Solo supervision Lapsed SEP
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't the danger here (for those who believe the premise is correct?) that pilots whose SEP Rating has lapsed could just go down to the local club once in a while and ask a duty instructor to supervise their solo flight and never actually revalidate their SEP rating - I'll get round to the test some day, just need more solo practice ...
It's seems bizarre to me that anyone would think, post-PPL, that they could expect to be sent solo without a valid Rating - I don't see it?!
You either have a valid SEP Rating or you don't - if you don't, you pass a LPC (or have the experience requirements) or you don't fly.
The idea of 'solo' is for a student pilot, pre-PPL, to gain the necessary experience to achieve the licence, not for a PPL to bypass the regulations.
You might just as well say when your ME/IR has lapsed that you'll just go off a do a couple of 'supervised' asymmetric ILS approaches solo at night in IMC for practice before your test!.
It's seems bizarre to me that anyone would think, post-PPL, that they could expect to be sent solo without a valid Rating - I don't see it?!
You either have a valid SEP Rating or you don't - if you don't, you pass a LPC (or have the experience requirements) or you don't fly.
The idea of 'solo' is for a student pilot, pre-PPL, to gain the necessary experience to achieve the licence, not for a PPL to bypass the regulations.
You might just as well say when your ME/IR has lapsed that you'll just go off a do a couple of 'supervised' asymmetric ILS approaches solo at night in IMC for practice before your test!.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FI(A) does not include a CRI(A) it just happens to have a number of
equivalent privileges.
equivalent privileges.
If not so, could someone please suggest an example.
Bose,
Your CRI SEP(Land) and SEP(Sea) - not required as included in your
FI Privilege (b)
Your CRI MEP - not required as included in your FI Privilege (h)
Your CRI SMG92/Cessna SET/Do28 also included in (b) and (h) unless
they are classified as "complex, high performance" aircraft - in which case,
according to Part-FCL, surely a TRI is required?
Of course listing various CRI privileges separately on a Licence is an easy
way of knowing/proving what an Instructor can teach - but that doesn't
mean those privileges do not all exist within an FI Rating - Else why would
Part-FCL.905.FI say that they do?
I don't hold a EASA licence. I am still bound by my current license restrictions.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Level attitude.
You have merely restated the point I was making about equivalent privileges within the ratings. Just because the FI has the equivalent privileges does not mean it has a CRI embedded in it though.
You have merely restated the point I was making about equivalent privileges within the ratings. Just because the FI has the equivalent privileges does not mean it has a CRI embedded in it though.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are entitled to get the CRI as part of the FI course all that is required is the application.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: EGYD
Posts: 1,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm suprised no one has mentioned FCL.045:
So in any case you would have to provide a written "authorisation" / or endorsement to the student to fly the flight solo.
(d) A student pilot shall carry on all solo cross-country flights evidence of the authorisation required by FCL.020(a).
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think anyone is saying that the purpose of sending a refresher course student solo is to side-step the rules. The value of solo flying is the same for a pre-licence student as it is for a licence holding but expired class rating pilot. It develops judgement, confidence and airmanship.
FO Kite; so, if a pilot undertakes a training course reaching solo standard and then, for some reason stops for a couple of years then picks it up again what's the problem with that? If he actually passes his licence and then stops for a few years before starting again his training requirement will be determined by the HoT at and ATO. If that HoT decides that solo flying would be valuable and includes it in his "assessment of training" then what's the problem??
The great thing about the EASA FCL philosophy is that it specifically devolves this sort of decision to individual HoTs who are experts in the training of pilots. The old system with its "one size fits all" approach had effectively removed this flexibility, or at best left it to the CAA to make decisions based on reading someone's log book and considering his total hours. Now, as an HoT I can go on a flight with the holder of an expired rating, see for myself what training he needs, write that down and then have my team of instructors deliver it. Much better and more effective.
Different HoTs will have different views but Part FCL seems to be sufficiently mature to accept that - well done the Eurocrats!
Happy landings
3 Point
FO Kite; so, if a pilot undertakes a training course reaching solo standard and then, for some reason stops for a couple of years then picks it up again what's the problem with that? If he actually passes his licence and then stops for a few years before starting again his training requirement will be determined by the HoT at and ATO. If that HoT decides that solo flying would be valuable and includes it in his "assessment of training" then what's the problem??
The great thing about the EASA FCL philosophy is that it specifically devolves this sort of decision to individual HoTs who are experts in the training of pilots. The old system with its "one size fits all" approach had effectively removed this flexibility, or at best left it to the CAA to make decisions based on reading someone's log book and considering his total hours. Now, as an HoT I can go on a flight with the holder of an expired rating, see for myself what training he needs, write that down and then have my team of instructors deliver it. Much better and more effective.
