LFAT ILS approach plates?

[CBLong]

Afternoon all,

Can anyone point me to an online source for the Le Touqet ILS approach plates please? I may be popping over for some IMC instruction on Sunday and would appreciate being able to bone up on the approach before then! (I've tried Google and found what I think was the 'official' Le Touqet Aerodrome website, but it was pretty dire...)

Cheers,

cbl.

[Thrifty van Rental]

The French Instrument approach plates are not yet online.

You will need to obtain a copy of an Aerad or Jeppesen plate

[CBLong]

Thanks, TvR - that certainly explains why I couldn't find it online!

I'll just have to wait til I'm at the club on Sunday for my first look at the approach... how hard can it be, anyway...? :)

cbl.

[Timmy O'Tool]

I,ll fax them to you if you like...?

[CBLong]

Thanks Timmy, that would be great... I'll send you my fax number in a private mail...

cbl.

[tmmorris]

You do know that your instructor's FI rating expires at the FIR boundary, don't you? So even if he lets you fly the LFAT ILS in simulated IMC, you can't log the time as P/UT, and it can't be signed off as a satisfactory ILS approach in your logbook? (Indeed I'm not sure about the legality of simulated IMC in French airspace anyway.)

For that matter, once you have the IMC rating you can't use it in France, either...

Tim

[FlyingForFun]

You do know that your instructor's FI rating expires at the FIR boundary, don't you? Really? In that case, I was wrong to log the time I spent in France on my cross-channel check-out. As is every single hirer who's ever done a cross-channel checkout (as required by my club, and probably many others). :confused:

FFF
---------------

[Fuji Abound]

tmmorris - I didnt (know the FI rating expired at the FIR). So is that another JAR ism? Are you saying the position is a UK FI qualified with a JAA license cannot teach in France or needs some other bit of paper before he can do so?

As to flying approaches in simulated IMC, there was a previous thread on this that reached the conclusion that was fine subject to the caveats mentioned.

It is true you cant use the IMC rating in France, but of course the point is training on the L2K approach is much cheaper than most here, and after all one ILS is much like any other (except in JAA land I suppose).

[rustle]

X-Channel checks should be logged as P1 to you for the last X minutes from FIR boundary to landing in france.

ILS approaches can be done under VFR, so they are perfectly possible with the UK-FI as safety pilot - you are not under IFR so the "trainee" is P1, and not P/ut, for the duration of the french-FIR bit.

Alternatively, if the FI is also an IR holder, he/she can log P1 for the french ILS approaches and you could do them under IFR (but log nothing) ;)

Not a real issue unless you only spend 10 seconds getting from the UK-FIR to the french FIR and then spend a lot of time inside french airspace...

But what the hell: If we're going to advertise breach of copywrite on a public BB, we may as well log whatever we like in our logbooks :p

[2Donkeys]

Are we sure that a JAA-licenced FI (issued in the UK) cannot instruct in a G-registered aircraft outside the UK FIR?

Where is the reference?

[2Donkeys]

Hmmm... Silence came the reply.

I would be tempted to disregard the alleged restriction on JAA FI ticket, since I can see no reference to it in any of the obvious documentation.

It would create something of a problem for the many overseas schools too.



What is true though, is that for your flight to be conducted under IFR in France, the commander of the flight (presumably your instructor), will need to hold an Instrument Rating, regardless of the weather conditions. As others have indicated, if nobody on board has an IR, then the approach can only be flown under VFR, and therefore in VMC.

This has been known to confuse French ATC at Calais and Le Touquet who have enormous difficulties working out what they are supposed to do when a VFR training flight and a real IFR flight are both holding or flying approaches at the same facility.

[Thrifty van Rental]

Ah yes indeed Mr Donkeys!

Flying a scheduled service the other day into a large Northern French airport, we were rather surprised to find ourselves behind two English Pipers making cheap ILS approaches under VFR. After struggling for a little bit, the controller had to tell them to leave the zone under VFR to allow us in. :cool: The biggest part of the problem for us is to try to explain things in English over the radio, when they are not part of the standard RT phraseology. I am sure there are ways in which the VFR traffic could have remained near the hold, but the controller simply could not explain things to them clearly enough for them to understand. All he knew was that the pilots were not really allowed to accept an IFR clearance, so he could not guarantee the separation.

