Ex-UAS flyers flying again decades later!

[jjoe]

Thanks to mrmum for previous invaluable advice on NPPL exemptions etc.

Wish to hear from any ex-UAS pilots who stopped flying then but took it up again years later (20+ in my case) and what their actual experience/treatment was/is in the hands of civilian flying clubs and did their log-books gain REAL exemptions from the NPPL/JAA syllabus?

What things did you remember/forget?
What stuff (if any) was RAF-specific and deemed better/worse? etc etc.

I am about to embark on private flights soon and would be grateful for any advice for my specific position (I'm sure it can't be unique!).

I passed BHT/ Nav(iii).

It would be great to hear from any ex-UAS flyers or Instructors having dealt with my kind in the real world!

Thanks in anticipation of your replies.- ps Love this website.

JJOE

[Genghis the Engineer]

Southampton UAS 1989-91.

Never really stopped flying, although I got into microlights for about 10 years after I graduated, and then went back into light aeroplane flying.

In the early days of JAR licences when I upgraded from PPL(D), which would now be NPPL(M) to JAR-FCL PPL(SEP) I was only exempted 10% of my microlight hours up to 10 hours off (so 10 hours off), but was allowed all of my Bulldog hours. Only about 17 sadly, but it still helped a lot.

I learned a lot from my UAS days, some of it about flying! I've done so much other stuff however, I'd struggle to identify where any particular bit of learning came from any more. I do remember however that when I did my complex conversion for my JAR licence, the Bulldog constant speed prop management came straight back to me and the learning process was almost instant.

I'm now a part time instructor, but the wrong sort to get you through your initial PPL. By all means PM me on any "how does that work" in GA flying questions however.

G

[silverknapper]

/is in the hands of civilian flying clubs and did their log-books gain REAL exemptions from the NPPL/JAA syllabus?

After 20+ years I sincerely hope not.

[jjoe]

Thanks Genghis; I will take you up on that PM offer.
Good to know that your previous high quality flying was not wasted.

(Silverknapper, if you are ex-UAS then a strange attitude,
If not ,your advice was not sought ,read the post before jumping in.)

Wish to hear from any ex-UAS pilots

[Genghis the Engineer]

Regarding Silvernapper's post, your existing hours will count, but you are unlikely to get any syllabus exemptions. In other words, you'll need to cover the syllabus and pass the exams and tests but there will be no minimum hours requirement for you.

Realistically, with the gap you've had, you are unlikely to get away with less than 20 hours.

G

[mad_jock]

I would check with BEagle about what counts and what doesn't. It might just be 10 hours. You will be lucky to complete the rest of the syllabus in 35 hours.

Also things are going to change in the not so distant future, they haven't got the Mil transfer stuff sorted out yet for EASA so you might have to do the full 45 hours.

As for an instructors point of view for ones that were 10 years out, I did one who was a pleasure but to be honest not that special. And another one who was really quite sharp on the hand foot stuff but kept on rabbiting on about aero's, low level recoverys and running breaks and to be honest I never really trusted him to only go and do what the brief was for the solo work.

I think the first one took 36 hours and the second took 45 due to him being u ****e at NAV and having to do extra sorties. The first one never mentioned the UAS and the second one metioned it at least 4-6 times a lesson.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Worth saying that although he's a grumpy and reactionary old sod, Mad Jock generally knows what he's talking about and also that the standards of nav required of a PPL are much higher than you ever needed on the UAS.

Also of-course, learning flying is fun in both environment, enjoy it.

G

[Jamieone]

jjoe,

Having stumbled across this thread 4 days before my first supervised flight in 10 years post-UAS I'm delighted to see someone else is about to take to the skies once again after something of a stall.

Best of luck to you and happy landings.:ok:

J

[Fake Sealion]

In 2007 I gained an NPPL(SSEA) after a break of 27 yrs flying.
As an ex Qualified Service Pilot with about 180 UAS & EFTS Chipmunk and Bulldog hours, I was regarded according to the rules as a PPL lapsed over 10 yrs.
I therefore had to do the complete dual and solo nav syllabus, as much dual and solo GH as I felt I needed, the Nav test, the GST and all of the theory exams.

