Why bother with a UK PPLH

[Out of Date]

If you have a UK PPLH with several type ratings on it then you have to do an annual LPC test each year on each machine to remain current, which apart from the logistics involved is obviously very expensive.

Where as with a USA PPLH a BFR test every other year on one machine will suffice for all the single engine helicopters you are competent to fly (up to a given weight).

Current legislation dictates this annual check but is it really necessary as a pilot who fly's regularly or more than 12 hours a year is obviously keeping current by the very fact he is flying. The examiner sits there going through the same motions you both went through for the previous god knows how many times before with the inevitable end result of yes you are still safe to fly and that will be ex pounds thank you good buy.

So why bother with the CAA licence when the FAA one offers a more sensible deal and better value for money.

I don't think it matters where you learn to fly in the world so long as you have a good instructor who you get on with and you can relate to.

I don't know how you guy's out there that do hundreds of hours a year put up with this as it must be very frustrating especially when you have probably done more hours than the person who is checking you out.

Its a rip off and unnecessary, when is the Committee Against Aviation going to toe the line and see common sence.

[Aesir]

It´s not just UK CAA that requires LPC for each type. It´s required in all JAA member countries.

I myself hold 8 JAA helicopter type ratings and I see it as necessary to stay current in each type to do LPC in each and every type. Some of the type I don´t get to fly much and when I do it´s doing emergency manuevers as I am Flight Examiner.

However if you hold type ratings in several piston helicopters it is enough to do just LPC (Licence proficiency check) in just one of the types if you have at least logged two hours on all type´s within the year. So it´s not all bad :ok:

JAR-FCL 2.245


(3) for single-engine piston helicopters,
as listed in Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 2.245(b)(3),
at least the proficiency check in accordance with
JAR-FCL 2.245 (b)(1) on one of the applicable
types held provided that the applicant has fulfilled
at least 2 hours pilot-in-command flight time on
the other type(s) during the validity period to
which that revalidation proficiency check shall
carry across.



I can see that your comment regarding BFR is relevant in the US. Where a 200hr CFI wonder can give the BFR.

I don't know how you guy's out there that do hundreds of hours a year put up with this as it must be very frustrating especially when you have probably done more hours than the person who is checking you out.


However in JAA land all LPC are done by Examiners who are very experienced.

[Hughes500]

See how many FAA helicopter guys there are in the Uk befors deciding. A question for you - how many types do you carry on your licence ? If you are only flying a few hours a year in each then should you have a one off check ride ?

[Whirlygig]

If you have a UK PPLH with several type ratings on it then you have to do an annual LPC test each year on each machine to remain current,
Not strictly true. Single engine piston helicopters all require a type rating and two hours a year must be flown in each type but the LPC need only be done on one of those types, not all of them.

By all means do your FAA PPL(H). I chose not to because I eventually wish to fly commercially in the UK and an FAA ATPL(H) would make that a bit tricky!

Personally I don't mind being checked out once a year as I enjoy having my wrists slapped by my examiner for all the bad habits that I've got into (in a year!!) and it forces me to revise and practice emergency procedures - a good thing in my mind. The marginal cost of the examiner's time is really only a few quid on top of the hire of the machine itself.

Cheers

Whirls

[Flying Pencil]

Whirlygig,

The way I read it, if you look at the types covered by this rule it won't help the vast majority of helicopter pilots who fly Robinsons as they aren't included in the appendix. Ok if you fly Enstroms and Schweitzers though.

FP.

[Up & Away]

Aesir you said "However in JAA land all LPC are done by Examiners who are very experienced."

Are you sure?? Ask to see their log book and even then to a check on them!!
Sadly You will be surprised.
Check JAR to see how little experience is needed now to be a FE.
Its CAA uk allows Each Training School to nominate their own. :ugh:

Heilds at present has the least experienced examiner but thats only a rumour perhaps you know one with even less.

[nigelh]

I think you can also do just one checkride on single turbines as well which will cover you for all, but again you must have logged x hrs pic and be current on the other types. This is a sensible move , so i guess it must be a mistake:rolleyes:

[Whirlygig]

Whirlygig,

The way I read it, if you look at the types covered by this rule it won't help the vast majority of helicopter pilots who fly Robinsons as they aren't included in the appendix. Ok if you fly Enstroms and Schweitzers though.

FP.
Oh dear, how sad, never mind!!! :}

I have just looked at the most recent JAR-FCL2 appendix 1 as quoted by Aesir and Robinsons are listed. Why shouldn't they be? I don't understand your interpretation.

What the new JAR-FCL2 DOES say though that is interesting is that the LPC must be taken on the type least recently used!

