Trial flights - are they legal?
On another thread there has been the usual discussion about when you can contribute towards or pay for a flight.
The point was made that the CAA has mounted a number of prosecutions against pilots without a CPL or CPL and AOC who have fallen outside the various exemptions (concessions).
Now I had always thought that trial flights were a bit close to the wind.
As we know nearly every flying schoold does them and the majority of flying schools dont have an AOC which is why I thought they dress them up as a trial lesson.
However, if you were to interview 100 people after their trial lesson (including the 70 year I recently saw hobbling out to the aircraft) whether they had any intention of learning to fly I suspect I know what the answer would be in the majority of cases.
So has the law changed, or is this still just a convenient way around the law. Do the CAA turn a blind eye?
.. .. .. and since the insurance companies were mentioned on the last thread, what would happen if there was an accident, and the relatives disclosed that the trial flighter had no intention what so ever of learning to fly but just wanted a spin around their mates house for their birthday .. .. ..
.. .. .. and is the matter even more complex when it is a trial aerobatic flight - I dont suppose there are many people who really wanted to learn to fly who would start out with a trial lesson in an Extra 300.
Last edited by Fuji Abound; 24th Sep 2007 at 11:58.