R22 block hours wanted!!

[alexlaw]

Hi all

I was just wondering if anyone had a R22 they would like to sell a block of hours on..... I am about to write a cheque to the local flying school and would kick myself if I heard of a machine that would be available at a better rate!...hence this post

I have around 45 hours left to fly before I can start my CPL and would like to have them flown by Xmas, I have a private site on which I could keep any machine and I am based in Northampton.

Please get in touch if can help!

Cheers

[alexlaw]

Hi .....Cheers for the thought matey but have done a little research and I think I will be okay where the cash is going!......

[Ewe Turn]

Hi .....Cheers for the thought matey but have done a little research and I think I will be okay where the cash is going!......

I heard someone else say something similar once just before they wrote out a cheque for £10k for some 'cheap' hours on a 500.

They lost the lot.

[alexlaw]

Hi,

Thanks for the concern,but the amount would not be 10k! I have dealt with the school for a long period of time and feel sure the funds will be safe.

[humanchimp]

Hi Alex,

Sorry can't help with your original request - just wanted to say to those saying don't pay in advance, why not pay £1 on the credit card and let section 75 of the consumer credit act do the rest if the company goes bust?

[Jonny109]

There is a company in Florida called Boatpix that will sell you 100 hours for $15,000 (Approx £9500). They make their money while the person in the left seat takes pictures of boats. If you fancy a trip to the US have a look at Helicopter Academy. Build time in the r22. (http://www.helicopteracademy.com/training/hourBuilding.htm).

I'm about to do the same.

[Ewe Turn]

The CAA will not, I believe, accept the time you spend 'flying' the BoatPix helicopter towards the totals required for issue of your CPL(H). Same with 'Traffic watch' flying in a 206 or similar. You can't log it as P1 which makes it an expensive jolly.

[Whirlygig]

Why not? If you have a 206 rating on your JAA licence and fly PIC (having had your JAA licence validated by the FAA), why can't you log it?

I think the caveat with Traffic Watch is that the JAA hour-builder is sitting in the left seat.

Cheers

Whirls

[chester2005]

Traffic watch and i presume Boatpix depends on a number of things.
is the other pilot a CFI
do you hold a FAA CPL

if either of these are yes then PIC hours are 100% valid and loggable/useable towards rating/licence issue

Chester:ok:

[VeeAny]

The CAA's view of logging flight time in the USA is on page 4 of Heli TrainingCom 1/2007 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/HELI%20TRAININGCOM%201-2007.pdf)

[Ewe Turn]

I remember speaking to Fred shortly after the document refered to in the above post was published.

Whirls, sitting in the left hand seat aside, I believe it stems from the fact you don't sign for the aircraft when doing the Traffic watch or Boat Picture taking ergo your are not PIC.

Chester2005 I take it from the OP's post that he doesn't hold an FAA CPL(H) and even if he did the point I made out to Whirls above would apply.

[Ewe Turn]

So where did you sign to say you had done an A check ? And where did you do the loading sheet/W&B for each sector ????? What about number of landings, CAT or PVT etc ,defects, hooks etc? Where did that all go?:eek:

[Gordy]

So where did you sign to say you had done an A check ? And where did you do the loading sheet/W&B for each sector ????? What about number of landings, CAT or PVT etc ,defects, hooks etc? Where did that all go?

Here in the US, when operating under part 91, there is no need to spend half your day doing paperwork.

Most companies do have some type of form for you to sign for the aircraft if you are renting it.

I fly the same aircraft everyday and fill in the daily flight log which has the AD's and Hobbs #'s, and a space at the bottom to write discrepancies. I fax the daily forms back to the office when I have access to a fax machine. Not all of us work from airports with a huge support staff....

[chester2005]

Regardless of which seat you are sitting in, and who signed for what, according to the FAA if you are the pilot solely manipulating the controls , whilst doing so you can log PIC time.
The CAA , when i spoke to them about it, in a nutshell said if the hours were flown within the limitations and rules of an FAA licence ie. PIC when it should be logged, and CPL if doing commercial work, or Dual if flying with a CFI., could be counted towards licence issue in JAA land
Chester:ok:

[Gordy]

Chester:

Regardless of which seat you are sitting in, and who signed for what, according to the FAA if you are the pilot solely manipulating the controls , whilst doing so you can log PIC time.

Technically no---you also need to have privileges to fly the aircraft legally.

14 CFR Part 61.51(e) (http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=1c9fd409bd65d3195120a702c928f757&rgn=div8&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.1.2.1.1.31&idno=14)

(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person—

(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privileges;

The biggest issue would be if you do not hold an FAA license and do NOT have a jetranger type rating on your CAA---then you cannot log PIC time in the Jetranger in the US. You also cannot have two people simultaneously logging PIC unless one of them is a CFI.

