Aerobatic training

[cosworth211]

Hi,

I've nearly completed my AOPA aerobatics certificate in a Robin 2160i, but unfortunatley the very good club I fly with has run into trouble (regarding renewal of leases) and I may be unable to complete my certificate. They have offered to continue my training with a local clubs decathlon but I do not have a tail wheel rating.

I need to complete my training in the next 7 weeks as I am off to EFT to complete the APP. I have completed 5 1/2 hours and have covered everything including emergencies, just combinations and the test to do.

Can anyone recommend any flying clubs that offer the AOPA aerobatics certificate in SE england that operate a reasonalby powerful (ie not 152 cessna) aircraft that isnt tailwheel so I can complete the certificate?

Thanks

[Chilli Monster]

They have offered to continue my training with a local clubs decathlon but I do not have a tail wheel rating.


So?

There is no such thing as a "tail wheel rating". It's just differences training that an instructor will sign off in your logbook when you are competent.

Why not finish the training in the Decathlon as suggested and get the above signed off at the same time? One way of getting more for your money ;)

[Pitts2112]

In addition to what Chilli said, is there a requirement in the AOPA syllabus that you have to do the take offs and landings, too? I'm sure you've already thought of this, but I can't help myself in suggesting that the instructor to all the "tailwheel" bits of the flying and you do all the aerobatic bits. After all, once the wheels are off the ground, a tailwheel airplane is just another airplane. And a Decathalon is a rather nice one at that!

Pitts2112
Got my tailwheel endorsement in a Super-D after only 10 hours. And, quite frankly, 5 of that was just to make up the time.

[kemblejet01]

try Ultimate High at Kemble.

Out of your way a bit, but they can give you intensive training and get you sorted min fuss.

KMB01

[Miserlou]

I rather think anything worth aerobatting has a tailwheel anyway.

Get yourself into the Decathlon and complete your basic flying training, ie. the ability to operate aircraft with conventional undercarriage.

As stated above it would be killing two birds with one stone.


Pitts2112,
10 hours for a tailwheel conversion is, as can be read from your post, double what it takes (for most students). How 'bout you name and shame the club who so shamelessly fleeces their customers in this way?

I have a friend who offers a combined tailwheel/aeros course for which the lesson plan is 10 hours. The aeros bit is quite thorough including flat spins, Muller recovery, and inverted spin.

[cosworth211]

Thanks for the replies, the decathlon looks like a fine plane for aerobatics, plus I do plan to go tailwheel when I get back from the first phase and start the ATPL.

The only downside i can see is that once I have completed the AOPA certificate, lets say on the decathlon, I will not be able to show off my new skills to my friends until I get back from the US and finish the tailwheel conversion!

I've heard of an operator in Shoreham that offers a slingsby, but have also heard it is underpowered like the C152.

Thanks for your help

:ok:

[SATCO Biggin]

I rather think anything worth aerobatting has a tailwheel anyway.

I know a few Yak 52 drivers who would take exception to that statement.

(and probably a few Tucanno pilots, Hawk pilots, PC9 pilots, .......)

[BroomstickPilot]

Cosworth211,

I think Ulitmate High also have a place at Goodwood, which might by more convenient for you than Kemble.

Western Air at Thruxton have a Slingsby T67M Firefly which is very reasonably priced per hour. I know they do aerobatics training, but I don't know whether they do the AOPA Certificate. Give them a call on 01264 - 773913, (the CFI is Barry Dyke).

I believe there is also a newly arrived specialist aerobatics outfit at Thruxton operating Pittses. Alas, I know nothing about them beyond the fact that they are there. Ask Thruxton's airfield manager; he should know about them.

Good luck!

Broomstick.

[stiknruda]

Know a very competent and capable instructor in mid Suffolk with a Cap10C.

Stik

pm me for contact details

[cosworth211]

I really appreciate all the replies, I do plan to move onto caps and ultimately pitts, and cash allowing the extra 300's, however I really would like to finish the AOPA cert on a trike wheel craft. The robin 2160i was fantastic, no vairable pitch, really had to work to make the moves look good, made you a really good pilot. Does anyone operate one in SE? Otherwise I am considering using the decathlon and finishing the tail wheel later, tho I really will miss showing off my new moves before moving to the US!

Cheers again!

[Miserlou]

SATCO,

I could add a few exceptions myself, the Slingsby, for one, is a lovely aircraft but there are few of the types you mention which are available to the private pilot.

Cosworth,
Just to add, there is no requirement for an AOPA aeros certificate. If your intentions are the more exotic types you mention then you would be better served going to one of the aeros training folk who train to competition standards, even if competition is not your goal.

A competition licence is worth more than the AOPA certificate.

[squawking 7700]

I'd get yourself in the Super Decathlon, VP prop is nothing to worry about - no aerobatic aircraft should be without one!

The Super D should have enough go with 180hp. I fly a Decathlon at Tatenhill - before the prop got changed for a fixed pitch item it was adequate with 150hp.

It took me 3.5hrs to get signed off for tailwheel - I'd try to finish the aeros course on the Decathlon, at least it shouldn't then take more than a couple of hours of dedicated circuit work to get signed off for the tailwheel.

Decathlon preferably over a Firefly, it's a lot more responsive, but
if you do go to Western Air, their Firefly's OK and Barry Dyke is a
good instructor.

7700

[SlipSlider]

Cosworth, I suggest a visit to Goodwood, where Vectair operate G-VECG a Robin 2160i and Goodwood Flying School operate G-IZZZ a Super Decathlon. Both options in one (fairly local to you) place!
Slip

[Pitts2112]

Miserlou,

This was a few years ago and the club (Sherwood at Nottingham) have since moved the Super-D on (to Tatenhill, I believe). I didn't mind too much as I was having fun and it was my only access to a taildragger at the time. Ironically, one day I flew a C152 from Leicester to Nottingham just to do an hour or two in the Super-D. I don't think I've touched a 152 since (and don't miss it a bit!)

From there to Super Cub, then Taylorcraft, and now in Pitts. Not a bad progression, I think. :-)

Cosworth, I'm not really sure what the AOPA aerobatics certificate really gives you, so I'm not sure of the benefits of "completing" it, other than to say you have a piece of paper. I've flown aerobatics for 4 years, competed for one, had some dual training, lots of hangar flying and trying things out myself. Never took the AOPA course. I guess what I'm saying is, if finishing the certificate is causing you some stress and hard work, don't sweat it because you can't really do anything with it once you have it. May as well take the training you've had and apply it to a taildragger and just get on with it. Have fun and consider forgetting about a "qualification" that doesn't actually qualify you for anything.

Pitts2112

[stiknruda]

As much as it pains me to publically concur with 2112, a Septic, I fear that I have to!

Miserlou's "competition licence" post sums it up.

2112 was a v succesful competitor, he just couldn't stand all the tea drinking required!


Stik

[cosworth211]

Vectair in Goodwood is where I am doing the AOPA using the 2160i, that is the club that unfortunately is closing down. I wanted to do the AOPA as an introduction to see if its for me, and if after the course it wasn't at least I had a certificate to show the achievement. And now I am totally hooked and plan to move onto the more advanced licenses etc once the AOPA is completed.

Pitts if you have the time please could you give me more of an insight into how you progressed to competition level, the number of hours before you could compete/get signed off for lower altitudes etc, the craft you use etc, by PM if you prefer.

PS received good news, the 2160i's owner has agreed to let me use it for another 3 weeks to complete the certificate.

[Miserlou]

Cosworth,

You may well find it well worthwhile going to the Tiger Club at Headcorn. They'll give you a taildragger checkout and teach you 'proper' aeros, and you can take part in the monthly competitions throughout the summer to get a feel for it.

As a side benefit you've got Nick Onn and Richard Pickin practicing unlimited level in the overhead and other former international level competitors and display pilots available to teach you.
There is simply no better value for money than that.

[Pitts2112]

Cos,

Well, I think you may be looking for something that doesn't exist. In the UK there is no aerobatic qualification or license or anything like that. You can do anything you like within the limits of the airplane, the airspace, the ANO, and your abilities. No one signs you off to fly at a lower altitude (however you define that) but you do need to get a signoff from the British Aerobatic Association to fly in their competitions at anything higher than Beginner. But that sign off doesn't allow you to do anything other than participate in their competitions. Rule 5 always applies, unless it's specifically exempted like for an air display or a competition.