Total flying time to license was about 21 hours in a PA28.

Added a microlight class rating in 2009.

[BEagle]

jjoe, all your previous flight time will count towards the NPPL. In addition, the accreditation requirements have changed since the time to which Fake Sealion refers - things are more straightforward these days

You will need to take sufficient refresher training which will also require you to cover those syllabus items which the UAS syllabus didn't include. Such as precautionary landings and operation from grass runways.

Including any previous flying, you must meet the mandatory requirements to have achieved:

Not less than 32 hrs flight time as pilot of aeroplanes. Which must include:
A minimum of 22 hrs dual, including an hour of instrument flying.
A minimum of 10 hrs solo, including 4 hrs of solo cross-country flying (that means pilot navigation, not just bumbling about on sector recces or solo GH trips outside the circuit!) including the qualifying cross-country.

You must take the Navigation Skill Test before flying the qualifying cross-country (solo flight of 185km / 100nm including 2 intermediate landings at other aerodromes).

Once all training requirements are complete, including the PPL theoretical knowledge examinations, you may take the General Skill Test. You will also need to pass the Communications (PPL) exam and RT practical in order to include RT privileges in your licence (actually you will receive a supplementary 'FRTOL' licence.)

The 32 hrs does not include the time of the NST and GST.

As has been said, the navigation element will require accurate pre-flight planning using a navigation computer - 'MDR' flight planning is inadequate. There is nothing wrong with using the Standard Closing Angle technique appropriate for the aeroplane you're using - but many of the FIs don't understand it and won't like using it. So you might be stuck with some ancient 1950s technique "Because we've always done it this way....":(

You will have plenty of airmanship as a result of your UAS days, but the civilian way is somewhat different and you will be expected to fend for yourself far more than was ever the case at a UAS. No ground crew to clean the windscreen, pull the aircraft out of the hangar, DI it and refuel it. Also remember that many training aeroplanes have seen better days, particularly regarding their avionics!

Don't forget that you won't have a dark visor, so take some sunglasses on sunny days if you don't want a bad headache later.

A NPPL/SSEA will be sufficient for flying both EASA and non-EASA aircraft until 8 Apr 2015, after which it will no longer be acceptable for EASA aircraft. If you intend to fly EASA aircraft after that date, you must have converted your NPPL to a LAPL beforehand. How this is achieved will be announced by the CAA this spring.

[jjoe]

Many thanks to all respondents for a great welcome and encouragement.

Big, big thank you to BEagle for a MASTER CLASS for someone in my position -you sure know my thoughts and fears. That's exactly what I needed to hear. (Are you available in the Midlands area for any/all of aforementioned instruction? or may I pm you for further advice?)

Thanks also to mabmac and genghis t engineer for their time and effort.

Good luck to you Jamieone/mabmac and all else who are beginning or continuing where they left off.

[mad_jock]

See Genghis I was talking ****e!! And also getting muddled with the JAR PPL.

[Genghis the Engineer]

See Genghis I was talking ****e!!

See, I told everybody you know what you're talking about :O

G

[NorthSouth]

Bit late in on this and slightly off topic but I did 23 hours on Chipmunks in a UAS and didn't realise then that it was the best training around, so left after a year. Realisation came when I went to a now long-bust civil school in SE England and found out what standards were like in civvy street - ****e, to quote madjock! Result: I gave up for 20 years.

When I re-started, the first reaction of my instructor when he asked me to do a medium level turn and I immediately craned my neck round every obstruction in the cockpit and looked up down and all around was "oh yes, you learned with the RAF".

Now that I'm a part-time instructor I find most ex-UAS pilots have a much better level of comfort with the aeroplane and situational awareness. But it doesn't exempt you from being a stupid a*se - as I demonstrate to myself on regular occasions.

