Aircraft ownership and flight instruction

[AppleMacster]

A friend and myself are thinking of buying a C152. I am about half way through my PPL and my friend has around 100 hours PPL. Does anyone know whether I could be instructed on my own aircraft, or does any instruction have to come under the auspice of a registered FTO? I It would be my intention to pay my instructor on a freelance basis.

[A and C]

Yes you can be instructed on your own aircarft .

If it is on a private C of A the last mantenance check has to have been done by a licenced engineer and not one of the owners ( you can do your own 50hr/6 month checks on a private C of A )

The instructor and you have to be members of the same flying club.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I think that you would have to be named as the sole owner if it's on a private CofA.

Which basically means construct the paperwork so that it appears you own the aircraft and are allowing your friend to use it, rather than that you are joint owners. You can always adjust for honesty once you are licensed.

G

[A and C]

I beg to differ you can take instruction if you are a part owner.

I think the limit is 20 owners per aircraft.

[Barney_Gumble]

I have had lessons and am planning to complete a new rating on my group owned C172. CAA has the names of all owners, but I am not the sole owner.

I would be interested to know if there is any reason why this is not in order.

Do your have any references from CAA/ANO etc that you could point me towards Genghis?

[CessnaEng]

AIC 1/2002 (White 49)

[Genghis the Engineer]

Depends upon category of CofA.

Any aircraft, whether on CofA or permit can be owned up to 20 ways.

However, unless it's on a public transport CofA (or a microlight with a type-approved permit), you need to be sole owner to be given initial instruction for a license or rating. If you are sole owner then it doesn't matter what sort of permit or CofA it's got.

Which is all in the AIC mentioned by CessnaEng, which if you're registered with AIS is at http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/aic/4W049.PDF

Also remember that you need the aircraft based at a licensed airfield. So, if for-example you are a member of one of the many well run syndicates at Popham, you'd have to relocate to, say, Thruxton, do the instruction from there, then relocate the aircraft back home - even if it has got a public CofA.

G

N.B. There is a clause you can use, which is that the instructor must be doing it entirely freely and out of the goodness of their heart without receiving any payment whatsoever. I've yet to persuade any instructor to do this for me, but have seen it done - the pilot in question only pointed out after his logbook was signed that he couldn't legally pay for the instruction. I think you'll probably only get away with that approach once per instructor unless you know them extremely well.

[rustle]

N.B. There is a clause you can use, which is that the instructor must be doing it entirely freely and out of the goodness of their heart without receiving any payment whatsoever.

The freelance instructor AppleMacster mentioned may charge apparently extortionate ground school fees... ;)

[Barney_Gumble]

I heard today that the CAA changed the rules concerning group ownership and training about 18 months ago and you are allowed to use a joint owned a/c for training purposes. I haven't got the details yet to support this but I'll post when I find out if there is any helpful truth.

Regards

Barney

[StrateandLevel]

"It would be my intention to pay my instructor on a freelance basis."

To do this the instructor would have to be registered as a Registered Facility and would have to nominate your aircraft, the airfield, and provide details of any other instructors used.

"The instructor and you have to be members of the same flying club."

This is now effectively the "Registered Facility".

[ACX]

Firstly, In order to stop all the confusion about aircraft C of A, place the aircraft on a Transport Category C of A. This should be a fairly easy process for a C152, providing that the engine has not reached its life. If you are going to leave the aircraft on a private C of A, there is an AIC on the subject, but i can not remember exactly what it says. Best to read it your self

Secondly, the instructor would need to be registered as a JAR training organisation and have agreement to operate under another organisation.

AC&X

[Barney_Gumble]

Re my last post, cancel it :D

I have been given "Duff" gen and have checked it out now. The AIC is very clear and I think I will be changing the C of A category as suggested.

I was under the impression this was very expensive though?

Some more digging required.....

Regards

Barney

[Genghis the Engineer]

The cost is somewhat variable depending upon the specific history of the aeroplane.

But, I think you can take it as a near certainty that it'll cost more than simply paying to learn on a school aeroplane would, and then flying your share on a private CofA thereafter.

G

[rustle]

The training restriction only applies to "training for the initial issue of a licence or rating" - so the biennial flight with instructor or MEP, IMC and/or IR refreshers and renewals are okay on Private.

Isn't it the additional checks on Public that make the costs go up unless you fly enough hours that a 50 hour check falls due every 62 days (or whatever the time-limited checks are).

[Genghis the Engineer]

There are also restrictions on lifing of parts, sourcing of some non-critical bits, etc. So, in taking an aircraft that's been private for some time to public, you may find yourself replacing (at considerable expense) quite a lot of apparently perfectly serviceable aircraft parts.

