Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Flying Instructors & Examiners
Reload this Page >

Solo supervision Lapsed SEP

Wikiposts
Search
Flying Instructors & Examiners A place for instructors to communicate with one another because some of them get a bit tired of the attitude that instructing is the lowest form of aviation, as seems to prevail on some of the other forums!

Solo supervision Lapsed SEP

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 15th Dec 2013, 09:09
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: France
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Solo supervision Lapsed SEP

The student has a PPL, his SEP is lapsed, he needs a training to prepare himself for the renewal SEP skill test.
- May the student fly solo if supervised by an instructor. (Under JAR such thing was allowed in France for instance.)
- Would that solo flight count for FI restriction removal?
172510 is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 09:25
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: My house
Posts: 1,339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Don't see why not, the regs only account for not first solo or cross country and you are working within your instructor privileges.
nick14 is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 09:36
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 6,580
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
he needs a training to prepare himself for the renewal SEP skill test.
So what value is there flying solo for this event? Whilst not illegal, there is no requirement. With regard to claiming such a flight towards the 25 supervised solo flights, there is nothing that says what flights they should be however; the clear intention is that to be meaningful, they should be ab-initio flights.

As such a flight now has to be conducted at an ATO (or RF) surely they will have some say regarding the suitability of a solo consolidation flight!
Whopity is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 14:42
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So what value is there flying solo for this event?
I had a couple like that as well.

Basically they want to go and bang some circuits in to practise.

And one wanted to go on a xcountry as well, so we went on a triangle as they requested and then I sent him off on a land away.

My opinion is if the student wants to spend money on more than is required who am I to tell them how to spend their money.

I wouldn't say it should count but as the whole FI derestriction thing is a joke I can't really get fussed about it. But you are leaving yourself open to getting the paper work sent back depending who is looking at it.
mad_jock is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 15:20
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To my understanding supervised solo flight is only allowable to someone who does not hold a licence. If the pilot holds a licence and the rating is lapsed then it is training as required to pass a test. There is no room for solo practice as either the pilot is ready for test or requires further training, there is no in-between.
S-Works is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 15:59
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's certainly a grey area, with no specific provision in the law, as bose-x says the only time solo flight is covered in the law is for people who don't have licences.

However, I'd say common sense should prevail, and if the student wanted to bash the circuit, or practice a pre-planned nav, I don't see why they couldn't do this on their own.

Would that solo flight count for FI restriction removal?
I'd say no.
RTN11 is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 16:07
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't see it as a grey area. The law is actually very clear, in order to fly solo as the holder of a pilots licence, you must have a valid rating. If the rating has lapsed then you can't fly solo. In order to regain the rating you must undertake training as defined by the HoT of an ATO and take a skill test.

Certainly as a HoT myself, there is no way I would permit solo flight for a pilot training to regain a rating.
S-Works is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 16:13
  #8 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: France
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Whopity
So what value is there flying solo for this event?
The regulator sees some value in flying solo for ab initio training. The regulation says nothing about solo training for renewal. After years out of practice, solo training helps to re-built confidence.
It might also be possible that your student is ready but no FE is available. To keep your student current, flying solo seems a good idea.
172510 is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 16:20
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rubbish. Thats a very poor justification.

There is no benefit whatsoever in sending someone renewing a rating off for solo training. They do the training as required to pass the test, get the test done and move on.

I have tested hundreds of people in the same situation.
S-Works is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 16:23
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As such a flight now has to be conducted at an ATO (or RF) surely they will have some say regarding the suitability of a solo consolidation flight!
Recency requirements for a LAPL(A) holder specifically mention this. If the pilot has not fulfilled the experience requirement in the preceding 24 months they can:

FCL.140.A

Holders of a LAPL(A) who do not comply with the requirements in (a) shall:

...

(2) perform the additional flight time or take-offs and landings, flying dual or solo under the supervision of an instructor, in order to fulfil the requirements in (a)
ifitaint...
ifitaintboeing is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 16:26
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To my understanding supervised solo flight is only allowable to someone who does not hold a licence. If the pilot holds a licence and the rating is lapsed then it is training as required to pass a test. There is no room for solo practice as either the pilot is ready for test or requires further training, there is no in-between.
I had this issue with a local examiner who decided to report me for it and refuse to do a test until it got sorted out.

The CAA confirmed it was acceptable for lapsed SEP's class ratings as previously they had a requirement for solo time after a certain period. But this was 9 years ago now.

Now it could very well be that it has changed under EASA. But there are lots of instructors that have done it and will continue to do it.

