Flying Companion License

[revilo_rehsif]

Hi everyone i am new to this forum , i am a young student pilot. i was just browsing the net and came across a license that is known as the flying companion license, this would be perfect for my father who is keen to be able to fly with me, but would not want to pay for a ppl himself.

has anyone done this course?would you recommend it?

any details,however little would be appreciated.

thanks:O


p.s i found it on the AOPA website

[FlyingForFun]

There is no license which enables a person to be a companion to a pilot. You can carry your father without him having any training at all.

I don't know the details of the course that you're looking at, but I would imagine it is what I would call a "safety pilot" course. The type of course I am thinking of is aimed at the potential passenger who might think "I'd love to fly with X, but what if he has a heart attack and drops dead? I wouldn't have a clue how to land the plane." The course teaches them to keep the plane flying safely, make emergency calls on the radio, and land well enough that if they damage the plane they will at least do minimal damage to themselves. At the end of this course, they have no qualifications whatsoever, but hopefully they have enough confidence to be able to go flying without fear of the worst.

(Statistically, of course, this course is very unlikely to be any practical use at all, because pilots don't generally drop dead of heart attacks whilst at the controls. But it will at least enable the passenger to help out the pilot with his flying duties, if the pilot so wishes.)

FFF
-------------

[revilo_rehsif]

yeah thats what i mean, i understand that i am not just going to drop dead.

i also understand that he can fly with me any way. the main reason is so he could help me out, if needed, and it is also just a good taster and to make him feel more comfortable, because to be honest would you let a 17 yr old boy take to up in a plane

i was also wandering as to whether a normal person without a ppl could obtain an RT license

the actual link is:
http://www.aopa.co.uk/newsfromaopa/Flyg_Comp_Guide_Syllab.pdf

[Flik Roll]

Im also a younger PPL, and my mum was going to do the safety pilot course, purely out of interest in learning something and for fun, as my FI does the course.
I think anyone can obtain an RT license if they carry out the training and take the correct exams.

[revilo_rehsif]

yeah it sounds like a good idea, just out of interest how old are you.

i reckon it would be a good idea for my dad to get an RT license because it would take a lot of workload off flying.

apparently the hours would also count towards a PPL if he decided to take the plunge

[Gulf Julliet Papa]

West London Aero Club i believe do one. It covers the bare essentials of flying.

I dont believe it can make anyone a safety pilot as a safety pilot must have a pilots licence. I thought the safety pilot is simply someone who is able to double check what another pilot is doing (ie. if the pilots a little rusty or need advice).

Id be very careful with someone else doing your RT, as there is more chance of a mis communication. To take the weight off as such you could always invite your dad to keep the plane steady?

[revilo_rehsif]

i dont mean like a safety pilot, i just think it would be good for him, like you said to have a basic understanding of flying and i think that this would be a good way of him learning this, so as you said he could take the controls if i am busy with something else

[Skylark4]

How old do you have to be to use a capital letter for the personal pronoun?

Mike W

[stiknruda]

REV - old boy,

Passenger hours DO NOT count towards the grant of any licence. If they did you could surely argue that your 3 trips to the States in the back of a Jumbo should give you a PPL!


Would I let a 17yr old licenced pilot take me flying? Yes - just ask tKf.


Stik

[MLS-12D]

Actually, the AOPA course involves 8 hours of dual with a qualified flight instructor, so there is no reason why that time should not be logged in case Rev's father becomes keen and decides to pursue his own license (you never know, it happened to Alex Henshaw's dad!). I believe that in the eyes of the CAA, his father would not be a passenger but a student.

Anyway, it looks like the primary objective is:

(1) to make his father feel more comfortable about flying as a passenger; and

(2) to provide his father with some basic knowledge and a few skills, so that he can provide assistance with the navigation and radio work.

Such ambitions are quite reasonable and realisable. The American AOP has for many years offered a Pinch Hitter course (http://www.bayshoreaviation.com/aopa_pinch_hitter_course.htm) that is well thought of. The UK AOPA syllabus looks broadly similar, and I would think that it would be a great idea for a regular flying companion.

[Gulf Julliet Papa]

i personally think its a great idea. it will also increase the enjoyment of the passenger who will understand (after doing the course) whats going on.

[J.A.F.O.]

Mike W

It isn't easy to use the shift key when using just your right thumb to type.

[down&out]

Or find the ' key, which is also near the shift key. :D


omg i feel like a gom:\

[VisaGeeza]

i haven't got a key marked "shift" so i'm never going to be able to find which is the key next to it either!!;)

[TheKentishFledgling]

Quite interested to hear why a 17 yr old should not be allowed to fly an aircraft with passengers? If he's got a licence, he's proved he's capable of doing so.

