PDA

View Full Version : FAA "Wings" Program vs. BFR


gyropilot
07-12-2004, 12:27 PM
With some limited exceptions, FAR 61.56(c) requires all USA rated pilots to complete a flight review every 2 years. FAR 61.56(c)(1) requires this flight review to be accomplished in an aircraft the pilot is rated in. Simply put, this means a pilot with a fixed wing rating only could not accomplish the required flight review in a rotorcraft, then continue to act as pilot in command of a fixed wing aircraft.

However, in lieu of a standard flight review, FAR 61.56(e) allows a pilot to substitute a FAA-sponsored pilot proficiency award program such as a "Wings" phase, per AC 61-91H. A Wings phase can be accomplished in *any* aircraft (including a balloon, glider, or ultralight), not necessarily one a pilot has been rated for, thus giving added flexibility to the pilot in what type aircraft used for the training.

But in the July 2004 edition of Plane Talk (http://www.faasafety.gov/notices/2004-Jul/12_Plane_Talk_v2i2_NM000022.pdf), the FAA published a narrowed interpretation of the type of aircraft a pilot can use as a substitute.

Personally I don't agree with their interpretation (as things are written now) and could fill several pages as to why... but since I'm not with the FAA, nor am I an aviation lawyer... my opinions don't count for squat!

Question:

Is it permissible to accomplish a phase of the Pilot Proficiency Awards Program [WINGS] [see Advisory Circular No. 61-91H] in an ultralight vehicle and then be able to act as a pilot in command of a Cessna 310 [or act as a pilot in command of a helicopter or a glider or balloon, etc.]

Answer:

Ref. § 61.56(c)(1) and (e); No, it is not permissible to accomplish a phase of the WINGS Program in an ultralight vehicle for meeting the flight review requirements in an aircraft for § 61.56(c)(1).

The Federal Aviation Regulations under § 61.56(c)(1), state, in pertinent part that “no person may act as pilot in command of an aircraft unless, . . . that person has. . . (1) Accomplished a flight review given in an aircraft for which that pilot is rated by an authorized instructor.” (emphasis added)

An ultralight is not an aircraft. Even though Advisory Circular No. 61-91H provides for pilots of ultralight vehicles to participate in the WINGS program, the intent of § 61.56(e) and Advisory Circular No. 61-91H for persons who desire to act as pilot in command of an aircraft is to require the pilots to accomplish the WINGS program in an aircraft.

It is noted that Advisory Circular No. 61-91H does not specifically prohibit the
substitution of an ultralight vehicle for an aircraft. But § 61.56(c)(1) clearly states that a person must accomplish a flight review “in an aircraft,” and the rules are controlling over advisory material. We note that Advisory Circular No. 61-91H needs to be revised to clarify this matter.

Answered by:

John D. Lynch, AFS-840 and reviewed by Komal Jain, AGC-240

This Q&A and others can be found on the web at: http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/infoforgeneralaviation/

KenSandyEggo
07-12-2004, 04:18 PM
"Simply put, this means a pilot with a fixed wing rating only could not accomplish the required flight review in a rotorcraft, then continue to act as pilot in command of a fixed wing aircraft."

John, let me throw this in. Couldn't one take the flight review in an experimental rotorcraft and then legally fly a fixed-wing? After all, it's not a rotorcraft, it's an experimental, same as a Lancair. One can take their flight review in a fixed-wing and then be legal to fly any experimental craft, rotorcraft included. I don't see why it doesn't work both ways. Experimental is experimental and we can take flight reviews in experimental aircraft. If not, would a person have to take 2 flight reviews? Anyone with a fixed-wing ticket is automatically rated in all small experimentals.

gyropilot
07-14-2004, 12:27 PM
Couldn't one take the flight review in an experimental rotorcraft and then legally fly a fixed-wing?Ken,

It's not my place to try and interpret the FAA's complex rules and procedures. My main beef with the FAA is the way they write sloppily rules full of what they later call "loopholes," which we use to our advantage (why wouldn't we?). When they don't like the mess they've created, they come up with BS reinterpretations based on what they claim was the "intent" of the rules. Like what are we supposed to do, read their minds?

Advisory Circular No. 61-91H for the Wings program says you can pass a Wings phase in just about and any kind of aircraft... including an ultralight. FAR 61.56(c)(1)(e) says all you have to do is accomplish one or more of these phases in lieu of a flight review. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

But now they realize they made a bit of an oversight... that a pilot shouldn't be allowed to accomplish a Wings phase in say a Weedhopper ultralight, and then continue to operate something like a Cessna 310. So then they play that "intent" card (that's not the intent) and come up with a convoluted explanation that flatly contradicts what's written to support their new position. If they'd write the rules clearly and concisely in the first place, they wouldn't have to resort to this.

But then we are talking about a big bloated government bureaucracy, so I shouldn't expect it any differently.

OK... I'm done ranting and I am grateful for flying freedoms we do in this country. It's just that I get a little irritated when the FAA changes the rules and definitions in the middle of the game.

Regards,

John L.

KenSandyEggo
07-14-2004, 02:58 PM
You said it all, John, and are absolutely correct. I should know better than trying to figure them out.

PW_Plack
07-14-2004, 07:03 PM
Golly, John...

Four weeks without flying the 'bee and your already getting grumpy!

The real answer is just to take and pass the practical test for a new rating at least once every two years. After 10 years, you'll start to accumulate a ratings collection tha looks like Chuck E's!

gyroplanes
07-14-2004, 09:36 PM
OK... I'm done ranting and I am grateful for flying freedoms we do in this country.
Regards,

John L.


I'm a little irritated that we are losing so many of our freedoms in this country.

These stupid (for the most part) TFRs. If you fly and you don't know what they are you may be in for a surprise.

4th of July weekend I was forced to fly more than gliding distance from the lake Michigan shoreline because of two baseball games, low ceilings and Chicago's B&C air space.

My real gripe is that all the TFRs do is placate a public that doesn't understand aircraft.

Bad enough we around Chicago have to deal with a knuckleheaded mayor.
Done venting, Thanks