LASORS 2007: Flight Crew Licensing information

[Flying Lawyer]

LASORS 2007 has been published.

The LAS section brings together all the flight crew licensing information otherwise found in JAR-FCL, the UK ANO, AICs and the old CAPs 53/54.

Regulations and procedures change between the annual publishing of LASORS and these updates are notified by AICs and published on the CAA website www.caa.co.uk/srg/licensing (http://www.caa.co.uk/srg/licensing).

The ORS section is intended to be a one-stop reference for all aspects of safe aeroplane operation.

Link to FREE download: LASORS 2007 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/LASORS_07.pdf)



FL

[FlyingForFun]

Great - thanks for the link. Time to update the bookmark!

Pity to see no changes to Section A Appendix B, though, to give some kind of definitive answer to the question of how to log time when a qualified pilot flies with an instructor, for example for a club checkout or a currency check.

Since neither the table in LASORS nor any other written source I can find contains advice for this particular case, I shall continue to advise my students that I will log P1 and they ought to log PUT to be conservative, even though the less conservative option of PICUS seems far more logical in many cases.

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

[FormationFlyer]

I shall continue to advise my students that I will log P1 and they ought to log PUT to be conservative, even though the less conservative option of PICUS seems far more logical in many cases.

Except that it is very clear on logging of PICU/S - only as a result of a successful flight test with a JAA/CAA examiner and therefore PUT is the only other option...but you are right...PICUS would be more sensible...but hey thats the rules. ho hum.

[FlyingForFun]

FF, I disagree.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't say "only" anywhere. It's just that a successful flight test is the only case listed (other than cases which specifically relate to a multi-crew environment).

By the same token, though, it "only" lists a couple of cases where PUT can be logged (training for a license, rating, or conversion onto a different aeroplane within a class, and an unsuccessful flight test) - and a club checkout is none of these.

Because there is no "only" or equivalent, my conclusion is that either is probably acceptable, but it is so open to interpretation that it is best to err on the side of caution. And it's so easy for the CAA to clarify. :mad:

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

[BillieBob]

I received an agonised pm the other week from a contributor to these forums who had just had his application for CPL issue rejected by PLD, partly on the grounds of insufficient PIC time. All of the club checkouts that he had logged as PIC had been disallowed.

You may put anything in your personal logbook, provided that it includes the minimum requirements of the ANO, but that does not mean that the CAA will necessarily accept it for licence issue.

[Islander2]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't say "only" anywhere.

Okay, you asked! LASORS 2007 Section A, Appendix B, page 44:"Flight time as PIC US, apart from as specifically provided for under Case J above, will only be allowable for the holder of a PPL subject to the terms of a prior agreement with the CAA." (my emboldening)

The 'Case J' referred to is "Pilot undergoing any form of flight test with a JAA or CAA Authorised Examiner."

[FlyingForFun]

Ok Islander, you got me there. In that case, my opinion has changed, and PUT is the only way of logging checkouts. :ok: Wouldn't have been my choice of how to do it, but at least it's reasonably definitive?

(On taking a closer look, I find that the reason I never noticed this before is because it is hidden in Note 3. Note 3 begins by saying "A pilot claiming hours as co-pilot towards meeting the overall flying experience for a license....." Since I'm not interested in hours as co-pilot, I skipped over this note entirely after the first sentence, without expecting a completely unrelated paragraph on PICUS to be hiding at the bottom of it. :mad: )

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