Best of luck to you - I'm 100% certain that a lot of your UAS training will come back to you.

NS

[mad_jock]

I think most of the problems occur when you get some numb nuts trying to retrain away from the RAF method. They try making them do pitch for speed etc and runnning fingers down checklists it just screws with thier heads.

Although saying that the NAV issue with my student was to do with doing Standard Closing Angle technique. After 4 sorties I showed him double the error method and he was fine with that.

[BEagle]

jjoe, you're welcome. I was both a UAS student (1969-1973) and a UAS QFI (1989-92) as well as being a UK/PPL/FE; I also chair the NPPL Policy & Steering Committee, so was well aware of the differences between military and civilian practices with their associated strengths and weaknesses when I drafted the military accreditation requirements for the NPPL.

Sorry, availability and increasing costs mean that I no longer instruct.

[silverknapper]

(Silverknapper, if you are ex-UAS then a strange attitude,
If not ,your advice was not sought ,read the post before jumping in.)

Jjoe

Sadly you obviously came here looking for an answer you wanted to hear, rather than a real world view.
You came to the private flying forum, therefore one assumes you are seeking advice from anyone with experience in this aviation sector. As it happens I am ex UAS amongst other things.
My comment still stands. You clearly assume you are due some sort of shortcut because you did some flying 24 years ago. Now I'm no expert but if ( an assumption on my part, please do correct me if I'm wrong ) you last piloted an aircraft 24 years ago why are you looking for shortcuts immediately. To me that stinks of not giving the NPPL the respect it deserves. Perhaps you have been piloting in the interim period, at a commercial level perhaps? If so forgive my assumptions.
A lot has changed in aviation in almost three decades. Human factors being an excellent example. Perhaps if you revised your attitude from 'what's the minimum I can get away with' to 'i'll go in with an open mind, no preconceptions and see how I go' you may find you learn more. After all it is not an inexpensive venture.
I find after a month off flying I am a touch rusty and have to think about things which before I went on holiday were second nature. I also try to treat every day as a school day. After 24 years I dread to think what I would have forgotten. Hence you may be best served by keeping an open mind and not trying to jump the gun because you were so illustrious 24 years ago.

[BEagle]

silverknapper, many people have returned to flying after a considerable time off and have found it quite straightforward to get back up to speed.

Much of the UAS training will be in the long-term memory and will soon be reactivated.

Theoretical knowledge requirements will ensure that regulatory changes and other practices, which are different to the way they once were, are made known to the student. For an ex-UAS pilot, the exams are mandatory, but for someone who last held a PPL in, say, 1970 there is absolutely no requirement for any theoretical knowledge study except to be sufficient to answer a few oral questions during the Skill Tests and to regain the FRTOL.

jjoe, one aspect which you will find new is the utter obsession with 'Crew Resource Managament' and/or 'Threat and Error Management' which has crept its way into even light aeroplance flying in a completely disproportionate manner. We used to call it 'crew cooperation' and you would have been taught much of the subject without realising it. But the huggy-fluffies have made an absolute mountain out of a molehill and will bleat about 'CRM' or 'TEM' in circumstances which are utterly irrelevant.

In fact, it's highly likely that it's time for the huggy-fluffies and trick-cyclists to invent yet another term for what is only really basic commonsense.

[silverknapper]

Beagle

I haven't said once that it is not possible. However what I did do was go against all the UAS ass kissing and suggest that perhaps 24 years is a long time in terms of retaining a skill which requires currency as a pre requisite of safety. We're not talking 5 years, 10 years or even 15 years. 24 years.

Looking at your post you perhaps feel its a UAS vs ppl conflict. For what it's worth I don't agree that a PPL who last flew in 1988 should be able to just do a gft and go off on their own either. After all a person who holds a type rating has to do the whole course again after a set time, is it 5 years after expiry? No matter how current they are.

