NPPL medical privileges

[flybymike]

I have just copied this from the link to NPPL privileges which was posted on GEP's infamous Indy Hiatt thread:
For most types of flying, if you do not meet the DVLA Group 2 (professional) driving standards, but do reach the Group 1
(private) driving standards, once you have been issued with your licence, you may only fly solo, unless your only passenger
is also a pilot licensed to fly the aircraft, and the aircraft is fitted with dual controls. This passenger will act as your safety
pilot and must be briefed accordingly. For balloon flying see Note 3.

Does this mean that the CAA either assume or insist that only two seat aircraft are only, or may only, ever be flown? Does it mean that with private Group 1 privileges one may only carry one passenger even in a four seater aircraft and that this passenger must be licenced to fly the aircraft and must sit in a seat fitted with dual controls? (I am nit picking as I am inclined to do but there is no stated requirement as to where the 2nd pilot must sit.) Does it mean that a Group 1 pilot may not for example carry three passengers in a C172 one of whom is also a pilot and who might even sit in a front seat with dual controls? (even though not specified) Does it mean that extraneous passengers may not be carried and if so why not if there are two pilots on board? Does it mean that this situation may not be simply got around by nominating the 2nd pilot as P1? and if so once again why are additional passengers seemingly excluded? or is this all just another example of hopeless thoughtless CAA drafting?

[UV]

Have you read the CAA guidelines for a safety pilot?
Do so, and it answers all your (rather odd) questions.
It is here ...for your ease of reference!

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/49/SRG_Med_SafetyPilotInformationSheetToPilotWithOSL.pdf

Although it is written to cover "non solo" pilots it does give all the information a safety pilot needs. Even says where he should sit!

[goldeneaglepilot]

A good source of advice is at NPPL Home Page (http://www.nationalprivatepilotslicence.co.uk/)

The Nppl medical for solo flight or with a safety pilot is to ensure the safety of the passengers. If you want to carry ANY passenger rather than another pilot as the safety pilot then you need the DVLA class two standards medical

[flybymike]

The Nppl medical for solo flight or with a safety pilot is to ensure the safety of the passengers. If you want to carry ANY passenger rather than another pilot as the safety pilot then you need the DVLA class two standards medical
I could not find an answer to my (rather odd) question about why additional passengers may not be carried with two licenced pilots on board, but presumably then, Group 1 NPPL holders who wish to do so, simply nominate the "safety pilot" as P1 (with their agreement naturally) and can then take additional passengers who are exposed to exactly the same risk. I venture to guess that this may happen and that it therefore makes the safety argument completely illogical and also deprives the restricted NPPL holder of valuable P1 hours needed for revalidation.

[goldeneaglepilot]

I think the point is that the other person as a safety pilot is not P1. If he is P1 then he may do whatever HIS/HER licence allows.

[jollyrog]

So, a safety pilot, properly briefed and with dual controls is OK for a medically restricted NPPL person, who may have flown without company for who knows how long...

Yet, a licensed and current pilot who wants to sit RHS with a rusty (>90 days) JAR/EASA pilot counts as a passenger and can't legally do it?

What nonsense.

[flybymike]

That is indeed another anomaly. Also, the restricted NPPL pilot may have many thousands of hours experience and be highly competent and current, whilst the safety pilot may have qualified only yesterday and never flown from the RHS in his life, but yet provided he is notionally P1, they can carry passengers.
I suspect that if it was the intention of the CAA not to allow additional passengers to be carried using an NPPL except with an unrestricted licence, then this would have been clearly stated in the regulations, rather than just an unclear reference to an "only passenger" needing a full licence. To me this seems to indicate that if there is only one passenger then that passenger should be licenced, but does not of itself specifically indicate that additional passengers are not permitted, which IMO is illogical given that the same two people are sitting in the front seats and they both have licences.
However, I suppose the reality is that if a restricted NPPL wishes to take passengers flying then he/she simply finds a licenced mate willing to be nominally P1 until the end of an uneventful flight when the passengers all evaporate into thin air as if they had never been there in the first place and then the restricted pilot logs it as P1 anyway.
I don't know why it should be necessary to jump through these pointless hoops.

[UV]

whilst the safety pilot may have qualified only yesterday and never flown from the RHS in his life
If he has never flown from the RHS then how can he be "current ...and qualified...for the purpose of taking over control" as is required by the CAA advice which I copied for you above?

