BFR & the Difference Between Current and Competent

[RitterKreuz]

my latest gripe. Enjoy. Maybe worth the read, maybe not. Critisize me please

Sometimes, when a private pilot candidate successfully finishes flight training he breathes a well deserved sigh of relief, gets a pat on the back and then he hangs up his headset thinking

[beaky]

Can't really argue with any point you're making, even though I'm one of the lazy bums you're complaining about  ;D.
But...
It may be hard to understand how anybody who really wants to fly can use time or money as an excuse for a long hiatus, but in my case, part of it was waiting until I knew I could continue to fly at least a couple of times a month, as time (my work schedule is wildly erratic and unpredictable) and money (due to travel and other expenses associated with work, cash flow is also hard for me to plan with) are at a very high premium for me. Maybe I should've just scraped up the time and money every 90 days for that half-hour, but I just didn't want to do it that way.
Started my first BFR in 5 years with a ground session yesterday (see my thread in "Real Aviation"); was so uncertain on some things (didn't study well enough- I'll admit a certain laziness there; thought I still knew most of that stuff), we're doing another ground session before we fly. Some of the questions I "failed" were way-out, left-field things, but he discovered a general unfamiliarity with the FAR/AIM, and really dug in there to reveal some haziness on the more practical stuff. Even if I'd stayed "current" with 3 landings per 90 days, without studying, I'd have found myself in the same situation.
I'm certain the flight portion will go better than the oral, which goes to show that there's a whole lot more to currency/competence than merely fulfilling the 3-landings requirement every 90 days... gotta keep studying!
You might notice that I'm not exactly arguing with you here...
 I don't blame anyone but myself, and I am glad this CFI is not going easy on me.
As for your 3 questions:
At the beginning, I asked myself those questions, and the answer to each was "yes". #s 1 and 2 worked out OK; I scrimped and worked and let other things slide to make that happen... but #3 is not so easy for all of us, although in the beginning, I felt sure I could do it.
 
 

[RitterKreuz]

hahaha good reply. your one of THOSE guys eh?  ::)

JK.

I love it on a BFR when we pull out a sectional and a plotter and E6B circular computer... even for some guy that has been flying regularly and he looks at you as if you just handed him a piece of a flying saucer panel for him to decode alien text from.

brings me to another point of pilots over- reliance on GPS. I jokingly call GPS the "Good Pilot Simulator" because my 3 year old niece could follow a straight line on a screen better than most! but i have had 2 GPS units fail on me. one was a hand held and one was a penel mount. (not on the same flight... imagine the odds)

Dont get me wrong I love GPS and it makes things convienient but when the thing takes a crap on you its nice just to reach down cool hand luke style and produce a sectional chart and resort to plan B without so much as a hiccup.

I have seen ONE student in 4 years get their license and continue to navigate by pilotage and dead reconing with the chart in their lap with times and distances clearly marked to check points mixed with a GPS as a backup. Its double redundant that way! everyone else hits "direct to" and follows the line into oblivion. without so much as a thought as to what might be charted between them and their destination! possibly what got the washington DC fly by guy in so much heat.

[beefhole]

Aye I'm TERRIBLE with the E6B and I've already flown three cross-countries (one of them a 4-legger).

I don't really plan on flying GA (or VFR for that matter) for much longer than I have to, but I do know that GPS is definitely my preferred method of navigation (I'm TERRIBLE at VFR cross-countries too ), but I would always, always plan the entire thing as though I didn't have the GPS (I've seen a few GPS' get messed up in my short time as well) as a backup.  It's just stupid to not have a backup method.

[Boss_BlueAngels]

Are you actually using the GPS on your VFR flights?  That good ol' dead reconing and pilotage is an extremely good skill to acquire.  GPS is great, but it can very easilly get you in trouble if you're not careful.  

What are ya gonna do if/when your electrical system craps out?  

When I do a VFR flight with an airplane equipped with GPS I don't even look at the nav pages.  I'll check out the nearest page, and an occasional glance at the other screens, but still have the Nav's on VLOC mode.  It's just another distraction to keep your head inside the cockpit when it shouldn't be.  

IFR is another story though, I LOVE my 330!

[RitterKreuz]

i keep a Garmin 296 in the Geronimo as a back-up but you can bet good money i have my share of organized charts on the lap or right seat for easy reach. When the GPS (or other wizardry) fails its good to be able to go back to the basics of what you know... and if you dont know anything your just a passenger at that point!

[C]

[quote]Are you actually using the GPS on your VFR flights?

[beefhole]

[quote]Are you actually using the GPS on your VFR flights?

[beaky]

I love it on a BFR when we pull out a sectional and a plotter and E6B circular computer... even for some guy that has been flying regularly and he looks at you as if you just handed him a piece of a flying saucer panel for him to decode alien text from.

Man, I wish this guy had done that! I'm still very good with the old "whiz wheel", but I'll admit I haven't used it much in flight, only for planning. And I always plan thoroughly, and fly the plan.
 I agree with you about GPS- I have only a few hours in a GPS-equipped 'hawk, and I only used it to check my groundspeed. I firmly believe that if you can't navigate VFR with only chart, compass, and clock, you've got no business flying...
 Looking at an old nav. log from my 2000 flight from NJ to Louisiana: checkpoints include "Lake, bridge, Gadsden VOR 170", and "highway, RR tracks, 90 deg. Mt. Airy NDB"... did really well on that trip; my ETA/ATA times were damn close, too. It helped that winds were not much different than forecast...
The only time I got much off-course on that trip was when I followed a VOR radial outbound for too long and didn't realize it was leading me astray due to weak signal.
Should've trusted compass, chart and clock more...

[beaky]

Aye I'm TERRIBLE with the E6B and I've already flown three cross-countries (one of them a 4-legger).

I don't really plan on flying GA (or VFR for that matter) for much longer than I have to, but I do know that GPS is definitely my preferred method of navigation (I'm TERRIBLE at VFR cross-countries too ), but I would always, always plan the entire thing as though I didn't have the GPS (I've seen a few GPS' get messed up in my short time as well) as a backup.  It's just stupid to not have a backup method.

Don't be intimidated by the E6B... it's just a mechanical computer, and a pretty simple one at that. I was utterly baffled by it at first, but once you finally get the hang of it, it's like: how could I not see the simplicity of this the first time?
And the only way to get used to it, as well as flying with the bare minimum equipment, is practice.
And if you think you're going to make it to an ATP or military flight assignment without strong navigation skills, think again...some of you more experienced pilots, feel free to chime in here...
 Do you ever make a sim flight after planning with real chart, plotter, etc., then fly the sim using the chart for navigation? It's a great way to practice those skills, despite the fact that things in FS are not always where they should be...

[beefhole]

I'm great at VORs and dead reckoning-not so much at pilotage.  I assure you, my navigation skills are intact.

I don't really have interest in doing those things in FS (I generalyl fly heavy metal,a nd I fly hand-flying the 172 in-game is much more of a handful than it si in real life)-as you said, the things on the chart are, more often than not, not in FS. However, one day, I may give it a go.