Cheers

Whirls

[Flying Pencil]

Whirlygig,

Perhaps i've got it wrong but appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 2.245(b)3 does not include Robinsons. I'm reading this on the JAA website.

FP.

[Whirlygig]

http://www.jaa.nl/publications/jars/444077-updated.pdf

Page 102 of 170 page 1-F-12 - I see Robinson!

Why would this not be included amongst other SEPs?

Cheers

Whirls

[Flying Pencil]

Whirlygig,

Yes you would see Robinson there!! Now try looking in this section, JAR-FCL 2.245(b)3 page 119. Don't know why there not there but there not!

FP.

[helilad]

Robinsons not included as FAA ,JAA and even its manufacturer wants Robbo pilots to have a check out every year .I think its smart as Robbos have low-enertia rotor systems and have lots of problems with mast bumping and the older ones with carb icing.

Aesir SET are also grouped together now for the purpose of LPC providing one has +300hrs rotor +15hrs on type and 2 hrs in the previous 12 mths on each type to be revalidated .You must do the annual LPC on a dfferent type each year ,in rotation if possible.ie Say you have 5 types :B206 H500 AS350 EC120 EC130 e.g.

yr1 B206
yr2 H500
yr3 AS350
yr4 EC120
yr5 EC130

[Whirlygig]

Whirlygig,

Yes you would see Robinson there!! Now try looking in this section, JAR-FCL 2.245(b)3 page 119. Don't know why there not there but there not!

FP.
Well blow me, you're right! :eek: I can only imagine it's because of the reasons Helilad has mentioned. As I only have half an hour in an R22, I'd never noticed!

However, ultimately, I don't think it's a bad thing to do LPCs. I dread them every year and get nervous when my nasty little habits are pointed out to me but hopefully I end up wiser after the event.

Cheers

Whirls

[helicopter-redeye]

The marginal cost of the examiner's time is really only a few quid on top of the hire of the machine itself.



I noted this year that it was a stunning £217.00 (inc VAT at 17.5%) and EXCL the cost of the machine.

Not exactly 'marginal'

h-r:*

[helilad]

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=40760189a03dfea0b501608f33820a45&rgn=div5&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.1.2&idno=14

Robinson pilots should read SFAR 73 on this thread .The first line in red.

[Whirlygig]

I noted this year that it was a stunning £217.00 (inc VAT at 17.5%) and EXCL the cost of the machine.

Not exactly 'marginal'

h-r:*
I am charged dual training for my LPC with an examiner. My instructor/examiner must be cheap then eh?

I do appreciate that this is different to the licence skills test.

Cheers

Whirls

[kissmysquirrel]

Yes but Whirly, you have an examiner who is a 'top bloke' and all round 'good egg', humourous and above all, fun to spend time with!:E !!

[Whirlygig]

Yes but Whirly, you have an examiner who is a 'top bloke' and all round 'good egg', humourous and above all, fun to spend time with!:E !!
Yes he is :ok: and he's cheap :ok: and he reads this :ok: :D

Cheers

Whirls

[idle stop]

Redeye:
That's £185 plus VAT? For an LPC? And who got the 'dual' bit of the hire fee? Examiner or operator? Sounds a bit steep!
The CAA 'guideline' charge for a PPL skills test carried out by a FE(H) is, I believe, the same as the CAA would charge for a staff examiner. That's currently £175. (Which has to be one of the CAA's bargain offers!) Guidance is that the workload required for the FE is such that normally no more than 2 tests should be carried out in one day. So, half a day's work, OK. But an LPC (flight time about 25 to 30 mins) should be a matter of an average of 1.5 hours work for a Brief, Flight Test and Debrief, including checking logbook hours and signing the forms etc. So on the PPL skills test guidance criteria, I wouldn't dream of charging more than £85; a bit more when it's an initial type rating test.
I do not distinguish between PPL and professional pilots in setting a fee: same either way.
(And no, I'm not touting for business and anyway, I'm anonymous!)
As it happens, I pay my own examiner auth fees to the CAA personally, and any examinees pay me directly. I can understand a FTO/TRTO bumping up the test fee passed on to candidates in order to cover general overheads, if the fee is recovered through the school for an employee.
If the examiner is not local, it would be reasonable for him/her to ask for travel expenses.
Personally, I encourage all the PPLs that I test to have a flight with an instructor every 6 months. OK, so thats £45-£50 per hour on top of normal hire charges, or operating costs for owners, but still money well spent: and it generally shows, to the good, when pilot turns up for his LPC.
The common SEP/SET is good for us all. Shame about the R22 and R44. BTW, when AL4 to FCL-2 is implemented, the current LTE allowing 3 hours for conversion to R22 and R44 will go: it'll be back to 5 hours for these two types.

