What is an aeroplane?

[0-8]

Could someone help me find the CAA definition of an aeroplane?

I've looked in LASORS but I can't find seem to find a specific definition.

The main reason I ask is that I need 100hrs p1 in "aeroplanes" before I start my CPL course. I've seen a cheap share in a Jodel D9 and I want to know if I can log my flight time in at as time in command of an aeroplane?

[topcat450]

Yup I believe so. Microlight hours don't count though IIRC for the 100hrs requirement, but if it's group A then I don't see why it wouldn't.

[BEagle]

The D-9 has a MTOW of 320 kg and a stalling speed of 25 mph. It has a wing loading of 36 kg/m2.

The CAA state:

“Microlight aeroplane means an aeroplane designed to carry not more than two persons which has:

(a) a maximum total weight authorised not exceeding:

(i)300 kg for a single seat landplane, (or 390 kg for a single seat landplane for which an individual United Kingdom permit to fly or certificate of airworthiness was first in force prior to 1st January 2003),

(ii) 450 kg for a two seat landplane,

(iii) 330 kg for a single seat amphibian or floatplane, or

(iv) 495 kg for a two seat amphibian or floatplane, and

(b) either a wing loading at the maximum weight authorised not exceeding 25 kg per square metre or a stalling speed at the maximum weight authorised not exceeding 35 knots calibrated airspeed”

The Jodel's MTOW and stalling speed might therefore mean that it is now considered to fall within the Microlight definition. You need to get confirmation from the CAA that any hours flown in the aeroplane would be allowable towards the CPL qualification TT.

[bar shaker]

Whilst they fit the current stats, the wing loading on Jodels used to be too high for the then microlight rating, so they are all VLA (Group A aircraft).

The hours count.

It is somewhat ironic that you can fly a Eurostar, CT, Banbi or other hot microlight that will far out perform the Jodel and the hours will not count for CPL.

[Russell Gulch]

CAA definition of an aeroplane I assume it's the same as everyone elses. That is, an aircraft (aero) held up by a plane (wing). cf helicopter (rotorcraft), balloon (lighter-than-air), (others?)

In other words, there is no distinction between a "microlight" aeroplane and any other type of aeroplane. They are all aeroplanes, unless anyone knows different?

Russ

[pheeel]

what about motor-gliders like the Rotax Falke? Does anyone know if these count?

[BEagle]

"there is no distinction between a "microlight" aeroplane and any other type of aeroplane"

In the UK there certainly is. See http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?categoryid=393&pagetype=90&pageid=1474

Which is why I would advise that clarification is sought from the CAA before anyone buys into a Jodel D-9 syndicate.

The Rotax Falke is a touring motor glider:

'Touring Motor Glider - A motor glider having a certificate of airworthiness issued or accepted by any JAA Member State having an integrally mounted, non-retractable engine and a non-retractable propeller It shall be capable of taking off and climbing under its own power according to its flight manual.'

A maximum of 30 hours' credit for PIC time in gliders or touring motor gliders (including Vigilant) is allowable towards the 200 hours total experience time required for the modular CPL. But again, contact the BGA and CAA for further details, including whether you would need a TMG Rating to fly it.

[Whopity]

Try the Air Navigation Order (CAP393) Schedule 2.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2005/20051970.htm

[ProfChrisReed]

The Air Navigation Order is no help directly, as it doesn't provide a specific definition of aeroplane.

However, it does define ‘Flying machine' as "an aeroplane, a powered lift tilt rotor aircraft, a self-launching motor glider, a helicopter or a gyroplane"

It also defines glider separately, together with definitions for free and captive balloon (though no definition for airship, which is often mentioned in the same regulations that apply to balloons).

Given that these unpowered or lighter than air craft are specifically referred to in the Order, but not included specifically in the 'Flying machine' definition, I'd say that the rules of statutory interpretation would mean that they are not flying machines.

By exclusion, therefore, we deduce that a flying machine is a powered, heavier than air, machine which flies.

Also by exclusion, an aeroplane must be any such flying machine which is not (from the definition) "a powered lift tilt rotor aircraft, a self-launching motor glider, a helicopter or a gyroplane". Having said that, the CPL 400 hour experience requirement relates to "aeroplanes other than self-launching motor gliders and microlight aeroplanes", so for these purposes touring motor gliders are aeroplanes and SLMGs are not.

It would also seem to follow that "aircraft" is the broad category of everything man-made which flies (and then we ask if a hovercraft flies and all the non-lawyers die of boredom).

All that this analysis proves, however, is that the answer to your question lies not in the definition of aeroplane (which includes microlight), but in the definition of "microlight" (because hours on microlight aeroplanes don't count).

The wing loading part of the microlight definition in BEagle's posting has been deleted from the 2005 ANO, so if his stats on MTOW and stalling speed are correct (this is stall at MTOW), then the D9 has become a microlight.

