Credit for taxiing time

[BEagle]

I'm often asked whether there is any official allowance for 'converting' military flight time into civil flight time.

Basically, there are 2 options:

1. Keep a copy of your military trips logged in a civil logbook under civil rules. Not easy if you've left it until late in life!

2. Refer to the allowances in LASORS:

"Logging of Military Taxi Time

When recording flying hours, the normal practice in civilian aviation is for flight times to include taxi time i.e. chock to chock time, and the PLD recognises this time. However, for the military pilot only a record of “airborne” time is recorded. Therefore as a result of the difference between the two methods of recording flying hours over a complete service career could mean the effective loss of several hundred hours flying time to the Service Pilot.

PLD has for many years recognised military flying experience and have considered military flying hours to be on a par with those gained in civilian flying, therefore when a military pilot applies for a civilian licence the CAA will accept all the flying hours recorded in their military flying logbook, and in addition it has been agreed that military pilots should also be credited for their taxi times.

The maximum taxi time credit PLD will accept is 5% of the total military airborne hours, up to a maximum of 75 hours credit against the ATPL(A) and 10 hours credit against the CPL(A). This corresponds to the average amount of taxi hours credited for civilian pilots under the chock to chock scheme. The times are an allowance to be added to each sortie as follows:-

Taxi Allowance Times:

Fixed Wing Training Aircraft: 10 mins

Fast Jets: 10 mins

Multi-Engined Transport Aircraft: 15 mins

Display Flying: 5 mins

Wheeled Helicopter (Airfield Operations): 5 mins

Wheeled Helicopters (Field Operations): Nil

Skidded Helicopters: Nil

Aircraft Carrier Operations: Nil"

All the other military accreditation allowances are also spelt out quite clearly in LASORS - you can download a FREE copy from this site:
http://www.caa.co.uk/publications/publicationdetails.asp?id=1191

[West Coast]

Do individual airline applications prescribe how much time for conversion in the UK? Some in the US do.

[BEagle]

West Coast - the only certain rule is that which applies to anyone undertaking 'Zero Flight Time' training course for a JAR-FCL Type Rating:

'(a) Pilots undertaking ZFTT shall have completed not less than 1500 hours flight time or 250 route sectors on a relevant aeroplane type if a flight simulator qualified to Level CG or C is used during the course. If a Level DG, Interim D or D qualified flight simulator is used the pilot shall have not less than 500 hours flight time or 100 route sectors on a relevant type;

(b) A relevant type of aeroplane is a turbo-jet, transport category aeroplane with a MTOM of not less than 10 tons or an approved passenger seating configuration for not less than 20 passengers.'

A 'route sector' is merely 'A flight comprising take-off, departure, cruise of not less than 15 minutes, arrival, approach and landing phases.'

Otherwise, it's generally 'Experience commensurate with age of the applicant' which will tip the balance in favour of ex-military job applicants.

Being locked into a 2-person flight deck for hours on end isn't my idea of fun, so this particular ATPL holder is quite happy to leave that avenue of employment to others!

[PPRuNeUser0172]

With the amount of digging going on at a certain north wales airfield, we should definitely be given some credit for taxying time as in some instances getting to and from the runway takes longer than the sortie itself.

[West Coast]

"Otherwise, it's generally 'Experience commensurate with age of the applicant' which will tip the balance in favour of ex-military job applicants"

Funny enough, that's exactly the opposite in the US.

I would rather sit in the pointy end and do nothing (never read anything other than company material of course) than be stuck doing real work where my time is accounted for. But I can understand your point.

[Impiger]

At the risk of sounding frivolous how about taking a percentage reduction in flying hours for all that time spent on autopilot?

:p

[BEagle]

Back in yer MoD-box, Impiger ;)

By that judgement, the same reduction should apply to TypHoon pilots, since their jets are always on 'autopilot' - much like an Airbus!

[West Coast]

Take all the hours you want, I already have a job.

Using the AP does take some skill, damn things are too slow in the terminal environment to the changes required by ATC. I would much rather hand fly a NPA to mins then have the AP do it.

