The flight review reviewed

What this means is that unless CASA comes up with a standard form the assessor instructor will need to create a form that can be filled out with the above details and sent off to CASA within 14 days.

As in the past the assessor will still need to sign off the candidate’s logbook to state that the flight review was been successful.

And what brings about this extra requirement of the flight review assessor? Both CASA and the ATSB have found that in a number of events in the past they cannot ascertain if the pilot in question has undertaken a flight review within the last two years. Can a pilot’s logbook be

It is said that some instructors are opting not to do flight reviews.

found and checked? Has the pilot undertaken a flight review but the assessor not signed off the review in the logbook? Has the logbook been destroyed in an accident? A review of accident investigations by both the ATSB and the American NTSB noted in some cases the pilot’s logbook could not be obtained. Sometimes the family of a deceased pilot simply declines to part with it. Sometimes a pilot has not filled out their logbook for some time and says it is lost.

All of this brings us back to the root cause of having a note sent in to CASA that will go on a pilot’s records file. CASA wants to know if a pilot is legal to fly. In short, has the pilot passed a flight review within the last two years? The ATSB wants to know if the pilot should have been flying, but also be able to go back to the assessor to gather information regarding what sort of flight review was conducted, did the flying conducted have a bearing on the accident, does the assessor have any information that could be worth knowing regarding the pilot and their flight skills? It has been said some instructors, capable of conducting a flight review, are declining to do them in order to avoid the responsibility and not be held accountable for at least the next two years.

One of the requirements of being a flight review assessor is that the assessor is endorsed on the aircraft type. The assessor of course is deemed to be in command of the machine.

It makes perfect sense that the assessor has a knowledge of the aircraft of which they are said to be in command.

There is a possible hitch here in that if the assessor does not have Multi-Engine Training Approval (META), should they be giving the subject pilot an emergency situation in a twin? That could be to bring one engine back to zero thrust or even ask for a single engine landing.

There are several ways of conducting a flight review. The first is for an appropriately-qualified instructor to conduct a flight review. CAAP 5. 81‑1(1) Flight Reviews gives guidance on how this may be conducted. It could be that the candidate undertakes a short flight that embraces both upper air work, a navigation exercise and a chat and quiz session.

The CAAP talks about the air and ground component taking a minimum of an hour each. It is not possible to conduct a nav flight with a diversion, upper air work and circuit work in a minimum of an hour.

The instructor should be trying to take candidates out of their normal comfort zone and give them a flight situation that will also expand their flight experience.

Another way the review could be concluded is the obtaining of an endorsement.

Yet another way would be if the pilot obtained a new rating, eg a Night VFR rating, an instructors rating or renewal etc. That would be acceptable as a flight review.

It can also be said that a competent assessor will be able to tell within a short time if the candidate is going to be signed off as satisfactory. Does the candidate need to do a cross-country flight of several hours with a person who does not hold flight examiner qualifications? Probably not. The prime purpose of a flight review is to provide an opportunity for pilots to refresh their flying skills and knowledge and to provide an independent assessment of those skills and knowledge.

The end result is to see if, in the eyes of the assessor, the candidate is a safe and competent pilot.