Two points of view - yours?

[LeanOfPeak]

I hate it when I can see the other person's point of view when I want desperately to disagree with them.
In this instance, here's the situation. I have an RPL (all endorsements except NAV) and am not far from the PPL test of only the weather would behave for a few days! I have done my training all with the one school at YSBK.
I was very happy with the changes Part 61 and the RPL brought over the GFPT. With that change, the time when I could legally take Mrs LoP up to see what I had been grinning about for months had been improved from "if my instructor is around to sign us out, we can look at the chicken sheds of Western Sydney" to "if an aircraft is available and weather ok, we can fly along the coast of the most beautiful city in the world". Victor 1 being easily within the 25nm radius of BK was an amazing realisation. After a dual flight with the instructor and the paperwork from Canberra, I did just that. More than once. Fantastic! No more complaints from home about the time and cost of training!

All good things must come to an end.

The school has now decided that RPL holders can only fly privately (in their aircraft of course) in the training area. The safety of familiarity (GFPT is what we are used to) seemed to have ended my fun until PPL.

I toyed with the idea of hiring from elsewhere, but figured may well have trouble convincing anyone to lend me an aircraft if even the school that had trained me from TIF to now (and tested and passed me for the RPL I might add) wouldn't do so.

I can see the school's point of view. There is a difference between "legal to fly" and "sensible to fly"... but if they don't think I am competent to exercise the privilidges of the license, then why sign me off for one?

In a few weeks I'll be back at 500ft off Manly with a fresh PPL and this won't matter to me directly, but I know those who will follow may also have the disappointment I felt at this policy, so I was interested to hear the views of those more wise and experienced than myself.

[Creampuff]

Buy your own aircraft.

Problem solved. :ok:

[LeanOfPeak]

:-D
I've stopped the grumbles about training costs. Getting the ok for ownership costs is still a work-in-progress!

(but if anyone has a fire sale on a Dakota, please PM me)

[BlatantLiar]

they don't think I am competent to exercise the privilidges of the license, then why sign me off for one?

You make a valid point. It speaks words about the quality of the training and the faith they have in their product. No need to be discrete. Name and shame.

[jas24zzk]

LOP,
in all fairness, your issue stems from Part 61.

With part 61 you got an 'upgrade' on your existing tickets.

At the point of hire now, your aircraft providers insurance comes into play...not all insurance companies have gotten their heads around the licensing changes, and that is reflecting in the policies being adapted by aircraft hire/training facilities. It also stands that some hire companies are behind the 8 ball on getting insurance sorted to cover guys like you.

Don't feel alone, and don't denigrate the company because of an admin issue.

Get your full PPL done and this won't be an issue.....by the time you do that, the rest of it will have fallen into place.

We had the same problem when RPPL and UPPL changed to GFPT and PPL.

Safe wings!
Enjoy

[thorn bird]

"not all insurance companies have gotten their heads around the licensing changes,"

Is there anyone who has their head around the licensing changes?????

Except for Looki Lefti

[Soteria]

Except for Looki Lefti
We all know what Looky has his 'head wrapped around'! Conceited old fool.

[Creampuff]

Such mature and helpful posts, thorn bird and Soteria. :rolleyes:

[5-in-50]

I think you'll find a lot of schools are doing the same thing. They've trained an army of students to meet the GFPT standards and rule structure, and now CASA have upended the rug and schools are still picking up the pieces.

Apart from insurance mentioned, there's Operations Manuals to amend, training syllabi to update and include in Ops Manuals, CASA approval for the previously mentioned, and retraining of students who have been groomed for the conditions of a GFPT.

A school cannot just say "you've only flown around the training area previously, but new rules is new rules, go nuts within 25nm". Schools are accountable for the supervision and safety of students, and training appropriate to the type of licence sought, so a blanket "not yet" in the initial stages is not that unreasonable.

Schools will catch up and RPL privileges will be recognised and permitted. Just consider yourself one of the unlucky ones who got caught up in the changeover process.

[LeanOfPeak]

No need to be discrete. Name and shame.

Nah. I can see their point of view and they have been excellent in training me. I'd recommend them highly.

[LeanOfPeak]

Schools will catch up and RPL privileges will be recognised and permitted. Just consider yourself one of the unlucky ones who got caught up in the changeover process.

Yep. I suspect you're spot on.

Did any schools in this situation stop doing RPL tests on September 1st last year and give more training before the test to allow full use of the 25nm rule?
I think I would have preferred this. I've always said, "train me well, not just in minimum time". Alternatively I may have forgone the test and just continued towards PPL.

Still (as you say), I suspect this is a temporary thing for the training industry. It is certainly temporary for me. I've calmed down now.

Thanks everyone for the feedback.

Jabba - I'm not sure where your post went; but being an engineer, I do prefer to rely on science rather than old-wives-tales and I've looked at the course you mentioned and it is on my to-do list once I feel I am ready for more advanced training (and hopefully when I have my own aircraft and can fit it with whatever sensors etc I like). :ok: