LPC and R44 rating renewal

[Border]

It's been over a year since I've flown and now coming into the summer I want to get my ass back into the right hand seat, can anyone please tell me why I have to sit 2hrs with an examiner and then to renew my rating on the R44 I have to sit another hr with the same man, this is costing me the guts of £1500 - £2000 and to me this is a rip off, why can't the rating renewal be included in the 2 hr LPC, what will I be doing different in the rating renewal that I won't be doing in the LPC, am I ignorant to the fact that it's 2 different types of flying or is it all the same, someone please enlighten me.

[helicopter-redeye]

1. Dems da rules in JAR/ EASA-land

2. If you have not flown a type in the past 12 months you are not current with all the drills. Are you safe as a result?

3. If you want to hire somebody elses asset, do you think they would consider you safe with 2.6hrs in the past year, let alone 0.6 LPC only?

Aviation all about safety.

h-r (v-safe)

[Noiseboy]

You have to have flown 2 hours in the prevoius 12 months in order to be current, if you havent done so then you can fly with any rated instructor to brush up.

The LPC can be included in those 2 hours if you are up to scratch, so you do not have to do the extra hour.

It is up to the examiner to decide if they are satisfied with your abilities to sign your license having flown the 2 hours.

[Border]

I understand the rules and I don't mind doing the 2hr LPC as safety always comes first, but what gets me is that after doing 2hrs why spend another hr renewing the rating going over again what I have prob already done in the previous 2hrs.......My instructor who is also my examiner has told me that it would be a min of 2.6hrs, including the 1hr rating with the 2hr LPC would make sense providing my flying skills were satisfactory.

[stringfellow]

its an expensive hobby im afraid just bite the bullet and get your head down. in my opinion 2 hours per year is a ridiculosly low amount of time to qualify for an lpc attempt i would not dream of turning up with the minimum hours in my book i just think its disrespectful to the examiner who probably has better things to do with his weekend.

[Border]

its an expensive hobby im afraid just bite the bullet and get your head down. in my opinion 2 hours per year is a ridiculosly low amount of time to qualify for an lpc attempt i would not dream of turning up with the minimum hours in my book i just think its disrespectful to the examiner who probably has better things to do with his weekend.

I have over 1000 hrs pic and due to the downturn I cannot afford to renew my rating, that doesn't mean I dont stay up to date on safety issues, and also when my friends are out for a flight and I'm sitting in the left hand seat, I can take control for a few min to brush the cobwebs.

Why is it disrespectful to ask an examiner to test you for an LPC, and does it have to be on a weekend?
1. what is the examiners job? I thought that is what he is paid to do.

2. I will my doing my LPC during a working week, so I won't be using up any of his precious weekend time.

[hands_on123]

I can take control for a few min to brush the cobwebs.


Oh dear, coming to an an AAIB near you soon!

Does this friend of yours let you do governer off work? autos? running landings? engine failures in the hover? While he is PIC? (I thought not)

1,000hrs PIC doesn't mean you are up to speed with all the drill and manouvers for one type of heli.

[Border]

I was always told, by my instructor and examiner, never to attempt auto's or any engine off landing without having at least an instructor with me....

[choppadan]

Hi All,

I think there is a bit of confusion is some of the above posts on the requirements for renewal. the way I understand it the LPC and Type rating renewal are not 2 separate flights, and it is incorrect to say that you have to do 2 hour LPC.

If you are applying for a renewal (previous LPC expired), you must have flown 2hours in the past 12months to qualify to take the LPC, you are not being assessed on these 2hours of flight. The LPC and the rating renewal are then one in the same flight. Because this is a licence renewal (not a revalidation), it is not possible to do the LPC within the 2 hours required.

If you are applying for a revalidation (previous LPC still valid), you must have flown 2hours within the same 12month period, but your LPC can be part of the 2hours.

[Border]

Hi Chopperdan,
My LPC and my rating have expired just over a yr now and even tho I have had some hands on flying within this last yr I cannot log it as my rating has expired, so on paper it shows I have not flown in the last 12 months, you say if I cannot show at least 2 hrs in the previous 12 months I don't qualify for my LPC, what do I have to do now to renew my LPC and my rating, tks :)

[puntosaurus]

Fly for two hours with an instructor, then take the LPC. The LPC is a minimum of 0.6 logged hours. If you want to remind yourself what is involved in the LPC, it's on page three of the form (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/SRG1174FF.pdf).

You can fly all this time with an examiner if you want, or use your favourite instructor for the first two hours. It's up to you.

The only thing that happens as your rating goes out of validity is that you now need two hours IN ADDITION to the LPC, as opposed to two hours INCLUDING the LPC if you do it whilst you are still current. Of course once your rating is no longer valid you have to pay for an instructor to sit with you for the time required to get you up to two hours in the last twelve months, and you are paying for (at least) an additional 0.6 hours flying. Since you can anticipate the LPC by up to 90 days, there's not much reason why you should let it expire.

