Cross channel check out!

[pistongone]

I visited one of the flying clubs at Biggin Hill today with a view to joining as i have just recently moved back to London. The one i liked had a nice fleet of clean and smart aircraft and the people i spoke with were pleasant and helpfull. I was taken out to the aircraft and shown around, after donning the yellow jacket of course:yuk: Back in the club asking the usual q's, how many hours per day if you stay away over night and currency requirements etc. I was told that if i wanted to go foreign i would need a "Cross channel check out?". I asked what one of these cross channel check outs entailed exactly. Filling out the F/P and other documents and an ELB check and how you get on with ATC in France! I pointed out that a join for right downwind for 14 is the same at L2K as any where else and they all speak English ICAO 4 or better!
I asked if they had an official cylabus for this check for me to study, obviously they didnt and so i asked if i could forgo taking the CFI on a free blast to France on the grounds that i have flown all over Europe, as a quick look in the log book would confirm. I was told to have a chat with the CFI when i come for my check ride. I really like the aircraft and a block of 5 hours worked @ £114/hr for a decent warrior with a GNS430(plus landing fee though:(). So i guess i will just have to try and win the CFI over or just take him on the first trip, but at £20 odd/hr for his time i do think its a bit of a liberty!
One last point, they didnt know which local euro countries were now insisting on Mode S? Any one know the latest on that please?.
Cheers PG.

[BackPacker]

So i guess i will just have to try and win the CFI over

If you've already flown over all of Europe and have the logbook to prove it, I can't imagine they're going to force you to blast up and down to L2K just to prove the engine doesn't quit on you when overwater.

One last point, they didnt know which local euro countries were now insisting on Mode S? Any one know the latest on that please?.

All countries in Europe, including the UK, will require mode S, eventually, in large areas, or even all, of their airspace.

However, each country has its own timetable for this. In the Netherlands they've made mode S mandatory above a certain FL and within certain TMZs, and the mandatory FL is coming down in stages. Other countries are no different but at the end of the day, you're going to have to look up each countries AIP, and possibly one or more associated AICs, to find out what the exact requirements are at which particular time.

So if the aircraft you're thinking of renting doesn't have mode S, be prepared for a serious additional amount of homework in planning your flight.

As a starting point, here's the Dutch AIC about mode-S for VFR flights:

Aeronautical Information Circular Series NETHERLANDS A 07/08 (http://www.ais-netherlands.nl/aim/080522-080703/eAIP/html/eAIC/EH-eAIC-08-07-A-en-GB.html)

The same thing by the way applies to the mandatory carriage of a 406 MHz ELT: This requirement is being phased in, but each country has a different timetable.

This is the Dutch take on this subject:

http://www.ais-netherlands.nl/aim/AICB/pdf/b07-08.pdf

[Rod1]

“All countries in Europe, including the UK, will require mode S, eventually, in large areas, or even all, of their airspace.”

That is not the CAA’s current policy. In France you will not require Mode S, but you will need Mode C.

Completely agree the CCC is a rip of.

Rod1

[B2N2]

Completely agree the CCC is a rip of.

No it isn't.
Even though you may have flown across Europe they still want to verify your skills.
Every self respecting decent club should do this.
The very fact that they require it means to me that they are serious about there business.
You're willing to pay 114 GBP/hr for the airplane and not an additional 20 for the Instructor?
You might learn something, go ahead and do it.
At the very least it's a confirmation from an independent source that you skills are up to scratch.

[Duchess_Driver]

Firstly, you'll find that most schools do treat this channel check with a bit of common sense - and although I don't know which 'club' you went to I'm sure that they will approach the situation with an even handed view.

Three things though....

Firstly, their toys, their rules! If it were my investment you were taking across water into a foreign airfield you'd be convincing me you knew exactly what you were talking about and handling everything I asked you to do on the club checkout with ease, probably before I'd asked you to do it!

Secondly, logbook evidence? Means jack! Had a 14,000 hour airline captain who'd flown to every airport in Europe in his long and illustrious career come to join our group. Could he file a flight plan?....nope, Ops did that. Did he know what a gen dec was? Nope....Did he understand a VFR chart?....nope, hadn't seen one for years. Could he land the thing?....nope, technique was completely different.

Thirdly, last time I went to L2K it was a quiet weekday. Even so, the controller had us join downwind LH for 14 from the Cap even though a base join was requested. The traffic behind was given a base join, but as he was much further behind he conflicted with us as we were 3/4's of the way downwind and had to throw an orbit for spacing. Then, we conflicted with traffic joining opposite base despite being afforded priority by yon controller. In short, a hectic arrival! Have you been there at a weekend recently? Even though it is alot quieter nowadays, weekends are still extremely busy and not everybody on freq. is speaking English - you're out of the loop, not the full picture! No big deal for a seasoned aviator - but for someone who hasn't done it before it's a daunting process.

So, please, don't be so dismissive of the cross chanel check - not everybody is as experienced, as qualified or as confident!.

And yes, I actually do have a SYLLABUS for the event - to include but not limited to paperwork completion and submission (timings, estimates et al), survival equipment requirements and use, ditching procedures, effects of the 'haze' layer over water, foreign airspace usage and differences from what happens in the UK.

Bon voyage!

DD

[Fuji Abound]

Firstly, their toys, their rules!

.. .. .. and your money, your choice.

Could he file a flight plan?....nope, Ops did that. Did he know what a gen dec was? Nope....Did he understand a VFR chart?....nope, hadn't seen one for years. Could he land the thing?....nope, technique was completely different.

The paperwork part is unrelated to channel crossing - it can all be demonstrated in the club house. The landing technique in L2Q surprisingly is the same as in Blighty - you either can, or you cant.

