permit to fly v. C of A

[G_STRING]

Can anybody tell me the difference between a certificate of airworthiness, and a permit to fly?

Can both be used for training, and what sort of differences in privilleges and insurance are there.

Is one preferable to the other in any way, and is one more restricted than the other

Cheers

[tonyhalsall]

Phew..................... What a question!
Not sure you may get many detailed responses as the answer is very long and very dependent on your personal attitudes, experience and ultimate aims.
Perhaps you should outline what you are looking to achieve and ask in that context which would be a better option for you. To be honest a Public cat CofA, a Private cat CofA and a Permit all have their advantages and downsides depending on what you yourself are looking to achieve.

[IO540]

The huge practical difference is that only CofA planes can fly IFR.

That's your first decision: will I ever want legal instrument flight capability.

Obviously suitably equipped Permit planes can fly on instruments, just not legally ;) In practice this means you cannot do instrument approaches, or any departures at towered airports with a cloudbase below the VFR departure minima, typically 1000-1500ft.

[bencoulthard]

Can both be used for training, and what sort of differences in privilleges and insurance are there.

Is one preferable to the other in any way, and is one more restricted than the other

To the best of my knowledge you can't use a permit to fly for training. No idea on insurance.

C of A is more preferable in regard to less restrictions. But as far as I know it is likely to cost you more to maintain C of A standards.

Also to throw a spanner in the works theres the new easa C of A and that is one of the reasons tony said its gonna be a long answer.:ugh:

Ben (with neither of the above) Coulthard

[scooter boy]

You cannot fly any less expensively than by the PFA route. I got 500+ hours in a little PFA taildragger and had a great time inexpensively accumulating flight experience.
However - (in general) most PFA types are very light aircraft with minimal levels of instrumentation (to keep the weight down) and little systems redundancy. There are good reasons why they are not allowed to fly IFR in the UK. Believe me you really don't want to be accumulating ice at FL120 crossing a front in an aircraft that someone has built in their garden shed and weighs less than a ton. You also probably want to avoid flying in significant turbulence or even pushing crosswind landings because the experience is highly unpleasant as is the bill for repairing the damage of a heavy landing or groundloop. So what I am trying to say is they are loads of fun in the right conditions and will save you a ton of cash in terms of maintenance and fuel costs.

For any serious business flying or IFR activity it really needs to be certified IMHO and preferably de-iced with all the gadgets.

:)

[Mariner9]

Permit a/c can be used for training, provided they're wholly owned by the student (Seems a strange rule to me, what difference would it have made to training whether the student owns 100%, 50% or whatever :rolleyes: )

Another restriction not yet mentioned is that Permit A/C cannot overfly built-up areas (though I understand that this is under review)

The insurance for my Pioneer300 is slightly less than a fellow pilot with similar hours pays for his PA38, which is surprising given that my a/c has retractible gear and is insured for a higher hull value

[High Wing Drifter]

Can anybody tell me the difference between a certificate of airworthiness, and a permit to fly?
* No flight in CAS.
* No flying permitted over built up areas (the definition of built up area is rather vague, I assume anything larger than a yellow square on the chart).
* Day VFR only.
* I beleive explicit permission is needed to fly outside of the UK.
* Owner maintenance is permitted with engineer monitoring and sign-off (i.e. much cheaper!)
* Only certain aircraft configurations can be inlcuded in the PFA (something like 4 seats max, single engine?. Not sure exactly what but there are some limitations). I don't believe performance is a factor. Don't some jets run on PFA. I understand most warbirds such as Spits and Hurries do too.
* No commercial/ariel work ops except displays, demos, instruction, etc.

Something like, that as a starter set. I'm sure I'll need correcting here and there.

[gasax]

I'd suggest doing some searching through this forum, and looking at the PFA's own site which although difficult to navigate does have an explanation of the differences.


Jets, Hurricanes, Spitfires and the like are outside the limits set for a PFA permit - they fly under CAA permits and incur all of those costs.

With a permit you can fly in CAS, you can also visit almost all European countries without any issue (although some do require prior permission - again see the PFA site).