, but yet provided he is notionally P1, they can carry passengers.

Whats a notional P1? Theres only one Pilot in Command and, as you no doubt know, he is nominated before the flight. Its the Law.

indicate that additional passengers are not permitted, which IMO is illogical given that the same two people are sitting in the front seats and they both have licences

No, they don't both have licences for that flight. One has a limitation on his licence.

However, I suppose the reality is that if a restricted NPPL wishes to take passengers flying then he/she simply finds a licenced mate willing to be nominally P1
No. In that case the the Safety Pilot has the be Pilot in Command.

The point of all this is that the CAA have devised a system whereby the Restricted pilot may continue to fly P1 (but alone).

The next logical question they were probably asked was "Can I fly with a safety pilot, and log it?"
No doubt after some thought they agreed he may carry another qualified pilot, (safety pilot) but no "real" passengers as he DOES NOT have a licence for that.

I think its all quite clear and reasonable.

[flybymike]

I am "current" but not from the right hand seat. If this was a requirement there would be very few PPL safety pilots available.

I think you know very well what I mean by "notional" P1 in this instance. P1 can of course be agreed before the flight or at anytime during the flight.

They both have licences. You have stated yourself that one has a limitation on his, and the other doesn't

I think you know very well what I mean by "nominally" as well.

I think it is all very unclear and unreasonable.

The next logical follow on question would in fact be "can I carry passengers if there is a safety pilot on board?" and if not why not

[UV]

I am "current" but not from the right hand seat
You are therefore NOT current from the RH seat, and therefore not placed to take over if necessary. Surely you understand that? Find someone who is.

P1 can of course be agreed before the flight or at anytime during the flight.


No. Show me where it says that P1 can be changed at anytime during the flight.

They both have licences. You have stated yourself that one has a limitation on his, and the other doesn't


NO they DO NOT both have a VALID licence for the proposed flight. One has a limitation saying NO passengers. Therefore he is UNLICENCED for that flight.

I think you know very well what I mean by "nominally" as well
No I dont! There is no such thing as a "nominal" P1.

"can I carry passengers if there is a safety pilot on board?" and if not why not

Because...simply,

a) The disabled pilot does NOT have a licence to carry passengers...and therefore;
b) The Safety Pilot is required by law to be Pilot in Command for that flight.

[flybymike]

You are therefore NOT current from the RH seat, and therefore not placed to take over if necessary. Surely you understand that? Find someone who is.

What airpolice just said. (Personally I dont need anyone to take over. I have a full Class 2 medical
No. Show me where it says that P1 can be changed at anytime during the flight.

Show me where it says they can't
NO they DO NOT both have a VALID licence for the proposed flight.
I didn't say they did. I simply pointed out that you yourself had said they both had licences except that one of them was restricted.
No I dont! There is no such thing as a "nominal" P1.
I know there is no such thing I am putting across a concept here which I am certain must occur but which you presumably naively believe does not...
Because...simply,

a) The disabled pilot does NOT have a licence to carry passengers...and therefore;
b) The Safety Pilot is required by law to be Pilot in Command for that flight.
The safety pilot does not have to be P1 If there are no passengers on board, and can not be so if other passengers are present and the restricted pilot wishes to log the time. This is plainly barmy since the safety pilot might well have a raving lunatic on board perfectly legally on an "everyday" flight with other passengers but not if the lunatic has a restricted licence and wishes to log the time.. My question is why are passengers not allowed with an unrestricted safety pilot on board (who presumably by your reckoning now has to be a RHS current instructor :rolleyes:)

[UV]

Have I missed some legislation about which of the front seats I need to sit in?
Nope... but if you wish to act as a safety pilot (who may need to take control in an emergency) how can you be considered to be current (as required by the CAA advice above) if you never sat in the relevant seat?

[airpolice]

Nope... but if you wish to act as a safety pilot (who may need to take control in an emergency) how can you be considered to be current (as required by the CAA advice above) if you never sat in the relevant seat?

Hi, three points if you are so inclined..........

Define "never"

Define "Current in the right hand seat", rather than "3 take offs and landings in the last 90 days as the sole manipulator of the controls" as current.

Lastly, "Advice?" from the CAA, don't they make Regulations?

