Multi engine instructor currency
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Multi engine instructor currency
Now that JAR as been running for a couple of years how many multi instructors are there that are current.
JAR agreed that a multi candidate must have 70 hours P1 experience on any aircraft before test on multi.
One assumes this was to increase the safety record.
All that has happened is that some very capable new PPl's have been deprieved of the benefits of multi time, new knowledge, skill and judgement.
Instructors skill base has been diminished so making the more experienced more dangerous and clubs with twins sitting around eating into profits, if any.
At least the safety stats will improve!
JAR agreed that a multi candidate must have 70 hours P1 experience on any aircraft before test on multi.
One assumes this was to increase the safety record.
All that has happened is that some very capable new PPl's have been deprieved of the benefits of multi time, new knowledge, skill and judgement.
Instructors skill base has been diminished so making the more experienced more dangerous and clubs with twins sitting around eating into profits, if any.
At least the safety stats will improve!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming that the PPL gets their licence with exactly 45 hours total time and only require the minimum 6 hours training before completing the MEP Skill Test which will probably take 1 hour, there is only 18 hours of experience required to make up the minimum 70 hous.
Personally, I believe that most training organisations today are turning out PPLs who are just able to keep up with the PA28 or C150 operation.
The fact that most insurance companies require pilots flying something like an Arrow to have a minimum of 100 hours or in some cases 100 hours P1, shows that the JAR requirement for the issue of a MEP class rating is not onerous.
If we are worried about new PPLs not having something to acheive after gaining the licence....how about;
Taking their friends and family flying............the PPL course does not deal with taking passengers flying and advice on this should be included within the course; and
Having become proficient flying slow small single engine aircraft, upgrade to a 4 seater that will permit more enjoyable touring including European destinations (after a cross channel course); and
Then after having gained relevant experience, move onto the more complex class of aircraft.
IMHO, while a newby PPL will simply cause havock by blasting into the circuit at 140Kt+ and doing a small crosscountry as a circuit and laways be 5 minutes behind the aircraft when flying something like a PA34, this is indeed a pain in the ass.............However, when they have an engine failure on departure at 100ft at max weight......do they have the skill and experience at 51 hours or 61 hours or even 71 hours to deal with the situation in the required manner?
I am sure it isn't but this sounds like another UK training organisation finding that profits are dropping and the JARs must be to blame
Regards,
DFC
Personally, I believe that most training organisations today are turning out PPLs who are just able to keep up with the PA28 or C150 operation.
The fact that most insurance companies require pilots flying something like an Arrow to have a minimum of 100 hours or in some cases 100 hours P1, shows that the JAR requirement for the issue of a MEP class rating is not onerous.
If we are worried about new PPLs not having something to acheive after gaining the licence....how about;
Taking their friends and family flying............the PPL course does not deal with taking passengers flying and advice on this should be included within the course; and
Having become proficient flying slow small single engine aircraft, upgrade to a 4 seater that will permit more enjoyable touring including European destinations (after a cross channel course); and
Then after having gained relevant experience, move onto the more complex class of aircraft.
IMHO, while a newby PPL will simply cause havock by blasting into the circuit at 140Kt+ and doing a small crosscountry as a circuit and laways be 5 minutes behind the aircraft when flying something like a PA34, this is indeed a pain in the ass.............However, when they have an engine failure on departure at 100ft at max weight......do they have the skill and experience at 51 hours or 61 hours or even 71 hours to deal with the situation in the required manner?
I am sure it isn't but this sounds like another UK training organisation finding that profits are dropping and the JARs must be to blame
Regards,
DFC
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm no longer associated with a flying club having left the industry for a break. Back then i believe that it was 70 hours P1 before the test could be taken. Perhaps i'm lucky but my last two multi students all moved on to own cabin class twins and have been flying safely for 2-3 years and another into islanders para dropping.
I'm not suggesting that a 45 hour ppl should immediatly be wizzing around the sky at 160kts, but for those who can hack it, benefit from the extra discipline of flying a twin and are still in learning mode.
When the chips are down a certain amount of luck is envolved anyway ( why so many twins are Group E if that still exists).
