BEagle wrote (a couple of days ago, regarding my microlighting input):
"Well, perhaps if you are talking about flying machines with such unreliable engines, then you might have a point."
Accepted as regards the two-stroke days, which was when our syllabus was drawn up. But now we have the ubiquitous Rotax 912 - designed as a certified engine - it does beg the question that this thread is based on: Why have two different approaches to training and PFLs. The syllabus for micros is on the NPPL web site.
"I'm not quite sure how a student can be permitted to fly his own aeroplane without holding a licence...?"
Quite simple. You buy the aircraft, you employ the instructor. In the light aircraft world, there might be questions as to whether it is on a private C of A or a Public C of A - or indeed in the PFA permit world whether of not it is soley owned - if money is changing hands for instruction. But if you are solo, you are in the aircraft yourself and as long as you meet the regs for that flying machine, you can do it. The problem in this case gives scope for another thread: the instructors had told (not advised) the student not to buy the aircraft and that they would not fly in it. Student insisted on buying. Student then wanted to do some of his solo hours in own aircraft (very common in microlighting since it used to be completely illegal to hire aircraft, so to continue flying after licence issue then microlight had to be purchased). Instructors thought: well, he is going to have to fly it sometime. Decided to check the aircraft out solo themselves before giving him a ground brief on its characteristics (sky turns green when you stall!) and sent him off.
"Statistically, aircraft approved for SEP Class training are maintained to a high sufficiently high standard to make engine failure a very, very unlikely event. So to cover every possible contingency ..."
Not talking every contingency in this thread, but PFLs.
Here are couple of questions from microlight instructor revalidations:
Give me five reasons why your nice new Rotax 912 (basically a certified SEP engine) powered microlight might have an engine failure?)
This was from an examiner who had had his throttle cable go at 50ft on take-off after having just crossed the Severn at height too low to glide to the other side!
Give me five reasons why your solo student could have a dangerous and unusual attitude on his first solo?
Well, this is what this thread is about. There are no rights and wrongs, I think, but different ways of thinking.
As for diversion airfields, we just tell students to use the farmer's field next door! (There again, unlike the runway at Strathaven, it is harrowed and rolled at least twice a year, so probably smoother!)
Very best wishes to all