It would help if somebody really explained the IMC rating to our controllers. Whenever I talk to them about English people who are allowed to fly IFR in England but not in France, and still insist on flying our ILS in VMC under VFR they become confused and emotional. I can sympathise with them :sad:

[rustle]

Hmmm... Silence came the reply.

2Donkeys you know as well as I do how long it can take to find the relevant docs when you actually need them :eek:

It would create something of a problem for the many overseas schools too.

The non-UK JAR schools (US/SA/Oz) need special dispensation to operate and teach JAR lessons (from the "host" JAA-state - UK, CAA) do they not?

We had a thread on here recently about one school losing it's JAA-approved status...

So this may not help understanding the case of UK-based FI's crossing the french-FIR boundary and instructing. (I agree that under JAR it should ;) )

[Thrifty van Rental]

I am hoping it doesn't work in both directions. I often bring students across to Shoreham, Manston and other places from France, often under IFR.

My money is on Mr Donkeys! :D

[2Donkeys]

:cool:

Well, I am looking at the ANO, in which the FI rating and its privileges are defined in law.

I am also looking at JAR-FCL 1.300 in which it appears to suggest that the FI rating is valid for instruction in any JAR state. France and the UK have both signed up for mutual recognition of JAR-FCL1, so I would imagine that clinches it. N'est-ce pas Mr van Rental ;-))

[Fuji Abound]

Rustle

"As others have indicated, if nobody on board has an IR, then the approach can only be flown under VFR, and therefore in VMC."

Not wishing to be pedatic, I just always get confused on this one.
Why cant you fly the approach under IFR but maintaining VMC in the same way a vanilla PPL in the UK can fly under VFR as long VMC below is maintained?

[rustle]

Well, without referring to my "pocket ANO" ;), you can't fly IFR in France (or most places) without an IR - irrespective of met conditions VMC/IMC.

In the UK you can fly under IFR without IR or IMC rating, but you can't fly in IMC (met) without one or other...

The confusion seems to be about Rules -v- Met.

[2Donkeys]

Without in any way wishing to needle Fuji Abound, this is precisely the problem that Thrifty van Rental and I were on about.

The mutual lack of understanding, French ATCOs about UK ratings and privileges and British pilots relating to rules outside the UK makes this a much more difficult area than first meets the eye.

[bluskis]

Why fly under IFR in VMC on an instrument approach in France, Why not fly VFR and route via the hold and the approach path. Strikes me as perfectly legal.

If one pilot is using foggles, and the other is watching out and can assume control at any time still no problem.

The only problem would be logging the flight, but the letdown and approach practice would still have been carried out and the pilot better for it.

[2Donkeys]

In practice, this is exactly what happens Bluskis.

The only issue that arises, as others have written is when ATC need to mix genuine IFR traffic, with the VFR boys. Under these circumstances, the VFR boys will normally get the boot for a while to allow the IFR arrival to take place.

[vancouv]

I'm a bit confused about the X-channel check. This isn't a licensing requirement is it? Isn't it simply a club requirement before they let you take their precious plane abroad?

When I did my cross channel check I logged it all as P1, as I already had my PPL and was therfore legal to make the flight on my own.

Is that not correct?

[rustle]

Exactly what I think you should do, vancouv :)

Clubs insist on the check, instructor goes along for the ride but then wants to log the time as well - not really "training" per se...

Maybe they could charge for the groundschool if they have to teach FPL filling or some-such, but X-channel checks I wouldn't have thought come under the remit of "training for the grant or renewal of a licence or rating" ;)

When you go to a new club/school and they want a check flight before letting you rent the aircraft how is that check flight logged? (Assuming you weren't doing any diff. training)

I suspect some schools/instructors will expect to claim the time for themselves as P1, but that ain't right shirley?

[Fuji Abound]

2Donkeys - absolutely no offence taken - a good discussion.

I still am uncertain where the legislation comes from. Are we saying that in France to file IFR requires an instrument rating because thats what the French ANO says and is that true throughout Europe. To me it again begs the question that we all operate in theory under JAR (and I except with certain national exceptions like the UK IMC rating) and yet presumably there are other differences between our ANO and the French. It begs the question as to precisely what JAR unified and what it did not.

