Getting back into flight training (for interest).

[rayonline_nz]

Hi all, it's been probably been over 2yrs since my heartblock, provided they accept my ECG analysis I could be allowed to resume flight training with whatever condition(s) attached. This is for PPL only, not considering CPL at all ....

I have about 30hrs. It has been on and off due to work etc.. and other commitments. I did buy an expensive package but that didn't go so well so now I may just pay by the lesson and have less regular lessons. Not yet gone solo yet. Not done the radio test yet or any of the tests.

I may this time go to a diff Aero Club for a new perspective. Thing is that in my old one, staff changes were v frequent and what tended to happen was that many times I had a diff instructor and I felt at one trip away the guy just wanted a student to pay for the flight so he could fly back earlier b/c he had some commitment of his own. So we went up, he didn't know what my training was up to ... and taught me cross country. Got utter confused, he too was not happy b/c he thought I could fly better given the hours, I paid the $250 or whatever ....... That was the last time I flew with that guy.

My training has been in a Tomahawk. The new place does (now) have 1 or 2 of them, in the past they usually teach in 152s. What should I choose?



Cheers.

[Weekend_Warrior]

PM sent.
As an aside, you don't need a medical to start flight training - you just can't fly solo.
Also in addition to comments in my PM, it would help to sit down with the CFI or a senior instructor, (B-cat) and map out a training plan - this will give you something run past the instructor so there is no misunderstanding about what you wish to do.

[Hasselhof]

Out of interest, do you need a medical in NZ to do an ultralight licence? My understanding in OZ was that you had to be able to state that you were fit to hold a drivers licence but that no actual medical was required. It might be an option to get into the air, even if it rules out the larger GA stuff.

[flyinkiwi]

Out of interest, do you need a medical in NZ to do an ultralight licence? My understanding in OZ was that you had to be able to state that you were fit to hold a drivers licence but that no actual medical was required. It might be an option to get into the air, even if it rules out the larger GA stuff.

You do not need an aviation medical, but a medical declaration similar to what truck and bus drivers need. It can be done by a GP (not an AMA/AME) and allows people with certain medical conditions to fly as long as their doctor is satisfied that they are managing their conditions appropriately, have sufficient risk management procedures in place and their specific condition is not in a high risk of incapacitation category.

[Weekend_Warrior]

The RPL was supposed to allow people to fly GA aircarft with a microlite type medical, but due to typical CAA stuff-up, you need to have held a PPL first - which means a class 2 medical. Only then can you get a RPL.
I'll be charitable and say it was an oversight. :ugh:

[Howard Hughes]

and allows people with certain medical conditions to fly as long as their doctor is satisfied that they are managing their conditions appropriately, have sufficient risk management procedures in place and their specific condition is not in a high risk of incapacitation category.
In my opinion this is what the regulator shuld be doing all of the time, for all medicals, some of the conditions they have are Draconian and out of step with the main stream medical profession!

[flyinkiwi]

The RPL was supposed to allow people to fly GA aircarft with a microlite type medical, but due to typical CAA stuff-up, you need to have held a PPL first - which means a class 2 medical. Only then can you get a RPL.
I'll be charitable and say it was an oversight. :ugh:

Can you please explain why this is? CAR 61.355 states:

(a) Except as provided for in paragraph (b), to be eligible for the issue of
a recreational pilot licence (aeroplane) a person must—
(1) be at least 17 years; and
(2) hold a medical certificate, issued in accordance with rule 44(1)
of the Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Rule 1999, that is
applicable for a Class 2, 3, 4 or 5 driver licence with passenger
endorsement; and
(i) was issued within the previous 5 years; or
(ii) if the person is 40 years of age or older, was issued within
the previous 24 months; and
(3) have a minimum of 50 hours flight time training and experience
as a pilot in aeroplanes comprising solo flight time, dual flight
time, instrument time, and cross-country flight time, acceptable
to the Director; and
(4) have a valid written examination credit, or approved equivalent,
that covers the following 6 private pilot licence subjects areas:
(i) PPL Flight Radiotelephony:
(ii) PPL Air Law:
(iii) PPL Air Navigation and Flight Planning:
(iv) PPL Meteorology:
(v) PPL Human Factors:
(vi) PPL Aircraft Technical Knowledge (Aeroplane); and
(5) have completed terrain awareness training that is acceptable to
the Director; and
(6) have passed a flight test for the issue for a private pilot licence in
accordance with rule 61.153(a)(7)
In Part B it talks about conversion of a PPL or better to RPL. Looking at the legislation above you can train for and receive a RPL solely with a medical certificate.