No big deal for a seasoned aviator - but for someone who hasn't done it before it's a daunting process.

There are a few places like that here as well.

Seriously, if you havent done it before a cross channel "check" may not be a bad thing - but you will have to do better as to the reasons why. :)

The log book does mean a lot if you know how to read it - and a club check out with the pilot around the local cabbage patch will tell you whether the pilot is likely to make it across the channel without mishap.

[LH2]

The bit I would have a problem with is, did you say the CFI of a flying club wants GBP20.-/hr to fly with you?

What kind of club is that, exactly? Neither the one where I did my night qualification, nor the one where I currently fly charge for an instructor (be they PPL or CPL licenced) It's a club and we/they do it for the joy of it.

With regards to the need for a "cross-channel" checkout, as opposed to a general assessment of your flying competence, the only thought that comes to mind, from this side of the channel, is "quelle connerie!" :E

[Say again s l o w l y]

Not being funny, but as an ex CFI, if someone had come to me with significant European experience, then I wouldn't have dreamed of expecting a cross channel check out.

People seem to think that aircraft fly differently on the other side of the channel, when obviously they don't.

Yes French VFR charts are a bit differnt, but to be honest I know a fair few PPL's who could show most FI's how the things work rather than vice versa.

Cross channel checkouts are an utter load of b*lls frankly.

If you were a bit unsure, then of course taking an experienced person with you is a good idea, it doesn't need to be an FI though.

I've certainly never seen any insurance certificates that ask for someone to be accompanied on a European jaunt.

[LH2]

DD,

Three things though....

You would not happen to be the CFI in question, would you? :)

Firstly, their toys, their rules!

Yep. That's fair enough--entirely agree with that.

Secondly, logbook evidence? Means jack!

No it doesn't. From the logbook you can get a decent idea of what kind of flying the person does, how often, in what planes, etc., etc. Evidence of long-range touring on GA machines, provided that the pilot's flying standard is consistent with the logbook evidence, and his general attitude and knowledge are satisfactory should be sufficient to decide whether or not the guy flies one of your club's planes.

In the event that he's found capable of local flying but one is not quite sure how he would cope abroad, surely that can be discussed, and a trip with a more experienced member of the club can be suggested? That would of course either be shared costs, or the person accompanying gets a free lunch in France, depending on who logs the hours... but paying someone to go with you? Sorry but in my book that counts as a rip-off. Remember it's a club we're talking about--it's supposed to be a social thing, not a business.

Thirdly, last time I went to L2K [....] a hectic arrival! [....] weekends are still extremely busy and not everybody on freq. is speaking English - you're out of the loop

So it gets busy? Big deal :hmm: Again, if not sure whether the newcomer has the experience to cope with a busy GA aerodrome, sharing a first trip somewhere busy with another pilot should give him the confidence/exposure he needs. But, sorry to insist, he should not have to pay for the other guy to come along.

As for not everyone speaking English on the radio, of course not--it's France. However, although you may not have the full picture, everyone else will and the local pilots (who by and large understand English well) will take care to stay out of the way of the rosbifs as needed.

Just how a presumably non-French speaking English CFI is going to help in that situation beats me. Meanwhile, if you do happen to go down mid-channel, you've just unnecessarily killed some poor sod who didn't need to be on that plane to start with.

Quite honestly, the whole thing strikes me as nonsense. Inventing rules for the sake of rules, as usual.

Anyway, as for mode S, just check the AIP of the country(-ies) you will be flying in, and if in doubt, call the relevant air traffic services for some first hand info.

The aircraft I have flown lately either have had mode S installed for a while now, or do not have/use a transponder at all (in the Alps, where it's mostly useless anyway) so I'm not really in the loop on that one.

[IO540]

The reason we have cross-channel checkouts is that the UK PPL training machine doesn't teach the pilot how to go anywhere useful.

If there was a significant cross country element, done using radio nav (dead reckoning doesn't work well for a flight over lots of water) one would not need the CCC.

But to apply the CCC to even experienced x/country pilots is silly.

[pistongone]

It seems the general consensus is that the CCC is a bit of a money maker for the club. Remember this would be after the hours check ride! However, i can see that a low houred pilot may find it usefull, but why not just offer a safety pilot for such instances? For example, Biggin to L2K is appx 78nm straight line or appx 90nm if you do the Dover-Cap dog leg. Not the most challenging cross country even for a newby, only difference being the fir crossing eta to calculate. Now, without the CCC the same low houred pilot could go to Denham(who ask for a local area familiarisation check thing? If renting from them:=(how do they apply that to visiting pilots:confused:)) to meet a freind say and then go to Barton, or Manchester City even, using the low level corridor and threading round quite a lot of airspace. Basically if they are not happy with your flying after the hours check the problem(s) should be discussed there and then. Having said all that. Their planes are very well kept and i did quite like the place so i will be taking a check ride with them and hope the CFI see's sense and just oversees the paperwork on the first trip to see all is in order. Thinking back to my first foreign trip, there was allways some one around who knew what to put in which box etc when doing the F/P etc etc, thats the whole point of being in a club isn't it?
Safe flying all PG.
I just had a look at google earth and just make it even easier for the newby pilot, Biggin is on a 78nm Looooooooooooong final for L2K:}

[Duchess_Driver]

LH2....

No I'm not the CFI of the school concerned......

Do people not read......?????:ugh::ugh::ugh: I said in my opening line...

and although I don't know which 'club' you went to I'm sure that they will approach the situation with an even handed view.


Then...