I'm 17, gained my licence of my 17th bday, and took my parents and sister flying on that day, back in July of last year. Have since taken over 20 friends and family flying, as they understood I'd been through the approved courses and proven I was suitable to hold a licence!

:confused: :confused: :confused:

tKF

[revilo_rehsif]

TheKentishFledglin

I am not saying that no one would trust me, because i also believe that any one who has got a license must be able to fly.

Like i said i just think that it would be good for him, because he is also keen to fly, and if he just learnt the basics from this course then i would be more than happy to let him take the controls if i am pre-occupied with something else.

[shortstripper]

Simple enough and no slur on young pilots ...

Sounds more like a father and son thing. My father wasn't keen on being a passenger when I passed my driving test. He knew I could drive OK ... but it's still hard to except "the boy" can drive. He's OK now ... but I'm near enough 40! :ugh:

That was with something he could do himself. Think of the dilema if you add the fact that the father is about to embark in a "flimsy little aeroplane" which he knows not how to control :ooh:, with .... "the boy"! :uhoh:

SS

[stiknruda]

SS - I'm a couple of years older than you and still have the same problem with my old man and cars. "No - I'll drive, you go too fast!"

Strapped him (aged 76) into the front seat of the Pitts last month and took him S&L to Seething, about 6nm away. Just as we approached he said something that I took to mean, "Show me a roll!"

On the ground he admitted to being terrified but said he was quite pleased he'd done it. He did insist on being driven back!

Go figure!

[Flik Roll]

I think my dad was a little aprehensive of flying with me...he even said i couldn't take my mum...so, I took my mum and then he was desperate to go!
I think it was nerves/not knowing what to expect or just a 'flying with family' thing as he had already been up with a friend of mine and had loved it.
revilo_rehsif, why not teach you dad how to basically fly the aircraft? I got my 70 y.o Gran doing a few turns and straight and level and she can barely see out. My Mum and Dad are pretty good, my brother, a natural!

[revilo_rehsif]

FlikRoll

I know this is a pretty stupid question but from a legal point of view could i let passengers fly the aircraft.

As i said earlier it is mainly a confidence thing.

[Gulf Julliet Papa]

i think you can advise someone once you are in the cruise, but not instruct

[stiknruda]

Rev,

Once you are pilot in command, you can then let somebody take the controls - of course YOU remain PILOT IN COMMAND.

To be honest, everytime I let a "non-pilot have control", they don't have control. My hands/feet are still where they should be.


My god-father (non-pilot) and I flew across Africa some years ago. It was high on my agenda to teach him straight and level as the a/c I borowed had no wing leveller. Doug was v good and after a few hrs could point us at the same speck on the horizon and that left me free to deal with AIP's, charts and guidebooks for 9 different nations!

Stik

ps - an apolgy, I read a previous post of yours to suggest that after yr dad did the pinch-hitter course all hours were then loggable!

[Yorks.ppl]

I stand to be corrected here but I believe that no person may control an aircraft unless they have the appropriate licence or are under the supervision of a QFI.
So having someone else to "lighten the load" and aviate whilst you navigate/comunicate would be illegal.

[waldopepper42]

My local club used to offer a "pinch hitter" course to regular flying companions of members. It concentrated simply on landings, to enable the candidate to have a fighting chance of getting safely back on the ground should the pilot become incapacitated for whatever reason.

Not sure about the legality of non-qualified persons handling controls, but surely the point is that you can only argue the toss later if you are still alive to do so!

[WestWind1950]

Yorks is right, but in an emergency (almost) anything goes.

The basic idea of "Pinch Hitter" courses I think is good... and of course can only be taught by instructors.

Westy

[Circuit Basher]

Yorks.ppl I stand to be corrected here but I believe that no person may control an aircraft unless they have the appropriate licence or are under the supervision of a QFI
This is one that regularly appears on this forum - the great and the good (ie Those better than me) have cogitated long and hard and the consensus is that a non-pilot can be allowed to handle the controls, with the obvious provisos that the PIC IS still PIC (and is thus responsible for the conduct of the flight) and that the person handling the controls cannot book it as instructional time (or in fact log it in any way, shape or form). Fairly obvious common sense would suggest that the PIC handle the take off / landing and that the passenger is only permitted to do S&L / modest manoeuvering. If this permits the PIC to do some nav / flight mgt tasks (whilst maintaining lookout), then I would say that this is a good bit of crew resource management, plus it adds to the interest of the pax.

[Yorks.ppl]

Not sure who the great and the good are but everything I have ever read is quite clear that you can't instruct on a PPL.
If your pax has no licence and is not qualified then he must be either a pax (if he doesnt touch the controls) or a pilot under tuition if he does, there is no other definition of his status available. If he is under the tuition or supervision of P1 then P1 must be a QFI.

[Flik Roll]

R_R
In answer to your question, i would say yes if you are happy. See your PMs.

