PDA

View Full Version : Air experience vs Trial lesson


pipertommy
17th Jan 2016, 15:58
I'm uncertain of this "air experience" terminology ? Is it just simple another way of saying trial lesson ???
Can an instructor for an ATO for ppl / lapl treat these air experience voucher holder's as simply trial lessons ??
I believe this maybe a silly question but its new to me hearing flights being sold as air experience......
Thanks. PT

TheOddOne
17th Jan 2016, 16:30
Juliet:
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."
Romeo and Juliet (II, ii, 1-2)

I think the name is more about how you market the thing rather than there being a material difference. Some here will tell you that a Trail Lesson is ex. 4.1 whereas an Air Experience is ex. 3. I don't think it matters to us, maybe Trail Lesson to some people might appear to have something of a test or grading about it; not what they want from a gift! I think the instructors I've worked with and the schools I've worked at all treat it as an opportunity to get the participant back to do some more flying. Clearly, someone who is having an 80th birthday treat probably isn't going to (though you never know!) The flight I did today at first didn't look like a repeater but when we got back to the office he asked about making more bookings, so always try and convert. I've only very rarely had someone not take up the offer of trying out the controls (which of course they're not obliged to do, then it really is ex. 3, not 4.1!)
I think the important thing is NOT to market the flights as a 'Scenic Flight' or a 'Joy Ride'. When we get people ring up for a scenic flight, we say that it'll be an air experience flight over some of the most spectacular scenery in the UK (North coast of Cornwall). We usually get a sale.

TOO

Mustapha Cuppa
17th Jan 2016, 16:43
You may wish to read this (http://www.caa.co.uk/General-aviation/Aircraft-ownership-and-maintenance/Guidance-on-cost-sharing-and-introductory-flights/) and this (http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/InformationNotice2015029.pdf).

pipertommy
17th Jan 2016, 16:56
Thanks, so a ppl can take these air experience flights for an ATO, obviously receiving no payment.
In a minority basis.
Madness !!!

Whopity
17th Jan 2016, 18:42
Thanks, so a ppl can take these air experience flights for an ATO,No, air experience flight is Exercise 3 and requires a FI however; an "Introductory Flight" as defined in the IN may be flown by a PPL holder. The sale of vouchers generates profit outside the organisation and is therefore not permitted.
9.7 Which organisations can conduct the flight?
In addition to Approved Training Organisations the regulation allows 'organisations created with the aim of promoting aerial sport or leisure aviation' to conduct introductory flights on the condition that 'the aircraft is operated on the basis of ownership or dry lease, that the flight does not generate profits outside of the organisation and that whenever non-members of the organisation are involved, such flights represent only a marginal activity of the organisation. Therefore, provided it can meet the conditions described, any organisation set up with these aims may conduct the flight, including an Registered Training Facility.

BigEndBob
17th Jan 2016, 20:32
I don't think this effects the average flying school trying to cover operating costs and wages doing Trial flights/lessons or air experience flights.

I can see how an organisation that might own say a Tiger Moth, balloon or glider, who's normal activity does not include commercial flight training, with a volunteer pilot might give an introductory flight to someone that pays to cover costs.

But what is marginal activity, 1 in 10, 1 in 50 or 100 flights?

Wasn't all this bought about by the French in EASA land?

Pull what
19th Jan 2016, 23:41
Introductory flights are a new EASA provision designed to allow people to be taken on air experience tours in light aircraft


Of course you can call this an air experience flight, you can call it anything you like! What it is, is air experience!

What it isnt is a stepping stone from Ex 1-3 to Exercise 4 because its not an air exercise being taught by a qualified flying instructor. Thats the theory of course, many instructors have little idea of how to teach Exercise 1 -3, especialy those that call it a Trial Flying Lesson!

You dont need to teach someone to recognise if they are going to like flying, they do that by themselves. You do need to teach someone, the datum attiude, the three primary controls and there movement and a simple introduction to the cockpit together with a safety briefing. Oh and if your Beagle you may need to tell them how to use the speaking tube too!

Whopity
20th Jan 2016, 08:20
You do need to teach someone, the datum attiude, the three primary controls and there movement and a simple introduction to the cockpit together with a safety briefing.But not on an "Introductory Flight" with a pilot who knows nothing about instructiion and who sits in the right hand seat because it makes him look like an insteructor!

172510
20th Jan 2016, 09:15
the regulation allows 'organisations created with the aim of promoting aerial sport or leisure aviation' to conduct introductory flights on the condition that 'the aircraft is operated on the basis of ownership or dry lease, that the flight does not generate profits outside of the organisation and that whenever non-members of the organisation are involved, such flights represent only a marginal activity of the organisation.This is exactly what has been called for ages BaptÍme de l'air in France, and I suppose that it has been added to the regulation to permit French aero-clubs (which are not for profit organisations in France) to continue to sell BaptÍmes de l'air to visitors. In France the local regulation requires that the pilot has a recent medical, a significant recent experience, and at least 200 hours of total experience. This is usually a good way to cover the cost of a 4 seat tourer.

mykul10
21st Jan 2016, 09:21
Definitions of marginal activity are given here

http://easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/Annex%20to%20ED%20Decision%202014-019-R%20-%20%20CR%20%28AMC-GM%29.pdf

...if you can get beyond the "Sir Humphrey Waffle"!