Firstly, their toys, their rules! If it were my investment you were taking across water into a foreign airfield you'd be convincing me you knew exactly what you were talking about and handling everything I asked you to do on the club checkout with ease, probably before I'd asked you to do it!


and, of course, you're right.....your money, your choice. Spend it where you want.


That would of course either be shared costs, or the person accompanying gets a free lunch in France, depending on who logs the hours... but paying someone to go with you? Sorry but in my book that counts as a rip-off.


Your argument has holes in it.....not paying someone, but buying them lunch...?

Remember it's a club we're talking about--it's supposed to be a social thing, not a business.

Is it...????? I work for a flying school, run as a business. We run CC checks. People expect everything for nothing these days. My boss has to show a profit or the 'nice, clean, functioning aeroplanes' that people hire won't be that way for long. £114 per hour for London...that's good. £20 per hour for an instructor, that's very good!

I can just see it now....Little Johnny goes off to L2K unbriefed and unchecked with a freshly minted PPL (which, of course he is entitled to do!) and something terrible happens - who would you all be pointing the finger at?

There was much hooting and bleeting recently because a CFI let a pilot depart into known IMC with terrible consequences. When schools take a responsible attitude and exercise a 'duty of care' we are accused of profiteering!

Make up your :mad: minds!

[Duchess_Driver]

Pistonbroke.....


I feel your focus is not perhaps where it should be - - - you're happy to have a safety pilot.....just don't want to pay for it!

Denham ask for a club checkout, which includes local famil, because we operate within the London CTR.

Visiting pilots are (or should be) briefed by the tower when they call for PPR - that's why it says in Pooleys PPR By Telephone. You'd be amazed at how many people don't either phone first OR/AND don't fully read Pooleys and end up infringing class A. Most of the time, Heathrow Special or Northolt (whoever holds the aerospace that day) simply and quietly issue a sqwauk via Denham tower and vector the offender out of harms way...other times Departures get delayed.

Now, are we profiteering......or are we acting responsibly?

[Fuji Abound]

Duchess Driver

Sorry, you have lost me.

Here is my view.

The issue with cross channel rides is you can find yourself on instruments even on surprisingly good days. This could be an issue for PPLs who have not seen these conditions before.

There are a few differences that a PPL may not have seen before. The paperwork you have mentioned. However a chat about the pocedures, which frequency you will work across channel, what to do about the FIR boundary etc can usefully explained.

Personally as part of the club check I would have a review of basic instrument skills to ensure if the pilot lost the horizon and other visual references they would cope. If they demonstrated they could I run through the paperwork and differences with them to ensure they were up to speed. I would then be happy they go.

If they already had a few trips in their log book and their club check went well I'd be happy enough in any event.

[LH2]

Hi DD,

No I'm not the CFI of the school concerned

Well, I'm sure pistongone will be glad to hear that! :}

Your argument has holes in it.....not paying someone, but buying them lunch...?

Yep, the difference between being coerced into paying and a voluntary gesture of appreciation. Capisce la differenza? :ok:

Is it...????? I work for a flying school, run as a business

Yes it is. We're not talking about where you work, we're talking about the club Mr. Gone is looking into joining.

I can just see it now....Little Johnny goes off to L2K unbriefed and unchecked with a freshly minted PPL (which, of course he is entitled to do!) and something terrible happens - who would you all be pointing the finger at?

Ah, the Nanny Ideology, I understand now.

There was much hooting and bleeting recently because a CFI let a pilot depart into known IMC with terrible consequences. When schools take a responsible attitude and exercise a 'duty of care' we are accused of profiteering!

Is that the one from a couple years ago where a low-currency student was basically coerced into flying somewhere else for the school's convenience, with a "safety pilot" who didn't even have a valid licence? Perhaps I'm thinking of a different accident report, but if not, that seemed a pretty good case of neglecting one's 'duty of care' and profiteering, so perhaps you would care to use a better example next time? :ouch:

In any case, just to make it clear: I am accusing you and any proponents of the idea of a "compulsory cross channel check" and similar superfluous, ad-hoc "rulemaking" of not acting with your customer's safety and best interests in mind. Whether that's out of greed, fear, or stupidity I wouldn't know and it probably doesn't make a difference anyway.

Perhaps, as a training venue, it would be better to put your efforts into taking IO540's suggestion onboard and making sure your students come out properly trained in the first place.

I did my first long range trip (1800nm, three countries, three days) with 55hr TT and everyone was most supportive, plane's owner included. Mind you, I was very disappointed when we had to change plans for my PPL x-country after I learned that Morocco wouldn't let me in solo as a mere student. That was devastating, I tell you :E

On the other hand, being in the South of England, I presume your school wouldn't have any difficulty in programming a hop or two down to la France as part of your PPL syllabus? I'm sure your students would love it (and any decent student pays for his instructor's lunch on a landaway so there is something for everyone :E)

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Firstly, their toys, their rules!
.. .. .. and your money, your choice.

All there is to say on this one, really. Move on, nothing to see here.

[pistongone]

DD i neither want or asked for a safety pilot, free or not. So i dont think its my focus that needs to be checked. I was merely suggesting that if it is considered prudent to have a pilot accompanied on a short 90 mile jaunt that happens to cross an Fir boundary when the pilot has not requested this then send someone as a safety pilot. Personally it would be a bit difficult as myself mrs p and my friend plus his wife uses up all the vacant seats and as they have agreed to pay half the bill and get lunch the unwanted guest would have to be less than 30kg all up ready to fly including the gold bars and captains hat with the obligatory corporate logo etc. I still maintain a trip from biggin to say carlisle with a stop at denham after obtaining the telephone briefing before departure to collect a friend would be more challenging and deserving of a safety pilot or instructor than a short hop over la Manche. I would also ask you to justify charging someone who has over 500hrs in the log book to go up with an instructor to learn the local area. If any pilot has passed nav'xs etc etc then why would they need you to show them something they can do themselves if arriving from another airfield without an instructor onboard or are you of the opinion that, like IO Says the PPL syllabus doesnt prepare pilots well enough to cope in the present day environment of aviation? If this is your position then may i suggest it is your focus that needs adjustment to whit the CAA and the regime they sadle the instructors of today to teach in. So when i am given the approval to go foreign after however many hoops through which i have to jump, could you tell me if i will be allowed to fly to Belgium sans mode s. As suprisingly the people i spoke with didnt know the answer and they want me to do a CCC?

