28 day rule

[trex600]

I know i should know this but what is it?

[BackPacker]

It's a money extortion scheme.

Legally there's no 28-day rule. But a lot of UK clubs/schools insist that you fly at least every 28 days otherwise you have to do a club/school check with an instructor. Thus guaranteeing a nice line of income for the club/school.

[Pilot DAR]

Something to do with three out of four February's?

[Human Factor]

Alternatively, it's a rule for private airstrips. If you operate for no more than 28 days in any one year, you don't need planning permission for your strip.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Alternatively, it's a rule for private airstrips. If you operate for no more than 28 days in any one year, you don't need planning permission for your strip.

Or anything else.

It basically says that under English law you can use the the land for something different - airstrip, campsite, motor rally site, whatever - for up to 28 days per year without having to go through any system for approval for change of use.

G

[trex600]

So if the aircraft you fly is shared ownership would i be right in saying this rule doesnt apply?

Thanks

[Duchess_Driver]

It's a money extortion scheme.

Legally there's no 28-day rule. But a lot of UK clubs/schools insist that you fly at least every 28 days otherwise you have to do a club/school check with an instructor. Thus guaranteeing a nice line of income for the club/school.


What price Safety eh?

....and the last time I looked there were similar rules elsewhere in the world!

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Thus guaranteeing a nice line of income for the club/school.
I rather suspect that they lose money actually.

If I book an aircraft and an instructor for one circuit to keep current I pay them for fifteen minutes. If I hadn't had to do that they could have sold that slot to someone who wanted a full hour's lesson.

[chris-h]

How can you say clubs lose money regarding the 28 day rule?
Its all a load of bo**ocks...

Its totally a money making add on

[Fuji Abound]

So if the aircraft you fly is shared ownership would i be right in saying this rule doesnt apply?

Thanks


Yes.

A complete deriliction of responsibility on the part of clubs. Some pilots need to fly every 28 days others can go a lot longer. They should know their "members" and categorise accordingly

[trex450]

of course if you fly single crew public transport then you have to have a 28 day check ride (assuming you have not flown in that time) regardless of how many hours you have done in the previous months. Surely it is common sense that a low hours pilot should have to do the same! I may be wrong but it might well come down to the insurance policy and the fact that the aircraft that are being rented will be flown on a public transport C of A and presumably insured as such.

[charliegolf]

Would a club get a reduced insurance premium for operating a 28 day rule- on safety grounds?

If so, it's a money saving scam!

CG

Doh! Didn't read the last post.

[mad_jock]

Its not insurance the standard club insurance is only done by 2 companys.

When I go home I take an aircraft out solo for 3 circuits and I am over 90 days never mind 28. I don't need to I might add for teaching I just prefer to anyway in case I have to sort a landing out its more to do with the weight of the controls than anything else. I checked with the insurance company and they are fine with it.

We have variable time limits but usually the punter wants to go up anyway even if you can say they can take it. Maybe its reverse physcology or we don't have any knobs as instructors and an hour/3 circuits with an instructor is seen as a fun thing to do and not a PIA. Whenever I do one of these the punter logs PIC anyway maybe that stops the mind set that its just done to fleece them.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

How can you say clubs lose money regarding the 28 day rule?

I'd have thought that my post was quite clear.

But here's a slightly longer version for the hard of understanding:

If a club has fixed slots for booking its aircraft and instructors, which sounds to me like a reasonable way of avoiding complete chaos, then if the instructor and aircraft are being used for a check ride and bringing in 15 minutes money they can not during the same slot be used for a full lesson and bring in a full hour's money.

An hour's hire is more money than a single circuit.

The club thus loses 45 minutes money by allowing a punter to book an aircraft and instructor for a one circuit currency flight.

[mad_jock]

Normally in the UK its the Instructor gets screwed.

1. you do the check and then the punter takes the plane away for the rest of the time. Didn't mind this actually gave me a break.

2. You get the check ride launched at you as you walk in from another lesson and you some how have to fit inbetween 2 lessons. Usually because the punter has turned up on spek and the school wants the solo hire as well as the 2 lessons. Stuff's up the debrief and the brief of 2 students

Thankfully I don't have to do that any more.

