Sport Pilot Talk

3Dreaming wrote:I didn't see any mention of the 1 hour of required ground training.

All CFIs should know about it. Spelled out in FAR 61.56(a).

drseti wrote:

3Dreaming wrote:I didn't see any mention of the 1 hour of required ground training.

All CFIs should know about it. Spelled out in FAR 61.56(a).

Yes, or course they do. I'm sure the OP had a proper flight review even though he didn't choose to list out ever detail for our approval. Geez.

TimTaylor wrote: I hadn't used VOR in about 10 years.

Around here your lucky to pick ours up below 6000'. I've tried and failed (including on the checkride) to dial it in multiple times. The DPE could not get it dialed in either so we just moved on, some of them around here (sawmill is an example) are being fased out...

Here is the AEX Vortac remarks section:
VOR UNUSBL 035-065 BLO 2000 FT; 066-094 BYD 35 NM BLO 3000 FT; 185-200 BYD 35 NM BLO 3000 FT; 201-214 BYD 35 NM BLO 2000 FT; 215-260 BLO 2000 FT; 261-285 BYD 35 NM BLO 2000 FT; 357-034 BYD 35 NM BLO 3000 FT.

I mean it might as well say: out of service, it sucks and there is no money to fix it...

Why spend money on an obsolete system? Those altitudes are fine for IFR airways and who makes VOR approaches anymore? Most VFR traffic uses GPS now.

TimTaylor wrote:Why spend money on an obsolete system?

I installed SL-30s with OBSs in both of my flight school LSAs. They support VOR, LOC, and GS. It's true that Sport Pilots don't shoot instrument approaches, and most VFR navigation is now conducted using GPS. But my planes were set up to allow training all the way up through SP, PP, CP, and Instrument ratings, plus instrument proficiency checks. For a personal VFR aircraft, I agree it would not have been a sensible investment.

Actually, we were talking about the federal government spending money to upgrade the VOR's. I think at this point, they are shutting many down, not upgrading them. By all means, an instrument training aircraft should be fully equipped.

TimTaylor wrote:Actually, we were talking about the federal government spending money to upgrade the VOR's.

Obviously I missed your point. Thanks for clarifying.

As a data point, in 11 years and about 530 hours, I have never once missed having VOR capability in my plane.

Other than Prof. Shuch’s specific training scenario, I see little need for it in a Light Sport, unless equipping it for IFR.

my current panel can simulate VORs, both real ones an imagined.

drseti wrote:

3Dreaming wrote:I didn't see any mention of the 1 hour of required ground training.

All CFIs should know about it. Spelled out in FAR 61.56(a).

Yet I was talking with a student who someone else started and I am finishing up, who witnessed the instructor he was flying with sign off several BFR's with only a one hour or less flight. This came up when I ask him about what he would need to do for a flight review in 2 years.

I am curious , what is being reviewed at the ground portion of a typical BFF - is it basically like a mini oral check-ride ?

Usually, a discussion of Part 91 and airspace. When I was doing flight reviews for my Mooney friend, it was an hour drive to the airport. So, during the drive, I would have the FAR/AIM open and ask him questions. If he didn't remember, I would tell him or read the answer from the FAR/AIM. The objective of the flight review was to make sure he was still a safe pilot, update him on any changes, and refresh his memory on things he may have forgotten.

On a flight review 6 years ago, the CFI barely let me talk. The whole hour of oral was him basically doing ground school.

By he way, it's no longer called a BFR.

Warmi wrote:I am curious , what is being reviewed at the ground portion of a typical BFF - is it basically like a mini oral check-ride ?

Unlike the check ride a flight review is not pass fail. The regulations call for at least 1 hour of ground training and 1 hour of flight training.

The ground training should cover any changes to the regulation or normal operating practices that have happened since the pilots last review. For example covering changes for operations at an airport in class G airspace would be a good choice since there was a recent change and new AC. At our airport I have changed where we do out run ups because of runway incursions. This is something else I would cover.

For the flight I do like Eddie. I plan it around the pilots experience level and operations. If they are a commercial pilot I might review chandelles and lazy eights. For a private pilot I might do more hood time with techniques that could save their life if they got caught in that situation. I will also often ask if there is anything they want to work on or feel deficient in.

I use the PTS or ACS as appropriate for a completion standard. I will sign off after the required training if their performance level is within the standards, or we do more training to bring it within the standards.

Thanks - makes sense.

Will have my first one in about one year...

Well at least from a checkride standpoint you need to know how to use everything in the aircraft, so in Paul's case, if it's in there, the student needs to know how to use it. It's not a bad skill to have in your pocket, but at least for us low and slow folks who fly on nice vfr days in locations we are familiar with it might be somewhat redundant.