I have a question ......

[planet47]

How long can a BFR remain overdue?

 

 

[Geoff_H]

I have had one overdue for 10 years, kept my medical up to date. Did an Aus medical in Houston TX during that period.

 

 

[facthunter]

As best I know, you have NO leeway. Once your BFR is due you don't fly till you have one. You can do some training with an Instructor that can count as one. I think it's the same with a medical. You must be current. Nev

 

 

[SSCBD]

PPL GA is to standard end of story, You will be expected to know the current airspace operations ect - RAA is the same as, to and acceptable standard of flying. However you will have to be complete with the current exams for example Human Factors which again is badly written and should be scrapped and changed to " Do You Have Common Sense".

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

If you are a RAA Certificate holder - the Operations Manual (Issue 7 Oct 2014) Section 2.07-3 Flight Review (p.51) only says that you must have completed a BFR "Within a period of 2 years immediately before the day of the proposed flight .." If you have not completed a BFR within 2 years, then you have not complied with the conditions Section 2.07-2 Privileges 3(a) (p.50) and cannot fly. The Ops manual is silent on how long a pilot can allow the BFR to lapse, so long as not flying. The new Ops manual may say something different. It hasn't been released as yet.

 

 

 

If you are a fixed wing PPL - the BFR is now known as AFR. If you have not completed one in the prescribed time, you cannot fly. CASA now require your AFR to be sent to them (as does RAA) as they are now trying to establish how many active pilots they have. Most inactive RAA pilots just don't renew their membership or request a change to Non-Flying. PPLs stay on the books, CASA is presently issuing new licence documentation as AFRs are received and I expect there will be thousands of inactive pilots when the exercise is finished. I have not found anything restricting the time an AFR can lapse - yet. However CASA's rules are slowly changing too.

 

 

[facthunter]

SSCBD, trouble is Commonsense isn't that common. Re the Human Factors.. Yes it wasn't done well, but that doesn't mean it isn't a good idea IN principle. I've had a fair bit to do with it over the years, and in my experience, many of those who don't think it's needed/useful at all. ( I'm not suggesting YOU) are the ones needing it the most. It's a bit of a shame where we ended up with it. You can build a $#!t Tractor but that doesn't mean tractors are not useful.. Nev

 

 

[planet47]

If the plane is a single seater what do you do about an overdue BFR?

 

 

[pylon500]

This aught to get some discussion;

 

 

My internet is barely working!

 

Probably best to go in the 'Bat, covers all bases.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

If the plane is a single seater what do you do about an overdue BFR?

RAAus permits a single seat BFR. The CFI discusses things with you and may observe you in the cct. You may have trouble finding a CFI to do this unless the CFI knows you and has observed you flying over some time. You can do the BFR in a two seat aircraft and get a type checked while doing it or you can do an endorsement (eg tailwheel) which will count as a BFR.

 

 

[facthunter]

In a single seater a BFR is the same whether it's overdue or not. The rule Pylon quotes allows a pilot to renew without an inflight (dual) session, which would of necessity have to be done in another aeroplane. I reckon it's a while since that was a widespread practice and now the default is to a more rigid interpretation of a BFR, more inline with a flight check with all sorts of complicated needs to renew various aspects of the " endorsements and ratings" on the certificate. There is even a most flown type consideration. This was designed to help the applicant whether he/she wants it or not. It should be capable of waiver by agreement. We gradually complicate things and rarely simplify them. It's a slow erosion of commonsense by beaurocratic process. During the time I was actively instructing I several times did a renewal in a plane of a type I hadn't previously flown. IF I'm not capable of that I don't deserve an instructor rating. After all legally, your certificate enables YOU, being any RAAus pilot, to fly any plane in the "category" you have covered on your certificate. We might be suspicious of a board loaded with instructors as being inclined to feather their own nests, but at least they have the personal experience of the type of flying we ALL do. Non flying management will always lack this knowledge, and it will count. Nev

 

 

[SSCBD]

SSCBD, trouble is Commonsense isn't that common. Re the Human Factors.. Yes it wasn't done well, but that doesn't mean it isn't a good idea IN principle. I've had a fair bit to do with it over the years, and in my experience, many of those who don't think it's needed/useful at all. ( I'm not suggesting YOU) are the ones needing it the most. It's a bit of a shame where we ended up with it. You can build a $#!t Tractor but that doesn't mean tractors are not useful.. Nev

Hi FT, I agree common sense is always a bonus.

 

My "Random Thoughts" Ramblings and Personal Problem and Opinion is:

 

I can fly GA all day long and night and don’t need to pass any Human Factors,

 

Did not have to do any exam on my GA BFR, yet I had to do the exam to fly RAA aircraft. Weird double standard is it not. Quote a CFI - It’s a mess the way its presented and tested.

 

Having said that I do agree for (non GA) RAA pilots that in my opinion should really have a higher standard from what I am seeing today. Specifically, some of the RAA aircraft have higher performance that GA these days.