[basil faulty]

I think you will find it is a requirement of the flying order book, the same as any other club at Biggin.

[flyingman-of-kent]

Why not just do your main checkout flight via L2K? Combine the two, also enjoy a spot of lunch and a chance to chat to the CFI or FI you do it with.

If it is the "club" I think it is they only require this CCC once, and it is then valid for all times. It is all part of their hire rules, and as such I am afraid you will just have to go along with it.

[Fuji Abound]

I think you will find it is a requirement of the flying order book

Oh goodie, well thats ok then. :)

I think my friend Getrude has aready summed it up. :) :)

[dublinpilot]

If it's not too far to France, why don't you suggest that instead of a checkout followed by a cross channel checkout, that your initial checkout is a cross water checkout with the CFI...combine the two into one?

Everyone's happy...

[robinpiper]

I came up against this a couple of years ago. Had a cross channel check with one flight school, school closes down. Joined new school had local checkout all fine, few local flights solo completed. Booked aircraft for a day trip to L2K.

On day of flight I was confronted by the CFI who said I need a CC check.
He was not happy even when I showed him my logbook showing a flight with a instructor 3 months before!

He only gave in when I started flashing life jackets about, presented him with flight plans, customs forms & W&B sheet all completed correctly and started questioning him about the aircrafts papers & who will be claiming the fuel drawback.

Have since completed a IMC rating. One of the reasons for doing so was to get logbook evidence of my experience on instruments for cross channel flights. I don't want to take a instructor everytime I hire from a different flight school its just a way to con a bit more money from you.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Cross Channel Checkouts are generally a total waste of time. You can cover everything you need to in a 30 minute chat. Any remotely competent PPL should be able to manage a trip to Le Touqet.

I've never understood why schools get their knickers in a twist about crossing the channel.

Actually that's wrong, I do know why. There are too many inexperienced FI's and CFI's who actually consider crossing the channel to be a "big thing" when it really isn't.

It might be in the flying order book, but all that needs to be done is to insert a line such as "..or at the CFI's discretion if the member has relevant experience."

Not rocket science. I've done many trips to Le Touqet with PPL's, but only at their bequest. Many times I've done it for the price of lunch, since I often did naff all. I was just there as a backup and unneeded, especially with members who are hour building. They wanted someone there for a bit of confidence which is fine, but to insist that someone with log book proof and an obvious knowledge of flying abroad needs a checkout is utter madness.

[Mikehotel152]

I love a good misquote:

As old Groucho once said, "I wouldn't want to belong to any Flying Club that would have me as a Member", so buy your own aeroplane and fly it to France if that's what you want to do.

But quite honestly and on a serious note, I do not see what the fuss is all about. If you want to borrow someone else's aircraft you have to comply with their rules, however silly.

Like many of us, I've driven abroad quite a lot and it doesn't phase me. If you're a competent driver you won't have any problems. IMHO driving a car on the Continent is no more complicated than flying to L2K by aeroplane.

Sure, for anyone who hasn't crossed the Channel before, sit them down in the Clubhouse and go through the paperwork with them, but IMHO any PPL holder should be quite capable of flying to France for a bacon-bagette. If he or she is not, how did they get their Licence and how did they pass the Club's check ride?

"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others"....is another Marx quote...:p

[Duchess_Driver]

Fuji,

Seems about what I’m trying to say.

LH2,

Yet again, it seems you have not read my post. I am not expecting nor suggesting rigid implementation of the rules for CC's. I am allowed a degree of flexibility by my employer, to use my judgement, to make a ‘club check’ as long as I deem it necessary to be, to include what I deem is needed – to ensure the pilot is safe to operate IN WHATEVER ENVIRONMENT they choose to operate.

The Nanny Ideology – my ar5e.

Everybody seems to accept that it is ‘responsible’ to show a new PPL the ropes, be it on a trip to L2K or Carlisle. What you seem to fail to grasp here is my argument that acting with a responsible attitude often, unfortunately, incurs a cost. You seem happy that that cost is paid by anyone except you.

So.....

“In any case, just to make it clear: I am accusing you and any proponents of the idea of a "compulsory cross channel check" and similar superfluous, ad-hoc "rulemaking" of not acting with your customer's safety and best interests in mind. Whether that's out of greed, fear, or stupidity I wouldn't know and it probably doesn't make a difference anyway.”

....demonstrates that you don’t read....

“Perhaps, as a training venue, it would be better to put your efforts into taking IO540's suggestion onboard and making sure your students come out properly trained in the first place.”

....

Sir, with respect, you know nothing of me, my training methods, my schools philosophy or the quality of the training we provide or the quality of pilot we produce. Sweeping statements based on such limited knowledge speak volumes.


Pistongone

It is not a question of charging someone to show them the local area. All schools will expect a new hirer to demonstrate a degree of competence in the aeroplane before they rent you the kit. I note that you see this as fair.

