Helping out new PPLs

[IO540]

This has been discussed here many times.

One reason why most new PPL holders chuck in it right away is because they don't feel confident to go anywhere outside the local area, and they soon get fed up with that.

It would be good if somebody who flies regularly was able to take these people up and show them it really isn't hard to go places. I am including flight planning in this, of course.

The problem, at any airfield where there is a flying school, is that you will get your tyres cut if you go up (knowingly, or inadvertently) with one of their students - either pre-PPL or somebody with a PPL who may be doing a night or IMC Rating. Schools tend to really dislike the idea of "their" customers going up with another pilot. At best, the person's instructor doesn't like somebody "interfering" with his way of doing things; at worst the school wants the (often a bit skint) student to spend all his money with them and not supporting somebody else's PPL Cost Sharing Scheme.

If anybody is taking people up, how do they resolve this?

[rustle]

The problem, at any airfield where there is a flying school, is that you will get your tyres cut if you go up (knowingly, or inadvertently) with one of their students - either pre-PPL or somebody with a PPL who may be doing a night or IMC Rating. Schools tend to really dislike the idea of "their" customers going up with another pilot.


That's twice this week you have made reference to tyre cutting at your flying club.

If it is that much of a ****hole why don't you relocate? I have never heard of anything like that from anyone else.

Blackbushe has 2 schools and an independent club (i.e. not affiliated with either school) which organises all that sort of stuff. In the carpark you will find all sorts of nice motors. I have never heard of tyre slashing there.

[cessna l plate]

I have to say that this isn't my experience. When I was learning at Liverpool it was positively encouraged to go up with other ppl's. If a spare seat was available it was always, why don't you go in the back, and take a map with you.

This has helped a lot when I came to learning to navigate the other week, although I took 4 trips to nail the subject, it could have been a lot more, and 6 hours to nail nav isn't bad at all, and I attribute most of that to sitting in the back with a map! If you get the opportunity, do it!!!

It also demonstrated to me that going places isn't that hard, and is one of the major benefits to flying in the first place. Staying in the local area kind of defeats the purpose of getting the ppl in the first place.

[aluminium persuader]

I'm more than happy to fly as "safety pilot" with anyone. East Anglia-based, pm me if you want.

ap:ok:

[Rod1]

At all the airfields I have been based at the students have been actively encouraged to go up with qualified PPL’s. I am very surprised at your tyre cutting comment, and I would be on my way if there was any hint of such a problem.

I once took a PPL student on a week’s tour of France totalling over 18 hours flying time, which helped her navigation no end and certainly convinced her you could go places. Her instructor was actively grateful and knocked some cash off my next IMC renewal for what he considered to be all the help.

You must be based at a very odd flying club.

Rod1

[S-Works]

IO540's description may be a bit extreme but has not been unheard off. My experiance has been more on the lines of being completly ostracised from the school just in case you took one or more of the "revenue lines" away. After all how can the school be making money if there students are swanning around the sky in a private owners aircraft. My old club used to send me out emails with xxx is looking for some flying cost sharing and I would respond with happy to take anyone along or go along with anyone. Those invites stopped coming out and then the invites to the fly outs stopped coming so I stopped renewing my membership. Very shortsighted of schools I think to milk the student for all they are worth and then just cast them aside when they are bored of the double slot bacon butty run.

If I had not had access to private flyers I would not have bought my own aircraft end flown as much as I have and would have become a lapsed PPL statistic. I will take anyone flying anytime and I do some pretty interesting trips, I am sure there are studes and members in these clubs that would love to go on some of these trips.

A real shame as I think the world of the guys that ran my old school and they are only 5 minutes aways from me.

[Johnm]

It is a fact that defence of revenue is always counter productive, the key to a successful market is growth, so that suppliers benefit even if their slice of the cake stays the same because the cake gets bigger.

This implies that those who encourage wider participation will generally prosper and the contrary is also true. The correlation with good general attitude to customer service merely weights the difference still further.

I can take budding or new PPLs flying in the Cambridge or Kemble areas from time to time (weather permitting) I shan't require cost share, merely a good excuse to go flying:) There will be the opportunity to play with Radio GPS and MK1 eyeball nav and even to give the autopilot a rest;)

PM if interested and we'll see what we can organise.