Once five years have passed since your rating expired, there are additional training requirements set by the CAA, and also CAA charges on top.

Just so as you know the terminology the CAA calls an LPC taken within the rating validity period as a revalidation, and after the rating validity period a renewal.

[Whirlygig]

even tho I have had some hands on flying within this last yr I cannot log it as my rating has expired, Why not if you were with an instructor? If you weren't with an instructor, what were you doing?

Cheers

Whirls

[puntosaurus]

I thought that too, but it turns out that there's absolutely no (legal) problem with a passenger manipulating the controls to a helicopter without a license or rating as long as the Pilot in Command is happy with the situation (and sitting at a set of controls also !).

Of course the PIC has to understand that his responsibilities are not altered just because he's allowed someone else to handle the aircraft.

[Whirlygig]

Really??? :eek:

Cheers

Whirls

[hands_on123]

here's absolutely no problem with a passenger manipulating the controls to a helicopter without a license or rating as long as the Pilot in Command is happy with the situation

I find that very hard to believe.

[Helinut]

There are certainly potential problems with a pax manipulating the controls. However, do the assembled masses consider it illegal (as distinct from undesirable), and if so which regulation/requirement?

[Whirlygig]

I'll plump for this bit from LASORS


A3 BASIC AUTHORITY TO ACT AS A
FLIGHT CREW MEMBER
A person shall not act as a flight crew member of a
civil aeroplane/helicopter registered in a JAA Member
State unless that person holds a valid licence and
rating complying with the requirements of JAR-FCL
and appropriate to the duties being performed, or an
authorisation as set out in JAR-FCL 1.085/2.085 and/or
1.230/2.230. The licence shall have been issued by:
• A JAA Member State; or
• Another ICAO Contracting State and rendered valid
in accordance with JAR-FCL 1.015/ 2.015 (b) or (c).
Pilots holding National motor gliders licences/ratings/
authorisations are also permitted to operate touring motor
gliders under national regulations.
Pilots holding a restricted National Private Pilot’s Licence
(NPPL) are permitted under national regulations to
operate aeroplanes registered in the State of licence issue
within that State’s airspace.
Exercise of privileges
The holder of a licence or rating shall not exercise
privileges other than those granted by that licence, rating
or authorisation.


I suppose it hinges on whether "having a go" classes as acting as a flight crew member?

Cheers

Whirls

[uk104]

Hi,

I have just been in that exact situation and was fortunate to have done something I think all Robinson pilots should do at least once in their flying careers.
I have recently completed the European Robinson safety course, taking 3 days 2 of theory and 1 of flying with 2 hrs of various drills not normally covered in "basic PPL training"

As this is my first post I do not want to break any advertising rules but a simple google search on European Robinson safety course will point you in the right direction. The instructor has 100% credibility being involved with the product since nearly the first ones made and has first hand knowledge of what exactly goes wrong by being the safety accident investigator for Robinson Helicopters.
It was an eye opener to get detailed and precise engineering and factory direct thinking on various components, checklist and flying techniques which for my part had been forgotten or missed in my PPL training.

The Course cost was 340 pound plus Vat for the ground theory part and the flying is variable depending what school hosts the course? (I paid 425 ++ per hour)

PM me if anyone wants the exact contact details and I hope this is of use and really made my issue of getting back into the right seat a very productive and valuable experience.:ok:

[puntosaurus]

I suppose it hinges on whether "having a go" classes as acting as a flight crew member?

Exactly. A pax on the controls has no status and is not a crew member.

[Whirlygig]

But aren't they "acting" as one? It's certainly my interpretation. The passenger is not a student since the PIC is not an instructor.

Cheers

Whirls

[puntosaurus]

Well it gets a bit circular at that point. They can't act as a flight crew member because they don't have a license or rating !

You need to look for something in the legislation which forbids a non-crew member from touching the controls (as there is in the case of commercial flights), or something which describes the pilot in command's responsibilities as sole manipulator of the controls.

I can't find anything.

The ANO defines Flight Crew as:
in relation to an aircraft means those members of the crew of the aircraft who respectively
undertake to act as pilot, flight navigator, flight engineer, and flight radio telephony operator of the aircraft.

It then fails to define Pilot !

It does define Pilot in Command as:
means a person who for the time being is in charge of the piloting of an aircraft without being under the direction of any other pilot in the aircraft.

So your pax is clearly under the command of another pilot in the aircraft and is therefore not Pilot in Command.

[Camp Freddie]

It would seem reasonable to suggest that if a pax is "having a go" under the direction of a pilot who has no instructor rating, then the pax is receiving unlicensed flight instruction.

If it was OK where does "having a go" end, you might as well let them "have a go" at takeoff and landing as well.

I also agree that proving it's not OK using the regs is a bit of a challenge :(

CF

[puntosaurus]

Not sure what the :( is about. Even if they learn the whole course with a mate, they still have to do 45hrs at our pleasure, so it's not like anyone is being done out of business.

[Heliport]

Not sure what the :( is about.

