Trial lessons ARE legal

[FlyingForFun]

My employer has just handed me a leaflet from the CAA, entitled "Is my flight legal? A guide to the Air Operator's Certificate".

The leaflet is aimed at passengers on public transport flights, and is intended to give them the information they need on AOCs, when one is needed, how to find out if a carrier has an AOC, and why you should not fly with a carrier who does not have one.

Putting aside for the moment the obvious flaw with this well-intentioned leaflet (i.e. carriers who are operating illegally without an AOC are hardly likely to make this leaflet available to their passengers!), it has a couple of paragraphs about trial lessons, which clear up the CAA's position:
What about trial lessons?

A 'trial lesson' is simply a first lesson which may or may not be followed by subsequent lessons. It follows that it is an instructional flight and should be conducted as such; and an abbreviated exercise such as 'effects of controls' or 'straight and level' should be taught. Instructional flights are not public transport, but aerial work, and are not subject to public transport regulations, so no AOC is required.

I have been offered a flight as a passenger during a trial lesson. Is this legal?

There is nothing in law to prevent the carriage of non-paying passengers on an instructional flight, apart, of course, from solo flights by a student pilot. If the only payment made is for carriage of the trainee pilot under instruction, the flight is classed as aerial work, and no AOC is needed. However, if any passenger has paid to be carried, the flight is classed as public transport, and is illegal unless the oeprator holds an AOC.
So there it is, in writing, confirming what I (and most others on this forum) have been saying for years. Unfortunately, I do not know if this leaflet is available on-line?

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

[long final]

Soo, FFF, that means that you can't charge for additional non flying passenger in a trial lesson? JW will have a fit when he hears .... :)

[RVR800]

FFF That's excellent news: a lot of flying schools now know where they stand

[breakscrew]

The issue is and always has been that it is to be conducted as a lesson. Sightseeing trips and jollies are outside the letter of the law. Happily, most people I know who conduct 'trial lessons' do so properly.

[Whopity]

Can you not lookout at the sites and be jolly whilst having a lesson?

[BigEndBob]

I can remember 15 years ago a competing flying club had a moan to the CAA about us taking pax on trial lessons. The CAA reply was that it was perfectly OK so long as no additional charge was made and we were just filling empty seats and the outcome of the TL might have a bearing on the pax, ie the pax being a wife, girlfriend, son or daughter. (Who might end up worse off financially!)
And i don't think unreasonable to ask the TL where they live so as to fly over their house or other point of interest. Gives you a target to aim for whilst teaching E of C or S&L.
I have come across some very experienced instructors who try to get across too much on this flight covering all of EofC and TL customer arriving back quite pale!

[Troy McClure]

In my opinion it's impossible to take anyone up on a trial lesson, sat in the left hand seat, and not teach them anything. Someone's first flight is where they'll learn the most, even if all they learn is what it's like to be in the front seat of a light aeroplane.

We always encourage any trial lesson to take control, but if they choose not to, so be it. They've still learnt something, even if it's all they've learnt is that they don't have the confidence to take control....

I've always suspected that charging extra to take a passenger in the back seat was illegal. Not to say that some schools haven't been doing it for years and got away with it though.....