Also a lot of minor tasks that on private could be signed for by the owner now can't, so the entire private-cat service history will need reviewing and any number of minor oddments may need inspecting, all obviously requiring expenditure on wages if nothing else.

Not really my area of Engineering, so by all means anybody better qualified correct me.

G

[Keef]

There is an awful lot of misinformation being put about on this topic, isn't there!

For instruction towards the grant of a licence or a rating, you need a Public Transport C of A unless you are the sole owner of the aircraft (in which case Private Cat will do, but with some stipulations about maintenance). You need a licenced airfield.

Unless the instructor is not paid for the instruction. Paying an exhorbitant groundschool fee to him in lieu of airborne instruction time might be misunderstood by the CAA.

Once you have a licence, the various "renewal" checkrides can be in a group-owned private cat aircraft.

It's all in the AIC. I wrote to the CAA for clarification for our group, so we aren't in any doubt. We all do our renewal flights (and type signoff) in the group aircraft, and hire club ones for the issue of ratings.

[LowNSlow]

A and C, as Genghis says, putting your C152 on a Public C of A could be difficult. I did it with an Aerobat and all it cost me was the price of fitting a starter motor warning light plus a fee to the CAA. This was done during an Annual inspection to make it all easier. If you get an engineer to look at the logbooks and the aircraft (which is advisable before buying an aircraft anyway :D) he should be abnle to assess what remedial work is necessary to make the change from Private to Public Cat.

To get around the instructor problem you could rent the aircraft to your local friendly flying school and then pay the instructor through them whilst using your own aircraft. In the agreement you make with the school you can then specify what do's and dont's will apply to the rental of the aircraft to others. You might even make some money out of it :ok:

[Barney_Gumble]

Again, the world of aviation seems over complicated. I wonder why it is deemed "safe" for the renewal to be completed in an a/c in the Private category but NOT the initial issue?

Is the a/c subjected to different stresses and stains during initial issue?

Have I missed the point completely, quite possible!

What is the difference? It seems that exemption under certain circumstances leads to strange differences like the one above.

Is the real issue that of protection of professional livelihoods be that Engineer or Instructor (I can understand this as I am a CEng albeit in a different industry), because I cannot see a difference in any safety issues between an initial rating and a renewal when just focusing on the maintenance of the aircraft.

Please can someone explain this if I have missed the point.


Edited because I had consumed too much "Duff" and got it back-to-front.

[rustle]

I wonder why it is deemed "safe" for the initial issue to be completed in the Transport category but NOT the renewal?

Wrong way around, Garney_Bumble ;)

You cannot do initial training (etc) in PRIVATE CofA aircraft (unless you own 100% of it) but you can do renewals etc...

You can do ALL (initial and renewals) in a PUBLIC Transport CofA, which is what flying school aircraft are kept on.

Just like what Keef said.

[Keef]

Barney - you're looking for logic for one particular set of parameters.

The CAA had to draw the line somewhere, to define what could and could not be used for training. (Their lawyers seem to have had quite a hand in that, based on the letter we got). The line is where it is because it has to be somewhere, and that's where the bloke in charge decided to put it.

You could make an equally valid case for a range of places to draw the line. It just isn't our call...

[Barney_Gumble]

Yes, I guessed it might be arbitrary to a degree, whichever way round it is ;)

I am looking at the little picture for logic when it probably exists in the big picture instead.

Let's take the conversation on a bit.....

Hypothetically speaking if a pilot were to complete a variation to his PPL (i.e. the removal of the night restriction) which was completed by an fully qualified instructor using an a/c which was operated in the private category, where does that leave his rating/variation and his licence......legal/illegal. Should he fly, should he not, should he complete the five hours again?

If he does fly then I wonder what would happen if there was, God & Keef forbid, an incident.

Insurance valid :hmm: not sure....he might find himself in one of my courts :(

Any views?

Barney

[Genghis the Engineer]

Lets say you go and hire a C150 from your local flying club as a licensed pilot; so far as the CAA is concerned this is a private flight from an operational viewpoint, but a public transport flight from an airworthiness viewpoint. Hence you only need a PPL to hire an aeroplane, but it still needs a PT CofA.

Where instruction is concerned, there is a similar division. The flight is considered public transport from an airworthiness viewpoint (the AIC exempts you from this rule, but doesn't actually change it where sole-owner training is concerned) and also from an operational viewpoint, which is why the instructor needs a commercial license.