I also view this as an opportunity for the hirer to review some of the exercises your average PPL doesn’t practice day to day – just to refresh, just to bring the important aspects of each drill back to the forefront of the pilots mind. Just because someone has X hours in the logbook doesn’t mean that they can fly a reasonable or in some cases, SAFE, profile.

Unfortunately, due to the location of the aerodrome I work from, there is a transit to the LFA. So, during the journey into and back from the LFA, we will discuss the local area, the ways in and out – where the local ‘honey pots’ are, where the noise sensitive areas are, local landmarks which define a safe boundary from the alpha airspace to the south and Lutons delta to the North.

Or are you advocating that we do the stalls, unusual attitude recovery, steep turns, PFLs, slow flying, or whatever else I decide is appropriate over the populated areas of Northwest London and all below the 2,500 floor of the TMA? Thought not.

BTW....my shoulder braid and peak cap were put away many years ago. Chinos and Polo for me. Occasionally I’ll even shave for work. I don't expect anybody I fly with to buy me lunch - quite often I buy the coffee's.

[Fuji Abound]

It is good to see a CFI posting here and in my book you have redeemed yourself with your last post :) - if indeed you needed to redeem yourself. :) :)

There is an issue in that most of the people on here are solid pilots. Lest we sometimes forget there are a few around who show the most extraordinary degree of recklessness and incompetence. A friend of mine runs a club and you would not believe what a few of the new renters get up to each year - which inevitable is the usual mix of either being unsafe and having absolutely no regard for the aircraft or subsequent users (assuming they are even fit for purpose on return!). The club check usually spots the unsafe ones, but sadly not those who have so little regard for the aircraft - the ones who behave themselves on the check out, but, for example, do everything humanly possible to minimise the tac time with complete disregard to the engine.

Sadly it is inevitably the school and another renter thay pays for their disregard.

[ExSp33db1rd]

" It's a club, they do it for the benefit of the club ..... "

Yes, up to a point, and if I'm there for some other reason, maybe, but I'm not employed, I'm retired and wonder how I ever found time to go to work, and if I agree to fly with you on a day when I had expected to be at home, and therefore drive to the airport just for you - it costs, and I'm on a pension. I ask for a 'donation to my travelling expenses - QED.

I 'give' my 'time' to the club, and enjoy getting some flying, even if it does turn my hair white at times ( did you know that some tractor throttles are pulled BACKWARDS to increase speed ? I didn't, until with an elderly, retired, farmer learning to fly who got low, and slow, at about 100 ft on finals - go on, you work it out - nearly broke his wrist, I did ) but should it also cost me. It doesn't, or I don't instruct, s'easy.

[jamestkirk]

It should be a judgment call on behalf of the club/school.

A brand new PPL wanting to go to France may be very nervous about the prospect and an initial check would be prudent. Its not un-common for new pilots to be nervous just flying somewhere 50 miles away.

An experienced pilot who may have joined the club and done a few trips abroad would obviously not need it.

I have done CCC and one of the main points i highlighted was that when the sea and sky were the same colour at some times of the day, it could be dis-orientating and made sure they could ref the instruments etc,etc.....
That stuff you all know and as others have said, the rest can be briefed and completed on the ground.

[flyingman-of-kent]

Quote "I came up against this a couple of years ago. Had a cross channel check with one flight school, school closes down. Joined new school had local checkout all fine, few local flights solo completed. Booked aircraft for a day trip to L2K.

On day of flight I was confronted by the CFI who said I need a CC check.
He was not happy even when I showed him my logbook showing a flight with a instructor 3 months before!

He only gave in when I started flashing life jackets about, presented him with flight plans, customs forms & W&B sheet all completed correctly and started questioning him about the aircrafts papers & who will be claiming the fuel drawback."

It sounds like there are some very arrogant people here, who feel that they are above everybody else just because they might have some experience. Throwing toys out the pram cos you are asked to comply with a schools/clubs rules is a very good example of why these people need to be checked out thoroughly - although sadly these are also the sorts of people who feel it is beneath them and will not listen or learn on such a check flight.

Every time, every single time, I have ever had an instructor along with me I have learnt something new, or different or revised certain things. You are never too old or experienced to learn, and attitude is everything here.

[Fuji Abound]

Every time, every single time, I have ever had an instructor along with me I have learnt something new, or different or revised certain things. You are never too old or experienced to learn, and attitude is everything here.

I think that is another debate.

There is a difference between having a flight with an isntructor enforced on you and your chosing to engage an instructor. Applying your logic you might just as well make every flight with an isntructor.

[flyingman-of-kent]

I think that is another debate.

There is a difference between having a flight with an isntructor enforced on you and your chosing to engage an instructor. Applying your logic you might just as well make every flight with an isntructor.

The point I was making is that if you have to do a check flight, make the most of it!

[Fuji Abound]

The point I was making is that if you have to do a check flight, make the most of it!

Very true, however you did start out getting a little more excited with your comment that:

It sounds like there are some very arrogant people here

which clearly unintentionally suggested a different point. :)

I fly with an instructor maybe three or four times a year what with the MEP and instrument renewals and then I just "enjoy" an added flight every once in a while. There is indeed usually something to learn.

However I fit my flights around my convenience which is why I agree that imposing a check flight without good reason is an unsound policy.

[italianjon]

I think the debate here is interesting but seems to have developed into two distinct paths, that are now argueing against each other. There is the path of the necessity of a Check Ride and the necessity of a Cross Channel Check.

My feeling is that yes a Check Ride should be expected, as you have to prove to the club/owner/group/syndicate that you are up to the standard to fly the aircraft. However the Cross Channel Check is not a legal requirement.