[Impiger]

I wish getting fish to bite was this easy!:ok:

[West Coast]

Funny, I thought this might be an interesting thread. You seem to think you've been successful at trolling.

[Right Stuff]

Most useful, thanks for the info BEagle. On another note, what are the rules regarding twin engined fast jets and civilian multi hours? I have heard that due to the proximity of the engines and the lack of any asymmetrical issues they are not recognised as 'true' multiengine hours - is this true?

[BEagle]

RightStuff, you are correct. The different levels of accreditation are for:

1. 'Recognised' ME types. These are: Andover, BAC 1-11, BAe 125/146, C-17, Hercules, Islander, Jetstream (all Mks), Nimrod, PA31, Sentry, TriStar and VC10/VC10K.

2. AAC Islander.

3. All other types

For full details, see LASORS section D3 and G2.

It's not just the nature of the aeroplane itself, but also the training given at the ME OCU and the environment in which the a/c is operated which allows accreditiation to be granted by the Authority. Thus, despite their undenied flying skills, pilots of a/c such as the Jaguar will be requied to do a bridging package and take more exams than the pilots of more 'airliner' type a/c for which an equivalent Type Rating can be granted. FJ pilots will need to open a CPL/IR with a Class or Type Rating on a civilian type; most do it on the PA34 Seneca - although if someone were to become interested enough, it wouldn't take rocket science to come up with a suitable CAA-recognised 'resettlement' course on the King Air at Cranwell which might lower costs to the individual.

Another point to make is that QFI/student operation of things like a Tucano, Hawk or fast-jet T-bird does NOT count as 'multi pilot' time towards an ATPL.

[MrBernoulli]

To all you military budding Professional Licence holder wannabes out there - take heed of BEagle's advice in these matters!

It is often damn difficult to find the simple answer to the plethora of rules and regs that we have to wade through to earn a crust flying civvy jets. BEagle seems to know the rules back to front and was recently very helpful with my query on a subject mentioned right here on this post.

Remember folks, 'multi-pilot' is precisely what JAR/CAA wants it to mean i.e. it has to be an aircraft certified for multi-pilot operation to their satisfaction. Example - the RAF Jetstream, while recognised as multi-engine, was not recognised as multi-pilot but the Navy version was recognised as multipilot. Go figure!

Beags - I owe you a beer. Paperwork has now been submitted and I should have the 'extras' soon.

[Right Stuff]

Yes, many thanks for the input BEagle. No doubt it will all have changed by the time I really need to know though!

[ZH875]

Credit for Taxi time!! What's next, Credit for gro-bag wearing time?.

With the number of 'rounded up to the nearest 5 mins' (except the C130J boys) trips, I would have thought aircrew had too many hours as it is.

[BEagle]

Thank you for a most revealing contribution to this thread......

[Tonkenna]

Cheers BEagle, much as I don't want to have to use this info, I have a horrible feeling that it may come in handy soon:(

Tonks

PS ZH875.... and the point of your post is ???? :hmm:

[BEagle]

It's not what you and I remember, is it Tonks?

Still, you'll soon have that ATPL!

[flipster]

BEags,

I believe you had something to do with the orchestration of the CAA/mil accreditation? If so, Bravo. If not, who did?

Even if it wasn't you, your advice over the last few years has been invaluable to those of us who realised the writing was on the wall. Bravo again!

Thanks to you, many of my us, have new, nice and shiney JAA ATPLs/CPLs that have helped us on our way. CAA Accreditation is the best thing the MoD has ever done for the troops!

For those wondering what the f... is going on at Linton/Valley, accreditation works also at PPL level for guys going through/post EFT- all it requires is the PPL Air Law and R/T theory exams -, a CAA class 2 medical and a qualifying 3 leg navigation land-away.

Anyone else wanting 'out' can't do better than heed BEagle's wise words. Suggest, however, one reads CAA LASORS first! Thanks again.

Yours sycophantically,
Flipster

[BEagle]

Kind of you to say that, flipster.