[S-Works]

Very valid point John. My friend has just started to learn to fly and he have taken him to my new club to learn, Who has lost out?

I extend the same offer, anyone Peterborough, Northants area give me a shout. Regular airways flights etc.

[maggioneato]

We were always encouraged to fly with qualified PPL's as a student. The CFI always tried to fill empty seats for us to gain experience. The school will gain more revenue from people who continue to fly after getting their PPL than from those who give it up once qualified.

I obviously didn't make it clear it was privately owned aircraft we were flying in, some of the aircraft had curtains. A bit of an eye opener after the somewhat scruffy club aircraft.

[S-Works]

We were always encouraged to fly with qualified PPL's as a student. The CFI always tried to fill empty seats for us to gain experience. The school will gain more revenue from people who continue to fly after getting their PPL than from those who give it up once qualified.

That was not the point, the point was Private owners taking people flying. Of course the club is all for matching you up with other club renters it keeps you in club aircraft. But once you have bored of the double slot bacon butty runs to the same dozen airfields what do you do? A long rental of a club aircraft is VERY expensive usually paying for a minima of 3 slots in a day and availability is very limited. If you have that sort of money then you are looking towards private/syndicate ownership that gives you true flexability. A syndicate is the way to go for someone who has outgrown the club scene and private ownership is for someone who outgrows syndicates. The latter 2 options do not generate revenue for the club.

[gcolyer]

I have never seen issue in this subject either.

After I got my PPL a thousands of hours bush style pilot friend of mine came flying with me a lot. It boosted my confidence, nav skills and short field and near MAUW flying skills no end. he also took me flying a lot in really crap weather conditions to show me how bad it really has to get before you need to go IFR.

Since then I have taken a PPL student up with me on quiet a few occasions. It definiatley boosted his confidence and nav abilites as well. depending on the airspace and weather I either let him navigate or fly (from the right seat), I have not let him do both yet.

I personaly think it is a great thing to be going on.

[drauk]

I have an idea which given a spare five minutes I will put together. It will be a kind of "buddying" online website (a subpart of http://fly.dsc.net). The idea is that you can put your details on the site (confidentially assured), for example saying something like "I am based at Norwich, I fly SEP VFR and IFR and I am happy to be someone else's right hand seater, or to do a bit of ground-school mentoring" or "I am a new PPL from Southend and I'd like someone to come with me on my first trip to Le Touquet in case the horizon craps out". Hmmm, sounds like if those two got together we'd be on to a winner for all concerned.

Then other people can use the site to search for what they want, contacting one another without the original poster revealing his contact details - s/he can choose to do that when they want to.

I hadn't considered the possibility that flight schools would try and slash the tyres of the website though...

[Pianorak]

. . . A syndicate is the way to go for someone who has outgrown the club scene and private ownership is for someone who outgrows syndicates. The latter 2 options do not generate revenue for the club.
Only up to a point. There is parking (£166 pm in my case) and fuel, not forgetting the odd meal, drink or cuppa! :rolleyes:
Happily there's no problem (so far) taking up other PPLs or studes.

Edit: Not responsible for the ads.

[Fuji Abound]

My latest trip with a training PPL (I think he had done about 8 hours) was around London, through Mig alley, over the top of Gatwick and out to the East.

I wanted to make it something he would remember, and also give him a feel for just what was possible. Three orbits over the North terminal did the trick if nonething else.

But back to the point, he was kind enough to 'phone me after the next lesson. His instuctor was genuinely astonished how much he had progressed and so was he. It renwed his enthusiam, and hopefully gave him an insight into what is possible with a PPL whilst at the same time encouraging him to go on and do other ratings.

Definitely one of those rare situations where if only the schools new it everyone benefits :D .

[S-Works]

Only up to a point. There is parking (£166 pm in my case) and fuel, not forgetting the odd meal, drink or cuppa! :rolleyes:
Happily there's no problem (so far) taking up other PPLs or studes.
Edit: Not responsible for the ads.
Depends if the club run the airfiled/hangers.......

[Julian]

AOPA US has recognised the exact same problem and has made a positive effort with its 'Project Pilot' scheme where experienced pilots adopt a newly minted PPL and hold their hands in the early days thereby giving them confidence and hopefully encouraging them to retain their PPL and not bin it.