Different HoTs will have different views but Part FCL seems to be sufficiently mature to accept that - well done the Eurocrats!
Happy landings
3 Point
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: EGYD
Posts: 1,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The great thing about the EASA FCL philosophy is that it specifically devolves this sort of decision to individual HoTs who are experts in the training of pilots. The old system with its "one size fits all" approach had effectively removed this flexibility, or at best left it to the CAA to make decisions based on reading someone's log book and considering his total hours. Now, as an HoT I can go on a flight with the holder of an expired rating, see for myself what training he needs, write that down and then have my team of instructors deliver it. Much better and more effective.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You win some, you loose some!
Not sure exactly what you mean by "conversion training" Care to expand??
There are certainly areas where the introduction of Part FCL has not been a good thing but it is not universally bad in the way that it is often portrayed.
Not sure exactly what you mean by "conversion training" Care to expand??
There are certainly areas where the introduction of Part FCL has not been a good thing but it is not universally bad in the way that it is often portrayed.
but it is not universally bad in the way that it is often portrayed
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If that HoT decides that solo flying would be valuable and includes it in his "assessment of training" then what's the problem??
Student pilots can be supervised solo.
Qualified pilots have to have a valid rating to operate as PIC (solo).
No valid rating = no privilege to operate the aircraft as PIC = no solo.
From the CAA website
I have an EASA PPL(A) | Private Pilots | Personal Licences and Training
'Ratings within your licence may need revalidating or renewing in order to keep them valid. For example, your PPL(A) may include a SEP(land) rating that allows you to fly a non-complex aeroplane defined in the Single Engine Piston (land) category class. This privilege initially lasts for two years from the date of passing the skills test.'
'If the rating has expired you cannot fly as a pilot in command until it has been renewed.'
I can't really believe we're having this conversation but, once again, it is not always that obvious and if an instructional opportunity is gained then that can only be for the good.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FO Kite,
Nothing I have seen in any law prevents me from sending a refresher student flying on his own! You have not shown us any regulation which would prevent it; simply quoting a generic comment from the CAA web site, out of its intended context will not do!
"No valid rating = no privilege to operate the aircraft as PIC = no solo"
Agree with your comment right up to the second equals sign! No privilege to fly as PIC then the pilot may only fly under the supervision of an instructor.
Consider a pilot who had a licence 30 years ago but has not flown since. He comes along and asks to undertake training to renew his licence; what training do you recommend?? The AMC says quite clearly that training should be based on the initial course and it also suggests that, after just three years the entire course should be repeated to regain a rating. So, after 30 years of no flying are you really going to train a pilot with no solo? I'm not! He needs to regain his judgement, confidence and airmanship by solo flying under the watchful eye of an instructor before he goes out to fly with 3 pax on a crappy day.
"Qualified pilots have to have a valid rating to operate as PIC (solo)." No real argument with this statement but I'd add that once his rating has expired he is no longer a "qualified pilot" and he reverts to being a student - simple!
Don't know if you are a HoT or not but, if you are then you are entitled to make up your own mind what training you think is reasonable and so am I
apropos of Whopity's comment; it's not just the National Authorities who insist on things which are not in the regulation. Why do we seek to make things more difficult for ourselves??
I seem to be in tune with the majority here and I will therefore continue to use solo practice as an important tool for training all students; pre or post licence!!
Happy landings
3 Point
Nothing I have seen in any law prevents me from sending a refresher student flying on his own! You have not shown us any regulation which would prevent it; simply quoting a generic comment from the CAA web site, out of its intended context will not do!
"No valid rating = no privilege to operate the aircraft as PIC = no solo"
Agree with your comment right up to the second equals sign! No privilege to fly as PIC then the pilot may only fly under the supervision of an instructor.
Consider a pilot who had a licence 30 years ago but has not flown since. He comes along and asks to undertake training to renew his licence; what training do you recommend?? The AMC says quite clearly that training should be based on the initial course and it also suggests that, after just three years the entire course should be repeated to regain a rating. So, after 30 years of no flying are you really going to train a pilot with no solo? I'm not! He needs to regain his judgement, confidence and airmanship by solo flying under the watchful eye of an instructor before he goes out to fly with 3 pax on a crappy day.
"Qualified pilots have to have a valid rating to operate as PIC (solo)." No real argument with this statement but I'd add that once his rating has expired he is no longer a "qualified pilot" and he reverts to being a student - simple!
Don't know if you are a HoT or not but, if you are then you are entitled to make up your own mind what training you think is reasonable and so am I
apropos of Whopity's comment; it's not just the National Authorities who insist on things which are not in the regulation. Why do we seek to make things more difficult for ourselves??