I wrote a paper in June 1998 shortly after JAR-FCL came into existence. The reasons were twofold, firstly we were losing people to the airlines at an ever-increasing rate, and secondly, they were non-effective for huge periods of time whilst they waded through their PPSC stuff and struggled about in ageing Senecas to obtain their IRs. JAR-FCL stated that it was a national obligation for military skills and experience to be credited. The paper went off to folks various - hardly anyone bothered to comment except for the Nimrod mates who pointed out the Capt/1st Pilot issue - and some faceless staff Wg Cdr who mumbled about 'correct staffing processes'. Then, a few weeks later, a statement was made in the House of Commons to the effect that military people would be given the opportunity to obtain skills in military service which would be recognised in later civilian life. I used this in a further attempt, this time through the Stn Cdr. He didn't even bother to answer......

Then Sir John Allison held his Waddington road shows. At one I raised the question of the military accreditation issue as a recruiting and retention incentive - tell people that if they stay for long enough, then they will qualify for a civil licence. I gave his PSO copies of my paper.... A few weeks later, things began to move. Sir John was kind enough to write to me thanking me for my initiative; whether it was a co-incidence or not, I then received a letter mentioning that AMP had directed the joint CAA/MoD working group to get going.

I don't know whether my paper was initiator or catalyst, but things moved ahead. I got the odd phone call for advice from the chap at PMA who was doing all the hard work; eventually in spring 2001 the formal accreditiation announcement was made.

I took advantage of it myself when my old BCPL expired - fortunately as an existing professional licence holder I didn't even need to take Air Law! Just got a CAA Staff Examiner to observe a CT trip incorporating the CAA IR requirements, filled out the form, paid the dosh and waited for the little green book to arrive....

The only real regret I have is that no-one has looked into RW/FW cross-crediting at CPL level. Hardly a difficult task to look at exam requirements and bridging courses - but there doesn't seem to be anyone in the mob who can be bothered to do so.

Incidentally, although I had letters of thanks from a couple of the top brass, no-one in the station level squirearchy bothered even to acknowledge the value of the military accreditiation result.......

Currently I'm trying to get the PPL accreditation for QSPs eased. Because someone amended QRs to indicate that the flying badge isn't 'fully earned' until 6 months productive service AND attaining Combat Ready status has been achieved, the CAA applied this to QSP PPL(A) accreditation - which is frankly ridiculous. CFS EW have supported my amendment proposal, it went to the CAA nearly 3 months ago but, despite several prods, nothing has yet been announced.

[flipster]

Good show Beags,

The scheme is alive and well. Dealing with the CAA's telephone system can try your patience though!

As I understand it, the EFTS Groundschool (not just the crit points) and the flying phase is PPL-accredited but guys need the CAA medical, R/Tand Air Law passes and a 3 leg landaway (total 100 nm, I think?). When I chased this for my PPL many years ago, the stumbling block was always the 3-legger, which I had to do from a local flying club. I think this is still the case - but it is far from insurmountable. Using the fairly cheap RAF flying clubs at Brize, Henlow, Cranwell, Lyneham, Valley etc is a very affordable option for young Plt/Fg Offs. The R/T and Air Law can be done 'gratis' at Cranwell I think.

Anyone wants further info, see LASORS, their local RAF flying club or PM me.

Flipster

[BEagle]

It's the peeps who have to hold post-Linton who I'm trying to help. The time from 'Wings' to CR is getting longer and longer, so the availability of a PPL to help them keep sane will help!

If anyone comes to Brize to do their Wings-to-PPL crossover, the charge for exams is £ zero for the first attempt at each.

It always strikes me as interesting that the first 'solo landaway' I ever did was in a brand-new Cessna 150 at the age of 17. I didn't do another until 8 years later when I had to divert in a Buccaneer to Mildenhall; the nice chaps at 237 OCU had made us fly on a Saturday with the cloud below our unrated approach limits. With the tiny amount of solo flying which he RAF allows during flying training these days, the ability to hire an a/c and just potter off on your own somewhere would probably be quite appealing - especially at the rates charged by most RAF FCA clubs!

[flipster]

Couldn't agree more!