[dublinpilot]

I haven't seen anything that says a passenger can't handle the controls.

Just because I let a passenger fly straight and level, it doesn't mean that I am instructing them. I've no intention of teaching them how to fly, nor do they intend to learn.

As for safetly issues, I'd argue that letting a passenger fly straight and level leaves you with two hands free to do other tasks. It can only add to safety. I can think of one flight last year that I wouldn't have been able to complete, and would have returned home, were it not for the benefit of a passenger who could hold straight and level. It freed up my hands to do some on the wing (not literarly!) replanning.

You need a licence to be the commander of an aircraft. You need a FIR to instruct. But you don't need anything to handle controls in flight as far as I'm aware.

dp

[Yorks.ppl]

I think I see this now!
Its OK to let an unqualified person fly the plane as long as they know how to fly it but if they make a mistake you are not going to correct them or tell them about it because they dont want to learn and you cant teach, sounds very safe to me.
And its ok to fly into marginal conditions relying on a non qualified pasenger too!:ugh:

[Circuit Basher]

Yep, that's about it, because all PPLs have no common sense and are idiots!

We are talking about reasonably intelligent human beings exercising judgement here, not pretending to be instructors. If someone will enjoy their flight more, learn something about how an aircraft flies, etc - nothing in the rules to say that they can't touch the controls. I have regularly flown with Air Cadets who I teach Principles of Flight / Air Nav to, who have also had Air Experience Flights in Bulldogs / Tutors - I have no qualms about asking them to maintain an altitude / course and then giving them control. I then monitor / advise and undertake other tasks (radio tuning, talking to ATC, nav, FREDA checks, etc) - the flying experience is enhanced for them and I can safely undertake other tasks. No problem.

If they appear to have difficulty / conditions are marginal / ther is other traffic or we are a high workload phase of the flight, then I take back control. Easy.

Noone is suggesting that the PIC is acting as an instructor in these situations - just a little bit of Crew Cooperation!

[dublinpilot]

And its ok to fly into marginal conditions relying on a non qualified pasenger too!

No one is talking about relying on a any passenger, qualified or not. What we are talking about is letting someone see what it's like to hold the controls of an airplane. If this also happens to free up your hands to do other things, all the better.


but if they make a mistake you are not going to correct them or tell them about it because they dont want to learn and you cant teach

What we are talking about is letting someone try to hold a heading and altitude. If they can't hold do that (90% can within reason) I'll exercise my responsibilities as the commander take over the control, and put thing right. If they are only letting minor deviations occur, then I won't correct them. Not because they don't want to learn, nor because I don't to teach. I won't correct them, because I want them to enjoy the exerience, and a minor deviation in altitude or heading isn't too important.

Holding the controls is probably the least most important part of flying. Managing the flight is far more important.

Would you consider it necessary that an autopilot hold a flight crew licence?

dp

[mad_jock]

Yorks it is very common practise and the safety pilot course which is indorsed by both the CAA and other people in the know as being a good idea. The parting instruction to someone finishing the course is usually along the lines of make sure you have a shot next time you are up.

There is nothing in the ANO which says that the PIC has to be the one handling the aircraft. FO's can do it, students can do it, my granny can do it if she so wishes. But there is only one person who the buck stops at and that is the PIC.

And i think you maybe have some misinterpritations about what is actually in an FIC.

You turn up with 200 hrs under your belt and a full set of CPL or better exams. How much of those exams are about GA SEP proberly less than the PPL ground exams.

You then have to sit through a series of lectures :D which is meant to cover the whole syllabus but unfortunatly it is the interpritation of the syllabus of the instructor.

While doing that you are taken in the air for 20 hours and shown how to break down a lesson into parts. If you haven't taught a practical subject before this could be a bit hard. If you have ever taught someone how to drive (which in my opinion is way more difficult than teaching someone how to fly, ex FI and ex HGV instructor). None of this is new.

All this is done with some person who has heaps of instructional hours and can fly the machine.

You then at some point go up with another FIC student and practise how far you can bend a C150 and nobody notice. I did actually do 5 hours of this mutial with someone on a FIC after having 500hours instruction under my belt. Huge difference, it was actually worth while doing. The repeated question was " students don't actually do that do they?" I would support a change to that rule and that mutial instruction is done with a current unrestricted FI playing student.

There is then a test which you show what you have learnt. I only know of one person who has failed this. But he was not a native speaker and .....

Then your let loose with Jo bloggs on the presumtion that you know what your doing. Most FI's leave the job just as they really do know what they are doing about the 700-1000hour instructing mark.

The first 100hours is a nightmare usually your standards are to high because your looking for Commercial standard. You don't have a clue how to teach landings beause all you did was patter them and do lesson 3-10 and PFL's all the time with a bit of Spinning thrown in. After 300-400 hours on trial lessons you don't give a **** what they do as long as you don't bust airspace or get outside you envelope which for most instructors is proberly outside the legal one. The punter gets to do what they like.