I seem to be in tune with the majority here and I will therefore continue to use solo practice as an important tool for training all students; pre or post licence!!
Happy landings
3 Point
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi 3 Point
I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.
Probably not, but that would be the decision of the Authority (CAA) - not the flying instructor or examiner. The pilot may have a lifetime licence but would require a medical and rating to fly as PIC (solo). After 30 years I'm sure the CAA would require 're-training' in order to 'regain' his/her licence. That 're-training' may indeed include a requirement for solo flights. But that's a different scenario to the one proposed on this Thread.
The example above is extreme. Generally, once a qualified pilot, always a qualified pilot in relation to the licences and ratings already obtained - student pilot re-trains (including solo as required), qualified pilot 'regains' (including all necessary dual instruction and flight tests required - 'solo' days are over in the student pilot sense).
All the best for Christmas and the New Year.
FOK
I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.
So, after 30 years of no flying are you really going to train a pilot with no solo?
The example above is extreme. Generally, once a qualified pilot, always a qualified pilot in relation to the licences and ratings already obtained - student pilot re-trains (including solo as required), qualified pilot 'regains' (including all necessary dual instruction and flight tests required - 'solo' days are over in the student pilot sense).
All the best for Christmas and the New Year.
FOK
Last edited by FlyingOfficerKite; 18th Dec 2013 at 18:05.
There is nothing in law, either national or European, to prevent a person being sent solo by an instructor as part of a course of training for renewal of an expired type or class rating.
The ATO is perfectly at liberty to develop a course that includes solo flight if it considers that appropriate. What is not permitted is for an instructor to act outwits the course developed by the ATO and send a student solo when none is called for.
ANO Article 60(2):
A person may act as a pilot of an EASA aircraft without holding an appropriate licence granted, converted or rendered valid under the EASA Aircrew Regulation when undergoing flying training, including solo flying training authorised and supervised by a flight instructor, in accordance with the EASA Aircrew Regulation as amended from time to time.
A person may act as a pilot of an EASA aircraft without holding an appropriate licence granted, converted or rendered valid under the EASA Aircrew Regulation when undergoing flying training, including solo flying training authorised and supervised by a flight instructor, in accordance with the EASA Aircrew Regulation as amended from time to time.
AMC1 FCL.740(b)(1)
Once the ATO has determined the needs of the applicant, it should develop an individual training programme that should be based on the initial training for the issue of the rating and focus on the aspects where the applicant has shown the greatest needs.
Once the ATO has determined the needs of the applicant, it should develop an individual training programme that should be based on the initial training for the issue of the rating and focus on the aspects where the applicant has shown the greatest needs.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BillieBob
Yes, 'when undergoing flying training' - without holding an appropriate licence - but not when already qualified.
Once qualified, ratings are either 'revalidated' or 'renewed'. Without a valid rating you're not going flying as PIC (solo), as described by the CAA in my reference above.
FOK
Yes, 'when undergoing flying training' - without holding an appropriate licence - but not when already qualified.
Once qualified, ratings are either 'revalidated' or 'renewed'. Without a valid rating you're not going flying as PIC (solo), as described by the CAA in my reference above.
FOK
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlyingOfficerKite, read the worlds more carefully
so if one has a rating, but it is not valid, they may be authorised to fly solo by an instructor.
ANO Article 60(2):
A person may act as a pilot of an EASA aircraft without holding an appropriate licence granted, converted or rendered valid under the EASA Aircrew Regulation when undergoing flying training, including solo flying training authorised and supervised by a flight instructor, in accordance with the EASA Aircrew Regulation as amended from time to time.
A person may act as a pilot of an EASA aircraft without holding an appropriate licence granted, converted or rendered valid under the EASA Aircrew Regulation when undergoing flying training, including solo flying training authorised and supervised by a flight instructor, in accordance with the EASA Aircrew Regulation as amended from time to time.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RTN11
With the greatest respect (I have read the words very carefully) - NO.
If you are 'undergoing flying training', 'without holding an appropriate licence', 'rendered valid under the EASA' ...
How can you possibly have a Rating?
You haven't got a licence to include it in!!!
You would be a student 'undergoing flying training, including solo flying training authorised and supervised by a flight instructor',
Not a qualified pilot renewing or revalidating a Rating included in a licence.
Previous comments apply.
Best wishes
FOK
With the greatest respect (I have read the words very carefully) - NO.
If you are 'undergoing flying training', 'without holding an appropriate licence', 'rendered valid under the EASA' ...
How can you possibly have a Rating?
You haven't got a licence to include it in!!!
You would be a student 'undergoing flying training, including solo flying training authorised and supervised by a flight instructor',
Not a qualified pilot renewing or revalidating a Rating included in a licence.
Previous comments apply.
Best wishes
FOK