Your training and abilities notwithstanding, as long as you don't bust Rule 5, you can fly any way you like at any altitude you like, but it may not be smart to do so. For myself, I never practice aerobatics lower than a 1000 foot floor. That's because I competed in that range of airspace so I know what my airplane will do relative to that floor. Most often, though, I'm much higher than that, especially if trying something new.

You may be confusing aerobatics with a Display Authorisation (DA). A DA is given by the CAA after a pilot has passed an oral and flying exam and will be given with specific limitations, usually not flying aerobatics lower than 500 feet AGL for a new display pilot. for more advanced pilots, the clearances will be much lower, as low as 30 feet in some cases. A guy like Will Curtis probably has an Unlimited DA which will allow him to go down to 30 feet. This allows you to fly at whatever altitude your DA clears you for at official air displays in front of a crowd. It doesn't allow you to do anything else anywhere else, but if you want to, say, perform at the Goodwood festival, you would have to have a DA from the CAA. If Will Curtis wants to go perform aerobatics over his buddy's backyard BBQ, he can do that as long as he obeys Rule 5, but having a DA doesn't mean he can go do a display over his BBQ at 30 feet. Am I explaining this very well?

As for how I got to competition standard (a phrase that will have the likes of Sticknruda in stitches!), I took a couple of informal lessons with guys on some basics, had lots of long conversations on the ground with guys who really knew how to fly Pitts Specials, went up to about 6,000 feet and tried things out. I've always been very honest with myself about my own limitations (and when I wasn't, the judges sure as hell were!) and I only push them in small increments in order to learn. I'm at the point now where I wouldn't want to do too much else without some good formal instruction.

Hope that helps. If it was me spending the money, I'd ditch the nosewheel airplane and the AOPA thing, go find an instructor and tell him what you want to do, and just go fly to achieve whatever your goal is. But that's just my .02 worth. In any case, keep your enthusiasm up, have great fun, and fly safely!

Pitts2112

[foxmoth]

If you want to try competition have a word with Ultimate High, they are doing a beginners comp at Kemble on 20th, you could probably use either the Robin or one of UHs Bulldogs, though with either you might want one of their instructors along as safety pilot considering your current aeros experience. Have a look at the UH website ( http://www.ultimatehigh.co.uk/ for more or give Mark a ring there and see if he thinks you might be up to it.;)

[Cambridge Aero Club]

Cosworth211,

I run an AOPA aerobatics course at Cambridge on our Slingsby T67 260M Firefly. I'm sure you know that it's a tricycle undercarriage and has pleanty of power, so it's easy and quick to get on with the training, and easy to convert to.

Availability is good at the moment and I'd be more than happy to pick up where you left off and finish your certificate.

If you're interested give me a call on (01223) 373717 and ask to speak to Luke. Ask for my mobile number if I'm not in the office.

Take a look here for more info: http://www.cambridgeaeroclub.com

Best wishes,

Luke

[djpil]

Luke - an interesting website, thanks. Things have certainly changed at Cambridge since I flew Tigers there back in the mid-70's.

[hekokimushi]

NSF Sibson, EGSP

www.nsof.co.uk

[cosworth211]

Again thanks all for your replies, lots of good interesting options and info coming in!

Pitts I am going to finish the AOPA as I only have 2 1/2 hours to go. I think I may have been confused by the aerobatic checks listed on www.tigerclub.co.uk, thinking they were some form of signing off, or rating.

I did plan to go and fly with the tigerclub for tailwheel and aerobatics towards the end of the year, has anyone flown there, the website makes it look like a really interesting airfield with alot of events.

Thanks again.

[Pitts2112]

Cos,
Sounds like a good plan if you're that close to finishing the course.

I've flown into Headcorn a couple of times. Very aerobatic-friendly airport and the people I met at the Tigerclub were superb and very welcoming. I'd highy recommend spending a bit of time there and getting to know them and see if you fit in.

Good luck and if you're ever at Popham, come looking for The Magnolia Pitts and I'll buy you a cup of coffee.