I'm confused... :confused:

[sleemanj]

I can explain the ab-initio to RPL means interim PPL medical requirement for you...

In order to get an RPL, you must become a student pilot, learn to fly, and get an RPL.

Being a student entails having a Student Pilot Licence.

To complete your training you naturally require to fly solo hours on that Student Pilot Licence.

The requirements for soloing with a student pilot licence are such that a PPL medical (Class 2) is necessary before doing so (61.105)

So if you want to go direct from ab-initio to RPL, you at least need that full on medical to solo with the Student Pilot Licence.

Incidentally, I won't be charitable towards the CAA, because this was not an oversight.

The CAA specifically wanted it this way, because the RPL was (in so far as the CAA is concerned) for existing pilots who have lost their medicals and who want to continue flying the aircraft they are familiar with.

Basically I understand the CAA saw these people losing medicals and getting into new hot microlights, and then getting themselves into trouble - better to keep them in the heavy GA aircraft to which they are accustomed.

[Weekend_Warrior]

(3) have a minimum of 50 hours flight time training and experience
as a pilot in aeroplanes comprising solo flight time

To fly solo you need;

A) class 1 or 2 medical certificate
B) A RPL

If you don't have a RPL or a class 1 or MC you can't fly solo. As you must fly a certain number of hours solo to get a RPL, you therefore need a class 1 or 2 to complete these hours.

OK, stricly speaking you don't need a PPL to get a RPL, I was wrong there, just to have completed the solo flight time requirements of a PPL.

For which you need a class 1 or 2 MC.

Edited to add; You can't get a RPL with a class 1or 2 medical certificate. The rule is clear on that - you MUST have an appropriate Transport Agency or whatever medical certificate - read you own post carefully.

So to go straight to a rpl you need BOTH a class 1 or 2 MC AND a Transport Agency MC - as the flight test and written requirements are the same for both, this is totally pointless unless you are unlucky enough to lose your class 1 or 2 after you complete the solo hours but before you pass the PPL flight test.

[Weekend_Warrior]

SLEEMANJ beat me to it, we both posted more or less the samething.

Sory to be picky but; Being a student entails having a Student Pilot Licence.

There is now no such thing as a SPL - went out the window years ago.

[rayonline_nz]

Thanks, I will read the PM now.

The thing for me, medical should be ok me thinks. I have sent my entire medical record after requesting them off the hospital to CAA and with thru their appointed cardiologist, I can do a ECG and provided it is okay, I can be reinstated with some conditions.

But to the point, if I don't get my Class 2 Medical, I see no point in continuing, because I will never be able to fly solo or graduate my PPL so I will always have to pay an instructor even if I have met the required level of expertise.

[flyinkiwi]

The CAA specifically wanted it this way, because the RPL was (in so far as the CAA is concerned) for existing pilots who have lost their medicals and who want to continue flying the aircraft they are familiar with.

Basically I understand the CAA saw these people losing medicals and getting into new hot microlights, and then getting themselves into trouble - better to keep them in the heavy GA aircraft to which they are accustomed.

I had a feeling this was the case (I believe the CAA even said as much in Vector a when the RPL was formally announced). Thanks to you and WW for setting me straight.

[sleemanj]

@rayonline

If you fail a class 2 (or even if you don't), don't forget about microlights, if you are fit to drive, you should be eligible for a microlight medical declaration.

Don't go thinking microlights are just flying clotheslines anymore, take for example the SportCruiser...

http://www.sportaircraftworks.com/oto%20bin/images/sportcruiser/scdaveata_copy(3).jpg

[Howard Hughes]

Or the FK-14 Polaris 'Le Mans'...:ok:

http://www.aviema.it/images/home_1_15.png