Rotorway Examiner needed in the UK.

[jellycopter]

Do any of you FE(H)'s out there fancy doing the odd LPC / LST on the Rotorway Exec?

For the last couple of years, since Iain King hung up his gloves, I've been the only FE(H) conducting tests/checks on Rotorways. I've recently sold my own Rotorway and no longer have an immediate interest. Also, I've started to get quite busy in my main corperate free-lance work so I really don't get the time to do the Rotorways any more. Unfortunately, being the only FE(H) at the moment, if I quit it will effectively 'ground' about a dozen aircraft as their (generally) low-time owners won't be able to renew their ratings when they lapse. Consequently, I feel duty-bound to keep going but it just doesn't fit in with my personal circumstances anymore.

Anybody out there feel like taking up the reins?

John Jackson

[jellycopter]

I guess that'll be a 'No' then!

JJ

[VeeAny]

If no one else wants to do it I will.

But I'll have to get rated first.

How about sharing the workload ?

GS

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Out of interest, what's the "Regimental Loud Officer" doing these days now that he doesn't apparently need his gloves?

[md 600 driver]

THUD

He is still around on buis jets ,twins and gazelles
but not on rotorways anymore

[Thud_and_Blunder]

I don't recognise the TLA "WAN", but I have to hold up my hand and say that I was the Crab exchange QHI at Middle Wallop who was entrusted with Ian King's training on 671. Apologies to any/all who may subsequently have suffered assorted trauma as a result! Just curious to know how he fared after leaving the Air Ambo world, Waddington branch - it's always interesting to hear how your ex-studes get on in real life after training.

[Whirlygig]

I thought "Wan" was a nickname given to anyone with the surname King; like Chalky White, Smudger Smith and Buck Taylor!!!

Cheers

Whirls

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Oh dear, I really am having one of those days, aren't I? :ouch:

Thanks, Whirls. :ok:

[jellycopter]

Gary

Thank you for your interest. Having a very busy week but I'll pm you in due course with further details.

JJ

[Whirlybird]

Slight digression....what do you need and have to do to become an FE(H). Don't get excited; I don't think I have enough hours, and I don't fly Rotorways. But just curious. Maybe next time.....

(Yes, I know I could look up the requirements, but it's easier to ask on here.)

[Camp Freddie]

Whirlybird,

as you are feeling to tired to look it up, I will help you :)

1) 1000 hours total helicopter time minimum
2) 250 hours flight instruction minimum
3) Apply to CAA for authorisation to do course, which is dependent on experience and geographical need
4) do an FE(H) course with an FIC (3 days I think)
5) do a flight test with Fred Cross

err thats it really

regards

CF

[Whirlybird]

Camp Freddie,

Many thanks. I wasn't too tired, just too busy. Not with flying, I might add - weather's horrible. :{ But I knew it would be quicker to get an answer on here than to trawl through LASORS - and it was. :ok: Anyway, I was right; I don't have enough hours.

[Camp Freddie]

Whirly,

the hours are not the problem, the majority of FI's have those, the biggest problem is geographical need, the CAA need to see that an FE is actually required in the part of the world where you are based.

regards

CF

[Robbo Jock]

Isn't that a little 'restraint of trade' ish? "No you can't become an FE(H) 'cos there's already one in your town". Can you imagine that working with, say, plumbers? Quite apart from stopping an individual 'getting on' I'm surprised it's allowed under UK/EU law.
Stopping someone becoming an FE because they don't have enough hours or instructional experience or basically just aren't good enough, I can understand and heartily concur with but preventing them adding another string to their bow income-wise due 'geographical need' seems wrong to me.

[Whirlygig]

Restraint of trade? Age discrimination? Monopolies? Since when have these little matters troubled the CAA? :}

Cheers

Whirls

[Whirlybird]

But we have a situation now where an examiner is needed who can operate nationwide for Rotorway owners. Suppose I were to tell the CAA that (I can't as I don't have 1000 rotary hours, but if I did), would that make a difference? Or are the CAA totally focussed on this idea of geographical need.

[muffin]

It used to be the same situation for AMEs, but I read elsewhere that the CAA have now had to change that policy as it has been deemed anticompetitive under EU law.

[Robbo Jock]

Whirls,
True, true. They are pretty much literally a law unto themselves.

Whirly,
Presumably, in this case, the geographical need is the whole country and you could argue that as no-one is currently doing it, then you should be allowed (given hours, etc.) Then, when you are happily servicing the whole nation (ooer missus!) you could then argue against someone in, say, Cornwall or Aberdeen becoming a Rotorway FE because you consider those areas your stamping ground.

Muffin,
That's basically what I thought - anticompetitive. If AME's have had those rules lifted, I'd imagine it would make maintenance of the FE equivalent untenable.


But, as Whirls said, these sorts of trivia have rarely troubled the CAA.

[VeeAny]

Robbo

The geographical need referred has nothing to do with whether someone else could do it, suitably qualified or not.

Once you are an FE you can test where you like, the Geographical need you have to prove is for an FE in that area. If someone else is already nominated at your airfield even if they have nothing to do with you and you are the only school then unless you can prove the need for another they are 'allocated' for want of a better way to put it that area. Or if you want to be nominated at someone else airfield there is nothing to stop you.

Means that you can be authorised on the basis of a need nowhere near you (can work to your advantage). Once authorised as I say you can test where you like.

This is the way it was when I got authorised and I don't think its changed, don't necessarily think its a great system myself but it is what seems to be applied.

Gary

[Robbo Jock]

Thanks Gary. Seems even more strange then if one can examine where one likes once authorised.

Just one of those eccentricities we Brits revel in I suppose. :)

[jellycopter]

Many thanks to all for your responses and PMs. I'm run off my feet at the moment and can't give this the attention it deserves. I'll get back onto it after the Christmas break and hopefully we'll get someone type-rated to take on the job.

In the meantime, the chaps at Southern Helicopters are very helpful and would gladly answer any questions you might have. www.rotorway.co.uk

Cheers

JJ