Good luck!

Pitts2112

[MLS-12D]

VP prop is nothing to worry aboutAgreed.

no aerobatic aircraft should be without one!I take it that you have no experience with glider aerobatics. :hmm:

teach you 'proper' aerosAs opposed to? :confused:

[KCDW]

Tiger Club

An interesting and different experience, particularly if you come to it from a Spam Can oriented training environment. You will be flying with "check pilots" rather than instructors, but don't worry about that, as they typically have gazillions of hours, so you really are in competent hands.

You can do tailwheel training on the Cub for about £85 per engine hour.

The check pilot approach does mean that you can get very different views on how to fly, but I believe you come out of the experience a much more flexible, knowledgeable pilot.

As said before, the vast majority of the club are friendly and welcoming, and it has more than it's fair share of interesting oddballs, though one or two were clearly badly beaten in their childhood :{ .

As an added bonus, there's nothing to beat Headcorn on a hot summers weekend for sheer buzz and interest.

[squawking 7700]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
no aerobatic aircraft should be without one!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MLS-12D
"I take it that you have no experience with glider aerobatics"



OK, no powered aerobatic aircraft should be without one!

re. the glider aerobatics, I have actually (including a Fox).

7700

[Miserlou]

MLS,
Yes, 'proper' aeros.
Manouvres conducted with the emphasis on accuracy of line, precision and symmetry. Positioning and presentation of manouvres to the judges and exchange of energy for the flow of the sequence.
Competition aeros by their very nature require discipline. Much as a nose wheel aircraft can be landed within a range of attitudes but a tailwheel aircraft can only be three-pointed in one.

Thus 'proper' aeros rather than just the safe completion of aerobatic manouvres.

Cosworth,
I admit to being a member. There is nowhere in the world which can compete with the atmosphere, variety and experience of people and flying at the club.
The Garden Party (8-9 september) may give you an entertaining introduction if you'd care to drop by.

[MLS-12D]

7770,

Good for you. :ok:

The Fox is a superb aircraft, isn't it? My only complaint is that the cockpits are cramped ... but I can always undergo decapitation or some other surgery to shorten myself. :p

Cheers,

MLS

[cosworth211]

Pitts I will definately pop over and say hi, I am a big fan of the Pitts Special, one of my fave aircraft, love to see what it can do. Did you read the article on the pitts day out to toulouse recently in Pilot?

I'd love to go to the tiger clubs party but I will be at EFT in the states at that point, though upon my return in Dec I will definately be heading over!

I've heard of the "check" pilot scenario at Tiger and it sounds like a mutually beneficial way of flying for check pilot and student alike, while saving instructor fee's! More FTO's should adopt it!

[Pitts2112]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you read the article on the pitts day out to toulouse recently in Pilot?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read it? I bloody wrote it!! :D

We're doing it again in about 2 weeks going to another chateau! We didn't get as far as Toulouse, though. More like Abbeville for a night over in Roune. Great time was had by all, I can assure you, and expectations for the next one are high as well!

The Pitts can do more than I'll ever ask it to. If you get a chance, get some time in one sometime. It'll spoil you forever!

Pitts2112

[stiknruda]

Read it? I bloody wrote it!!


And what a superb piece it was - we are really looking forward to drinking all the beer that your fee for the article will provide in 3 weeks in Dijon.

Flossie sends love from here in deepest Ireland!!


Stik

[cosworth211]

I popped into to see the tiger club today at Headcorn, they were a very friendly bunch, and a good vibe across the whole airfield. Their cap10 is a lovely looking aircraft and seems to be in very good condition.

Pitts I enjoyed that article, especially the story of your run and break at Lydd!

[Pitts2112]

Thanks, Cos and Stik. The article wouldn't have been half of what it was if Stik hadn't been with us and when I say "I wrote" really it was a collaborative effort of everyone who went - which is part of the reason it appeared in the magazine in May when we did the trip the previous September.

Yeah, the run and break at Lydd seems to have stuck in people's minds for some reason. I'm not sure which was more fun, doing the run and break or watching our intrepid leader contend with the bollocking from the tower. :D

Stik, is the fee from the article going to be used for drinks in August or for bail this weekend? Let me know if any of you need a character witness!

