Complex Airplanes??

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Can anyone please tell me why simple light aircraft suddenly become "complex" when a gear up/down lever is added or a prop pitch lever?

Are we to believe that if you give a pilot one more lever to work it suddenly becomes "complex"?

Or is this description just another buzz word to make flight training seem to be an endeavour that only the gifted among us can aspire to and thereby requires an extraordinary amount of training to accomplish?

It seems to me that flying training is getting to be more and more hype, and less and less based on common sense and an objective approach to what is really just another vehicle designed and built for the adverage person to safely operate.

...............

:) The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no. :)

[Noggin]

The term "Complex" comes from the USA. The JAA have to some extent copied the FARs in producing JARs they do not however mention the word "Complex" they merely state that familiarisation training is required if you fly an aeroplane with any of the following features:

Tail wheel
VP Prop
Retractable U/C
Turbo/Supercharger
Presuruisation

So those who use the term "Complex" are like those who call all ball pens "Biros"

[foxmoth]

I'm not sure what training for complex types consists of where you are CT but in the UK the training need not be extensive, in fact it CAN consist of a ground brief as long as it is then signed up in your log book, as an instructor though I would want to fly at least a couple of circuits with someone before signing them of on say retractable u/c, having seen how some people fly I would want to be sure they have the right discipline in their checks, rather than just leaving them to it and then they forget the gear on their 1st approach.
I once flew with a pilot who I told to go around at <100ft, when I asked why he had not got the gear down he replied " I couldn't concentrate because of all the noise", the noise was the GEAR WARNING HORN!!
Remember, there are two types of pilot flying retracts, those that HAVE landed gear up and those that have yet to do so!

[CaptAirProx]

Cat, possibly this is due to the fact that PPL training here in the UK is being watered down constantly so it only makes sense to further train those who have attained that wonderful achievement called the 'licence to learn'. If we all taught PPL students on the worst case aircraft that they could legally fly, we would kill the sport due to higher training costs. Why not give them a chance on the simpler matters to get them started and then allow them to blosom down the line. Seems fair to me.
More to the point, why do we judge the skill required to fly aircraft based also on weight. A lot of new microlight aircraft have the performance far exceeding spamcams, and also very much less forgiving. Yet they require less training to achieve and less certification. Blokes trained on say a C152, getting into a slippery kit aircraft - all quite legal, would perhaps have a very rude awakening. There appears to me to be a weak link in the chain here. Whats you thoughts on this.

[SimJock]

Can the complex training/familiarisation be signed off by an experienced FAA licenced complex aircraft owner/pilot or does he have to be a JAR instructor to sign my JAR PPL(A) logbook ?

[Stan Evil]

Simjock. It must be a JAR FI or CRI.

[SimJock]

Thanks..Stan

I have been searching for a JAA-FCL recomended course content for this type of class rating but can only find the FAA Advisory Circular 61-9B which is dated 1974.

<a href="http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/acs/61-9b.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/acs/61-9b.pdf</a>

Does anyone have anything from JAA on its recomendations for class rating course contents ?

Cheers

[CurtissJenny]

My understanding of the expression 'Complex' relates to the CPL flight test in that a complex aircraft is to be used for the flight test.
In the past that has meant an aircraft that had a CSU, tuck up gear and flaps and a cruise speed of 120 or 125 kts at cruise power or better.
This ask was to ensure that the CPL candidate was being brought up to be prepared for the sort of aircraft that the real world of CPL aviation was all about. In recent times the gear up requirement has been dropped but the rest still remain current.
And IMHO rightly so.
When this was first introduced in the USA Beech, Cesna and Piper had such products as the Beech 24 Sierra, the Piper PA28R Arrow and from Cessna the 172RG, 177RG and 182RG ready to fill the requirement. Today the C182 with fixed gear will fill the bill.
If it were not for the Complex aircraft requirement CPL Flight test candidates would be put up for test in such aircraft as no flaps Austers and high wing Pipers.

[Stan Evil]

Simjock/CurtissJenny

Just talking JAA here. The JAA CPL Skill Test must be taken in an ac with retractable gear, a VP prop and 4+ seats. That make the aircraft a 'complex' one and so a PA28R, Sierra, C172RG or most twins would do.

Noggin's list of individual 'complexities' is correct. The differences training required to fly a complex aircraft is not laid down by JAA and can vary from a quick look round the cockpit with an FI to one or more conversion flights. The deciding factor will be a combination of your experience, the complexity of the aircraft and the requirements of the owner and/or insurer of the aircraft.

You mentioned type/class ratings. They are something entirely different. Differences training only relates to variations within a class ie for MEP - PA34 to C340; for SEP - C150 to Arrow to Pitts etc.