As to instrument flying - what a joke, as approximately less than 0.5% of PPLs actually have an IR then it is pretty unlikely this would ever be an issue. Cruising at FL120 - there are a handful of aircraft with oxygen systems and the performance on the UK register. If you want to do that then that is serious flying and pretty much academic if you need to know the difference between C of A and permits!

Spend some time on the PFA site and then ask more focused queries.

[Rod1]

Just switched from private C of A to PFA permit

There are several theoretical limitations on a Permit, like you cannot fly in Europe, but in practice an agreement exists to let you do this. I will restrict this to the practical ones!

No IFR, this is of limited importance unless you have an IR and a de-iced twin

No Night flying

Flight training is limited, but you can get trained through the PFA coaching system.

I do not agree with Sboy on the capability of aircraft. You get the full range from very basic single seat micro (eg Minimax) to sophisticated 4 seat 250hp (eg Vans RV10). My MCR (MTOW 490kg) cruses at 125kn, manages 1250 fpm and has a crosswind limit of 20kn, all on £16 of mogas per hour. She is fine in turbulence and has a huge fun factor. This is much better than your average club PA28.

My maintenance budget for this year is £500, my old AA5B (180hp C of A) will cost about £5000 for the same period. Some PFA machines can live in trailers to save on parking.

I built my machine to allow me to continue touring Europe for fun at a price I could afford.

Rod1

[Zulu Alpha]

I think there is some confusion over permits to fly. Many warbirds and jets operate on them. These are issued and controlled by the CAA. The CAA have delegated authority for permits to fly on small aircraft, homebuilts etc to the PFA. a PFA permit aircraft is the one that many recreational pilots use in the UK.
I suggest that you look at the PFA website which has some excellent articles explaining what you can and cannot do on a PFA permit.
The main thing is that the routine maintenance can be done by the owner as long as it is signed off by a PFA inspector. This significantly reduces costs.
The downside is that there is no IFR, there are very few 4 seaters as these have only been allowed in the last year or so. There is no overflying built up areas. I have been told this means anywhere with a 30 mph speed limit.
You can go abroad, Ireland and France have given a blanket approval for PFA permit aircraft so no individual permission is needed. Other countries readly give permission.
As I mentioned the PFA website is a good starting point
www.pfa.org.uk
or the engineering section
www.pfa.org.uk/engineering.asp

[Mike Cross]

Most of the rules are in Art 11 of the ANO.

It's worth pointing out that it's not for the owner/operator to decide which he wants. If the a/c is eligible for a C of A it cannot be put on a Permit.

There are a few exceptions that have come about over the years where there has been no Type Certificate Holder to take responsibility for airworthiness and aircraft formerly on a C of A have been allowed to go on a Permit. If the TC is resurrected there is then no route back to a C of A. This can lead to situaitons like the Luscombe where some are on Permits but any new imports would have to go on a C of A.

[slim_slag]

A nearby airfield has a small fleet of essentially identical model/make airplane. Some managed to get on a permit, the others are on a CofA and there is nothing they can do to get the almost identical airplane on a permit. These people are just simple folk who like to go up and fly around and have fun, as the vast majority of private pilots in the UK do. Ask them what the difference is and they will point to their wallet and the number of grey hairs on their heads due not not having to deal with the 'regulator', whoever that might be. The permit people look younger and have more cash to spend on other things. In the real world of UK private flying, that's the difference.

[IO540]

No flight in CAS

I didn't know that. That is really restrictive, especially in some places outside the UK.

[G_STRING]

Brilliant! thanks very much to all who've answered, I didn't expect so many in so short space of time.

Information very useful, cheers all

[Jumbo Driver]

Permit a/c can be used for training, provided they're wholly owned by the student (Seems a strange rule to me, what difference would it have made to training whether the student owns 100%, 50% or whatever :rolleyes: )


I believe there is another circumstance where training may take place under a Permit to Fly.

