Failed LPC becomes PUT
Does anyone have to hand the reference that defines a failed LPC or LST as becoming PUT?
|
CAP 804 Section 1 Part E Para 9 Table Item J
Pilot undergoing any form of flight test with a EASA or CAA Authorised Examiner (other than case K). PICUS for successful Test P/UT for unsuccessful test (including partial pass) |
Thanks Whoppity. Is there anything that links to Part FCL for this?
|
This is a specifically UK interpretation that is not supported by EU regulations. In fact, according to the regulation, the use of PICUS is restricted to multi-pilot operations.
|
Hmmmm, OK so what is the EU regs stance?
|
FCL.050 Recording of flight time The pilot shall keep a reliable record of the details of all flights flown in a form and manner established by the competent authority. AMC1 FCL.050 Recording of flight time (1) PIC flight time: (i) the holder of a licence may log as PIC time all of the flight time during which he or she is the PIC; (4) instruction time: a summary of all time logged by an applicant for a licence or rating as flight instruction, instrument flight instruction, instrument ground time, etc., may be logged if certified by the appropriately rated or authorised instructor from whom it was received; (5) PICUS flight time: provided that the method of supervision is acceptable to the competent authority, a co-pilot may log as PIC flight time flown as PICUS when all the duties and functions of PIC on that flight were carried out in such a way that the intervention of the PIC in the interest of safety was not required. |
Does anyone have to hand the reference that defines a failed LPC or LST as becoming PUT? The Examiner will always be Captain and so will Log PIC in all cases. Therefore, in Single Pilot Aeroplanes, the Candidate can only be PUT unless there is a rule somewhere that stipulates otherwise - and in the UK there is, but this applies only to successful tests. So, as Whopity quoted, there is a reference that defines a passed LPC or LST as becoming PICUS. |
I know I am asking the question the wrong way round. There is method in my madness....... ;)
If a candidate takes an LPC and an NAA negates the LPC the flight becomes a training flight. If the NAA then says that it can't be a training flight because it was an LPC where do you stand...... |
Originally Posted by bose-x
(Post 9637268)
I know I am asking the question the wrong way round. There is method in my madness....... ;)
If a candidate takes an LPC and an NAA negates the LPC the flight becomes a training flight. If the NAA then says that it can't be a training flight because it was an LPC where do you stand...... Ask the NAA concerned as the only other option I can think of would be the PIC (Examiner) carried a passenger that they allowed to fly the aircraft and, I would assume, a fare paying passenger at that! |
Yep, real life.
I asked the NAA to tell me how they think it should be logged with no response other than they do not deem it a training flight!! |
bose-x
Is this the same situation as you described in your Post "Training Rejection Conundrum..."? I would suggest that the flight was a DUAL flight so the Candidate would Log PUT, but that the NAA is saying that they will not accept it as a required Training flight for the purposes of EASA Licencing |
Yeah, it's linked to that.
Since the NAA are unable to state what they consider to be a required training flight and unable to say what they think the flight should be logged as I am no further forward!! Candidate has now done four training sessions where FCL.740 SUGGESTS two. They have over ridden me as Head of Training but are unprepared to actually make a statement of exactly what they want!! This is a Type Rates aircraft we are discussing not a cheap SEP. I have never seen anything like it! |
All times are GMT. The time now is 14:58. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.