At least a newly qualified pilot "might" be up to speed.
Unfortunately by the time some pilots get the required experience to go on to twins they may have lost interest in flying having done the things you suggest.
I'm not suggesting that a 45 hour ppl should immediatly be wizzing around the sky at 160kts, but for those who can hack it, benefit from the extra discipline of flying a twin and are still in learning mode.
When the chips are down a certain amount of luck is envolved anyway ( why so many twins are Group E if that still exists).
At least a newly qualified pilot "might" be up to speed.
Unfortunately by the time some pilots get the required experience to go on to twins they may have lost interest in flying having done the things you suggest.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite correct GT. My mistake.
So the guy has 20 hours P1 when they get their PPL thus 50 hours to go before they get their MEP. Not too onerous a requirement in my opinion.
BigendBob,
If pilot have given up flying because they have managed to complete all there is to do before reaching 70 hours P1 then I think that their outlook on flying shows little imagination.
They do of course have the option to complete the PPL course on a twin engine aircraft from the very start if they are that determined to fly a twin...........anyone fancy paying current UK twin rates for basic PPL training?
I still think that this is simply a case of looking for another aource of income for a company i.e. "lets open a new market for twin ratings.....encourage newby PPLs to go straight for it before they get a chance to settle into the usual C170 or Arrow touring mode"....Ahh but JAR-FCL blocks this money making potential so JAR-FCL must be wrong and must be changed!!
Cynical I know but is it that far from the truth..........after all, JAR-FCL was sooooo wrong we needed the NPPL.......and that has been soooooo good that everyone wants one......not likely.........we now have schools complaining that the NPPL is nt enough to provide customers
There a few organisations who would just love to advertise as follows:
Fly here.......£100 per hour for licence holders.......£500 per hour for non licence holders plus insurance waiver.
Sounds funny.....but I bet you would get a few takers!
Regards,
DFC
So the guy has 20 hours P1 when they get their PPL thus 50 hours to go before they get their MEP. Not too onerous a requirement in my opinion.
BigendBob,
If pilot have given up flying because they have managed to complete all there is to do before reaching 70 hours P1 then I think that their outlook on flying shows little imagination.
They do of course have the option to complete the PPL course on a twin engine aircraft from the very start if they are that determined to fly a twin...........anyone fancy paying current UK twin rates for basic PPL training?
I still think that this is simply a case of looking for another aource of income for a company i.e. "lets open a new market for twin ratings.....encourage newby PPLs to go straight for it before they get a chance to settle into the usual C170 or Arrow touring mode"....Ahh but JAR-FCL blocks this money making potential so JAR-FCL must be wrong and must be changed!!
Cynical I know but is it that far from the truth..........after all, JAR-FCL was sooooo wrong we needed the NPPL.......and that has been soooooo good that everyone wants one......not likely.........we now have schools complaining that the NPPL is nt enough to provide customers
There a few organisations who would just love to advertise as follows:
Fly here.......£100 per hour for licence holders.......£500 per hour for non licence holders plus insurance waiver.
Sounds funny.....but I bet you would get a few takers!
Regards,
DFC
Beacon Outbound
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: "Home is were the answer machine is"
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is actually required is 70 hours P.1 in total before a MEP class rating can be applied for. The test can be taken before that.
There is however nothing in the rules to stop a suitably qualified instructor to authorise a solo flight in a MEP aircraft. In theory you can still do your PPL on a twin, do your first solo on a twin, and get a PPL issued without ever flying a single. Problem would be that you need to do 70 hours P.1 in the twin, authorised by an instructor. It's clear that this is not the intention of those who wrote the rules (they want people to work their way up the SE ladder), but it is possible.
Regards
Gerard
There is however nothing in the rules to stop a suitably qualified instructor to authorise a solo flight in a MEP aircraft. In theory you can still do your PPL on a twin, do your first solo on a twin, and get a PPL issued without ever flying a single. Problem would be that you need to do 70 hours P.1 in the twin, authorised by an instructor. It's clear that this is not the intention of those who wrote the rules (they want people to work their way up the SE ladder), but it is possible.
Regards
Gerard
