Instruction on permit aircraft
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Near Shobbers
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instruction on permit aircraft
Can anybody tell me the situation regarding instructing on permit aircraft such as the YAK 52TD?
It would be used for advanced training- high performance tail dragger, aeros, conversions - as well as trial lessons.
The CAA some time ago told me it was a no no, however there would seem to be some inconsistency - trial flights being done in Jet Provosts for instance, as well as illogically - aircraft designed for the purpose and potentially a lot safer than a Tiger moth.
Any considered and informed thoughts most welcome.
PF
It would be used for advanced training- high performance tail dragger, aeros, conversions - as well as trial lessons.
The CAA some time ago told me it was a no no, however there would seem to be some inconsistency - trial flights being done in Jet Provosts for instance, as well as illogically - aircraft designed for the purpose and potentially a lot safer than a Tiger moth.
Any considered and informed thoughts most welcome.
PF
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,006
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instruction can be given on any aircraft for conversion, recurrency training and the 1 hour with an instructor.
I think the difference is you need a c of a aircraft (and a licenced airfield) for the issue of ratings (PPL , IMC etc).
I'm not clear where a tailwheel or complex conversion comes into this.
I bet Beagle will be able to quote chapter and verse.
I think the difference is you need a c of a aircraft (and a licenced airfield) for the issue of ratings (PPL , IMC etc).
I'm not clear where a tailwheel or complex conversion comes into this.
I bet Beagle will be able to quote chapter and verse.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Age: 85
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a permit aircraft registered in my name.
In addition to me, a qualified instructor is insured to fly it and has had conversion training.
My wife is training for her PPL.
Can the instructor give her any training in my permit aircraft - accepting that this time may not be counted towards her PPl and that he may not be paid for it?
The intention is that with 'type training' she would be in a better position should her skills be required e.g. if I were incapacitated.
In addition to me, a qualified instructor is insured to fly it and has had conversion training.
My wife is training for her PPL.
Can the instructor give her any training in my permit aircraft - accepting that this time may not be counted towards her PPl and that he may not be paid for it?
The intention is that with 'type training' she would be in a better position should her skills be required e.g. if I were incapacitated.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding (and again, BEagle would probably know better) is that instruction can only be given if the person receiving instruction is the sole owner of the aircraft.
Having said that, there are numerous groups around permit aircraft, and it seems to be generally accepted that instruction is given on these aircraft to the members of group, and despite it not being 100% legal, the CAA accept it because to not allow a group member to receive a checkout on their own aircraft would simply be madness. At least, that was the case when I used to be a member of group formed around a permit aircraft.
On the subject of Jet Provosts, my knowledge is based purely on my shady memory of a previous post on PPRuNe, but I seem to remember that the conclusion was that the instruction which was given on JPs broke just about all of the rules, but was done with approval from the CAA (not sure if it was written approval or just a general agreement to turn a blind eye) on the basis that flights in a JP are something for which there is a genuine demand, and there is no other way of satisfying this demand. I'm sure there must have been more to it than that, but my memory has faded a bit since it's a while since I last saw it discussed.
FFF
-----------------
Having said that, there are numerous groups around permit aircraft, and it seems to be generally accepted that instruction is given on these aircraft to the members of group, and despite it not being 100% legal, the CAA accept it because to not allow a group member to receive a checkout on their own aircraft would simply be madness. At least, that was the case when I used to be a member of group formed around a permit aircraft.
On the subject of Jet Provosts, my knowledge is based purely on my shady memory of a previous post on PPRuNe, but I seem to remember that the conclusion was that the instruction which was given on JPs broke just about all of the rules, but was done with approval from the CAA (not sure if it was written approval or just a general agreement to turn a blind eye) on the basis that flights in a JP are something for which there is a genuine demand, and there is no other way of satisfying this demand. I'm sure there must have been more to it than that, but my memory has faded a bit since it's a while since I last saw it discussed.
FFF
-----------------
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Near Shobbers
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
YAK 52TD
Thanks everybody. I'm keen to use the above for remuneration, which may put a different complexion on things. I've just trawled around and found the reply from the CAA which I received some time ago;
"In reference to your recent enquiry regarding flight instruction on the YAK
52, I must inform you that this aircraft type only qualifies for the issue
of a 'Permit to Fly'. As such, each aircraft granted a Permit to Fly is
individually investigated and issued with a set of flying conditions
pertinent to aircraft type and operating limitations."
OK, I could take that as a definate 'maybe...'
"The sole owner of a permit to fly aircraft can receive remunerated flying
instruction provided the permit does not preclude flying instruction.
Group owners of permit to fly aircraft cannot receive remunerated flying
instruction, but unremunerated flying instruction can be received and given
when using solely or group owned permit to fly aircraft, it is also
permissible for unremunerated flight testing for the purpose of qualifying
for the grant of a licence or rating in permit to fly aircraft."
So if I own it all or don't get paid then 'yes'.... or maybe not?
"It is not possible for the YAK 52 to qualify for a C of A in any category so
it remains unable for you to carry out instructional remuneration on this
aircraft type."
Mmm, that'll be a 'no' then...? How about if I lease it? Or form a 'club' with flights as a benefit of membership'?
Your thoughts and advice welcome.
PF
"In reference to your recent enquiry regarding flight instruction on the YAK
52, I must inform you that this aircraft type only qualifies for the issue
of a 'Permit to Fly'. As such, each aircraft granted a Permit to Fly is
individually investigated and issued with a set of flying conditions
pertinent to aircraft type and operating limitations."
OK, I could take that as a definate 'maybe...'
"The sole owner of a permit to fly aircraft can receive remunerated flying
instruction provided the permit does not preclude flying instruction.
Group owners of permit to fly aircraft cannot receive remunerated flying
instruction, but unremunerated flying instruction can be received and given
when using solely or group owned permit to fly aircraft, it is also
permissible for unremunerated flight testing for the purpose of qualifying
for the grant of a licence or rating in permit to fly aircraft."
So if I own it all or don't get paid then 'yes'.... or maybe not?
"It is not possible for the YAK 52 to qualify for a C of A in any category so
it remains unable for you to carry out instructional remuneration on this
aircraft type."
Mmm, that'll be a 'no' then...? How about if I lease it? Or form a 'club' with flights as a benefit of membership'?
Your thoughts and advice welcome.
PF
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: S Warwickshire
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most of the essential points have been stated already.
Type conversion, differences training, refresher training etc. can all be carried out un-remunerated or "expenses only" on group owned permit aircraft. The PFA coaching scheme is an example of this where the training is done by FIs or CRIs (SEP).
There seems to be little scope to use the aircraft to generate revenue other than display flying.
I gather previous attempts at commercial operation with a foreign CofA (Hungarian?) ran into difficulties. I'm sure the likes of Jeffries and Goode will know the ins and outs, but it doesn't look promising.
Type conversion, differences training, refresher training etc. can all be carried out un-remunerated or "expenses only" on group owned permit aircraft. The PFA coaching scheme is an example of this where the training is done by FIs or CRIs (SEP).
There seems to be little scope to use the aircraft to generate revenue other than display flying.
I gather previous attempts at commercial operation with a foreign CofA (Hungarian?) ran into difficulties. I'm sure the likes of Jeffries and Goode will know the ins and outs, but it doesn't look promising.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilgrim Flyer,
Your Permit to Fly precludes the aircraft from being used for Public Transport or Aerial Work. Therefore it cannot be hired out in the manner you describe.
Basically, you can RECEIVE:
1) Ab-Initio Training provided you are the sole owner of the aircraft by an instructor whom you can pay, but not the examiner.
2) Recurrent training such as any part-owner's Biennial Flight Review, Tailwheel conversion etc. provided this is un-remunerated.
There is a CAA maximum of 20 equal partners (ie. min 5% ownership).
You cannot as an instructor own an aircraft and offer it for lessons to the public as this would be aerial work. It cannot be used for trial lessons.
Whilst I assume it is on a CAA Permit to Fly, the same rules apply as PFA Permit to Fly. See the PFA website. They have unfortunately put the documents under the Engineering Section>>"Operating An Aircraft on a PFA Permit">>"Operating on a Permit to Fly compared with a C of A"
Hope this helps.
Regards,
ifitaint...
Your Permit to Fly precludes the aircraft from being used for Public Transport or Aerial Work. Therefore it cannot be hired out in the manner you describe.
Basically, you can RECEIVE:
1) Ab-Initio Training provided you are the sole owner of the aircraft by an instructor whom you can pay, but not the examiner.
2) Recurrent training such as any part-owner's Biennial Flight Review, Tailwheel conversion etc. provided this is un-remunerated.
There is a CAA maximum of 20 equal partners (ie. min 5% ownership).
You cannot as an instructor own an aircraft and offer it for lessons to the public as this would be aerial work. It cannot be used for trial lessons.
Whilst I assume it is on a CAA Permit to Fly, the same rules apply as PFA Permit to Fly. See the PFA website. They have unfortunately put the documents under the Engineering Section>>"Operating An Aircraft on a PFA Permit">>"Operating on a Permit to Fly compared with a C of A"
Hope this helps.
Regards,
ifitaint...
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is all very baffling. This is slightly off topic but I have a share in a group owned Private C of A aircraft. A while ago, a member of the group who had not flown for some four months or so, but who was still perfectly current to fly solo, wished to carry out 3 circuits in order to be allowed to carry passengers ( 3 take offs and landings in previous 90 days rule) He asked whether I would accompany him as a check pilot since I am usually very current on the aircraft. Since I am not an instructor however, it occurred to me that I would be classed as a passenger and that the flight would therefore be illegal. He subsequently flew with an instructor therefore. Given that I believe that the instructor was paid on a private Cof A aircraft, was this flight legal? and is it not bizarre that pilots who are very current and familiar with a specific sometimes unusual aircraft type with whom most instructors would not be familiar, are prevented from assisting with advice and checks in circumstances such as those above or indeed when familiarising a new group member?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes the flight was legal.
If you have problems with people staying current and as a general bum covering exercise.
have you thought about http://www.ontrackaviation.com/cri-se.htm
Means your group can be self sufficent away from the local flying school.
If you have problems with people staying current and as a general bum covering exercise.
have you thought about http://www.ontrackaviation.com/cri-se.htm
Means your group can be self sufficent away from the local flying school.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the link MJ. Interesting reading, and indeed any of our group members would meet the pre entry requirements. Although I had heard of the PFA coaching scheme before now, I had honestly never heard of the CRI SE Scheme before. If this applies to me after 23 years continuous flying in a group environment (and I like to think I keep fairly current with GA matters generally, read all the mags etc) I cant help wondering how widely known this scheme is within the flying group environment generally! At any rate it certainly seems to make more sense using this scheme than my one hour flight every two years with a pimply newly qualified FI who is completely unfamiliar with my aircraft type and with whom I spend an hour teaching him ( or her ) how to fly it before we unanimously declare to one another that we "have each passed!"
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In addition to me, a qualified instructor is insured to fly it and has had conversion training.
My wife is training for her PPL.
Can the instructor give her any training in my permit aircraft - accepting that this time may not be counted towards her PPl and that he may not be paid for it?
My wife is training for her PPL.
Can the instructor give her any training in my permit aircraft - accepting that this time may not be counted towards her PPl and that he may not be paid for it?
Gizajob
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: uk
Age: 49
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good answer FBM
but a valid point Billiebob. I know LASORS is already distilled from other publications but I still find all these little ins and outs confusing and difficult to access easily. There must be an opportunity for some web wizard to come up with a site that enables you to put in a straight question and get a straight (correct) answer. Wishful thinking though, given the fact that even the Belgrano crew don't know half the time!
but a valid point Billiebob. I know LASORS is already distilled from other publications but I still find all these little ins and outs confusing and difficult to access easily. There must be an opportunity for some web wizard to come up with a site that enables you to put in a straight question and get a straight (correct) answer. Wishful thinking though, given the fact that even the Belgrano crew don't know half the time!
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearly, there must be some instructors out there who do not have pimples, and maybe even some who do not wear anoraks. I am seriously beginning to doubt however, whether there are any who appreciate that some of us who post on these forums hold down full time jobs outside aviation and who therefore do not have the time or inclination to tuck ourselves up in bed every night with a copy of the air navigation order, and who therefore cannot be expected to amass the level of knowledge rightly and properly acquired by instructors during the course of their work and who do not therefore expect to receive snide and mocking retorts to an innocent demonstration of incomplete knowledge, or indignant responses to light hearted remarks.
For the record however, I unreservedly offer my apologies to any instructors who might have taken offence by my remarks.
For the record however, I unreservedly offer my apologies to any instructors who might have taken offence by my remarks.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can't have it both ways FBM, you said
"my one hour flight every two years with a pimply newly qualified FI who is completely unfamiliar with my aircraft type and with whom I spend an hour teaching him ( or her ) how to fly it before we unanimously declare to one another that we "have each passed!"
If you don't like to fly with a newly qualified instructor go and find a more experienced one who can actually teach you something! There are lots of us out here.
You asked "is it not bizarre that pilots who are very current and familiar with a specific sometimes unusual aircraft type with whom most instructors would not be familiar, are prevented from assisting with advice and checks?" No, its not bizarre if that individual is not qualified (ie is not an FI or a CRI). You can, of course "assist with advice and checks" and pass on your experience but you can't do the required training flights or difference training without being a qualified instructor - seems reasonable to me!
One might say that its bizare that an experienced pilot such as yourself who feels he has something to offer has not bothered to go out and get qualified! If you are familiar with unusual aircraft types you should find that there is plenty of demand for your services!
Happy landings
3 point
"my one hour flight every two years with a pimply newly qualified FI who is completely unfamiliar with my aircraft type and with whom I spend an hour teaching him ( or her ) how to fly it before we unanimously declare to one another that we "have each passed!"
If you don't like to fly with a newly qualified instructor go and find a more experienced one who can actually teach you something! There are lots of us out here.
You asked "is it not bizarre that pilots who are very current and familiar with a specific sometimes unusual aircraft type with whom most instructors would not be familiar, are prevented from assisting with advice and checks?" No, its not bizarre if that individual is not qualified (ie is not an FI or a CRI). You can, of course "assist with advice and checks" and pass on your experience but you can't do the required training flights or difference training without being a qualified instructor - seems reasonable to me!
One might say that its bizare that an experienced pilot such as yourself who feels he has something to offer has not bothered to go out and get qualified! If you are familiar with unusual aircraft types you should find that there is plenty of demand for your services!
Happy landings
3 point
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the point 3 point, and of course I wasnt suggesting for one moment that I be permitted to conduct the LPC in lieu of an instructor since as you rightly say, I am not qualified to do so. I merely remarked that it would have been helpful for my colleague to have had a pilot familiar with the aircraft type come along with him even if only to give psychological support ( if not to assist with the flight and checks etc) rather than have him, (as he would have been perfectly entitled to do,) fly on his own after an extended lay off because "passengers" were not permitted.
As for becoming an instructor myself, No thanks, I have seen what you guys have to endure and I couldnt take the heat in that particular kitchen!
As for becoming an instructor myself, No thanks, I have seen what you guys have to endure and I couldnt take the heat in that particular kitchen!
Nobody seems to have spotted AIC 65/2003, which is the authority on training and testing in ex-military Permit aircraft. An Exemption from GAD will permit training and testing, remunerated, in certain circumstances. See also CAP632. AICs on AIS website, CAP 632 downlaodable form SRG website.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FBM
We are creeping off the original thread but its a worthy subject in its own right. You are right, it would be very useful for your friend to have an experienced pilot with recent experience fly with him; there is nothing stopping him from doing so.
You can both fly together with you (the experienced pilot) as aircraft captain, you can let him fly, give him advice and so forth; he can then fly his three solo take offs and landings in confidence and then subsequently fly with passengers. If however he wants teaching he needs an instructor, if he wants teaching by an instructor who has relevant experience he needs to go out and find one.
The choices are clear; if he wants advice from an experienced pilot, fine; if he wants to fly with an instructor for some training or to meet some regulatory requiremnt, fine; or if he wants training by an instructor with relvant experience that's fine too. Three entirely sepatate situations, all perfectly within the rules; your friend, the customer, can choose which one meets his requirement.
Happy landings
3 Point
We are creeping off the original thread but its a worthy subject in its own right. You are right, it would be very useful for your friend to have an experienced pilot with recent experience fly with him; there is nothing stopping him from doing so.
You can both fly together with you (the experienced pilot) as aircraft captain, you can let him fly, give him advice and so forth; he can then fly his three solo take offs and landings in confidence and then subsequently fly with passengers. If however he wants teaching he needs an instructor, if he wants teaching by an instructor who has relevant experience he needs to go out and find one.
The choices are clear; if he wants advice from an experienced pilot, fine; if he wants to fly with an instructor for some training or to meet some regulatory requiremnt, fine; or if he wants training by an instructor with relvant experience that's fine too. Three entirely sepatate situations, all perfectly within the rules; your friend, the customer, can choose which one meets his requirement.
Happy landings
3 Point