[douglas.lindsay]

You know, the more I read on PPRUNE, the more I appreciate my own club...

[Talkdownman]

It's a money extortion scheme.

Legally there's no 28-day rule. But a lot of UK clubs/schools insist that you fly at least every 28 days otherwise you have to do a club/school check with an instructor. Thus guaranteeing a nice line of income for the club/school.
If a club or a school wants to impose its own 'rule' such as this (which can maximise its income) then that club or school should bear all costs of carrying out such a 'check'. And why an instructor? It is not licensed training. Why even a licensed pilot for that matter?

[Genghis the Engineer]

Any club will impose the rules that it thinks are appropriate to safety, good training, and protection of their assets. And they'll inevitably pass the cost of this this onto the customers.

On the whole, most clubs get to know their customers and apply some pragmatism. But equally, anybody only flying a few tens of hours annually isn't maintaining good recency and has to expect to be require to fly regular checkouts.

G

[bern444]

But a lot of UK clubs/schools insist that you fly at least every 28 days otherwise you have to do a club/school check with an instructor. Thus guaranteeing a nice line of income for the club/school.

Our club has this, but as it's non-profit making and has no employees, no-one stands to gain apart from an instructor getting half an hour's money. It's just a sensible bit of practical safety - seems good to me.

B

[Mark1234]

In my experience, one size fits-all 'rules' generally do little to improve safety, they provide somewhere for the jobsworth to hide behind: "Not my fault mate, them's the rules". Those who are not 'hurt' by the rule say "seems like a good idea to me, safety's good mm'kay?", those who are receive accusatory finger pointing: "what price safety?" I'd suggest there's a case to argue that it might be detrimental to safety. It might just engender a mindset of "I've done a check so I must be OK", rather than an objective assessment of whether you are OK. On the other hand, perhaps some people aren't too objective(!)

For example, most of the flying clubs I spoke to when I was looking for a new home require 28 day currency on *their* aircraft, or even individual types in the fleet. So, I can fly 30 consecutive days on someone else's aircraft, then come back and have to do a check? Perhaps I fly a pitts several times in those 28 days, then need a checkout to fly a PA28? And apparently it's not blatant profiteering! :ugh:

Fortunately there are some more enlightened operators out there, if you keep looking. Oh, and just for the record, this 28 day business isn't (in my experience), common in Aus, or NZ. Don't know about the rest of the world, but the UK is the first place I've seen it.

[IO540]

I am not backing an unconditional 28 day club/school currency rule but speaking as someone who used to hire out a plane for a few years, and have a collection of stories as long as your arm to tell about some of the characters I "met" (undoubtedly already posted here) there is a clear need to enforce a certain minimum level of pilot currency.

If I flew just once a month, I would be a hopeless pilot. OTOH I accept that if somebody just flies along the coast and back on a sunny Sunday, in a simple C152, 1/month is possibly OK for currency. And I know a lot of PPLs do only that.

I would not agree that the club should pay for that; it would be a massive expense for them, and it is the pilot who benefits totally, in currency, in collecting logbook entries, and he gets a flight out of it, hopefully somewhere purposeful.

Flying is not a super expensive hobby but equally it cannot be played right down in the gutter, and a lot of people refuse to accept that.

[Mark1234]

Airpolice, I meant to point out in my earlier post that when I'm not *compelled* to take an instructor, I often welcome the chance - I'm past the point of caring about getting 'solo' hours, definitely not 'afraid' of having an instructor along, and it can be *made* useful - last time I had a gap, I called them for a checkride, and we went and did some fun stuff - farm strips and the like. 3 times around the circuit for the point of form is a different matter. Also, really one GA piston single doesn't fly that much different from another. I can't see one good reason for treating the DR400/PA-38 separately. What happens if you fly someone else's aircraft in the meantime? They're not complex aircraft, they don't need type ratings, etc, we're not talking about airline flying here! Basically, I don't think anyone would disagree with reasonable currency, but..

As for flying every four weekends - there are many reasons; weather, work, travel, life, other interests. Sometimes I'll fly more, sometimes less. Just the way it is.

[Duckeggblue]

Some questions from a relative beginner to the "Perfect pliots" on this thread - the ones who never want or need a check ride.