I would argue that a club that required you to do a Cross Channel Check in addition to a Check Ride, or refused to combine a Cross Channel Check and Check Ride together are simply out to skin you for another few quid. If they are truly interested in people and flying would take a judgement on cross channel ability based on a conversation with the individual to check for the knowledge of what is required. The only difference, apart from the academic paperwork, between a flight to the continient and a domestic flight is the call at the FIR boundary, and the paperwork could be filled in for a ficticious flight at no real cost.

[Fuji Abound]

The only difference, apart from the academic paperwork, between a flight to the continient and a domestic flight is the call at the FIR boundary, and the paperwork could be filled in for a ficticious flight at no real cost.

Not quite true. Conditions over the Channel can verge on instrument flying and can come as a surprise to the "novice". This may be even more relevant to a longer trip than the hop across to L2K from LYD.

The trouble is a check flight will probably not encounter these conditions so becomes of no value from that point of view.

[italianjon]

Conditions over the Channel can verge on instrument flying and can come as a surprise to the "novice".

Fuji, I agree completely with what you say there, in my opinion conditions over land can just as quickly deteriorate-look at some of the days we have had recently. A winter high pressure holds haze and as the sun descends through this layer, it can completely take away your horizon. I think that the key is for the operator of the aircraft to be satisfied that the PPL is capabale of dealing with the situation, whether that be overland or over water.

[BackPacker]

A winter high pressure holds haze and as the sun descends through this layer, it can completely take away your horizon.

Not quite the same as a cross channel flight. A haze can usually be seen in METARs and TAFs and although it is hard to predict accurately how hazy it will really be, the fact that there will be haze can be easily forecasted and anticipated.

However, over the channel you can be in perfect CAVOK conditions and still be in IMC, for all practical purposes. Simply because CAVOK means a flight visibility of more than 9999, but at FL45 (a typical channel crossing altitude, to remain clear of controlled airspace above), the horizon is more than 10 km away. This means that the sea blends into the sky and you see no horizon whatsoever around you. The solution is to fly lower, or look below you for clues about your attitude. Or switch to instruments/AP.

This is something that has to be seen and understood, and is one of the reasons that I can imagine a cross-channel checkout would be required for novice pilots.

Although I have to say I've flown cross-channel a number of times now, never had a checkout, and never had a problem either.

The only difference, apart from the academic paperwork, between a flight to the continient and a domestic flight is the call at the FIR boundary, and the paperwork could be filled in for a ficticious flight at no real cost.

The call at the FIR boundary is completely standard. It's usually a handover from one controller to the next, occasionally a freecall. If you've flown within Europe, it's exactly the same as crossing a FIR boundary over land. The flight plan is also equal for a continental flight that crosses a FIR boundary. The only real difference is the GAR form, and that form has detailed instructions on the back. And even if you can't understand these instructions, you can simply fly from one customs field to another, just like we did on the continent before Schengen.

[DavidHoul52]

Taking an instructor with you to L2K is like taking your mum as chaperone on your first date

[OneIn60rule]

Flying order book signed.

Whatever it says, you abide by.

As for Cross channel checkouts...

It's not a bad idea.

It is a bad thing though if a club requires you to done again and again. (unless you really managed to bust and bust and bust when you went on your own).

1/60

[Say again s l o w l y]

Can anyone really justify why a PPL with more than minimum hours and an obvious brain in their head who's already undergone a checkout and has flown in Europe many times, needs to have an FI sitting next to them to go across the water?

No? Because I can't and I always been very hot on making sure people are safe before letting them loose in our aircraft.

Flying order books aren't always fantastic documents. Though if you sign it, then you should abide by it, but they can be rewritten if there is something silly in there.

Commonsense should always take precedence over things like FOB's and they can be challenged. I should know. I've rewritten them on many occasions to take into account different things.

The original post in this thread wasn't about Cross Channel Checkouts, but about why someone experienced should have to do it when it is obviously a total waste of time.

I'd always advocate someone going abroad taking someone experienced with them, but it doesn't necessarily have to be an FI. Many PPL's are far more au fait with cross channel flying than your average FI.

The argument about renters damaging aircraft is moot and for a different thread than this. There is no basis that someone coming along will bash your aircraft around just because they like to go to Europe.

Schools/clubs should be encouraging people to be more adventurous, not sticking stupid restrictions on their members. They need the hire business and someone going off for a European jaunt is worth far more than someone who just comes along and bimbles in the local area for an hour a month.

Why make life difficult for people? Is it about managing risk? Is it f**k. It's about inexperienced Schools and FI's trying to excercise control and not really understanding anything about allowing your members to use their discretion or encouraging them to spread their wings. Both of which will actually help the school/club.

Of course checkouts need to be rigourous and standards must be maintained, but there is a time and a place for it. Insisting on stupid unnecessary checks makes no difference to flight safety and might just annoy your customers enough for them to go elsewhere.

[17thhour]

I'd have to agree with those against this checkout. Like many have said its not a "big thing", and I personally believe it's blown totaly out of proportion.

Sure there are differences in airspace etc, but do you really have to go into this "different" airspace with an instructor to understand it? I don't think so, a bit of reading of the airlaw will do i think.

In my opinion it is a bit of a marketing scheme, sure its their aircraft and they have every right to make sure people are safe, but going all the way across the channel to prove it, what a jip!

The majority of my flying is in Scotland, and I'll tell you, I certainly didn't do a "North Channel" or "Irish Sea" checkout! And no one else at my club does/did either! Is it not much the same?!.. Personally I haven't conquered the infamous channel ...yet.

