BIENNIAL 'TRAINING FLIGHT'
Thread Starter
BIENNIAL 'TRAINING FLIGHT'
Currently it is unacceptable for the 1 hour training flight (required as one element of the 'revalidation by experience' option for JAR/FCL) to be split into 2 or more flights adding up to 1 hour.
But wouldn't it be reasonable to allow such a flight to count if it took the form of no more than 2 consecutive flights with the same FI/CRI adding up to not less than 1 hour? Surely there's nothing wrong with doing half of it from A to B, landing for a bacon buttie and a chat, then doing the other half back from B to A? I've just had to fly an hour with a pilot who'd flown far more than 12 hours in the last year, but had done his 'biennial training' as a 40 min training flight with another FI culminating in a landing at a different aerodrome where they'd landed, had a cuppa whilst they'd been briefed on local short-field and noise abatement requirements, then did a short field departure before completing the other 20 min on the way home. I reckon that's pretty sound 'training' - but it doesn't meet the current requirements. Fortunately he was entirely happy to do another training trip - just the very day before his SEP Class rating would otherwise have expired.
Does anyone else have any other comments on the conduct of the 'biennial training flight'?
But wouldn't it be reasonable to allow such a flight to count if it took the form of no more than 2 consecutive flights with the same FI/CRI adding up to not less than 1 hour? Surely there's nothing wrong with doing half of it from A to B, landing for a bacon buttie and a chat, then doing the other half back from B to A? I've just had to fly an hour with a pilot who'd flown far more than 12 hours in the last year, but had done his 'biennial training' as a 40 min training flight with another FI culminating in a landing at a different aerodrome where they'd landed, had a cuppa whilst they'd been briefed on local short-field and noise abatement requirements, then did a short field departure before completing the other 20 min on the way home. I reckon that's pretty sound 'training' - but it doesn't meet the current requirements. Fortunately he was entirely happy to do another training trip - just the very day before his SEP Class rating would otherwise have expired.
Does anyone else have any other comments on the conduct of the 'biennial training flight'?
Log it as a single event eg EGxx - EGyy - EGzz & use the total time from departure to final arrival.
It's the same a/c, same crew etc. In Oz that may be counted as a single loggable event.
I've always logged this way & my log books have survived Oz, USA & UK CAA surveilance without any untoward comments.
It's the same a/c, same crew etc. In Oz that may be counted as a single loggable event.
I've always logged this way & my log books have survived Oz, USA & UK CAA surveilance without any untoward comments.
Guest
Posts: n/a
BEagle,
I fully agree with your comments about allowing the biennial flight to be flown as two flights however at present we are stuck with the requirement for it to be a single flight.
Since you are an FE(PPL) another solution would be to conduct an LPC rather than a "training flight", since with a competent pilot the LPC can be completed in well under an hour.
I fully agree with your comments about allowing the biennial flight to be flown as two flights however at present we are stuck with the requirement for it to be a single flight.
Since you are an FE(PPL) another solution would be to conduct an LPC rather than a "training flight", since with a competent pilot the LPC can be completed in well under an hour.
Its utter madness. My tactic would be to log the first 40mins as an LPC and argue my case at the subsequent board of enquiry.
Logging the 2 flights as 1 would be a clear breach of the ANO.
WWW
Logging the 2 flights as 1 would be a clear breach of the ANO.
WWW
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I,m with beagle on this one short X-C sector a talk about it then some practice emergencys on the way back all sounds like common sense to me , the trouble is that the reflective windows of the crystal palace at gatwick seem only to reflect most of the common sense back at us !
Thread Starter
OK chaps - I will write to that nice Captain Hills and suggest that "The biennial training flight may include one intermediate stop providing that both sections of the flight are flown consecutively on the same day with the same instructor and the total flight time is not less than 1 hour".
All those in favour, please say "Aye"!
(Sorry if that screws up the server capacity, Danny!)
All those in favour, please say "Aye"!
(Sorry if that screws up the server capacity, Danny!)
Aye
WWW
WWW
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trouble is its got nothing to do with anyone in the Belgrano. Its down to the JAA. Write to them, put it forward as an NPA and wait a long time for it to be thrown out by the French.
As the man said there is no 1 hour requirement for an LPC.
As the man said there is no 1 hour requirement for an LPC.
Thread Starter
Yes, noggin - but it's all a matter of interpretation. Such as the 'recommendation' for an observed flight test for FE re-authorisation being mis-interpreted as being mandatory by you chaps at the CAA!
It doesn't specify in JAR-FCL 1.245 that the 'flight of at least an hour's duration' has to be made as a single continuous flight; I consider that a flight including an intermediate landing as I've suggested is an entirely reasonable and acceptable means of compliance. Incidentally, it says that the flight must be made with a flight instructor - does that mean Flight Instructor or flight instructor (including a CRI, for example)?
[ 25 November 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]
It doesn't specify in JAR-FCL 1.245 that the 'flight of at least an hour's duration' has to be made as a single continuous flight; I consider that a flight including an intermediate landing as I've suggested is an entirely reasonable and acceptable means of compliance. Incidentally, it says that the flight must be made with a flight instructor - does that mean Flight Instructor or flight instructor (including a CRI, for example)?
[ 25 November 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle, this is the first I have heard that it has to be in one whole flight. I have always believed and signed guys up who had flown two sorties etc, provided it was the same instructor that signed the log at the end. You also say that it does not say in words at JAR FCL .... So what is the official? I ain't got access to JAR Jungle today so cannot find out. I will browse the informative examiner hand book and el, instead. But would like to know where you found this little gem. I agree with you entirely. Let us know what Hills says. Why can't Elizabeth C....Hayes un-retire and be in charge of all this. Wouldn't the world be a wonderful place!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aye.
Can't see why it would make a blind bit of difference, especially as it is supposed to be training flight. It would give you more time to talk about any problems
It's a daft system anyway, since it is not laid down properly as to what we are supposed to do, you could just do an hour of taxiing. That would count! Utterly useless and absurdley unprofessional, but it would fulfil the requirements!!! What a great system.......
Can't see why it would make a blind bit of difference, especially as it is supposed to be training flight. It would give you more time to talk about any problems
It's a daft system anyway, since it is not laid down properly as to what we are supposed to do, you could just do an hour of taxiing. That would count! Utterly useless and absurdley unprofessional, but it would fulfil the requirements!!! What a great system.......
Thread Starter
Actually an hour's taxying wouldn't count unless it preceded a take-off. But to taxy out, get airborne, land and keep taxying until the hour was up technically would.....
So far there have been no votes against - I'll elicit opinion elsewhere tomorrow.
So far there have been no votes against - I'll elicit opinion elsewhere tomorrow.
Thread Starter
Thank you everyone - the proposal being forwarded to the CAA is along the lines of:
'The training flight with an instructor may consist of not more than 2 sectors with an intermediate landing, as long as:
1. Both sectors are flown consecutively.
2. Both sectors are flown on the same day with the same instructor.
3. The total flight time for the 2 sectors shall be not less than one hour.'
'The training flight with an instructor may consist of not more than 2 sectors with an intermediate landing, as long as:
1. Both sectors are flown consecutively.
2. Both sectors are flown on the same day with the same instructor.
3. The total flight time for the 2 sectors shall be not less than one hour.'
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle, great work if you can sort it. Not sure about going down the "same day" theory. What if you intend doing a flight with a guy/gal that is shortened due wx. Or more likely the case: last slot of the day, program running late, get all the upper airwork done and finish off the Ccts tomorrow sort of thing. Much more flexible for the club and customer. Can you not leave that suggestion out? Anyone disagree?
Thread Starter
As there is no mandatory content specified for the 'training flight', only a recommended content (which is, in fact, more extensive than the revalidation proficiency check), I can't really accept that the 'half today, half some other time' suggestion would be viwed as reasonable. If there wasn't time and weather to do some form of training for an hour, perhaps it would have been better to have cancelled it? The other problem is when would you do the second half? Next day, next week, next month....??
No - I think that it's probably best to ask just for this minor change to allow a break in the middle of the flight; perhaps other easements can be brought in at a later date?
[ 27 November 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]
No - I think that it's probably best to ask just for this minor change to allow a break in the middle of the flight; perhaps other easements can be brought in at a later date?
[ 27 November 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]