Pitts2112

[BEagle]

"I've heard of the "check" pilot scenario at Tiger and it sounds like a mutually beneficial way of flying for check pilot and student alike, while saving instructor fee's! More FTO's should adopt it!"

But is it legal? Unless holding at least a CRI Rating, there is no legal way for such instruction to be given unless someone very brave at the CAA has issued some form of exemption. And you should certainly NOT be charged for any such 'check' by a non-CPL holding non-FI/CRI!

To my mind, anyone giving aerobatic instruction to a licence holding pilot must be AT LEAST a CRI(A) - and if charging for such, must of course hold a Professional Licence.

[foxmoth]

You also need an instructors rating to sign off on differences training for taiwheel so how do they get round that:confused:

[KCDW]

BEagle, Foxmoth,

Probably need someone in the know from the club to comment.

However, note I didn't say they were not FIs, they may well be - its just that they don't call themselves that. The key difference (and main benefit) is that they don't charge :) .

[MLS-12D]

But is it legal? Unless holding at least a CRI Rating, there is no legal way for such instruction to be given unless someone very brave at the CAA has issued some form of exemption.One way to get around this legal hurdle is for the 'student' to log all time as the PIC, while the check pilot is officially a mere passenger. This is not a perfect solution, but workable.

To my mind, anyone giving aerobatic instruction to a licence holding pilot must be AT LEAST a CRI(A) - and if charging for such, must of course hold a Professional Licence.Well, you are entitled to your opinion. Personally, I'm inclined to think that the only real criteria are experience and competence. I know several high-time pilots, mostly ex-military, who have no civilian instructor qualifications but are more than capable of serving as checkpilots. And I know some civilian instructors who have lots of paper qualifications but not the matching skills.

IIRC, Duane Cole (http://www.texastcart.com/duanecole.htm) lost his medical about ten years before his death, but continued to give informal aerobatic instruction ... and his services were sought-after by those in a position to know.

[Miserlou]

BEagle,

If I may address your last post, what a load of twoddle!!!

I believe the check pilots, quite coincidentally, do hold instructors ratings or higher. The system has been in place for, oh, nearly fifty years and has worked well, the Tiger Club having been a breeding ground for aerobatic, racing and display pilots for most of this time. You'll want to check your history books to see the role of the Tiger Club in UK GA.

The Club has a system which imposes a higher standard than the law requires.

Type specific training, aerobatics and formation flying require no special qualification of the teacher, there being no specific qualification to receive. You 'could' teach yourself.

Whilst the check pilots hold professional licences none of them charge for their time or experience. Put rather romantically you could say that they are 'giving' back to a club which has been so generous to give them those skills in the first place.
Perhaps, in this cynical world, it is hard to believe that there are people who just love flying old aeroplanes.

As for "To my mind, anyone giving aerobatic instruction to a licence holding pilot must be AT LEAST a CRI(A)"...I nearly fell of my chair at such blind nonsense!

Instructors building hours to get their careers started seems to me like the one-eyed man in the land of the blind.

[BEagle]

Miserlou, firstly there is no need to be so rude.

Since the advent of JAR-FCL, any instruction, of whatever kind, has to be given (at SEP Class SPA level) by either a FI(A) (for ab-initio) or by FI(A)/CRI(A) (for licence holders).

So the statement made by one poster "You will be flying with "check pilots" rather than instructors, but don't worry about that" cannot be legally correct. There is nothing to prevent suitably qualified people, including well-qualified aerobatic pilots, from becoming bona fide CRI(A)s (as all PFA coaches now are) in order to conduct properly regulated training.

Requirements for CRI(A) Ratings and their revalidation and/or renewal are far simpler than for FI(A) Ratings.

As for "Type specific training, aerobatics and formation flying require no special qualification of the teacher, there being no specific qualification to receive. You 'could' teach yourself."; that my friend is truly 'twaddle'.

[Miserlou]

BEagle,
Would you be so kind as to give us a reference to which specific JAR ratings must be held to fly aeros or formation?

To my knowledge there is none. Thus the 'check' pilot is performing no legally required function, only that required by the Club.