[flybymike]

In the context of a safety pilot acting as a passenger for a restricted pilot who is P1, then I suppose even 90 day currency rules would not apply and a valid rating and medical should theoretically suffice, unless of course the restricted pilot became incapacitated and..... (heaven forfend) they had to agree to change who was P1.....:eek:

[airpolice]

Mike, I think that you suppose wrong. Mind you, they should really have made a version of this for the NPPL instead of pointing us at the JAR version.

This is from the CAA Website. http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/49/SRG_Med_SafetyPilotInformationSheetToPilotWithOSL.pdf my bold.

JOINT AVIATION REQUIREMENTS (JAR)
SAFETY PILOT INFORMATION SHEET
WHAT IS AN OPERATIONAL SAFETY PILOT LIMITATION (OSL)?
This limitation is added to a medical certificate when a pilot is considered to be at increased risk of
incapacitation compared to his/her peer group. The holder of the medical certificate is precluded from solo
flying and always has to fly with a safety pilot.

DEFINITION OF A SAFETY PILOT
A safety pilot is a pilot who is current and qualified to act as Pilot In Command (PIC) on the class/type of
aeroplane and carried on board the aeroplane for the purpose of taking over control should the person
acting as the PIC become incapacitated.

BRIEFING SHEET FOR THE SAFETY PILOT
Before each flight the pilot who holds the restricted medical certificate should inform the accompanying pilot
that he/she is required to fly with a safety pilot, because of a medical condition. No details of the medical
condition need be given, but the safety pilot should give sufficient information to make him/her aware of the
type of problem that could occur during the flight.
The attached briefing sheet should be handed to the safety pilot who should be acquainted with its contents
prior to the flight.

So............ it is hard to imagine how you could be a safety pilot in a PA28 if you were sitting in the back. That will not be compatible with being carried on board the aeroplane for the purpose of taking over. Imagine trying to get the front right seat pax to climb into the back, beside you and other pax, then you climb in the front and take over. All this while the guy driving is incapacitated.

The only remaining issue is of course, changing fuel tanks on the PA28 from the "wrong" seat.

[flybymike]

I think that's why I only "supposed". ;)

[airpolice]

UV Wrote:
Although it is written to cover "non solo" pilots it does give all the information a safety pilot needs. Even says where he should sit!

Actually it makes no mention of where the safety pilot sits. Limpy Dan could choose to sit on the right, as P1 and have the safety guy sit on the left. That way if he was incapacitated, he could be pushed rather than pulled out of the aircraft if required.

[goldeneaglepilot]

if he was incapacitated, he could be pushed rather than pulled out of the aircraft if required

Now its making more sense - save the paper work, if Limpy Dan is incapacitated in flight, just get the safety pilot to push him out of the door. Seems simple really, no debate over who is P1, the aircraft will fly better with less weight, and of course the hidden advantadge - the pretty blond sitting in the back can climb over and "help" the pilot.

All this paperwork just makes it so complicated, have you guys learnt nothing from the South African authorities, a good example from them would be the crime report when a crook gets killed "accidently" trying to break into someones house.

[UV]

Actually it makes no mention of where the safety pilot sits.
What does this mean then, from the CAA advice?
The PIC should be sat at one set of controls and the safety pilot at the other set.
It means
a) you have to be CURRENT on type and
b) therefore, able to take control from the APPROPRIATE seat you sit in.

This could be left, right, back or front.

So you may need to sit in the right seat of a motor glider with airbrakes, throttle and stick to work simultaneously.You have to be able to control it with the opposite hands to which you are used to from the left seat. Ever tried converting someone from the left to the right seat of a Grob 109? Thought not.

You may be required to sit in the back seat of a Super Cub. A world of difference from the front.

Its not just the left and right seat of a Cherokee we are talking about.

[airpolice]

So, I ask again, UV, how do you establish whether or not I am "Current" in a particular seat?

[JW411]

And then there is the Tiger Moth where the P1 sits in the back.

[flybymike]

The holder of the medical certificate is precluded from solo
flying and always has to fly with a safety pilot.


Well that bit is certainly not correct, either for a group1 or group2 NPPL.

What does this mean then, from the CAA advice?

Quote:
The PIC should be sat at one set of controls and the safety pilot at the other set.

It means the CAA do not appreciate the difference between a present and a past participle.

[airpolice]

FlyByMike

Fantastic stuff, keep it coming!