Microlight Instructing

[BristolScout]

Can anybody enlighten me as to what I would have to do, as an experienced aeroplane instructor, to be able to instruct on microlights, both kinds? I've done some searching but the data seems a little contradictory in places.

[Whopity]

Legally nothing because a microlight is an aeroplane. As the microlight syllabus is substantially different to the AOPA style PPL syllabus then get a copy from the BMAA or your students may not satisfy the examiner.
Make sure that you are familiar with the aircraft that you want to instruct on and be aware of the differences with Permit aircraft and the fact that you can't lease them.

[BristolScout]

Thanks Whopity. It seems odd that I can legally instruct on a weight-shift without some kind of formal training but then I've long ceased to be surprised by the dark corners in the pilot licensing system. LASORs do state that I '..shall first undertake any necessary differences training' but how long is that particular piece of string? In essence, I guess what you're saying is that as long as I can be happy with my own proficiency and the differences you mention, I can instruct too.

[Whopity]

A few years ago you didn't need a licence to fly one. Common sense says that you need to gain a reasonable level of experience before you attempt to teach on one.

Differences training is defined as any of the following:

VP Prop
Turbo/Supercharger
Retractable U/C
Pressurisation
Tailwheel

otherwise its familiarisation training.

[xrayalpha]

Hi Whoppity,

It was back in 1985 that you didn't need a licence to fly microlights - so more than a few years!

If you have a JAR or old Group A, which one will if a light aircraft instructor, then it is an aeroplane as defined by the ICAO rules. So you can fly microlights on your ICAO compliant licence.

If you have an NPPL then it is a microlight, because the NPPL is a CAA licence and the CAA have a definition of a microlight, and so you can't fly it with an SSEA NPPL unless you do what is prescribed (see NPPL website).

Yes, you'll have fun of one kind if you learn to fly a weighshift microlight - just as a merchant ship captain would with a dinghy with a tiller!

You'll also have fun on a modern three-axis like the Ikarus because of the massive power-to-weight ratio.

very best wishes

[Whopity]

so more than a few years!

Its all relative! The point is that 20 years ago it was deemed so simple no licence was necessary, now the same thing is "so complicated" it almost needs a "type" rating. Some of us are old enough to remember when "Health and Safety" was called "Common Sense!"

[FlyingGasMain]

I've just started doing some instructing on 3-axis microlights (C42s). I was checked out by the schools CFI for 2 hours and then got a 'differences' sign off in my logbook. The checkout was mostly to show me the differences required in flying technique between the C42, and things like the 152 and Warrior which I was more used to. A lot of emphasis was placed on the low inertia the microlights have.

I have to say I'm still feeling my way around the rules and regulations regarding these aircraft. The JARs pretty much seem to regard them as coming under national regulation.

[BristolScout]

Thanks FGM. A couple of hours differences training sounds good to me. thanks also to all of you who took the trouble to reply. I'm happy that my CAA (not JAR) ATPL with attached Instructor Rating legally entitles me to fly and instruct on what is, as people rightly say, a single engine aeroplane. As Whopity so pertinently observes, it should be down to common sense.