[chester2005]

Gordy i agree completely, before i did any Traffic watch i got the 206 rating on my JAA licence
As far as 2 people logging the same time and neither being a CFI surely it would make sense that the person actually doing the flying hands on the controls should be able to log the time especially when they are a CPL holder.
Also only a small % of the time is actually traffic watch the rest of the time is approachs landing and take offs so for the CAA to discount all of it seems a tad unfair
Chester:ok:

[Gordy]

I never did the traffic watch thing so cannot comment. I have however allowed pilots to fly with me while I ferry aircraft to contracts. They can do all the hands on, (I start the aircraft however---and if I am not comfortable with them doing it, I will also do the take off and landings).

They can log all the time they are flying---normally about 15 hours per ferry---but then again, I hold a CFI, so the issue does not come up. There is also no question as to who is "responsible" for the aircraft either. This matter was a matter for the NTSB law judges a few years ago, and is still used as precedent today.

Determining who is the PIC on a supposed training flight is a factual issue depending upon the stories of the parties involved. If a CFI gives, or agrees to give dual, then in the event of an accident or enforcement action for a violation, the FAA will probably go after the CFI, using the rationale in Walkup, below.

In determining whether the CFI aboard the aircraft was the PIC (in this case, subsequent to an accident, the CFI denied it) the judge in Administrator v. Walkup, 6 NTSB 36 (1988) said:

"... Similarly, the amount of time or whether the person is current and qualified would not in and of itself be dispositive. You could have a 15,000 hour Captain for one of the major airlines but if he's transitioning up to a 767, when he's being given instruction, he is still the student and the instructor pilot is the individual who is pilot-in-command of the aircraft." ...

"... Even if one is current and qualified, if you don't feel comfortable about doing particular types of maneuvers, whether its take-offs and landings or chandelles or whatever if you ask the flight instructor to check you out and to give you comments to improve your performance you are receiving flight instruction."

In perhaps the most important reasoning of the case (for CFI's), The judge in Walkup continued:

"... The mere fact of holding designation as certificated flight instructor doesn't mean that you are, ipso facto, pilot-in-command if you're aboard the aircraft. That is, possession of that certificate doesn't magically convert you into pilot-in-command as soon as you step aboard any particular aircraft, even if it is one in which you are type rated or current in. What makes the flight instructor the pilot-in-command is when he assumes that position as pilot-in-command by giving or agreeing to give flight instruction. "

This case is still valid precedent and has been cited twice since then in other NTSB certificate enforcement actions. Of course, the Walkup decision is for FAA/NTSB ADMINISTRATIVE action against a pilot. In the event of CIVIL action in tort against a pilot for negligence, the situation is much more bound on the facts (who was at the controls, who was the better qualified pilot, who was directing the flight, etc.). The result of a lawsuit in tort for the same event against a CFI pilot may be completely different from the NTSB finding, and often is, especially in a comparative fault or contributory negligence jurisdiction.

Assuming that neither pilot holds a CFI, they would have to share the logging of flight time. Now my brain hurts....

[John Eacott]

As far as 2 people logging the same time and neither being a CFI surely it would make sense that the person actually doing the flying hands on the controls should be able to log the time especially when they are a CPL holder.

We have PICUS: Pilot in Command, Under Supervision, where both pilots are able to log P1. A necessary evil, since most endorsements require 5 to 25 hours Under Supervision before being allowed to fly P1 on Passenger Carrying Charter. How else is a newly endorsed pilot able to get the hours in their log book, unless they flog around on airwork or non pax jobs until they have the hours?

The Pilot Supervising the Pilot Under Supervision has to be approved by the AOC holder, but does not have to be a QHI.

[boatpix]

I'm the President of BOATPIX and the manager of the school HelicopterAcademy.com which runs the boat photo program for BOATPIX. All our pilots are CFI's and we currently have 16 of them. If someone interprets some rule that they need a non-cfi we can arrange that, too.

[Heli-Ice]

John

I believe that the PICUS scheme only applies to AOC holders training their pilots.

[MartinCh]

Should I take it that Boatpix do not require folks to have FAA CPL anymore since they make sure all their hourbuilding instructors have FAA CFI?

Also, I got to know about that 170lbs body or flying weight in the past.

The document linked above mentions single pilot heli flown by two persons claiming PIC time. They do mention traffic watch, also use 'etc'.

Would the use of Boatpix Robbies for commercial work, flown by FAA CFI 'giving dual instruction' (or as safety pilot??) how to fly R22 for picture taking, busy taking pictures of yachts him/herself, not be frown upon by UK CAA?

Maybe the FAA CPL requirement I read on the website before, was to cover for the lack of FAA CFI. Some US pilots may just want to hourbuild to meet SFAR 73 requirements, having finished their CPL with sub-200hr TT heli, but European pilots may need the hours count towards JAA(EASA-ish) CPL and probably 250hr requirement for their FIC.

I'm slimming down, but may not make it to 170lbs either weight. Last time that weight when starved after tonsillectomy many years ago. Well..

[boatpix]

You can weigh up to 235 pounds as we have instructors that weigh 120 pounds. For a job with us you need to weigh less than 180 pounds but most people can get down to that weigh with several months on NutriSystem.