[ExSp33db1rd]

If you're legal to fly over the Channel with the licence you hold. QED

A slab of French concrete is just as unforgiving as a slab of English concrete - or tarmac - if you smite it incorrectly, so if the owner is satisfied that you're not going to break his machine at Biggin Hill, what's the problem ?

If you make a cock-of it, it's your licence on the block, not the aircraft owner ( providing everything is up-to date and working ) so why should the aircraft owner worry about you if his aircraft and documents are fireproof - does he insist on a check flight into every airport that you are likely to use when you disappear over his horizon ?

Having said that -- it is his aeroplane, so he is entitled to demand anything he likes, you can put up with it or vote with your feet.

Slightly off thread but ...... as a new pilot / navigator I was sent to Honolulu to navigate 707's from San Fran. to Tokyo - GPS ? think sextant. The company navigators insisted on giving us a check-flight across the Pacific into Japan, partly to prove their own importance and partly to stay living in Hawaii to do the check flights, but when I arrived the duty Captain had sent them all home, I got a note to say that I had a UK Flt.Nav. licence that entitled me to navigate British reg'd aircraft anywhere in the World and I was rostered to Tokyo the next night - but suggesting that I had a word or two with my colleagues in the pub that evening ! Same difference.

Just do it, but do your homework too.

[Fuji Abound]

I wish people would stop calling it the Channel .. .. ..

it is the English Channel. :)

It is nothing more than a wide river, infact the Amazon is wider during the wet season. (Not many people know that :})

[Pace]

It takes something like 10-15 minutes to cross so hardly a major north Atlantic adventure :)

As there is a continuos stream of ferries trundling to and from they leave pretty white lines leading you there.

Just make sure you dont follow the ones running down the channel or you may make your day joint in Jersey or Amsterdam.

On good VFR days you will see the other side from the UK and it looks very close.

For the Newbie non instrument trained pilot avoid your first crossing on anything but the best days and remember you have to come back.
Return well clear of sunset so you can be found if the worst happens before you get flattened by one of the numerous ships charging through there.
Other than that its a piece of cake and smacks of money making by establishments who want special checkouts.

You may get checked out on a perfect day and end up doing it on your own not such a perfect day which will be as different as chalk from cheese anyway.

You will find the weather over the channel is very different. Cloud builds up along the coastline and that is a good way of spotting the coast just look below the cloud line.
It can be cloudy over land but gin clear over the sea.

On the negative side storms tend to roll in from the East which is a breading ground for thunderstorms. On many occasions coming back to the UK at night in business jets and twin props I have been met by a wall of thunderstorms protecting the UK. Once in a twin I had to fly all the way down mid channel to Southampton to find a way through.

Watch out for sea fog as the weather in the UK can be brilliant only to find the channel covered in fog. I have flown over there and watched the ferries carving channels in the fog often with their funnels sticking out of the milky base below very surreal :)

Pace

[Fuji Abound]

Pace

That is at least two channels .. .. ..

and not one English.

Are you one of us? :) :)

[Say again s l o w l y]

I prefer to call it the ditch........;)

[Pace]

Fuji

The murky pond water seperating the uk from Europe. The bit thats narrow by Dover and gets wider the further along you go :)

Whether its UK or France who knows the french tend to pass you over to London in airways over france anyway in jets so maybe they think we own the lot :)

One tip the famous white cliffs of Dover are not a patch compared to the ones on the french side. Fly low and level with the cliff tops, but watch out for the seagulls as they seem to be bigger that side :)

Pace

[pistongone]

It would appear that with the exception of DD and B2N2, the CCC is regarded as a non essential check! The ironic point i was trying to make in the original post was the person telling me I needed a CCC didnt know the current requirments re:- Mode S on the Continent:confused: So how can they asses my performance WRT flight planning, weather briefing, notams and PPR's etc if they dont know the current situation themselves on the Mode S issue:confused: Surely this would be part of the planning they would want to see performed with proficiency? To check if your flight is legal in all the states you intend to visit! Call me old fashioned but surely the question asker should know the answer:ugh: And this is what they want to charge me in the region of £300 for! Does anyone know if a Mode Alpha equiped aircraft is legal to visit France, Belgium, The Netherlands and Germany? This is the information i have really been after as none of the aircraft in question have Mode S as Mr Singh said it will cost him too much money:eek: although some have mode c, and seeing as my friends and wife particularly want to visit these places it would be silly spending over £500 to check out and join a club who's planes aren't fit for the purpose to which i intend to use them!

[Fuji Abound]

Here you go - could be right, could be wrong .. .. ..

France

Mode A or C required for D and above and for night (SVFR) but not mode S, unless IFR in which case mode S now mandatory. You will still get exemptions from some class D TMA - L2K for example.

Belgium

Mode A or C for all classes, unless IFR, in which case mode S mandatory in all classes.

Germany

I think mode S is already mandatory for all classes D and above IFR or VFR and compulsory in all classes IFR.

Netherlands

As above but mandatory in all classes except designated airspace below 1,200feet amsl.


Practically, I wouldnt be to bothered for VFR in France, any where else it is becoming more hassle to not have mode S than to have it.

I have to say I am mode S so I havent taken particular note or had any relevant issues so may nto be the best person to ask.

If however I were running a fleet of aircraft without mode S and were willing for pilots to fly them in Europe I would want to make certain I knew the current situation.

[BackPacker]

Just out of curiosity I happened to browse the AIPs to see what they say about it. My main interest was VFR.

France

Mode A or C required for D and above and for night (SVFR) but not mode S, unless IFR in which case mode S now mandatory. You will still get exemptions from some class D TMA - L2K for example.

Agree. VFR only needs mode A+C. AIP GEN 1.5

Belgium

Mode A or C for all classes, unless IFR, in which case mode S mandatory in all classes.