Edit added because having thought about the issue presumably it is us that departs from the international norm by permitting pilots to file IFR without an IR subject to the mc whereas in Europe filing IFR is not mc dependant, so IFR becomes impossible in VMC without an IR. Anyone know for sure?

[rustle]

It's the UK that are different by allowing IFR without an IR.

Everyone else (mostly) is the same - no IR, no IFR.

I'm not sure, but suspect, that we (UK) filed a difference with ICAO for allowing IFR on vanilla and "IMC" licences.

[Thrifty van Rental]

What a great discussion!

If this IFR/IMC message is spread more widely amongst British pilots, I am sure that it would help to eliminate some of the confusions that we see everyday when you come to visit us in France.

You are very different in the UK, with your IMC rating and your liberal approach to IMC. I sometimes smile when I hear some people complaining on Pprune about how rigid the CAA are with the IR. You should try living in France, where our DGAC have elevated rigidity to an artform.

TvR

[rustle]

You are very different in the UK, with your IMC rating and your liberal approach to IMC.

Not strictly true, TvR, when you have VFR on top with no additional rating(s) and we do not :p

Or did you mean our liberal approach to IFR ;) :rolleyes: :hmm:

[Thrifty van Rental]

Check your facts Rustle. :D

We in France adhere to the ICAO VFR defintion, which permits VFR over the top of a covered layer.

Your UK definition of VFR permits it too, but it is you who have chosen to place an artificial restriction in your PPL privileges.

None of this has anything to do with IMC and IFR though :D I find your approach to IMC and IFR to be rather flexible, but this is not always a bad thing

TvR

[rustle]

I think we are agreeing, but semantics got in the way :)

[PhilD]

Going back to logging flight time....I have always applied a simple rule: If I am legally allowed to fly the plane as P1 then I log as P1.

If it's a club or rental checkout I am legally allowed to fly the plane, so I log P1. If it's a cross-channel checkout (for which there is no legal requirement in the ANO or the rules of the air or anywhere else) I log P1. If it's training for (e.g.) a complex endorsement or a night rating I am not allowed to fly the plane without it, so I log PuT and need an instructor in the plane who logs P1.

I have always applied this rule and never had a problem, although clearly others have, and I think rustle is right that it is more a matter of FIs trying to get more time in their logbooks than a consistent application of the rules.

[FlyingForFun]

Wow - this is great. How many un-related questions can we ask in one thread? Ok, let me try to summarise - based on a combination of my prior understanding, and the previous posts on this thread:

To fly IFR in most of the world requires an IR. In the UK it doesn't, but you do need an IR or an IMC rating to fly in IMC.

To fly an ILS doesn't require anything special - it's just an approach. You can fly it IFR as long as someone on board has an IR (or an IMC rating if in the UK), or you can fly it VFR. ATC may treat you differently depending on your choice of rules.

A safety pilot is required when under the hood in VMC, whether VFR or IFR. (Except in Portugal, apparently, as discussed on another thread.)

Flying VFR on top is allowed anywhere in the world. However, a UK license without an IR or IMC rating prevents it. (Haven't seen anyone say this on this thread, but it is my understanding.)

Logging P1 with an instructor on board is entirely legal if you are legal to fly the aircraft yourself. But only if the instructor doesn't log the time at all. This needs to be agreed in advance. It would have implications on, for example, whether you choose to ignore your instructor's advice on how to manage the flight.

Instructing in France on a UK license in a G-registered aircraft. The suggestion has been made that this is illegal, but no one has been able to back this up with reference to legislation. 2Donks has found legislation which "appears" (his word) to suggest that it is legal.

Have I missed anything?

FFF
-------------

[CBLong]

Interesting discussion. This is now the longest thread I've ever started, although it did go off-topic after about three posts!

The whole area of logging time seems to be a confused nightmare: there seems to be a need for some sort of webpage or other publication to set out all the different possibilities... (maybe I should volunteer to do that?? :rolleyes: )

The 'cross-channel check' struck a chord with me... I did mine last year, and the conversation on our return to the club went like this:

Me to instructor: How do I log that time then?

Instructor to CFI: CBLong can log that P1, can't he?

CFI to instructor: Yes, but only if you don't log it at all.

Instructor to me: Log it as PUT.

:)

cbl.

[rustle]

FFF, were you being true to form your point:

To fly IFR in most of the world requires an IR. In the UK it doesn't, but you do need an IR or an IMC rating to fly in IMC.