Drauks idea sounds like a good one and I am sure would get a lot of use.

J.

[Fuji Abound]

PS - I should have said another :ok: for Drauk's suggetsion - what an excellent idea and well worth a try!

[IO540]

My tyre slashing comment should have had a smiley after it (I am aware of only one case of sabotage and that was elsewhere) but bose-x describes it correctly. What happens, given a sufficiently political airfield, is that you get slagged off all around the airfield and get problems with all sorts of things, for example hangarage. This business can be very cliquey.

Exactly like bose-x, I was made clearly unwelcome when it came to taking people up. Unless I came along on a school fly-out, sat in the back, and the school put an instructor in the RH seat, and a student in the LH seat (this became impossible once I left the G-register). Or the only passengers were people who were definitely never going to learn to fly (e.g. spouses of the pilots) but wanted to come along; then I was most welcome as a free taxi driver for the non-pilots.

Drauk's idea is excellent.

[flyingfemme]

Dare I mention the "other place"?

They have student flyouts a couple of times a year. Owners/renters adopt a stude for the day and everyone meets up for lunch, chat etc. A different venue each time. Studes are encouraged to have a go at nav, radio, enroute flying etc. Costs are not shared but landings fees and a burger are always graciously received.

Seems like everyone enjoys it. :)

[englishal]

Dare I mention it as well:)

I am on the mailing list for some place in America. Every week they are organising weekend fly-outs (Vegas, San Fransisco, Sedona, Mexico etc...) where it is planned as a group, new pilots can fly if they want or go along as passenger, normal take-away minimums are waived and the whole thing is done as a group event. That way inexperienced PPLs get to fly with experienced mentors or instructors if they want, they can take their mates and family and there are no worries about minimum flying hours. It is good experience, cost effective, and makes the place money on the rentals. There is also the safety aspect when flying over inhospitable terrain.

Events like these would interest me....so long as the destination is interesting.

[high-hopes]

someone is just trying to

- share hiring costs

- pull a good looking female student

:E :E :E
[cynical]

[stickandrudderman]

I'd be interested to know what people consider to be the transition time from "Newbie" to "experienced mentor":rolleyes:

[dublinpilot]

Interesting S&Rman.

I'd say if you've done something a few times, and are comfortable with it and understand your subject matter, then you can be a mentor to someone has never done it.

If you've gone to LeTouquet a few times, then you can certainly help out someone who's nervous about doing it for the first time.

If you've flown further afiled a far bit, then you have help out someone who hasn't.

If you've done a lot of IFR flying, then you can help out someone who hasn't.

It's not about number of hours, or overall knowledge. It's about having experience at a particular part of aviation, and being willing to share it with someone who want's to learn.

You can be a newbie in one area of aviation, and a mentor in another ;)

IO540 - If you're looking to pass on some of your knowledge, to those your local club can't complain about, I'd love to take up the opportunity! I reckon you'd make a great 'teacher' (I'm reluctant to use the word instructor ;) ).

dp

[stiknruda]

Interesting stuff. My "friend" was invited to accompany a newbie PPL(H) to Le2K recently. She's a CPL(H) but insisted that I also come along as despite being a lowly PPL, I 've 15 times her hours and have done Europe 15 times more than she has.

It worked well for all concerned, I saw more of rotary ops and they gained in paperwork procedures (GAR and flight plan) and Mark I eyeball nav and traffic alerting.

I've flown quite a few on here aerobatically - but I'd rather know the person first and then decide if I want to offer a trip. A-B stuff is pretty dull for me in the Pitts and despite spending some dosh, the radio/intercom/noise-cx h/sets really are not conducive to long chats about technique/critique.

However, in principle, I applaud the concept.

[XL319]

I agree with the attitude of 'some' flying schools. I did my PPL in USA and come back and got checked out on their aeroplanes. The instructor was fine. However the school have turned their noses a little at the fact that i won't join the club as a member and that i haven't dont my PPL with them.

Thing is this has a knock on effect when i come to choose a school to do my CPL with.

[englishal]

transition time from "Newbie" to "experienced mentor"
Pretty much as DP puts it.