You obviously think that human factors is a waste of space, for lesser men perhaps. Those not worthy of the precious UAS maybe? But the introduction of it in aviation had had a beneficial effect on accident rates. Like it or not. And for me, someone taking up aviation training after 24 years away from it, and immediately looking for shortcuts has the wrong mind set to be taught anything.

A quick search shows that 24 years ago:

Mrs T as PM.
Scargill in charge of the miners.
Bae bought Rover cars.
SAS Gibraltar shootings.
A 21 yr old Gazza signs for Spurs.

In other words a long time ago.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I was in a UAS for a year or so, it accounts for approximately 1.5% of my total flying hours, but most of my "free" time during a very important and formative period of my life. So, I like the fact that I was a UAS cadet, go to occasional reunions, and still have a lot of affection for the good old Bloodknot. I still occasionally wear a pair of SUAS cufflinks to the office.

Since that time, I reckon I've had to pass 5 skill tests, an RT exam, 21 written exams, and demonstrate satisfactory flying on a selection of checkouts, BFRs, and so-on which I've lost count of but must be very well into double figures. I've been sent solo on three different aircraft classes.

Along the way I've had the occasional concession on hours (UAS flying to my JAR-PPL included), and I think skipped two written exams because of other civil licences that covered the material. But ultimately I've had to meet the flying and knowledge standards that applied at every step along the way.

Which is true of everybody, including the OP. I'm sure he was well aware of this - but you can hardly blame somebody for looking for concessions, particularly on hours (which are expensive) so long as they meet the required standards before being let off on their own.

And if en-route he can find people who share some of his background and prior experiences - which may just be enjoyable, or may actually help with the flying because they understand his starting point, why the heck not?

G

[mad_jock]

Well Genghis there are generally two ways people go about allowances.

If for example I decided I could afford to get a helicopter license. I would walk into a school have a look at it, then a trial flight and then start training. I wouldn't mention dispensations, in fact if the exams were free I would redo the ones in theory I didn't have to do. I most certainly wouldn't bank on having any reduction in flight hours. If we came to a point where they said I was ready for test but couldn't because we needed another 10 hours I would then mention dispensations.

You have another type that come in and tell the school and the instructor how many hours they will be doing and then they will do the test and see any more than the minimum as an attempt to defraud them.

Personally if I was the OP I would go find a school that had exams that were built into the "package", had a old fart old school of an instructor (maybe one of the schools that has a CFS contract) and then learn there. And then take it from there if they get a reduction in hours.

If you get a good instructor and you enjoy learning from them, additional hours won't be an issue because you will feel you are getting value for money. If you have a clueless numb nut of an instructor the whole thing won't be enjoyable and you will be starting off pissed off with the whole civi flying thing before you have even started.

When I am instructing I really don't care what the background of the student is or for that matter what method they use (you will also find that there are many many different ways to kill a cat with the exercises and each civi instructor has thier favorite method).

All I care about is that a safe competent pilot is handed over to an examinor to confirm I have done my job properly.

Actually isn't that TMG lot in the midlands that does the very cheap PPL by doing TMG NPPL then upgrading it to SEP? That might be worth looking into because then it gives you an additional class to go and play in which is significantly cheaper than SEP rates. Apart from which gliding is bloody good fun and is someways is more of an art than powered.

[mad_jock]

PFT: The MotorGlider Club | Pilot flight training and lessons (http://www.motorgliderclub.co.uk/index.html)

Found it. Don't know how close they are to you.

[BEagle]

You obviously think that human factors is a waste of space, for lesser men perhaps. Those not worthy of the precious UAS maybe? But the introduction of it in aviation had had a beneficial effect on accident rates. Like it or not. And for me, someone taking up aviation training after 24 years away from it, and immediately looking for shortcuts has the wrong mind set to be taught anything.

Perhaps you should read my post more carefully. I said that the disproportionate influence of 'CRM' and 'TRM' has reached into light aeroplane flying. Whereas all that's really needed is some commonsense and airmanship.