SEP Rental from non liscenced A/D

[Unusual Attitude]

After scouring the CAA website and being directed through about a dozen CAPs and articles within the ANO I'm still none the wiser so I'm hoping someone on here may have come across this before.

Basically I'm trying to find out if it is possible to offer a Group A SEP (C152 or similar) for hire from an unliscenced A/D ?

If this is allowed then is a qualified instructor allowed to undertake 'check flights' from this A/D to ensure the flying standard of existing PPL's looking to hire ? Obviously no training would be done from the unliscenced A/D, just purely for checkout purposes.

Am I right in thinking this would be legal given that no training would be undertaken however the FI would still recieve renumeration for the check flights?

Any advice very welcome !!

Regards

UA

[S-Works]

Yes, you can rent it from your back garden if you want. You won't be able to do PPL training but other forms of training and skill tests can be done from an unlicensed airfield.

[Unusual Attitude]

Thanks kindly Bose-X, thats one question answered and I thought that was the case from what I'd seen but wanted to be sure.

How does it stand with the FI being renumerated for a 'check flight' since its not instruction ? Am assuming its ok also ? Obviously you dont want to rent out an aircraft to an unknown punter without checking them out.

Finally, I'm assuming however that 'gift voucher / air experience' type flights cannot be given ? From what I understand these are currnently done as 'instructional' flights to avoid the need for an AOC if it was a simple sightseeing trip. If its an instructional flight then it needs to be done from a liscenced A/D.

We really do have some crazy regs !!

[S-Works]

The arrangement between the check pilot and the FI is a private matter. As long as the rules are observed, CPL, Airworthiness, Insurance etc then there is no reason why the FI can't be remunerated.

No, gift voucher or air experience flights cant be given, that is in the grounds of trial lessons which require an FTO and as they are an ab-initio lesson towards the PPL require a licenced airfield. Sight seeing flights are into AOC territory and this licenced airfield again.

[Unusual Attitude]

Thanks for your help Bose-X, pretty much confirms everything I'd thought.

[3 Point]

An FI can give training from an unlicensed aerodrome any time he likes and that includes a trial lesson. No reason a potential student shouldn't take a trial lesson at an unlicensed aerodrome then decide later to continue his training for the issue of a license; the trial flight (and any other training) flown at the unlicensed aerodrome could not count as part of the required 45 hours but that doesn't mean that the flight can't be done in the first place.

It's also not necessary for trial (or any other PPL lessons) to be done by an FTO, a RF (registered facility) will do nicely.

Happy landings

[S-Works]

3 point,

you are getting into very sticky territory with that claim. A trial lesson is by it's very nature a trial lesson and covers elements from the PPL course. To carry out a trial lesson it must be from an RTF and be from a unlicensed airfield. An Instructor taking a punter on a fair paying flight from an unlicensed airfield without being part of an RTF/FTO is in a grey area that I would not want to try and argue with the authority. I guess that is the reason why there are no trial lessons being done as you describe (at least publicly!).

PS: I will concede my typo, I meant RTF or FTO in my post.

[Danny boy]

3 Point
Had to reply to your post,
To offer flight training you have to be RFTF minimum...The instructors have to be suitable qualified to be able to offer instruction in flying,
The aeroplanes have to be maintained to a certain EASA level, basically no pilot maintenance and the aircrafts insurance has to cover abi-nitio flight training and have the European minimum of third party cover...
Abi-nitio flight training has to be done from a licensed aerodrome including the trial flight which is part of the JAR-PPL or NPPL syllabus of flight exercises...if you offer a trail lesson from an unlicensed aerodrome you are flying an illegal public transport flight...
Flight training is classed as Ariel work, so not requiring an AOC, the student pilot is paying for pilot training for the grant of a particular pilots licence...
The CAA feels that this requires the extra safety of the licensed aerodrome...There is talk they are considering relaxing this piece of the ANO...
The RFTF also has to inform the CAA of the aircraft they are using in the school..
A licence holder i.e. a PPL could add a rating on to his licence using a RFTF without the training being done from a licensed aerodrome... i.e. IMC etc...
So be careful not to check some guy out in his mate’s plane...or take money off some enthusiastic person for a flight in the left seat and offer them a clutch of the controls...
Happy flying in 2010
DB
PMs Welcome
PS sorry about the spelling :)