[misterbonkers]

I think Up & Away is referring to Hields' (not Heilds) Chief Pilot who has circa 2000hrs and flies at least 5 types. He's 24 and has been working & flying in the industry since he started on work experience.

U&A - sour grapes?

Its the same old cack in industry. The only way to have experience is to build it. If you can take a gruelling to get the FE/TRE qualification is that not enough? Is U&A suggesting that the CAA Chief Examiner is too lax?

What is the industry supposed to do when the more senior experienced pilots hang up their flying boots? Surely its too late to react then?

[Up & Away]

"all FE's are 'very' experienced"
My comment is only to point out this is only an assumption and certainly Not Fact.
Sour grapes about what?? := I've had my morgages paid off ten years ago
This is not an attack on any individual.
I am in no way upset with James and his progress, I wish him well.
{Nor with the CAA chief for having to live with rules he did not write}
I was trying to findout if anyone knew of a FE with LESS experienced than James!!
I felt it supported the thread that you may be better off with a FAA licence

[Aesir]

I based my statement that all FE´s are very experienced on my own experiences with Scandinavian aviation authorities where to my knowledge all FE´s are highly experienced.

I admit that I am not that familiar with UK CAA requirements for FE. However in the case above if the individual has +2000hrs then he´s certainly not inexperienced and actually has good experience for his age.

However back to the original question. It seems to me that the poster "out of date" should reevaluate his view of JAA PPL(H) training and certificate.

He´s information seem to be that LPC are required for all helicopter types which is not true in light of the posts above. The only difference from FAA PPL is that with a JAA PPL he will need to do LPC once a year with an JAA Flight examiner (somewhat experienced :) ) instead of every two years a BFR with a FAA instructor.

And seriously. It really is a good idea for a PPL to have a thorough checkout once a year since he probably will not be flying much more than 10-50 hrs.


But an LPC (flight time about 25 to 30 mins) should be a matter of an average of 1.5 hours work for a Brief, Flight Test and Debrief,

?? 25 min for an LPC! That´s very unusual in the rest of JAA. In my guidelines a 1hr LPC is minimum and if all the maneuvers are completed as required then 1 hr is often not enough. My LPC´s usually last 1.2 to 1.3 hrs.

[Out of Date]

Many pilots fly regularly and some may have been flying for years and have a vast amount of experience that does not need to be checked out each year or on each type.


There is nothing wrong with any pilot practising emergency procedures (should they either wish to or need to) however one does not need to be line tested so frequently as proof of capabilities.


If a person has a need to practice any manoeuvre and, for peace of mind would like another pair of more experienced hands next to them. Then there are lots of pilots out there who, like me, are willing and able to sit in as safety pilot to advise/assist /take over or what ever with the confidence of carrying out the same, who do not charge a penny for there services and are just happy to help out.


As for this business of five hours dual and then a type rating test for additional choppers, then once again if you have been sat in with an owner or operator or you have the knowledge/experience to handle the said machine, then that's where the good old Yanks with their FAA licence see common sense and win hands down as you can simply just get in and get on with it.


Now of course everybody is not the same and that's why you have some people passing their GFTs after ninety-five hours or one year and some at thirty five hours or one month but the need to penalise everyone is out of order. Can you imagine if you had to take a re-val. of your car test every year and in addition for every different vehicle that you drive, no way hoseh. It's high time our Gestapo CAA took a leaf out of the FAA and followed suit.


It all boils down to freedom of choice if you want to take extra lessons or extra checks/tests, no problem, but it should be up to you and not forced on you. :)

[Hughes500]

Up and away - what rubbish you speak. The CAA does not allow each school to have an examiner. Where do you get this info from ? Fred Cross only allows a certain amount in the country - ask Bounemouth helicoters ! Who are not allowed to nominate one.
You have to be recommeneded to be an FE but that does not mean you will get it. You have to prove to the caa your ability and experience and the fact there is a need in your area for an examiner

[Up & Away]

Hughes500 := Don't be abusive
Read what I wrote and not what you think I wrote :ugh:
You gave the reasons in your own reply

[Hughes500]

Up and away, it is you being abusive to others on the forum. You obviously have an axe to grind with Hields examiner. What I have written is different from your views and "as it is".
Please tell all what is your beef so we can all be better informed on your superior knowledge ! Before you are under any missaprehensions I was refering to your first post. Incidentally experience if you mean hours does not mean you are a good pilot. I have examined many professional pilots with a serious amount of hours who quite frankly would be put to shame by some low houred ppl's. Please inform us how you would decide who should be an examiner and who shouldn't