 

Personally I also think spin training, unusual attitude recovery, under a hood for an hour or two, and “solid x-wind with turbulent gusting landings and takeoffs” should be included (hammered) in the training SYSTEM when getting a PAX / Cross country endorsement. (another non flying pax life matters and skills need to be high). These take offs and landings training need to be pushed in rough weather I believe. When you watch some of the club boys in gusting weather land. They are all over the place and I shake my head in disbelief in the lack of skill and control.

 

How to use Flaps – I am shocked to her discussions on the use of flaps and power.

 

Specifically, for low inertial training then the faster heaver 600k beasts. Using all stages of flaps which I was “stunned” that a member had never flown a metal beastie and he had not used flaps with the aircraft and had not trained on using them before taking a Pax with him and bent a 600kg beastie when he did for the first time as if came down hard!! Really no excuse and no common sense.

 

Training gaps would be so simple “to bring up to GA RPL on flying standards”.

 

I also saw the thread that said it takes “around or average 20 to 25 hours” for a RAA PC.

 

Back in the Lightwing / Thruster / Drifter in the AUF days was around 15 hours to have an average student pretty well up to speed from memory. And around 10 to 12 for first solo.

 

Yes, I know we are more anal now – and accept that. However to have a GA flying standard (PRL STANDARD not PPL ) with the 600kg RAA aircraft if not far away to get to.

 

Remember some GA training aircraft you started in you had to be spin endorsed before you went solo or could not fly unless you got that endorsement. EG - Tomahawk!

 

Yes it would cost a bit more to exercise the privilege to fly RAA with a PAX. Say an extra 3 to 5 hours (my guess) HOWEVER CASA would not really have a leg to stand on with pilot proficiency or standards with our flying the 600kg beasties. To get the PAX / cross country endorsement or in other words a non-flying human life at stake.

 

This should go down well with the RAA pushing safety and shows CASA we are serious and to get further freedoms like night flying etc.

 

 

[facthunter]

I'm pretty sure with most Airlines you will do Human Factors and CRM( Cockpit Resource Management.) I went to Canberra when the Human Factors was in it's infancy with the RAAus and did the course and was not happy with it in it's form at the time, for our pilots. I have had previous training in that area. I believe in the CONCEPT. It's proven to save lives at a relatively low cost. Why you don't have to do it for a PPL eludes me . We would have to put that one in the category of an anomaly. IF it was put to the CASA I have no idea how they would answer that one. Inconsistency is part of the way things are done, apparently . To do this properly has yet to happen. Interactive IT programmes should be utilised on an ongoing basis for all pilots, ideally.. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

When I learnt to fly airmanship was drummed into me and that is what human factors really is. It is just a pity that they had to change the name.

 

 

[facthunter]

I understand airmanship and it's importance but really Human Factors does go a bit beyond that.Nev

 

 

[DWF]

........ I can fly GA all day long and night and don’t need to pass any Human Factors, .....

This is not correct.

 

The CASA Day VFR syllabus for PPL includes a [theory] section titled "HUMAN PERFORMANCE AND LIMITATIONS".

 

It is not examined separately as there is only one PPL theory exam covering all the topics in the Day VFR syllabus.

 

 

 

DWF

 

 

[planet47]

A bit of thread drift occurring but WTH!

 

 

[SSCBD]

This is not correct.

The CASA Day VFR syllabus for PPL includes a [theory] section titled "HUMAN PERFORMANCE AND LIMITATIONS".

 

It is not examined separately as there is only one PPL theory exam covering all the topics in the Day VFR syllabus.

 

 

 

DWF

Hi DWF, To be clear when was it brought in? Not when I did the PPL many, many years ago. Also never had any requirement for an exam with all the BFR's I have completed.

 

 

[DWF]

G'day SSCBD

 

Human Performance and Limitations was added to the Day VFR syllabus in 1996.

 

AFIK there is no legislative requirement for a theory test with the BFR although I know of a number of GA and RAA flying schools that set a (usually open book) theory test as well.

 

There are minimum requirements but it is up to the CFI/School to decided exactly what is included and how the BFR is conducted.

 

A good school will tailor the BFR to the individual experience and requirements of the pilot.

 

Maybe your CFI thought you were full bottle on the theory .

 

DWF

 

 

[SSCBD]

G'day SSCBD

Human Performance and Limitations was added to the Day VFR syllabus in 1996.

 

AFIK there is no legislative requirement for a theory test with the BFR although I know of a number of GA and RAA flying schools that set a (usually open book) theory test as well.

 

There are minimum requirements but it is up to the CFI/School to decided exactly what is included and how the BFR is conducted.

 

A good school will tailor the BFR to the individual experience and requirements of the pilot.

 

Maybe your CFI thought you were full bottle on the theory .

 

DWF[/quote

 

Thanks DWF for the info - Just survived many years and many hours in aviation, and maybe pissed off a few CFI's.

[facthunter]

"Human Performance & Limitations " is only a component of a Comprehensive Human Factors Consideration.. I wouldn't expose myself to deciding who does and doesn't need it, for all the TEA in CHINA. CASA appears to have done just this. RAAus needs it But GA perhaps doesn't. Airlines do it, so there's something "special" about GA. Try explaining THAT in a Court or to a Coroner. Nev