[S-Works]

Actually it was not you I was referring to! But if the cap fits then feel free to wear it! But do tell me why I stopped renewing my membership at your place? I seem to recall it being nothing more than not getting a reminder and forgetting about it.....:ok:

Allthough there is a point, I have missed the emails!!

[IO540]

To get an FI rating one needs to pass the JAA CPL exams. Unless (AIUI) one is going to instruct for free, and then you will be "really popular" in the vicinity, among the schools who have to pay their instructors.

It's no wonder that few if any experienced PPLs do this kind of thing, except very informally on a prearranged 1-1 basis.

[Twiddle]

And if he did offer to instruct for nothing he'd be ripped to shreds for devaluing instructio so its a bit of a pointless post don't you think?

you two obviously have issues with each other and here isn't the place to air them, PM each other and sort it out in private?

[IO540]

Can a non-CPL "instructor", working for free, fly a trial lesson punter who is (obviously) paying the establishment for the flight?

[unfazed]

Can a non-CPL "instructor", working for free, fly a trial lesson punter who is (obviously) paying the establishment for the flight?

What do you think I0540 ?

If they can then the rules are a joke, I think that you will find that if the instructor is not renumerated then it is OK but we all know the FTO is gaining commercial profit so it is a commercial flight regardless

My guess - CAA do not check and clubs don't care because they are quids in

Ethically it is unsound IMHO:(

[IO540]

if the instructor is not renumerated then it is OK but we all know the FTO is gaining commercial profit so it is a commercial flight regardless

That is a contradictory statement. I think this would be illegal because it is aerial work even if the pilot isn't getting paid.

Are flying schools really using unpaid PPLs to take up trial lessons? That would be pretty amazing.

Back on the subject of this thread, isn't it amazing how quickly any suggestion along those lines gets bogged down in problems (real as I am sure they are) with objections from flying schools.

It's no wonder nothing ever improves in this business. They will still be teaching compass & stopwatch navigation in 2106, and the schools will be fully behind it.

[Say again s l o w l y]

No chance. A "trial lesson" is actually Excercise 3 of the PPL syllabus. The air experience flight, this is a loggable flight and therefore must be flown by an FI or FI(R)

A PPL non-FI may most certainly not fly this, whether the school is paid or not is irrelevant.

If anyone knows of any schools doing this, then get onto the CAA pronto with any evidence you may have. This is totally unacceptable and illegal.

[S-Works]

SAS the question was about a PPL INSTRUCTOR doing the flight and the answer is yes they can as you rightly point out it is lesson 3.

Be careful about being so indignant about following the rules. The vast majority of trial lessons are joy rides and never go onto learn to fly. They are steady source of income for flying schools and keep aircraft in the air that real students and regulars benefit from.

[Fuji Abound]

"never go onto"

without wishing to be too pedantic but

never go on and there was never any intention to go on to training - it was always a "joy ride".

[S-Works]

"never go onto"
without wishing to be too pedantic but
never go on and there was never any intention to go on to training - it was always a "joy ride".

Hmm wat ya sayin that i is thik?

[Fuji Abound]

Naaa

Iz a saying you are spot on and emphasing that in the majority of the cases both the instructor and "student" know darn well it is a jolly but "pretend" otherewise - cynical, what me :ouch:

[S-Works]

Naaa
Iz a saying you are spot on and emphasing that in the majority of the cases both the instructor and "student" know darn well it is a jolly but "pretend" otherewise - cynical, what me :ouch:

never......:p

[Say again s l o w l y]

Bose, there is nothing laid down as to what ex.3 should contain. It is simply a flight to see if people are interested in learning. Why people buy them is not our concern, we are providers of training, if people don't take it up for whatever reason that is not within our control.

They are "joyrides" in the fact they are a lot of fun, but they aren't pleasure flights, they are a lesson that is loggable.

Unless of course we start vetting people beforehand for both aptitude and financial reasons... I don't think anyone would be very pleased about that!

I always brief properly, explain what it's all about and hopefully the trial lesson customer goes away with a much greater knowledge of aviation than they arrived with. That is a lesson, not a simple pleasure flight.