Frustration.

Being able to point out that something is definitely illegal makes some people :)
Assuming something is illegal but not being able to say why is :(


"unlicensed flight instruction" :rolleyes:

[Border]

"unlicensed flight instruction"

It wasn't unlicensed flight instruction, my mate is a FAA instruct/examiner and he kindly give me control on straight and level flying, talk about a thread snowballing :confused:

[puntosaurus]

Relax mate. You got your answer, now we're just having a natter amongst ourselves.

[Whirlygig]

my mate is a FAA instruct/examinerWas it an N-reg aircraft? Why couldn't you have logged that Pu/t?

Cheers

Whirls

[Heliport]

Border

When people start getting bothered about whether someone without a current licence/rating handling the controls under supervision is actually legal, it's best to just let them get on with it. ;)


H.

[hands_on123]

Well, something I always used to think about when teaching people (and still do today - offshore) is "how would this look in the accident report?"

I'm afraid AAIB reports are littered with cases of people flying with no current type rating/licence, unlicensed instruction etc

I'm sure you taking control straight and level is pretty safe, the chances of anything going wrong are pretty slim, and you're wondering what all the fuss is about on this thread, but at the end of the day, the rules are laid down by the JAA/CAA/ANO etc, and if you try to get around them somehow, you are leaving yourself open to risk.

Yes, the whole type rating system is an expensive pain, and we all have to deal with it. Thats the licensing system we have in Europe.

But ask yourself, is your career really worth jeopardising just for saving about 1 hour in an R44 (about £500)?

[Camp Freddie]

Aeroflot Flight 593 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_593)

Now I am not saying this kind of thing is likely but it gives an indication of what can go wrong while someone is "having a go". I know it was a complex aircraft and not representative, just making a point.

I agree with hands_on123, if it feels like the "board of enquiry" would disapprove of your actions, then that gives you a test of reasonableness, but doesn't help with the legalities.

[puntosaurus]

I don't think anyone on this thread is trying to get away with anything. The original question was about how to legally renew a type rating. The gentleman has his answer, and I'm sure he'll go off and do the right thing now he knows what is required.

On the way the question of whether you can legally touch the controls on a private flight without a license or an instructor next to you came up. That's been answered too, and broadly speaking the answer is yes as long as you don't have an accident !

[hands_on123]

Well, I think you can do anything in aviation as long as you don't have an accident! (or get caught by the authorities)

Anyway, some interesting points raised in this thread.

[Border]

Sorry guys for the outburst earlier, just got it into my head someone was trying to make an example out of me, anyway, tks to everyone who has contributed to this thread, yes, a lot of questions have been asked and answered, but as for me, I'm a safe pilot, I don't take chances, I wouldn't fly an aircraft or take control of an aircraft if I didn't think it was safe to do so, I have spent a lot of hard earned money getting my PPL(H) and don't intend to lose it by doing something stupid, I intend to renew my license and the only way I will be doing it, is the proper way, no short cuts.
I couldn't log the time with an FAA instructor because at the time I wasn't rated, another question, could I have logged that time with the FAA instructor as P2 under instruction?
Tks again everyone for your input :)

[hands_on123]

Well, its a bit of a can of worms all this "can I lot this?"..

You cannot log it as P2 as it's a single pilot aircraft

Under FAA rules, if you have a PPL, and you fly with an instructor, you can BOTH log the time as P1/PIC. But..... this only applies to time logged under FAA rules. The CAA will view ANY time logged with an instructor as P/UT.

[Bronx]

I'm sure --- you're wondering what all the fuss is about on this thread

Wondering why SOME people are making such a fuss about it would be more accurate. :rolleyes:
A fuss about nothing IMHO. A friend gave him some stick time. Big deal.
I doubt if there's many pilots who haven't at some time offered other pilots some stick time even if they haven't got a current license or type rating and I doubt if many pilots have refused the offer just in case it's not legal.

[Border]

My thoughts exactly Bronx :)

[Nubian]

Well, what can I say besides of maybe pilots with too little (flying) to do and therefore too much time to read up on small petty details and post here. This is only one example, and the posters are normally the same ones... :hmm:

With one exception all helicopter I have flown, the dual-controlls are very easy to remove/install and thus the opportunity is there to either leave them in with a fellow pilot occupying the other front seat or remove them when having pax in the seat.(in most Ops-manuals a requirement, if they can be removed)
My preference, is to leave them in when I do have a pilot (rated or not, those extra hands can come in handy from time to time) in the other seat, and remove them when carrying pax.

In the big picture, it's the amount of ''stick-time'' that counts to the feel for the aircraft, not the hours in the book, allthough it's those hours you need to prove that you've done the minimums.

[EddieHeli]

Well looking at the LASORS extract quoted by Whirlygig it appears that no-one can learn to fly any more.
How can one learn without acting as a pilot and manipulating the controls etc without holding a licence. I don't recall holding a student licence at any stage during ab initio training, just a logbook (and medical before solo).