And what's the safety case to stop it or not allow it?
mad_jock is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 16:36
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't think its a matter of a safety case. There is no point to it. The requirements are training to pass the test. When they are ready to pass the test they take it. What is the point of sending someone off solo. If you deem them safe to solo you deem them ready to pass the test in my opinion.

I personally think it is to much of a bag of worms to open up sending someone with a lapsed rating off to swan around solo.

ifitaint, with all respect throwing the LAPL into the equation is a bit of a misnomer. I can't find anything similar for a PPL, have you?
S-Works is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 17:46
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I personally think it is to much of a bag of worms to open up sending someone with a lapsed rating off to swan around solo.
no bag of worms they go off into the circuit like any other student and gain confidence and fine tune there technique just like any other student.

Apart from anything I hate doing bloody circuits so as soon as they are safe they can go and practise by themselves while I go and do something more productive like get some peace and quiet with a newspaper in a small cubical.
mad_jock is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 18:06
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That's my point MJ, as soon as they are safe then they should be able to an LPC. There is no pint whatsoever I doing solo consolidation.
S-Works is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 18:08
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Have to say I'm strongly on MJ's side in this discussion.

Ask yourself, what's the purpose of solo flying in the basic PPL training course? If it is just to satisfy the regulators requirement for 10 hours P1 then there would seem to be no justification for sending a lapsed licence holder on solo flights prior to renewal by skill test. However, the requirement for pre-licence solo is clearly not just a box ticking exercise but rather an opportunity for the tyro pilot to develop his confidence, hone his judgement end decision making skills.

A pilot who holds a licence, possibly expired many years ago, needs to develop these skills just the same as the new pilot does hence solo flying is perfectly justifiable in appropriate cases.

This, as I see it, is one of the great benefits of Part FCL. As Head of Training it is entirely within my gift to assess that a particular individual would benefit from solo practice and to send him off on his own just as I would for a ab-initio student.

Bose,

Consider a pilot who did his PPL 25 years ago, flew a total of 100 hours over the next two years and has not flown since. His licence (old CAA lifetime variety) is still valid but his SEP rating is long expired. Can you see that this (albeit extreme) case is just like a basic PPL student and therefore needs solo as part of his training? Indeed, the AMC suggests that for a rating renewal after just three years then entire training should be repeated - surely this would include solo flying??

I have sent renewal students on solo flights before and would certainly do so again if I felt it would be of benefit.

As far as using these solos towards de-restricting an inexperienced instructor; I don't see why not. The process of sending a student off on a solo is essentially the same. I don't work with restricted FIs in my school so not something I've ever considered.

Happy landings

3 Point
3 Point is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 18:13
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I can't find anything similar for a PPL, have you?
AMC and GM to Part-FCL: 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.
If solo flying is desirable for the applicant, then I do not see why it shouldn't be included. The test is a by-product of what we are doing isn't it?

ifitaint...
ifitaintboeing is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 18:18
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And after they have passed the test what then they go off unsupervised solo or with innocent pax onboard.

Far better they get there PIC skills up under supervision than not.

I don't train for tests they are the lowest standard which I will accept.

If the person wants more training than the minimum required then they can have it. I have no doubt that some will say well do the test then they can do any extra they like.

But realistically they will gain more from flying solo in the circuit that having a big lump sitting next to them. They just need the old wiring opened up to get the touch back.
mad_jock is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 18:30
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Mortnon
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lapsed SEP

Bose-X is correct and BTW
what do you think the Investigators and Insurance Guru's might have to say in a post accident situation?
dhorgan is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 18:38
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Absolutely nothing abnormal your covered was the reply when I asked the insurance firm the first time I did it, 60 second phone call followed by a fax 5 mins later confirming it.

As for the AAIB I presume what ever they normally say after a student has an accident solo. A solo student under flight instructor supervision.

As I said I have been reported to the CAA for doing it with JAR rules enforce and the head of policy said it was fine and the examiner should do the test.
mad_jock is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2013, 18:52
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Bose-X is correct and BTW"

dhorgan, what's the basis on which you make this statement? Where does it say so in the regulations? As I and others have said, the HoT of an ATO is empowered to devise an appropriate training programme. The AMC specifically says ...

"develop an individual training programme that should be based on the initial training for the issue of the rating" (thanks ifitaint...)

so, that would include solo flying where judged relevant by an HoT.

Insurance? My club insurance covers the aeroplane to be flown by students for training - no issue there.

AAIB? Ditto what MJ said

Let's not invent difficulties and complications which do not exist in the regulations. rather, lets work within the rules to deliver quality training for our students and make them into safe, competent and confident pilots.

3 Point
3 Point is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.