[S-Works]

yes of course.... You keep on kidding yourself....:p


Bose, there is nothing laid down as to what ex.3 should contain. It is simply a flight to see if people are interested in learning. Why people buy them is not our concern, we are providers of training, if people don't take it up for whatever reason that is not within our control.
They are "joyrides" in the fact they are a lot of fun, but they aren't pleasure flights, they are a lesson that is loggable.
Unless of course we start vetting people beforehand for both aptitude and financial reasons... I don't think anyone would be very pleased about that!
I always brief properly, explain what it's all about and hopefully the trial lesson customer goes away with a much greater knowledge of aviation than they arrived with. That is a lesson, not a simple pleasure flight.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Sorry, but what's that supposed to mean?
Most FI's I know take trial lessons as seriously as anyother. It is a shop window into aviation and as such is our best marketing tool and happily, one that people are happy to pay for.

The CAA has never made any move to stop trial lessons going ahead. I had one many years ago and that directly lead to me becoming a professional pilot. I did it on a "see if I would like it " basis. If I had to sign up for a course before hand, I probably wouldn't have done it as at the time I wasn't sure about it. I wouldn't have signed up to thousands of pounds of training on a whim.

So you can smirk and make comments that we are doing something wrong, but the fact is that this isn't the case and I certainly haven't seen any guidance to tell us we are doing anything dodgy.

[Fuji Abound]

SAS - are you seriously saying that every trial flight done by flying schools is because the client fully intends to do a PPL and the only reason he does not do so afterwards is because he finds after ex. 3 he doesn’t like it?

"The CAA has never made any move to stop trial lessons going ahead."

:{

In short they wouldnt - would they if the intention had been to undertake a trial lesson.

As many a lawyer might say - intent is everything. :rolleyes:

[Say again s l o w l y]

No, what I'm saying, is that it is impossible for us to control why people buy these flights. We are just providers, it is not for us to decide why someone does it. They may have their own reasons, that are unfathomable to me.

A lot of people start flight training to get over personal fears, not just to get a licence, it is not up to us to judge the reasoning behind it.

To try and say that only those who intend to finish a licence are allowed to fly, is both insulting and irrelevant. We provide training towards a licence. What people do with that is up to them.

Our intent is to teach people, if we try to do that, then there is nothing anyone can do about it.

[S-Works]

No, what I'm saying, is that it is impossible for us to control why people buy these flights. We are just providers, it is not for us to decide why someone does it. They may have their own reasons, that are unfathomable to me.
A lot of people start flight training to get over personal fears, not just to get a licence, it is not up to us to judge the reasoning behind it.
To try and say that only those who intend to finish a licence are allowed to fly, is both insulting and irrelevant. We provide training towards a licence. What people do with that is up to them.
Our intent is to teach people, if we try to do that, then there is nothing anyone can do about it.

And your intent is most laudable, don't get your knickers in a twist. But EVERY flying schools knows that the vast majority of people coming for a "trial" lesson are coming for a jolly. You no doubt intend to give them the best lesson you can and I am sure you do. But this does not change the fact that the trail lesson is a revenue generator. This is the same as a business being a "club". I don't have a problem with it, in fact flying needs it in the hope that we capture some of these people to continue flying and the schools need to keep the revenue coming to keep trading. I just don't believe in hiding behind sugar coating!!!

[rustle]

The CAA has never made any move to stop trial lessons going ahead.

The CAA have taken a keen interest in "trial lessons" in ex-military equipment of late, and I doubt it would take much for them to become more interested in trial lessons in slower stuff as well...

But EVERY flying schools knows that the vast majority of people coming for a "trial" lesson are coming for a jolly.

If it is a "jolly" it would need an AOC - are you saying all these operators have an AOC Bose?

[Say again s l o w l y]

Ex-mil stuff is a totally different kettle of fish, these aren't operated on CofA a/c nor do they really form part of a recognised syllabus, whereas a "trial lesson" in something like a cess-pit from a decent school does.

What gets my goat is the assumption that doing these flights is somehow dodgy. It isn't. They are very useful for us when it comes to revenue, but that isn't their primary function.

If the CAA did try and find something wrong with what we all do, they'd have to dig very, very hard and I doubt they'd find anything wrong at all. These aren't "jollies" in any way and if they are thought of as such by schools, then the CAA would have a point in doing something. But since they aren't, then there is no reason for any problems.