Yep. A+C. AIP ENR 1.6

Germany

I think mode S is already mandatory for all classes D and above IFR or VFR and compulsory in all classes IFR.


A tad more complex. Mode S is required in class C+D, in any TMZ, at night in controlled airspace, and above 5000' MSL/3500' AGL (whichever is higher). AIP GEN 1.5

Netherlands

As above but mandatory in all classes except designated airspace below 1,200feet amsl.

Correct according to the AIP (GEN 1.5). But I know there's an AIC too (AIC-A 07/08; I linked to it earlier in this thread) which shows a gradual introduction of mode S, outside the TMZ, above a certain FL, where the FL is coming down in stages. (FL65 now, FL45 after 9-4-09, 1200' after 9-4-10.


The other thing that might catch people out is the ELT/PLB requirement in France:

https://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/dossier%5Caicfrancea%5CAIC_A_2008_10_EN.pdf

[LH2]

The ironic point i was trying to make in the original post was the person telling me I needed a CCC didnt know the current requirments re:- Mode S[....]
Call me old fashioned but surely the question asker should know the answer

The impression I'm getting, as has been pointed out by others, is that this is down to the instructors' and their employers' inexperience more than anything else. Which your comment above seems to confirm.

Does anyone know if a Mode Alpha equiped aircraft is legal to visit France, Belgium, The Netherlands and Germany?

BackPacker has already given you a general answer. For a specific answer, you should check the AIP as I mentioned earlier--the reason being that there isn't a black and white answer. For example, you will see that in France, each FIR and many TMAs have their particular requirements, going from Mode A recommended to Mode A+C required.

In practise, flying mode A only in the continent is not a good idea as you are likely to be denied transit through any but the quietest controlled airspace (and as you know, in the continent one does not try / is expected to avoid CAS as a general rule). Mode C will make your and the controller's life easier so go for that (side note: I can't believe there are still non-mode C aircraft around)

As for mode S specifically, it's all a bit of a nightmare VFR-wise. I am already mode S equipped as is mostly everyone I know around here so I'm not really up to date, but the following page may be of interest for you:

EUROCONTROL - General Aviation - VFR Briefing Room (http://www.eurocontrol.int/msa/public/standard_page/General_aviation_VFR.html)

HTH.

[LH2]

Hi DD,

The Nanny Ideology – my ar5e.

Proving my point, are we? It's spelled arse, with an 's'. If you are going to use candid language, at least write it properly--no need for "child-speakesque" spellings. Which brings us back to the Nanny theory, etc., etc.

How's that for a contorted expression? :p

Anyway, what I was going to say was this:

Sir, with respect, you know nothing of me, my training methods, my schools philosophy or the quality of the training we provide or the quality of pilot we produce.

Thankfully not! :} But tell me, do you or do you not invite your students to fly across the channel as part of their PPL training? And if you don't, do you agree that it would be a good (+fun) idea, precisely for all the reasons proponents of cross-channel checks put forward?

[Duchess_Driver]

LH2

Thankfully not! But tell me, do you or do you not invite your students to fly across the channel as part of their PPL training? And if you don't, do you agree that it would be a good (+fun) idea, precisely for all the reasons proponents of cross-channel checks put forward?

As it happens, students where I work are invited to do a cross channel flight. We have fly out’s where one student would fly the outbound leg, and sit in the back for the return - an ideal way to ‘fleece the punter’, yes? Next one is in April – would you like to come along?

Annoying thing though, there is always the argument about who pays for my lunch – is it my student on the outbound leg or the return student?

Now, have I spelled everything correctly?

[spittingimage]

Since you ask, DD, and only for that reason, you do not need an apostrophe in 'flyouts'. The word is a simple plural. Otherwise 10/10, I think.

SI

[Fuji Abound]

If you must ignore my earlier post (the English Channel) shouldn’t channel also have a capital "C" in this context?

[Duchess_Driver]

Damn......and I tried so hard!

Cheers Spitting...

[Meldrew]

To cut to the chase- I would have thought that just dealing with circuits at Biggin on a busy summer weekend would be experience enough for coping with L2K. ( apart from the French speaking of course!)

[LH2]

Hi

As it happens, students where I work are invited to do a cross channel flight. We have fly out’s where one student would fly the outbound leg, and sit in the back for the return

Is that during their PPL training, or after they have gained their licence? In any event, I do commend your school for offering the experience.

- an ideal way to ‘fleece the punter’, yes?

Only if a "Cross-channel Checkout" is subsequently required of them. :E

Next one is in April – would you like to come along?

I'll keep your invitation in mind in case I happen to be in the UK around those dates. With someone else paying for the return leg, it costs as much as the Eurostar so it's a doable proposition.

Now, have I spelled everything correctly?

Yes, except for "fly outs", as has been pointed out. 's is the genitive marker in English.

[ExSp33db1rd]

( apart from the French speaking of course!)


No problem - just shout louder. ( in English of course ) Foreign ATC is only allowed to talk in local language to local registered aircraft - the fact that visitors have no idea what they are talking about, and hence where the aircraft they are about to hit is coming from, is of no consequence.

In my experience most countries stick to English anyway - with one notable exception, of course.

[Molesworth 1]

I did one of these recently - cleaned me out financially for the rest of the month.

On the positive side - the instructor was pleasant enough and good company. I got some experience of flying IMC (but as my getting my IR is still some light years away not immediately useful). Also, in my particular case experience on a PA28 on which I have not previously been checked out.

Otherwise I really don't see the point. All I needed was a briefing about filing a flight plan, customs form and radio procedures. The instructor knew even less French than the very little I do.