If you own an aircraft, presumably you would be happy to allow anybody to fly it regardless of experience, demonstrated skill in the prevailing conditions or of currency?

If somebody offers to take your loved ones for a flight, will you be happy for them to go regardless of the experience, skill or currency of the pilot?

If the answer is "no" to either of the above then presumably you would have to allow that some people DO need check rides sometimes?( although , obviously not you......:ok:)

Everybody is different - what is a rip off to you could be a lifesaver for others - and their passengers.
In general, to promote the blanket view that all check rides are a rip off may deprive pilots of a valuable aid to safety - after all, who is going to volunteer for a rip off - even if they need one!?

[Molesworth 1]

If I book an aircraft and an instructor for one circuit to keep current I pay them for fifteen minutes. If I hadn't had to do that they could have sold that slot to someone who wanted a full hour's lesson

My club has a 45 day rule. Go over that and it's a full hour with an instructor - PFLs, the works!

Definitely makes it worthwhile making the effort to head out to the airfield before then - even if's it's just to do a single circuit.

As a matter of interest, does anyone practice PFLs on their own?

[neilgeddes]

does anyone practice PFLs on their own?


Yes absolutely! Great practise and fun.

The 28 day rule can be a pain but I wouldn't want to drive just once a month and then head out onto the motorway.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

My club has a 45 day rule. Go over that and it's a full hour with an instructor - PFLs, the works!
Mine has a graduated rule, depending on how long you haven't flown, starting at one circuit and ending up with "the works", but even "the works" (leave/rejoin, steep turns, PFL, EFATO, normal/glide/flapless circuits) doesn't take anywhere near an hour on a good day.

And flying elsewhere counts for club currency. Flying anything elsewhere counts. I once relied on this rule when the only flying I'd done in the last several weeks had been on floats ... the resulting crosswind landing wasn't very pretty.

[Mark1234]

Some questions from a relative beginner to the "Perfect pliots" on this thread - the ones who never want or need a check ride.

There aren't any perfect pilots on pprune.. or anywhere else. I've sure stuffed up plenty. You're extrapolating simply to ridicule - I don't see any suggestion from anyone that they never need a check ride. However, at the risk of becoming a bore:


If you own an aircraft, presumably you would be happy to allow anybody to fly it regardless of experience, demonstrated skill in the prevailing conditions or of currency?

If somebody offers to take your loved ones for a flight, will you be happy for them to go regardless of the experience, skill or currency of the pilot?

Not regardless. I regard experience, skill, and more importantly judgement rather more than currency. To put it simply: I know pilots I'd not send my dearest up with, no matter how current, and pilots who I'd send them with even if they'd not flown in a good few months. The first category may abide by every rule in the place, but have no insight or judgement. The latter I trust to exercise judgement, not only IN the air, but in deciding whether to take to the air. I've certainly never met a pilot I'd send them with at 27 days, and not at 29. Nor anyone where 3 circuits with an instructor would change my decision.


If the answer is "no" to either of the above then presumably you would have to allow that some people DO need check rides sometimes?( although , obviously not you......)

Everybody is different - what is a rip off to you could be a lifesaver for others - and their passengers.
In general, to promote the blanket view that all check rides are a rip off may deprive pilots of a valuable aid to safety - after all, who is going to volunteer for a rip off - even if they need one!?

Again with the extrapolation! Nobody suggests all check rides are a rip off, just arbitrary 28 day currency. You kinda defeat that argument yourself; as you say, everyone is different. Aviating requires judgement. I'll stick my neck out, and suggest if you can't exercise that, you shouldn't be given a license in the first place - judging your own currency is no different to judging the weather, how tough a trip you feel comfortable with, when to throw the approach away and go around, or anything else. Of course, it's rather unfashionable in the modern age to expect people to think for themselves.

Everyone needs a check ride now and then, even if they are current. Ideally check rides are something you request; I'd suggest the time to worry is when someone stops you on the way to the aircraft and says "Oi you, not before a check ride" Perhaps time to wonder why you hadn't already asked for one (or why you fly with that club/group)?