[S-Works]

Who said it was dodgy? I merely pointed out is the norm for schools. The same schools that are members clubs to avoid having an AOC. Nothing wrong with this as it is what keeps the schools in business. But ask the average person who got a trial flight voucher for a prsent if they intend on taking up flying and they will admit they are here for a jolly.

Sugar coat it as much as you like and word it carefully to meet the rules but those are the facts.

I am just glad that there are instructors out there prepared to make it a proper lesson. It might just be enough to ignite someones enthusiasm to learn.

[Fuji Abound]

What gets my goat is the assumption that doing these flights is somehow dodgy. It isn't. They are very useful for us when it comes to revenue, but that isn't their primary function.

A board outside the school - "Trial flights available here".

Punter - I'd like a trial flight please.

Instructor - Thinking of learning then.

Punter - How much does it cost.

Instructor - Five grand will see you through.

Punter - I could never afford that, but I'd love to give it a go for half an hour.

Hmmmmmm.

[Say again s l o w l y]

So only those able to afford it should be allowed to experience flying?

There's nothing wrong with giving someone a taste. They may not be able to afford it now, but in the future they may. Nobody would suggest that this isn't an acceptable situation.

So why discriminate?

Bose, why would a members club need an AOC? They aren't flying public transport flights, so why have one? A "pleasure flight" and an air experience flight are two very different things. One requires an AOC to be done legally, the other doesn't. They could be lumped together as they are both flights in a light a/c, but there are fundamental differences between the two. One is a lesson, one isn't. We are talking about semantics here, but unfortunately they are important.

There is a fine line between the two and with the CAA casting it's eyes about, it doesn't help to muddy the waters. Whilst we do nothing wrong, it would be a pain if it ended up in something being changed for the sake of it. Especially as it would hurt everyone involved in light a/c flying.

[rustle]

So only those able to afford it should be allowed to experience flying?

"Experiencing flying" is not lesson 1 ( or Exercise 3 :rolleyes:) in learning to fly though, is it?

I would wager that you* can tell who is there for the ride and who is there to start lessons in about 30 seconds.

1st clue would be who bought the trial flight voucher -- if it was a "gift" for a birthday/Christmas then it is most likely going to be a "jolly";

2nd clue would be the "can you circle my house?" question - if that's asked within the first 30 seconds it is probably a "jolly";

3rd clue will be the "can my mate/girlfriend come too?" question - if that's asked within 30 seconds it is probably a "jolly".

*"You" would be anyone who has been in a flying club in the UK for longer than an hour.

[IO540]

I've discussed this subject of "trial lessons" with a fair few instructors. They all know it is verging on the suspect, and the view appears to be that it hinges on whether the punter took the controls. If so, it is a bona fide lesson. If not, and he clearly didn't want to, then it isn't. But, who cares?

IMHO the vast majority of trial lesson customers never go on to do any training. But if the CAA stopped trial lessons, most flying schools would go bust, which is probably not in anybody's interest. Well, it's not in anybody's interest at any location where there is only just one school already.

The bottom line however is that IMHO the whole AOC v. no-AOC business is to do with

a) protecting CAA's AOC fee income (which most would think is a pretty bogus reason), and

b) ensuring a supposed higher degree of safety for fare-paying passengers (which is debatable since an AOC holder can fly a charter flight in exactly the same old dog as the non-AOC school next door would use for training)

The CAA know this too, of course. They aren't stupid. They are well aware of the state of the UK GA scene, including those parts of it that do have AOCs, and they know that tampering with trial lessons would wipe out most of their GA revenue stream within a few years.

I think it is a real shame that so many people commence PPL training and then pack it in, and it's an absolute scandal to see how many pack it in right after getting their PPL, but preventing them from starting is not the way to approach it, IMHO.

[Say again s l o w l y]

I may be able to tell if someone is interested in doing a licence within a few minutes, but I can't tell that before then. I certainly can't tell by the person who bought the lesson, especially as most are bought by family or friends as a present.