In practice, if the CAA tell you in writing that the D9 is not a microlight and that the hours can count towards your CPL, then it should be bound by that letter.

So, don't buy into the D9 before you hear, in writing, from the CAA.

If you have hovercraft hours, I'd give them a try!

[Standard lawyer's health warning: Not my field of legal expertise, so all this is based solely on reading the ANO. Case law and CAA interpretation, which I haven't read, might change this. This advice is worth exactly what you paid for it.]

[shortstripper]

Well if a D9 is suddenly considered to be a microlight, along with all the other traditional single seaters such as FRED's, Luton Minors ect, then there's an awful lot of CPL's out there with hours that don't count!

Try checking the aircraft's registration doc. Once issued the category, group or whatever you want to call it, cannot be changed without some considerable effort. Having just been shown what was needed to change a CH701 from group A (I know I know!) to microlight, I can assure you there is more to it than just the outline figures!

SS

[BEagle]

The advice remains extant - check with the CAA!

"I am considering joining a syndicate flying Jodel D-9 reg G-****. Please advise me whether hours gained on this aeroplane may be counted towards the CPL qualifying total"

Make sure that you include the registration to make clear that the D-9 in question is a SEP Class aeroplane, not a G-M*** class Microlight aeroplane.

And don't use obsolete terminology such as 'Group A' when writing to the Authority if you wish to appear as though you know what you're talking about, I would suggest...

[912ul]

0-8

I see you asked a simple question and get conflicting replies.

There is simply no point in contacting the CAA and wasting their time when all the information you want is available on line.

Go to the G-INFO web site and type in the registration of the aircraft that you are considering purchasing and you will see a full specification including classification of the actual aeroplane.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I suspect that the logic of the situation is that microlights are specifically designed to be particularly simple in operation - for example it's not possible (within placarded seat and fuel limits) to take a microlight out of CG limits. Therefore, microlight hours don't count.


Who am I kidding, the CAA are analy retentive on the subject of microlight hours for any other licence, and always have been. The DR9 is a pretty little aeroplane, but arguably much less of an "aeroplane" than many microlights.


However, that's the way it is - look on G-INFO, if it says "Aeroplane" it counts. In this case, I tihnk it's probably because the stalling speed is a couple of knots too high for the microlight definition.

G


N.B. Although I've not flown it personally "Noddy" used to come into our farmstrip very regularly. Chatting to the pilot and watching him fly it, he clearly had enormous fun and it's a reasonably capable little machine - you could do far worse. But, watch out for the annual club fees at WW.

N.B.B. Whilst Beagle is technically correct, most of the industry still call it "Group A", so don't worry about it unduly.

[Dan Dare]

There are some aircraft that can be registered EITHER as Microlight or Aeroplane (the Jabiru comes to mind). Once registered there little chance of changing the classification. So your hours in a Jabiru UL would not count. Hours in a normal Jabiru would count (bizarre isn't it?).

I know of no Jodel, Turbulent, Luton, FRED or VP which is a microlight so each is an aeroplane and the hours all count towards licence issue (even though they are simpler and less instrumented than many modern day microlights).

Word of warning about asking the CAA FCL though. They probably will not know and you could ask 3 of them and get 3 answers. Get everything from them in writing and even then treat with a pinch of salt.

[Genghis the Engineer]

There are different versions of Jabiru, sharing the same fuselage but different wings - hence changed performance, MTOW and stall speed.

G

[shortstripper]

Also ....

My Slingsby T31m is registered as Group A (just a term we all uderstand:rolleyes: ) because when I first registered it, I was given a choice by CAA registrations at the time. I could have classed it as a SLMG (no TMG then) but was allowed to class it as group A. An odd one I know, but that was the rule then, so mine's an aeroplane not a motor glider. I guess now it would be registered a TMG.

SS

[Rod1]

In France a number of pilots with MCR-01 Club aircraft have build a set of ULM wings (the only difference) and had them reclassified as Microlights. As it takes about 15 min to change the wings, I wonder if you can change category depending on which wings are on?

I assume our PFA/CAA would have 1000 reasons why this could not happen in this country, but I guess you could export one, change the wing and the category and re-import it.

Rod1

[distaff_beancounter]

Sorry if this is slightly off topic, but as all the usual experts seem to be on this thread perhaps they could help me, please. I have already waded my way through LASORs on the CAA website, but just got more confused! :confused:

My CAA-PPL, includes class ratings for SEP and SLMG. I am current on SEPs but have never flown any sort of 'Motor Glider'

What is the difference between a SLMG and a TMG? Does SLMG include TMG?

What would I need to do to validate/renew the SLMG class rating?

And should such training/tests be with JAA or a BGA instructor/examiner?

Thanks :)

[BEagle]

From LASORS:

In the UK for licencing purposes there is no destinction
between SLMG and TMG aircraft. UK issued licence
holders with a valid SLMG or TMG rating can fly any
motor glider (SLMG and TMG).