So there really isn't much difference with a PPL letting someone hold the stick compared to an instructor (Niether actually get taught how to do it). Both are PIC both know what they are doing and both won't let the person flyng get outside there own limits.

Its the person giving the information which is the difference, you can do all the courses going. A real instructor will be only be shown the way in the FIC to pass then proberly ignore the whole thing until they renew. A none instructor (on the FIC) type will be taught enough to survive until they get there first airline job. The folk that can teach will teach its in there nature

MJ

[Yorks.ppl]

Mad Jock,

It is all too apparent that what you say about instructors is true.
My own experiences bear it out, I did my whole training with an instructor who filled my head with all sorts of nonsense, I didnt descover how much untill well into my training when I met a proper instructor (semi retired ex cfi/examiner) who put me right
(and still does)

However that is not really the point I made. I simply said that I think it is not legal for a pax with no licence to handle the controls of an aircraft unless under the supervision of a flying instructor.

I stand to be corrected, but not by peoples views and opinions. Unless someone can show me where the laws of the air say that a non qualified pax can fly a plane then I remain convinced that it is illegal.

Our young friend who started this thread needs to be aware that he may be doing somthing illegal and all I was attempting to do was to give a warning about it.

[ThePirateKing]

Yorks,

In this country nothing is illegal unless explicit stated. So it remains for you to show the legislation which you believe prohibits the activities you mention.

Somebody already said that this has been done to death on this forum over and over again. I'm sure a search will reveal the answers.

Rgds,

TPK:ok:

[Yorks.ppl]

Simply trying to warn a fellow pilot of a potential problem.
Dont need to prove anything, to myself or anyone else.
R_R does though, (at least to himself) if he wants to allow pax to fly, especially if he is going to tell people what he is doing.

Just offering a note of caution, thats all, no big thing.

[shortstripper]

Yorks

I see where you're coming from but as stated by TPK you are normally deemed quite legal unless specifically told you are not. If this were not the case, PPL's, ratings ect ect would not have their "specific" priviledges stated and restrictions such as IFR flight would would not be worded to "specifically" require certain ratings, conditions ect.

Of course there are plenty of grey areas. One example is a PPL checking out another PPL on type. This must be deemed as instruction? but it has gone on for years and I've never heard of anyone falling foul of the law over it.

SS

[Genghis the Engineer]

A point or two here.

When I fly an aeroplane, I am...

- Handling the aeroplane
- Doing RT
- Navigating
- Managing the aircraft systems (checks, fuel, et al)
- Ensuring everybody else in the aircraft is happy and knows what I'm up to.
- Maintaining a running record of the flight.
- Continuously deciding whether the flight should continue as per my plan, or replanning.


There are very few stages in flight where the first of those takes the majority of my attention - primarily take-off, landing, and the occasional extreme manoeuvre. If I allow a passenger (and I often do) to fly the aircraft outside of those three brief and intense phases of flight I am still pilot in command, and I am still doing all of the difficult and important bits, I've just exchanged handling for monitoring my passenger's handling of the aeroplane.



Second point, the CAA's safety sense leaflet on care of passengers recommends giving an airsick passenger a task, or even letting them fly the aircraft. If CAA are happy to recommend it, it's hardly illegal.


Third point, last night I flew a Seneca simulator with a friend who is a retired Concorde training captain - he hasn't held a current licence since losing his medical about 5 years ago, although probably has 10-20 times my hours. If I were to take him flying (or I believe his son, who flies airliners for a living takes him light aircraft flying occasionally) can anybody think of any good reason he shouldn't handle the controls at any point in the flight, because I certainly can't. (Unsurprisingly, the sim didn't seem to give him many problems :O )

For that matter I have another friend who is an engineer that writes flight simulators for a living - he has getting towards 1000 hours of unlogged simulator time, but has never soloed a real aeroplane. I have, with due caution, allowed him to fly circuits in one of my aeroplanes, and he's given me no cause to regret it. Not illegal, and not (in my judgement) wrong or dangerous - and those who know me will be well aware of my safety obsessions. (His checks and lookout are lousy mind you, and I'd certainly not trust him with those).


But in any of these cases, I'm the captain, and I'm responsible if anything goes wrong.

G

[MLS-12D]

Indeed, circuit basher, pirateking and Genghis are quite correct:
(1) it is perfectly legal for an unqualified pax to fly an aircraft under the direct supervision of a licensed-but-not-instructor-qualified pilot;
(2) that pilot legally remains in command of the aircraft, and will carry the can in the event of any accident or incident;
(3) because of (2), most pilots exercise good judgment and tend to be relatively conservative about how much (1) goes on.

dublinpilot, good point re the autopilot.