Some have a genuine interest, some don't, but I'm not about to say that they aren't allowed to fly. That's just crazy talk. Would you buy a car without having driven it? Then why should we try and put barriers on who can try flying, especially as the cost of getting a licence is about the same as most people spend on a car. (Avg. amount £5-6K)

Air Experience flights are an essential part of our industry, they aren't "jollies" as we instructors do at least try and teach something. If the student isn't interested, then the way I see it, is so what. Not everyone is that fussed about flying, we on here are definately not "average" in this respect. What we are providing is a window into the flying world, whether the punter chooses to look through it is their concern.

[rustle]

...but preventing them from starting is not the way to approach it, IMHO.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that are they?

It isn't so much throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as labelling the baby and the bathwater ;) :suspect:

[S-Works]

Wow, very defensive SAS. No one is suggesting that these flights are stopped or that you should decide who takes them. We are just saying that maybe you are looking at it with rose tinted specs!! Please refer to my sugar coating comment!

[Mad Girl]

Either you guys are a bunch of cynics or I'm far too innocent, but trial lessons - to me - open your eyes to something you've never experienced before.

An example.... I had NEVER considered flying - not even in passing.

My partner bought me a trial lesson for my birthday....... An aerobatics trial lesson.


I would wager that you* can tell who is there for the ride and who is there to start lessons in about 30 seconds.

1st clue would be who bought the trial flight voucher -- if it was a "gift" for a birthday/Christmas then it is most likely going to be a "jolly";


Was I there for a "Jolly"??? - YES.

But ask the average person who got a trial flight voucher for a prsent if they intend on taking up flying and they will admit they are here for a jolly.I am just glad that there are instructors out there prepared to make it a proper lesson. It might just be enough to ignite someones enthusiasm to learn.

But did I get well and truly hooked due to a really friendly flying club, a brilliantly reassuring instructor and having an absolutely brilliant time - YES.

You'd think the aerobatics would ONLY be a jolly but my club gained a PPL student who does Aerobatics as well - double the dosh!!!

[Fuji Abound]

Wriggle as you will but a trial lesson is not a “jolly”.

To use your analogy potter down to your local Ferrari dealer and ask to have a trial spin in one of their cars. I suspect they might make some assessment of whether there was any likelihood of your buying it before handing over the keys!

Rustle surely has it right - in most cases you know whether it is a lesson they have in mind or a “jolly”.

Does it matter - in my opinion not one bit - I cant see any reason why a non AOC operator shouldn’t take someone for a jolly (other than it is against the law, so the law needs changing). It cant be air charter because not many people want to go from A to A.

Fact is in my opinion a jolly is not a trial flight and I suspect in most cases the instructor could assess which is which in the first 5 minutes if he wanted to.

Mad Girl

.. .. .. but if you had gone for a real jolly with a school with an AOC the outcome would probably have been the same, and it might also have been the same if air charter were permitted in a SEP and you sat up front. We are talking about semanics I suspect, but as you say, you went for a jolly with no intention what so ever of doing a PPL.

Put it another way if 100 students signed on for Fresher week but only 1 was still there at the end of the first year you might think you had got something horribly wrong if you were setting out to market a course

[Say again s l o w l y]

I'm not defensive Bose, but the tone so far is that these flights are somehow not kosher, or aren't a valuable thing. Mad Girl's experience shows exactly what these flights do for the industry. Did she have any intention of getting a licence before the flight? How about after it? The reason it's termed air experience is because it can encompass anything, you can do effects of controls if you want, or just go sight seeing with them at the controls. I'll change what I do depending on the person.
I had someone the other day who wanted to try it out but refused point blank to touch the controls. He had the option and I talked him through what I was doing, will he come back? He may for another try, but I doubt he'll ever get a licence. It's his right to go up if he wants and nobody else's to tell him he can't. We're fulfilling our mandate by offering training, we don't allow people to continually do trial lessons however, but if he wants to continue to go up, then he has the option of joining the club and going up with other members on a cost sharing basis.

How can there be anything dodgy in that?

These flights aren't just jollies and the training industry as a whole has to be very careful that they aren't seen as such. As I've said, it's all semantics, but the thought behind these flights is to provide a training benefit, not simply as entertainment.

If the idea got to our friends in Gatwick that this was the case, then the whole industry could be in the sh**e, as we do need them. So I do take them very seriously because if we don't, we may not be allowed to do them anymore and that would be a disaster for everyone.