Funny you mention the PFA coaches. That system was inspired by the Tiger Club. Do check your history, old boy.

As MLS wrote,"I'm inclined to think that the only real criteria are experience and competence."

Don't think for a moment that the Club is operating outside of the law!

[slim_slag]

So nobody can post a top tip on, say, how to handle a crosswind landing in a supercub without registering his instructor qualifications with the forum moderator? What a load of bollox.

[Miserlou]

That would appear to be the case according to BEagle.

Also, you cannot fly with any-one of less experience than yourself for fear that you offered advice on technique thus breakiing the rules.
Quite contrary to the Tiger Club's charter.

[BEagle]

"Would you be so kind as to give us a reference to which specific JAR ratings must be held to fly aeros or formation?"

Non required to fly aerobatics or formation; however, any instruction (in whatever field) to a licence holder at SEP Class SPA level must be given only by a CRI or FI. Which is what the PFA now do.

Variable quality advice has been posted by the unqualified about the quirks of various a/c; you may be lucky and receive such guidance from a good quality source, or you may be very unlucky and be given absolute tosh.

Experience, competence and legality are the sole criteria for any 'check pilots'.

I was at an aerodrome the other day and overheard an interesting conversation:

A."Why have you asked to fly with xxxx ?"
B."I need to do my single engine reval."
A."Your what?"
B."My reval. check"
A."You don't need to fly with him; any intructor can do that!"

'A' is a well-known aerobatic pilot. But clearly has no knowledge of the requirements for conducting SEP Class Rating Revalidation Proficiency Checks. What else doesn't he know when it comes to the Law, I wonder...........

Those who do not hold CRI or FI Ratings and who profess to be 'aerobatic instructors' might care to note the following from the Air Navigation Order:

"..the holder shall be entitled to fly as pilot in command of an aeroplane of a type or class specified in any flying instructor’s rating, class rating instructor rating, flight instructor rating or assistant flying instructor’s rating included in the licence on a flight for the purpose of aerial work which consists of:

(i) the giving of instruction in flying; or

(ii) the conducting of flying tests for the purposes of this Order;

in either case in an aeroplane owned, or operated under arrangements entered into, by a flying club of which the person giving the instruction or conducting the test and the person receiving the instruction or undergoing the test are both members."

And don't try to pretend that teaching aerobatics isn't 'the giving of instruction in flying' - quite obviously it is!

[Miserlou]

You'll strangle yourself with all that red tape!

The legal sense of the term 'instruction in flying' is toward the completion of a rating or licence. It is not a general term and doesn't mean the same as it would outside of the legal document.

What you're saying is that a pilot who perhaps wants to learn and investigate accelerated autorotations may NOT ask a more experienced pilot (not holding CRI) to accompany him for the purpose of demonstrating or for safety's sake.
So, to stay legal, he goes off on his own.

Doesn't sound like the law serving safety to me.

[BEagle]

Tough - it's still the law.

The ANO does NOT restrict 'instruction in flying' solely to instruction for Ratings or Licences.

Want to instruct? Become a properly regulated instructor. A pretty simple concept, really. And one which hardly amounts to strangualting red tape.

[MLS-12D]

There is nothing to prevent suitably qualified people, including well-qualified aerobatic pilots, from becoming bona fide CRI(A)s (as all PFA coaches now are) in order to conduct properly regulated training.Well, perhaps there are one or two things to prevent them. Maybe they don't want to spend the time or money acquiring what in many cases would be meaningless paper qualifications.

You'll strangle yourself with all that red tape!Indeed. :rolleyes: Personally, I think there has to be a reasonable balance between legal requirements and practicality. Indeed, I'd go so far as to say that any reasonably successful lawyer in private practice has learned that lesson a long, long time ago.

Tough - it's still the law.There are many people in aviation (e.g., bureaucrats, controllers, engineers, "consultants", physicians, instructors) who have no legal training whatsoever, but pose as experts on 'aviation law'. Typically, such people have a slavish adherence to 'black letter law' and are given to dogmatic statements, which should be ignored. A real lawyer understands that 'the law' has a strong human element and incorporates many nuances of interpretation and application.