelope you don't poke around in on your own. Or maybe now's the time to refine your spot landings in preparation for Oshkosh. If you'd rather be more practical, of course, combine your flight review with an instrument proficiency check. Completing your instructor's list and precision, non-precision, partial-panel and circling approaches, plus holds and unusual attitude recoveries constitutes a fulfilling hour (at least) in the air.

We're repeatedly surprised by the number of people who get involved in something as intrinsically expensive as aviation, then try to pinch pennies. Whether it's running the tanks dry trying to reach fuel that's 20 cents cheaper (see "Cheapgasitis," May 2014), deferring maintenance until accumulated damage makes repair costs ruinous or balking at paying for an extra hour or two of instructional time, pilots can amplify long-term risks by trying to shave immediate expenses.

How much did it cost to get your certificate? How much gas does the cost of an hour of instructor's time actually buy?

Airline and military pilots refresh their skills not just regularly, but frequently. If you don't fly for a living and aren't working on a new certificate or rating, though, your flight review may be all the formal training you do. It's up to you to make sure you're not flying around on the equivalent of bald tires and worn-out ball joints.

Unless you fly a Mitsubishi MU-2B or a piston-engine Robinson helicopter—aircraft for which special pilot certification rules exist (Part 91, Subpart N for the MU2, and SFAR 73, an appendix to Part 61, for the Robinson pistons)—what constitutes a legal flight review is pretty much up to the instructor conducting it. FAR 61.56 specifies only that it:

A couple of details strike the eye. Most important is that two hours is the minimum in which things can legally be concluded, not some threshold guaranteeing a sign-off. If you haven't maintained your skills and knowledge at checkride standards, well, join the club...and recognize that you might need more time to regain the sharpness you've previously demonstrated.

Next, note that it's certificate-specific. If you're a commercial pilot or ATP, scratching out private pilot proficiency won't satisfy your instructor and shouldn't satisfy you. You've earned the right to be held to higher standards.

Seasoned CFIs can spot trouble from a safe distance, including indications that a flight review will be contentious, frightening or both. If the ideal client is someone you taught to fly and who takes the "license to learn" idea seriously, a couple of other profiles can represent the opposite extreme.

At the top of the list are "airplane owners you've never seen before who want to wrap up everything in an hour." Some even balk at paying the instructor for the ground time that's required by regulation. Next come pilots who don't fly frequently or take any dual between reviews—but still only book a two-hour block, expecting to get signed off at the end.

Once in the air, it doesn't take long to see whose head's in the game. The best pilots challenge the instructor to find useful ways to fill 60 minutes; far more wander between 30 and 60 degrees of bank with 400-foot altitude excursions attempting steep turns. Pilots who bank 45 degrees in the pattern usually aren't well coordinated, either. Their power-on stalls have a way of degenerating into spins. Which are you?

If you own or fly the same airplane all the time, you can get bored, unchallenged. When it comes time for your flight review, you may or may not need "flight instruction" per se, but why not get some anyway and put it to good use? The flight review's often-overlooked "secret" is that obtaining a new rating resets the 24-month clock. And certificated pilots often have lots of options for new ratings.

The best rating you can add, of course, is the instrument. Getting it can require a substantial commitment in time and money, but it'll be worth every penny if you use it. Other ratings—like for a seaplane, sailplane or multi-engine airplane, which don't require a written exam—aren't exactly foolproof or free, but can offer major benefits.

For one, you just may like it, and find a new way to enjoy flying with friends and family. And if you have commercial privileges already, adding a seaplane or multi-engine rating means you might be able to earn back your investment. Either way, you'll definitely learn something, meet some new people and knock out the flight review. The point is the flight review doesn't have to mean two hours of drudgery; it can be several hours of fun and learning something new, something you can brag about to your tiedown neighbor, if that's important to you. — J.B.

David Jack Kenny still owns the 180-hp Piper Arrow he flew on his commercial checkride in 2004. He also holds commercial privileges for helicopters and was previously the statistician for AOPA's Air Safety Institute.

This article originally appeared in the May 2018 issue ofAviation Safetymagazine.

For more great content like this,subscribe toAviation Safety!