Passengers are another matter - personally, I have a currency I'll happily fly at solo, whilst the currency requirement to have a non-pilot along is rather higher. At the former I'm confident I have can conduct the flight safely. At the latter, I intend to be able to do the same whilst managing and explaining things to someone who may be nervous, airsick, or interrupting at inappropriate times.

Yes, I practise PFL's, though not as often as I ought. I'll put it on the list for next time I fly. Gertrude's place sounds much more like what I'd expect.

[Duckeggblue]

Mark1234

Thanks for your thoughts. There is little that i would disagree with but you speak as a pilot with judgement and you would look after yourself and your dearest using this judgement.
I suppose that I was thinking of how flying could be safe for the potential passengers (who do not have the experience to make this judgement) flying with the

To put it simply: I know pilots I'd not send my dearest up with, no matter how current....

If these pilots are to carry passengers, and I can't see how they can reasonably be stopped, then a 28 day checkride can help rather than ....

I'd suggest there's a case to argue that it might be detrimental to safety. It might just engender a mindset of "I've done a check so I must be OK", rather than an objective assessment of whether you are OK.

At my club, pilots become eligible for a checkride after 28 days but get one at the discretion of the CFI -the decision seems to be influenced by experience, attitude & judgement of the pilot & also the prevailing wind/weather if they want to fly after ( especially with pax)- as well as days since last flight.

Apologies to all for any perceived ridicule - was supposed to be facetious enough not to offend....:O

[Pilot DAR]

Not regardless. I regard experience, skill, and more importantly judgement rather more than currency. To put it simply: I know pilots I'd not send my dearest up with, no matter how current, and pilots who I'd send them with even if they'd not flown in a good few months. The first category may abide by every rule in the place, but have no insight or judgement. The latter I trust to exercise judgement, not only IN the air, but in deciding whether to take to the air. I've certainly never met a pilot I'd send them with at 27 days, and not at 29. Nor anyone where 3 circuits with an instructor would change my decision.

Very wise words.

Presuming that most flying clubs operate in the UK, as most clubs of any sort operate anywhere, they are run by a group of directors, (who generally seem to put in more than their fair share of the work anyway). As such, the club will run within the bounds of simply sustainably possible, regulatorily compliant and safe. There are many ways to accomplish this. But above all, a club, like a business, be it for profit or not, will not sustain itself with no members or clients. If a club's rules are acceptable to enough of its members/clients that is the "norm" for that club, and others who choose to participate will have to accept that. I don't think anyone is being forced to rent aircraft, are they?

In my experience, both with the club where I learned to fly decades ago, and other organizatons whose aircraft I have flown since, there seems to be some wisdom and latitude applied to currency, once the baseline skills and total experience of the renter pilot are understood. At the point where I had about 200 hours total time, the club from which I rented authorized me to declare myself current on any of their aircraft, and check rides were no longer required. There was certainly an expectation that I kept myself current, but a number of days was not a part of that.

I would agree with all who say that a pilot who flies 10 hour a year is not current or safe without close supervision. If you fly 50 hours a year, and miss six weeks, I don't think safety is being compromised. I think that those pilots who resist checkrides need to consider the situation from the other perspective. The custodian of the aircraft will have a lot of explaining to do if a pilot whose currency they did not confirm, is involved in an accident.

[flybymike]

The custodian of the aircraft will have a lot of explaining to do if a pilot whose currency they did not confirm, is involved in an accident.

Provided their currency complies with revalidation requirements, they should not have any explaining to do.

[Molesworth 1]

I wouldn't want to drive just once a month and then head out onto the motorway

I don't currently own a car but hire one from time to time. Yes I do head straight for the motorway after not driving for a month or two. That's after negotiating my way out of London!

Do I think that is dangerous? Does it take time to get back into it? Absolutely not! I have been driving for 40 years.

Flying is different - mainly because I'm far more inexperienced. The important thing is to gain experience - not the number of days between flights. I find that I need to fly quite often if I haven't flown for six months or so. Two months and been flying regularly before that? I'm much more with it. You don't loose your skills that quickly. Hence you have the CAA rule for taking passengers - 3 take offs and lands in the last 90 days. There is much more wisdom in that that the 28 day rule. (The CAA rule is based on safety - the club rule is based on financial considerations)