It would seem that there is no direct restriction on the use of a Permit aircraft for training as such. However, the constraint is indirect in that the Permit Conditions normally exclude flight for the purposes of public transport or aerial work.

Aerial Work is defined (ANO) as "any purpose (other than public transport) for which an aircraft is flown if valuable consideration is given or promised in respect of the flight or the purpose of the flight."

Thus training may take place, in compliance with the Conditions of the Permit to Fly, provided that no "valuable consideration" (as above) is given for the instruction.

JD

:)

[Mariner9]

No flight in CAS
I didn't know that. That is really restrictive, especially in some places outside the UK.

Certainly would be if correct, thankfully it isnt :ok:

[Mariner9]

Paid flying instruction can be given in a permit aircraft, but again, by some strange logic, an examination (eg GFT) is only allowed where the examiner does not receive any remuneration. Makes sense to someone obviously :ugh:

Details here (http://www.pfa.org.uk/Engineering%20pdfs/Operating%20an%20Aircraft%20ona%20PFA%20Permit/Operating%20an%20Aircraft%20ona%20PFA%20Permit/TL%202.09%20Learning%20to%20Fly%20in%20a%20Permit%20Aircraft .pdf)

[High Wing Drifter]

I stand corrected! Don't know where I got that idea from. Probably pprune :}

[Croqueteer]

:) Although a dedicated PFAer, I would like to point out that you can work on a C of A aircraft. I completely rebuilt a Stampe and operated if for 10yrs doing all the work myself signed off by engineers that knew me well enough to cover me. I also had the backing of the local CAA surveyer during the rebuild. You would be surprised at the background of some of the "engineers" that work on your holiday jet.

[IO540]

Paid flying instruction can be given in a permit aircraft, but again, by some strange logic, an examination (eg GFT) is only allowed where the examiner does not receive any remuneration. Makes sense to someone obviously

All these weird ownership rules are there to prevent flight training operations being set up around these types of planes, depriving the CAA of their CofA income. Protectionist practices really, to safeguard the bulk of the flight training business.

Of course they would argue it's done for the superior safety of Transport CofA planes that have to be looked at every 50 hrs...

[englishal]

Cruising at FL120 - there are a handful of aircraft with oxygen systems and the performance on the UK register.
Most typical 4 seater 160HP variants will get you up there no problem (PA28's / 172's etc....).

It is worth mentioning that not all aeroplanes can be put on a permit, for example you couldn't buy a 172 and stick it on a permit AFAIK. If Cessna ceased production and support then you probably could......

[Mike Cross]

That's the great thing about the forums. People trot out opinions or quote documents that may or may not be correct rather than refer to the law. The CAA bu@@ers about with the rules so much the only way to see what is correct is to look at the legislation.

ANO 2005 Art 11(4)
(4) With the permission of the CAA, an aircraft flying in accordance with a national permit to fly may fly for the purpose of aerial work which consists of the giving of instruction in flying or the conduct of flying tests, subject to the aircraft being 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.

ANO 2005 Art 11(1)
11 (1) The CAA shall:
(a) subject to sub-paragraph (b) issue in respect of any non-EASA aircraft registered in the United Kingdom a national permit to fly if it is satisfied that the aircraft is fit to fly having regard to the airworthiness of the aircraft and the conditions to be attached to the permit;
(b) refuse to issue a national permit to fly in respect of a non-EASA aircraft registered in the United Kingdom if it appears to the CAA that the aircraft is eligible for and ought to fly under and in accordance with a national certificate of airworthiness.

Mike

[IO540]

Englishal

You are right that loads of common spamcans will get to FL120, though it might take a while :)

Even so, the number of real IFR tourers in the UK is way way more than a "handful". There must be hundreds if not more of SE planes that can get to FL180. Any IFR tourer with an IO-540 in the front can get to FL200 or so. Oxygen is an issue but a portable Aerox kit is a few hundred quid, imported from the USA.

The stuff about a CofA is, IIRC, that any plane capable of being on a CofA is not allowed to be on a Permit. This is a plain blunt revenue stream maintenance measure by the CAA.