Solo flying...

[Duchess_Driver]

It used to be common practice that after LST but before licence issue schools/clubs would rent aircraft for solo hire only.

What at are the current rules, can’t find anything in Part-FCL.

[Duchess_Driver]

Thanks. As I thought, but the nice part would be a reference within Part-FCL.... (hens teeth I suspect!)

[Mustapha Cuppa]

Most examiners now issue the candidate a temporary rating form which allows them to exercise the privileges I believe, or from what I'd seen locally.
Prior to that (several years ago) club instructors would indeed sign out the 'student' for solo hire.
Are you suggesting that a temporary certificate can be issued for the initial issue of a licence?

[Jawzyjawz]

It was my understanding that the form in question is for ratings only and not for the issue of licences, but I may be mistaken.

This was released by the UK CAA a few months ago on their website:

The CAA confirms that a student pilot may be permitted to operate an aircraft as the sole occupant, provided the flight is authorised and supervised by the holder of a valid Flight Instructor Certificate, within the following criteria:

The Competent Authority and State of Licence issue will be the UK CAA.
The Flight Instructors and training organisations authorising the solo flights must be sure that the student pilot has made application to the UK CAA for the issue of the licence.
Such flights should be for the benefit of the student pilot, to keep their skills at an appropriate level for the safe operation of the aircraft and enforce the training they have received.
All authorised solo flights must be conducted in accordance with relevant legislation and the Approved Training Organisation’s (ATO) approved manuals or the Registered Training Facilities (RF) - Flying Order Book.
The student pilot can only be authorised solo in an aircraft of the same class or type that was used during the Skill Test.
Once the student pilot is in receipt of their licence, unless the licence is a Light Aircraft Pilot Licence (LAPL) or otherwise instructed by the UK CAA, they are not permitted to be authorised solo by the Flight Instructor for future flights.

All Flight Instructors are reminded that they will be authorising the solo pilot to operate flights in accordance with FCL.020 of the EASA Aircrew Regulations and if through an ATO in accordance with the ATO’s approved manuals and if through a RF in accordance with the RF’s Flying Order Book.

[Genghis the Engineer]

It used to be common practice that after LST but before licence issue schools/clubs would rent aircraft for solo hire only.

What at are the current rules, can’t find anything in Part-FCL.
My recollection from doing some of this circa 1993/3 when I passed my GFT was that this was done as supervised solo training, not solo hire - from a legalities viewpoint, if not in reality.

G

[Duchess_Driver]

And there hangs the crux of my dilemma.

Once the test is passed, the student is technically no longer a student - the course is complete - and there is no other course that they could 'enrol' into that requires solo flying.

@jawzyjawz - can you post the url for that piece of text. I'm happy with that for the purposes of what we are trying to achieve.

Thanks all.

DD

[Jawzyjawz]

Flights after completing a skill test but prior to receipt of a licence UK Civil Aviation Authority (http://www.caa.co.uk/Flights-after-completing-a-skill-test.aspx)

[Genghis the Engineer]

And there hangs the crux of my dilemma.

Once the test is passed, the student is technically no longer a student - the course is complete - and there is no other course that they could 'enrol' into that requires solo flying.



Just engaging with that bit if your response - so what? Is there a rule somewhere that says that students can only be trained against a specific qualification? I don't recall one - we train students all the time to get to know an aeroplane they can already legally fly, to sort out something they're lacking confidence in, or to develop a skill they want but isn't legally required for anything (such as, for example, a cross-channel check, short field landings, or how to use a new avionics box). So long as a flight is for a valid reason (valid in the minds of the instructor and student, basically), and it's properly briefed, debriefed, and authorised - surely it's still a valid lesson?

G

[BristolScout]

I've been flying for 52 years and I'm still learning so I guess I'm still a student in a way.

[Whopity]

What at are the current rules, can’t find anything in Part-FCL. Why do we need rules to tell us what we can do? There is nothing in the regulation to say we can't, so on that basis we can. The recent CAA blurb was to clarify incorrect information promulgated by one of their staff following a number of Industry protests.

[Duchess_Driver]

So long as a flight is for a valid reason (valid in the minds of the instructor and student, basically), and it's properly briefed, debriefed, and authorised - surely it's still a valid lesson?

I shall engage....playing devils advocate.

For what purpose would I send a 'licence holder' for training solo? Confidence building would be the only thing I could remotely consider. There would be no need for me as an FI to authorise that flight as he would be perfectly entitled to 'self authorise' either a flight school aircraft or his own. Most of the other stuff you mention falls under some form of differences/familiarisation/club rules and, as you state, are valid and recognised training with stated aims. I am either happy that he has completed the defined training/LOs to the standard within tolerances defined and then sign his logbook appropriately or it's a cuppa, rebrief and re-fly.

Sometimes we live/work in environments where just because it doesn't immediately say you can't doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't say you can't - maybe the trail through definitions of terms in other documents. In order to satisfy CMMs, HTs or accountable managers we have to search deeper and check that somebody else hasn't found some nuance of terminology somewhere that COULD be interpreted as 'you can't'. In this instance, somebody spotted something and 'fessed up' for which you rightly point out says that you can to clarify a point. I agree, and normally am in the 'permissive' legislation stable.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Personally I refuse to authorize a “Solo” flight for a person who has completed training but have not done the test. This is to encourage students to finish and not procrastinate getting the flight test done.

[Whopity]

With the CAA taking up to 7 weeks to issue a licence, (No such problem in the US or other EASA States) then there is a need for someone newly qualified to stay current so the issue has recently come up. Some bright spark from Gatwick declared that as the licence had been applied for, Bloggs was no longer a student and could not be authorised to fly solo however; there is no regulation to support such a claim. Until the licence is issued and signed by the holder they are not a licenced pilot and can be deemed a student. Similarly, a person who does not have a licence valid for a specific flight could also be deemed a student. The regulation does include a provision for an instructor to authorise student solo flight so it is ultimately at the discretion of and under the supervision of the instructor.

[FAR CU]

Sometimes we live/work in environments where just because it doesn't immediately say you can't doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't say you can't

That comes across as some sort of confusing double speak, My "old school" first instructor (59 years ago) would have said
"I want to know what it is; not what it isn't".