[gcolyer]

Erm...

What on earth does this have to do with the origins of this thread?:ugh:

[Mad Girl]

We are talking about semanics I suspect, but as you say, you went for a jolly with no intention what so ever of doing a PPL.


Probably because I knew Bu**er all about it so didn't know what it was all about - but I came away from the club with a big smile and went back for "another" aeros trial lesson a month later.

By the time I was on my THIRD aeros trial lesson ...I joined the club the next day.

By the time I was on my fourth half hour - but perfectly legit now because I was a club member and being taught - My instructor started talking to me about the PPL and straight and level.

We went and did a bit of basic straight and level for a while just so I'd understand how the controls worked for the aeros.

It STILL took me another few weeks before I said - ok I'll do the PPL!!!

Trial lessons are handy for people like me who stumble across the possibility of doing something they'd never considered before.

I don't honestly know if I'd be where I am now, if the trial lessons had been done in a chartered organisation which was run as a "Jolly"- I don't think it would have got and kept my interest.

I'm doing this because the school and the instructor were encouraging me to try the controls and manoeuvres and explaining at every stage of the process. I stayed with the school and the same instructor. It was laid out for me on a plate, at a flying school, and I took it.

If a commercial chartered business had been running the "Jolly" and I'd had to go out and find somewhere to learn... I don't know that I'd have investigated further.

[IO540]

It isn't so much throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as labelling the baby and the bathwater

Yes but if you did that then trial lessons would breach the current ANO and would have to end, which would wipe out most of UK's flying schools.

The law is a complete mess. A major reason why much of the ANO is incomprehensible is because this business has so many people who push the boundaries, so various areas have been plugged over the years. Given this problem is not suddenly going to go away, I don't see a relaxation of the law on charters, AOCs, etc, is very likely.

Every country struggles with this problem. The FAA does too, prosecuting many people each year for supposedly illegal charters.

[S-Works]

since when has that stopped us? :p

[Fuji Abound]

bugger all...

but who cares, thread drift -all part of the fun :O .

I think a few have got the wrong end of the stick.

As is so often the case, what the law says, what happens, and what the law should say are all totally different things.

Personally I am all up for as many trial flights as possible, and who cares if the school has an AOC - fact is it is not air charter. Bring back the days of barn storming I say!!

However as I think Rustle-X, Bose and I would say it doesnt change the colour of the bath water however much you may wish it did.

[S-Works]

Not the tone from me. Like I said the industry needs these flights. The law needs changing not sugar coating.



I'm not defensive Bose, but the tone so far is that these flights are somehow not kosher, or aren't a valuable thing. Mad Girl's experience shows exactly what these flights do for the industry. Did she have any intention of getting a licence before the flight? How about after it? The reason it's termed air experience is because it can encompass anything, you can do effects of controls if you want, or just go sight seeing with them at the controls. I'll change what I do depending on the person.
I had someone the other day who wanted to try it out but refused point blank to touch the controls. He had the option and I talked him through what I was doing, will he come back? He may for another try, but I doubt he'll ever get a licence. It's his right to go up if he wants and nobody else's to tell him he can't. We're fulfilling our mandate by offering training, we don't allow people to continually do trial lessons however, but if he wants to continue to go up, then he has the option of joining the club and going up with other members on a cost sharing basis.
How can there be anything dodgy in that?
These flights aren't just jollies and the training industry as a whole has to be very careful that they aren't seen as such. As I've said, it's all semantics, but the thought behind these flights is to provide a training benefit, not simply as entertainment.
If the idea got to our friends in Gatwick that this was the case, then the whole industry could be in the sh**e, as we do need them. So I do take them very seriously because if we don't, we may not be allowed to do them anymore and that would be a disaster for everyone.

[rustle]

However as I think Rustle-X, Bose and I would say it doesnt change the colour of the bath water however much you may wish it did.

bose and I may share some interests, but we ain't married to each other... :O

[S-Works]

:p bose and I may share some interests, but we ain't married to each other... :O

Rejected again...... :p

[Fuji Abound]

I'd marry you any time Rustle :ouch: - if I wasnt already :{ :) .

[gcolyer]

bugger all...

Fair enough:)

[gcolyer]

since when has that stopped us? :p

This is True:)