Needs the qualification "In the UK outside CAS it doesn't..."

With a further clarification then that a valid IMC rating extends that privilege into Class D within the UK/IOM. ;)

(And before any pedants start, I cannot find any Class "D" in CI)

[2Donkeys]

"I cannot find any Class "D" in CI"

If you mean the Channel Islands, look harder Rustle! :D


Still waiting to hear from those who alleged that a JAA FI (issued in the UK) cannot instruct in a G-reg aircraft in France...

Any takers?

[rustle]

Bollox. :rolleyes: :O

PS, CI = Canary Islands :p

[2Donkeys]

Bet you'll never guess what class, the Los Rodeos CTR is Rustle...

:D

[rustle]

Hmmm.

According to Jepp I must have meant the Cocos Islands ;)

Hah! I know the aerodrome there isn't in CAS because it is in the middle of a golfcourse (cleared of players when an aircraft lands or takes off)

[Keef]

I thought Channel Islands instructors regularly took their students into France while training. Doesn't that rather imply a UK FI in a G-reg aircraft can do that?

My FI (back in the dark ages) did some training with me, pre-PPL, to France and back, and he thought it was legal. The CAA inspected my logbook when they were issuing my PPL (even ticked bits of it) and didn't object either.

[tmmorris]

I must confess, I thought I was right about the FI being restricted to UK FIRs, and I've seen it quoted before, but I checked the ANO and couldn't find it - so probably you're right. Sorry if I started an unnecessary controversy...

I quite agree about FI's trying to log time for cross-channel checkouts, though; mine rather neatly side-stepped the problem by including a cross-channel trip in my IMC training (and yes, I think he did log the bit in France) so he could log P1 and I P/UT.

Tim

[RodgerF]

I was looking for something else in the Private Flying forum and found this observation

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Going back to logging flight time....I have always applied a simple rule: If I am legally allowed to fly the plane as P1 then I log as P1.

If it's a club or rental checkout I am legally allowed to fly the plane, so I log P1. If it's a cross-channel checkout (for which there is no legal requirement in the ANO or the rules of the air or anywhere else) I log P1. If it's training for (e.g.) a complex endorsement or a night rating I am not allowed to fly the plane without it, so I log PuT and need an instructor in the plane who logs P1.

I have always applied this rule and never had a problem, although clearly others have, and I think rustle is right that it is more a matter of FIs trying to get more time in their logbooks than a consistent application of the rules.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I quite agree that this makes sense. However there may be issues of insurance. The Insurers may not grant cover to a pilot wanting to rent without them first having had a check flight with an instructor. In case you could not be in command of the check flight.

[Mike Cross]

I quite agree that this makes sense. However there may be issues of insurance. The Insurers may not grant cover to a pilot wanting to rent without them first having had a check flight with an instructor. In case you could not be in command of the check flight

What's that got to do with it? Of course you can be PIC, there being no legal requirement for insurance within the UK.

Mike

[rustle]

...there being no legal requirement for insurance within the UK.

Me thinks thou doth protest too much, MC

You replied to this comment:

...may not grant cover to a pilot wanting to rent...

Whilst there may be no legal requirement for insurance, there may well be a "club/hirer" requirement for insurance, and such insurance may be voided if you haven't been "checked-out", and to be "checked-out" for other than an IR-renewal you can only log P/ut and not P1 or P1s...

So there :rolleyes:

[welkyboy]

In the Channel Islands a lot of the instruction for the issue of a JAR PPL is carried out within the Brest FIR and we send our students on Nav Ex's solo over France. At no time in the last 40 years has this been a problem. We just have to send a copy of the medical certificate to the CAA and they issue a dispensation for a student (who has no licence) to fly outside UK airspace.
So I suggest you dont believe all that you hear.

[BEagle]

Regrettably this 'can I log it' debate is clouded by the CAA, JAA, the desperation of 'hours builders' and meaningless nonsense like 'SP1C U/T' or whatever it's termed.

Commonsense would indicate that if you're being taught something (such as a cross-Channel check) by an instructor, then you are the student and the FI is the Commander. Simply and easy - FI is P1C you are P U/T (but really ought to be P1/S if there was any sense in the world!).

But since when did the expressions 'CAA' or 'JAA' appear in the same sentence as 'commonsense'....