On the flight review - I have done the WINGS courses picked up from FAASafety.org (actually quite fun to do) - so I have 50 hours or so in the past year, so good with the minimum of ten in the previous twelve months and I have the three WINGS credits (I have the certificates).
I was wondering what I do next - do I have to notify the FAA separately of the three credits or do they automatically know through the website?
Thinking as with the medical, carry the old medical and the section of the SFAR, that I would carry the section of the SFAR relating to flight reviews, my log showing the expiry of the old one in may and the three credits certificates.
The reason I need it is to enable a local engine health flight and, as soon as the borders open up, to take it to Guadeloupe for the annual, due end of July (if the three month periods in the SFAR are not extended I hope I will be able to get to Guadeloupe before the end of the month (22nd June is rumoured to be the date for opening of the border - looking at the NOTAM's I could maybe get in before but taking no chances).
Would appreciate any comments on whether I seem to have anything missing in the documents I intend to carry.
The WINGS credits are in the system, so if the question arises, the Inspector involved will verify them in the system. There's no need to carry while you fly any documents to prove it. As for the medical, all you need is the medical certificate -- your pilot logbook has nothing to do with it. And the FAA does not require you to carry your pilot logbook with you to show flight review currency -- if they want to check that, they'll have you bring it to them later.
As for carrying a copy of SFAR 118, if you think you're going to run into a non-US aviation inspector who doesn't know the US rules extending medical certificate expiration, you might want to do that. But there would be no need to do that in the US since FAA Inspectors know this rule.
However, while flying your plane to where an annual can be performed is covered, "engine health flights" are not among the purposes in SFAR 118 for which you can fly beyond your normal flight review expiration date. Also, for that ferry-to-annual flight, if it's beyond your 24-month flight review date, make sure you either have a commercial ticket or meet the 500 total time/400 PIC requirement as well as 50 hours in the last 12 months.
As it happens I met all of the terms except the prescriptive list of bodies one can fly for - but of course since it is US centric - it does not mention alike bodies in other jurisdictions.
Very much a fan of the Canadian and UK systems - the reason to restrict flying is to stop cross country flights spreading the virus - so UK system requires it be done in sight of the tower.
On engine health flights - the UK acknowledges them - have you read the Lycoming letter (it's been around since 2000) - basically - don't hand turn the prop, don't run it on the ground - fly it for 30 minutes once a month - of course only where one does not have access to lay up oil, wicking plugs etc. From a personal perspective - I took my airplane to the US in 2014 - under 300 hours on the engine - 24 hours of flight time to get to the US - it went to be painted and refurbed internally - was to have been "six weeks maximum" it took four months - engine was trashed ($33,000 to repair it) - plus other hefty figures for other components - my auto pilots have never been what they were when it got there, so I have seen the effects of my plane sitting for months on end. Engine health flights are a "thing" not just the engine but the whole airplane - I am expecting to see a spike in failures once things return normal - those of us whose airplanes spend 99% of their time over the ocean will in a few cases be going swimming.
To be clear I am not saying the the British version is relevant - just that it WORKS, the FAA version does not - 100% of the airplanes here are US registered, if this continues for another couple of months they will be written off, simply due to a rule that covers 95% of instances but not the last 5%.
Do you have any insights into the thinking behind the 400/500 hour limits? Doesn't impact me but it does seem odd - there are fewer airplanes in the air in the US during this, so are super experienced pilots needed - I learned to fly in the Miami area, I recall flying around the Class C (stayed out of the Class B) along with other first cross country students with Lear Jets zooming by into Opa Locka - seriously busy - now there would be less pilots so why denying flight - seems very odd - not seen limits like this in other jurisdictions.
Do you have any insights into the thinking behind the 400/500 hour limits?
The FAA said it's an issue of "risk mitigation". From the SFAR 118 preamble: "The [500-hour] eligibility requirements for private pilots are consistent with conditions and limitations imposed on private pilots conducting charitable flights under a part 11 exemption." You'd have to dig back in the Federal Register to find the NPRM for 91.146 where the FAA set that limit to find their logic.