Whopity
1st Feb 2016, 08:15
It would seem that this new privilege is already being abused and from what I have heard, the CAA are really not bothered. The first accident will prove interesting and the insurers will ultimately take over the regulation.

ShyTorque
1st Feb 2016, 08:40
Maybe the CAA will be putting some consideration into this accident:

http://www.pprune.org/accidents-close-calls/564562-tiger-moth-netherthorpe-any-comments.html

oneagleswings
9th Oct 2016, 17:51
Up our way the club does introductory flights only. These are done by the ppl holders (free flying with a small donation given) ! Although the caa legislation says the experiencee as it were cannot touch the controls etc, they are allowed.

The caa are aware this is going on and choose to ignore it. The instructors are mighty peeved as there isn't many students. All will be well till the first incident !

Whopity
10th Oct 2016, 20:09
How blatant can it get?
https://en.wingly.io/?gclid=CIj8pouB0c8CFQIW0wodSMEIlw

oneagleswings
10th Oct 2016, 21:08
I'd love to know is the insurance people happy with the arrangement.. the prices for those that choose to fly without taking the public up will only increase to accommodate the free ppl flying...

pilotflyingrocks
25th Apr 2017, 13:03
Any profit made from the flights are kept within the organisation

So how does this apply to experiences sold through Groupon, Virgin experiences etc., as surely these companies are profiting also?

pilotflyingrocks
25th Apr 2017, 13:05
An organisation intending to offer such flights as regular business activity is not considered to meet the condition of marginal activity.

Also, flights organised with the sole intent to generate income for the organisation, are not considered to be a marginal activity.

I guess this rules it out anyway.

BillieBob
25th Apr 2017, 14:12
So how does this apply to experiences sold through Groupon, Virgin experiences etc.If they are operated as 'introductory flights' under NCO.GEN.103, they are illegal and, probably, uninsured.

Homsap
29th Apr 2017, 14:57
Pipertommy... You raised a good question. Historically, people could book a trial flight which is exercise 3, but if it was in four seater such as a PA28 or C172, bring two friends or relatives.

Infact a number of years ago I can think a number of fliying clubs who were not only encouraging passengers on trial flying lessons or air experience flights, some were even offering sightseeing flights, as an air experience flights. I raised this issue with the CAA, as I considered these flights required an AOC, of course the CAA choose to sit on the fence.

i see no reasons why passengers should be on a trial flying lesson, not lease it is a real distraction between the instructor and student, for example your teaching effects to a student with his or her children vomiting in the back, I say that because effect of controls (yaw) are ideal for inducing sickness in pax.

I am unclear what the current situation is with EASA, and pax on training flights, but I would not do it anymore.

FlyingFiddler
30th Apr 2017, 09:53
Infact a number of years ago I can think a number of fliying clubs who were not only encouraging passengers on trial flying lessons or air experience flights, some were even offering sightseeing flights, as an air experience flights. I raised this issue with the CAA, as I considered these flights required an AOC, of course the CAA choose to sit on the fence.


The CAA are useless, I work for a company that does have an AOC for scenic flights but we competing against companies that do them as Introductory Air Experience flights. We pay thousands just in fees to the CAA to just have that piece of paper, costs us a lot to train our staff as well. Unfair competition if the others guys don't have to do any of it.

But then again someone at the CAA told me that they are also aware that companies are offering PPL/LAPL training without approval, but the CAA don't care and are not going to do anything to stop it..

Whopity
30th Apr 2017, 18:59
I am unclear what the current situation is with EASA, and pax on training flightsThe only significant difference is in Part NCONCO.OP.180 Simulated situations in flight
(a) The pilot-in-command shall, when carrying passengers or cargo, not simulate:
(1) situations that require the application of abnormal or emergency procedures; or
(2) flight in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC).
(b) Notwithstanding (a), when training flights are conducted by an approved training organisation, such situations may be simulated with student pilots on-board.

Pittsextra
30th Apr 2017, 19:14
Quote:
Any profit made from the flights are kept within the organisation
So how does this apply to experiences sold through Groupon, Virgin experiences etc., as surely these companies are profiting also?


So how does this apply to experiences sold through Groupon, Virgin experiences etc.
If they are operated as 'introductory flights' under NCO.GEN.103, they are illegal and, probably, uninsured.

aren't we confusing introductory flights with an FI v PPL here?

Whopity
30th Apr 2017, 22:31
aren't we confusing introductory flights with an FI v PPL here?
There are 3 separate areas:
1. Flying Lessons flown by a FI of which Ex3 is Air Experience
2. Introductory Flights conducted in accordance with NCO.GEN.103 which includes specific requirements of the operator and;
3. Cost sharing which allows licence holders to share costs with passengers

All quite different, but confused by the CAA issuing an IN that groups Introductory Flights and Cost Sharing together. Some organisations have incorrectly assumed that Introductory Flights and "Trial Lessons" are the same thing.

With no enforcement action, nothing will happen until the first accident occurs and the CAA is found negligent again.

Homsap
1st May 2017, 16:09
Or more likely the pilot will get blamed, because as we know the CAA can never be wrong!

Whopity
1st May 2017, 16:47
because as we know the CAA can never be wrong! Try reading the Shoreham report!