[Whopity]

An FI can give training from an unlicensed aerodrome any time he likes and that includes a trial lesson.
I suggest you read the latest ANO:Flights which must use licensed or Government aerodrome
208.—(1) Subject to paragraph (5), article 207 applies to any aeroplane which has a maximum total weight authorised of more than 2730kg flying on a flight—

(b) for the purpose of instruction in flying given to any person for the purpose of becoming qualified for the grant of a pilot’s licence or the inclusion of an aircraft rating, a night rating or a night qualification in a licence;


Now a trial lesson can only be for the purpose of training for a licence; if not, it is either a Public Transport flight or a Private Flight. If it is a private flight the passenger may only pay a proportion of the direct operating costs!

A FI is not confined to only giving instruction at a RTF or FTO; these are JAA licensing requirements and do not apply to the NPPL.

[BillieBob]

A FI is not confined to only giving instruction at a RTF or FTO; these are JAA licensing requirements and do not apply to the NPPL.Or to any other instruction that does not lead to the issue or renewal/revalidation of a JAA licence or rating (e.g. aerobatics)

[Whopity]

Careful! That could create the impression that an aerobatic trial lesson may be given from an unlicensed aerodrome! If the person does not hold a pilot licence, it is the same as any other "trial lesson"

[MrAverage]

The way I understand it there is a distinction between initial issue training and revision training for a renewal or revalidation flight test. In addition, even initial IMC training can be done from unlicensed fields.
Comments gratefully accepted of course.

[BillieBob]

Whopity - My comment was directed (as evidenced by the embedded quote) to your last point regarding the requirement for an RTF or FTO, nothing to do with a licensed aerodrome.

MrAverage - See above, I was not referring to the requirement for a licensed aerodrome. However, you are correct that a licensed aerodrome is not necessary for training towards the IMC Rating, nor for the IR or any instructor rating come to that.

[3 Point]

Hey Whoppity, I suggest you read the ANO, particularly the extract you yourself published; it says

"for the purpose of becoming qualified for the grant of a pilot’s licence or ..."

If my mate down the pub says "I'd love to try flying" there is no earthy reason I shouldn't take him in my aeroplane from my farm strip and give hem a lesson. The flight may not be for the purpose of becoming qualified for the grant of a licence or it would be illegal but it's a trial lesson nevertheless. If he subsequently decided to take up flying then of course this flight could not count towards his required 45 hour total.

I'm not suggesting running a training organisation at an unlicensed aerodrome but equally, there is no reason I can't do training from one provided it is not "for the purpose of becoming qualified for the grant of a pilot’s licence or ..."! That's what the law says!!

Happy landings

[3 Point]

In fact I'd say that Bose-X put it pretty well in post #2 when he said

"You won't be able to do PPL training but other forms of training and skill tests can be done from an unlicensed airfield."

If the trial lesson is the first step on a course towards the grant of a licence then the use a licensed airport is certainly required. If however it's someone who wants to have a go at flying then I see no need to use a licensed airport.

Happy landings

[USP]

An FI can give training from an unlicensed aerodrome any time he likes and that includes a trial lesson.
Legally, that statement is TRUE!
In fact you can go right up to lesson 13 with him/her
PROVIDING.....
1.. That the student submits no more than a portion of the total operation costs, and
2.. Providing the flight is not entered in any log as part of a training exercise!
Number 2 prevents this
"for the purpose of becoming qualified for the grant of a pilot’s licence or ..."

[Whopity]

Most people who take Trial Lessons pay for them! The only lesson defined in the ANO is one for the purpose of becoming qualified for the issue of a licence or rating. Beyond that the flight is Private; what you do on a private flight is up to you so long as you don't breach the public transport rules. You don't even need to be an instructor for what you describe.

[3 Point]

USP and Whopity,

Exactly!

Given that the thread began with questions about giving a dual checkout of an already qualified pilot at an unlicensed aerodrome I just wanted to emphasise that there is no legal imitation on the type of training which can be given from an unlicensed aerodrome except that it may not be training for the grant or renewal of a licence or rating.

PS, USP, I'd say that I can enter such training in the student's log book (indeed I must enter it because he has acted in the capacity of a student pilot during the operation) I may not however show it on the subsequent application for a licence or rating as part of the required hours because it can not legally count for that purpose.

I think we are all broadly in agreement and I acknowledge that I am a pedantic sod sometimes but I do get frustrated when I hear broad statement about what can and can not be done when it is perfectly clear in the rules if only people would read said rules carefully!

Happy landings all

3 Point

[USP]

Yes,
Your student can log as many hours as he/she likes as P2.
Legally, there is very little that can not be done at an unlicensed airfield.

[Whopity]

I'd say that I can enter such training in the student's log book (indeed I must enter it because he has acted in the capacity of a student pilot during the operation)
The only thing he can log is passenger because that's what he was. To log flight time as a student pilot it has to be countable for something such as licence issue.

Your student can log as many hours as he/she likes as P2.No he cannot because P2 is only countable in a multipilot aeroplane!

You can take you mate up, do the entire PPL course with hm but as its not countable towards anything, there is no point putting it in a log book. It is not illegal to do so, but if it was ever claimed as countable time then it would be fraud. Such a student has no status as a crew member therefore must be a passenger.

[Danny boy]

Does anybody have an idea when the ANO might be changed to allow flight training from unlicensed airfields...?

Training for the NPPL with the SEP Class rating would be a good start... Then people could move over to a JAR-PPL if required...could even save a few bob as well..

[BillieBob]

Does anybody have an idea when the ANO might be changed to allow flight training from unlicensed airfields...?April 2010 as a wild guess.

[BEagle]

Training for the NPPL with the SEP Class rating would be a good start...

An SEP Class Rating cannot be included in an NPPL. Training for the SLMG or Microlight Class Ratings may be conducted from 'approved sites' which do not need to be licensed; however, training for the SSEA Class Rating may only be conducted from a licensed or government aerodrome....

...at the moment.

[USP]

To log flight time as a student pilot it has to be countable for somethingTry flight experience!

No he cannot because P2 is only countable in a multipilot aeroplane!All student pilots are P2, and they enter their hrs in P2 Column!


You can take you mate up, do the entire PPL course with hmWould love to see your entry for lesson 14

Such a student has no status as a crew member therefore must be a passenger.Not quite, this student is with a QFI and therefore it changes his status.

Not trying to dig in here whopity, but may i quote you!
what you do on a private flight is up to you so long as you don't breach the public transport rules.Like i said above, only those 2 conditions prevent a training syllabus.

Now if you can show me anything, anywhere, to the contrary, i would be very amazed.

[USP]

Danny Boy.
I dont believe you will see the relaxation of licensing until the standardization of the rules (2012)

[Say again s l o w l y]

All student pilots are P2, and they enter their hrs in P2 Column!


P U/T not P2.

Other than that, there's a lot of nit-picking here. Anyone would think that the weather was rubbish and that people were bored...

[S-Works]

And there is no such thing as a QFI in the civilian world.....

[Whopity]

Not quite, this student is with a QFI and therefore it changes his status.

Not trying to dig in here whopity, but may i quote you!
Certainly. Try Article 255.

Flying with an instructor has nothing to do with the status unless the flight meets the requirements for the giving of flight instruction as defined in the ANO.

Would love to see your entry for lesson 14
You the instructor would not have an entry! Neither would the student unless he was sent solo from a licensed aerodrome; and then with no relevant accountable training prior to this exercise I think you might find yourself in contravention of Article 138