SLMG:

‘an aircraft with the characteristics of a non power
driven glider and which is fitted with one or more power
units which is designed or intended to take off under its
own power’

TMG:

‘a motor glider having a certificate of airworthiness
issued or accepted by a JAA Member State having an
integrally mounted, non retractable engine and a non
retractable propeller plus those listed in Appendix 1 to
JAR-FCL 1.215.'

The main advantage of holding a TMG Rating for pilots already holding SEP Class Ratings is that those who fly both SEP Class and TMG Class aircraft can count time on either towards revalidation requirements for both - which could be substantially cheaper for them. Whereas without such a TMG Rating, although the holder of a UK JAR-FCL licence with SEP rating may, subject to differences training, exercise the privileges of their licence on SLMGs, they may not count hours flown under national SLMG privileges (even in an aircraft which meets the JAR definition of TMG) towards the re-validation of the SEP Class rating.

The BGA are the guys to speak to about flying SLMGs/TMGs. But to get the maximum benefit, you would need to add the TMG rating to your PPL.

[distaff_beancounter]

BEagle many thanks for the reply - it is all becoming a bit clearer!

I have the possibility of flying an aircraft that is shown in LASORs Appendix D - list of "Motor Gliders Classed as SLMG and TMG".

So are you saying that I can fly it on my existing SLMG class rating, but that I could not log it with my SEP hours unless I get a TMG rating?

In the UK for licencing purposes there is no destinction between SLMG and TMG aircraft So why are there two seperate class ratings, or have I misunderstood this bit? :confused:

[BEagle]

SLMG is a national rating, TMG is a JAR-FCL rating.

As you have never flown a motor glider, your SLMG rating will be well out of date. So, either:

1. Do the differences training on whatever the aircraft is and fly it on your SEP Class Rating (althought the hours won't count towards SEP revalidation requirements.

2. Take a TMG Class Rating LST, add a TMG Class Rating to your licence and then keep [b]both[/i] SEP and TMG ratings valid by flying hours on either to count for both. See LASORS:

[i]If the licence contains both SEP (Land) and TMG ratings, revalidation requirements of both classes may be satisfied by completing the requirements in EITHER a TMG or a SEP (Land) aeroplane (or a combination of both).

[distaff_beancounter]

BEagle thanks for the reply.

I will probably go for your option (1)

I am not usually short of hours for SEP revalidation, so it would not matter if those in the motor glider did not count.

BUT, you say that the TMG is a JAA class rating.

As I only have a dear old 'for life' CAA PPL, I assume that I would have to pay a large cheque to the Belgrano to get a JAA PPL, just to have something to attach the TMG class rating to!

Thanks for clarifying all that for me - the advice system on this forum sure beats the CAA! :)

[BEagle]

Nope - absolutely no need to change your lifetime CAA PPL for a 5 year JAR-FCL PPL. Don't even consider it!

You can add a TMG rating to your current licence; on top of whatever the Examiner might charge, the CAA fee would be £70.

[0-8]

Thanks for all your input.

Well according to G-INFO it's classed as a fixed-wing landplane. I'd already emailed the CAA on Sunday and by the time they get back to me they'll probably have decided it's a microlight. : :rolleyes:

[Genghis the Engineer]

To make it a microlight, you'd have to prove that the stalling speed, at MTOW, was below 35 kn CAS.

Given that there almost certainly is no such thing as an IAS.v.CAS curve in existence for a DR.9, and if there is, CAA PLD won't have a copy, I'm pretty certain that you're safe.

G

[BEagle]

RTFP!

The D-9 has a MTOW of 320 kg and a stalling speed of 25 mph. It has a wing loading of 36 kg/m2.

[Genghis the Engineer]

320kg does the job, the maximum MTOW for a single seat microlight is 300kg.

25 mph stall speed will almost certainly be indicated, not calibrated.

In my experience 36kg/m² probably means a stall speed around 35-40kn.

G

[BEagle]

RTFP 2!

....or 390 kg for a single seat landplane for which an individual United Kingdom permit to fly or certificate of airworthiness was first in force prior to 1st January 2003.

[shortstripper]

And if you're quoting historical fact ... fact is that back then a D9 was not classed as a microlight. Wasn't then and it isn't now. Why try to confuse the issue further?

SS

[Genghis the Engineer]

....or 390 kg for a single seat landplane for which an individual United Kingdom permit to fly or certificate of airworthiness was first in force prior to 1st January 2003.


Not according to EASA, who do not recognise that definition within Annex 2. This is something currently troubling our own dear CAA who aren't quite sure what do do with such aeroplanes.

G

[912ul]

For goodness sake girls.............................

G-INFO says that the aircraft he was looking to buy is a fixed wing landplane.

End of story