So from the operational viewpoint, so long as the instructor was properly licensed and you used a licensed airfield, the flight would be operationally legitimate and you'd almost certainly get your license / rating from CAA Personnel Licensing. But from an airworthiness viewpoint the flight would be illegal because it was conducted without holding the relevant CofA on the aeroplane. So, whilst one bit of the CAA (PLD) would probably give you your license, another bit (aircraft certification and/or legal and enforcement) would be prosecuting your instructor for breaching the ANO with respect to the airworthiness regulations.

G

[AppleMacster]

Thanks to everyone for replying with their views and thoughts on this subject. As I suspected, it's by no means straightforward. :uhoh: I'll read up some more on the subject, particuarly any AICs.

I think that waiting until I've got my PPL would make things easier; I'm going to start flying everyday to get it done before my next contract (I'm a freelancer)!

[Barney_Gumble]

Thanks AppleMacster,

Good thread and prompted some interesting info.

Good luck with your PPL.

Andy

[IO540-C4D5D]

Barney_Gumble

There are several thousand employees at the CAA and they have to paid somehow. Then you have all the licensed engineers, doctors, parts distributors who charge hundreds or thousands of pounds markup for rubber-stamping a certificate, you name it, who depend on the "system" for their living too. This is why there are various restrictions many of which appear to be bizzare :O Otherwise, every plane flying in the UK would be perfectly legally registered in Liberia where the maintenance regime and license / medical issues are ... shall we say ... more "liberal" :)

I am pretty damn sure that plenty of people have been trained over the past years in Private CofA planes. I have no idea but I don't suppose it would invalidate their logged hours so long as the student participated in good faith - let's face it, how many students know this stuff? It's only when you become an owner that you have to know it; even many syndicate members don't know it. I was offered IMC Rating training in a Private CofA plane once, by a very experienced instructor who most definitely "knew" (I discussed it with him at length).

You've got to be very careful what you buy (whole or share) if you plan to do additional training. It's not only the CofA type but also the equipment fitted, for example if an ADF does not work then you might just about be able to legally train (in VMC with an instructor) but you won't be able to do many/most IAPs. And a group keen to get rid of a troublesome member isn't going to explain this to you!

[Flyin'Dutch']

Hi AMS

I am not aware of any changes to the rules as stated here by others.

See your brave plan here but may be I can inject a little reality check in here.

If you are as you state half way through your PPL you will only have about 23 hours to go or £2300 readies.

To get a C152 onto the Public Transport C of A you will need to fork out dosh (fee for this from the CAA is £400) Dont know the story behind your intended mount but someone must have deemed it more costeffective to let it go from PT to Pvt for a reason (engine hours?)

If we assume that you need another 23 hours to finish your PPL you will have to fork out the following:

Fuel 23hours @ 20 l @ £1 = £460
Engine fund 23 hrs @ £5 = £115
Insurance (higher as for abinitio training lets guestimate 2500 per annum and 250 hours per year so £10 per hour) = £230
Instructor (you will do well to get one freelance for less than £15/h) = £345
Landing fees for circuits and bumps £100
Parking for say 2 months/2 (as your mate will pay half) £100
Cost for annual (again estimate 250 hours per year and £1500 annual) approx £150

So that comes to £1900 before any rectifying work is done on the 152 to get it to PT spec.

If you intend to keep the 152 to let it out to other folks you have no option and going this route is the way forward. If you just want it as a mount for you and your mate Iwould suggest finish off what you are doing at the moment and then take the jump.

What you also may want to consider is waiting to get the PPL and do some flying on different machines before committing some money to this particular machine as you may well find that with another 50 hours under the belt you want to stretch your horizons beyound the 152.

Just my thoughts.

FD

Hi IO540 etc,

I think that it is very easy for the CAA to check against the register the registrations used for your training.

It would be very silly to train not according to the rules set up by 'the system' and after presenting all your (still expensive) acquired logged hours be told that you have to do it again.

Of course there is very little stopping people flaunting 'the rules' after all aerodynamics are not adversely effected by the absence of medical/annual/licence.

FD

[Barney_Gumble]

IO540-C4D5D

I can understand well the ecomonics of the aviation business. In some ways it is the same as the industry I am in. I am not saying it is wrong, just trying to get to the detail i.e. is this a safety issue or not. In this case, for the specific example discussed, I don't believe it is a safety issue.

There many ways that I can see to deal with it. Change the category of aircraft, find an instructor who works for "Free", find an instructor who will charge huge fees for ground school but throw in the flying instruction for free. Al these and others must have been used before I am sure.

I will use the group owned aircraft for my training, BUT I will stay on the right side of the law, I haven't got much choice as I don't want to end up in the dock in my own court ;)

Andy

[Mike_flyby]

Had you thought about a permit aircraft?
Try this -

http://www.pfa.org.uk/pdf_docs/engineering/information_leaflets/learnto_fly_inpfa_aircraft.pdf