Signature in logbook
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Signature in logbook
Is there a requirement to have his flight signed by a FI in the UK for any rating?
that's a requirement in certain european country but i do not think it is needed for a UK JAR licence?
thx
that's a requirement in certain european country but i do not think it is needed for a UK JAR licence?
thx
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the flight was for the purpose of meeting the requirements for the renewal or issue of a rating then it must be signed. As an examiner i will not accept a flight that has not been signed and carries the instructors number.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,096
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
As an examiner i will not accept a flight that has not been signed and carries the instructors number.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am curious, do you think that if you turned up with an entry in your log book that you claim is a dual flight looking for me to revalidate you by experience you would expect me to sign it?
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lasors specifically states that the entry for revalidation must be countersigned by the instructor.
For any other dual training for a licence or rating I would expect the school to stamp and certify the hours before any application is submitted.
For any other dual training for a licence or rating I would expect the school to stamp and certify the hours before any application is submitted.
Last edited by RTN11; 23rd Feb 2012 at 17:12.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LASORS does not specifically state none is required either....
I would be interested in the comments of other examiners on this one. I won't accept a flight being claimed for revalidation unless it's signed as per the instructions given to me when I first became an examiner.
I would be interested in the comments of other examiners on this one. I won't accept a flight being claimed for revalidation unless it's signed as per the instructions given to me when I first became an examiner.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Up North
Age: 57
Posts: 557
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Bose, in the UK (or for a UK issued PPL with SEP(L) class rating) the training flight has to be signed by the instructor.
I don't have my FEH at home, but not sure if there's a need for the instructor's licence/reference number, although I do like to see it as well as a signature. I rarely get asked to revalidate or renew for people I've never heard of, so usually I can recognise the instructors name/number/signature. However, if someone was going to fake a page of logbook entries, then go to an examiner who doesn't know them, a signature and number aren't any harder to do than the flight entry itself. Has anyone actually got suspicious and checked?
LASORS F1.5
iii. a training flight of at least 1 hour’s duration with a FI(A) or CRI(A)* who must countersign the appropriate logbook entry
iii. a training flight of at least 1 hour’s duration with a FI(A) or CRI(A)* who must countersign the appropriate logbook entry
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Up North
Age: 57
Posts: 557
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what next:
The countersignature requirement could well be a UK thing, but it only applies to the revalidation of SEP and TMG class ratings, when doing it by experience. I guess what you're coming to the UK to do, is some other rating which is revalidated by test with an examiner, so no need in that case.
On what legal basis if I may ask? JAR is JAR everywhere I thought. We go to the UK every year for our recurrent trainings and neither has any instructor ever signed my logbook nor did any examiner ever want to see a signature.
The reason that a FI/CRI is asked to sign the logbook on a Dual flight is simply to assist the examiner by providing a verifiable endorsement that a particular flight met the requirement for a dual flight as described in JAR-FCL 1.245(c)(ii)(C). It is not a legal requirement, nor is it even a JAA requirement that the log book be signed by the instructor. Prior to the introduction of JAR-FCL in 1999, Examiners asked the CAA how they could verify that a person in a log book was a FI. The CAA agreed that if the FI signed the entry with a licence number the examiner could cross check it with the CAA if necessary. That is not to say this is the only method of checking, but it has proved to be a simple method for the past 12 years.
If a pilot produced evidence of such a flight to the CAA they would have no alternative but to revalidate the rating by experience if all other criteria were met, even if there was no signature.
If a pilot produced evidence of such a flight to the CAA they would have no alternative but to revalidate the rating by experience if all other criteria were met, even if there was no signature.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: oxon
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My FIC instructor told me thus:
1.) As an instructor you always have the right to refuse to sign off a two-yearly flight if you deem it to be unsatisfactory but the licence holder has every right to pop down to CAA HQ and get his/her licence revalidated by them direct as they have, in theory, completed the requirements
2.) If you do a flight that aint great and you don't want the responisibility, I was told to tell the individual concerned that you would be signing there logbook but stating that the flight was not to standard. In this way most examiners would be unhappy about signing the licence off and the CAA take the responsibility
Anyway, logbooks look so much more interesting with signatures and stamps all over them!
1.) As an instructor you always have the right to refuse to sign off a two-yearly flight if you deem it to be unsatisfactory but the licence holder has every right to pop down to CAA HQ and get his/her licence revalidated by them direct as they have, in theory, completed the requirements
2.) If you do a flight that aint great and you don't want the responisibility, I was told to tell the individual concerned that you would be signing there logbook but stating that the flight was not to standard. In this way most examiners would be unhappy about signing the licence off and the CAA take the responsibility
Anyway, logbooks look so much more interesting with signatures and stamps all over them!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thanks for the all the answers.
I was more wondering : " does a FI need to sign all the flight he has done with a trainee, for the trainee to gain his PPL"
or does a FII need to sign all the hours he has flown with a trainee FI. The CAA is checking the logbook to issue a FI rating, do they need to see every flight made to obtain a FI countersign by the FI instructor?
thx
I was more wondering : " does a FI need to sign all the flight he has done with a trainee, for the trainee to gain his PPL"
or does a FII need to sign all the hours he has flown with a trainee FI. The CAA is checking the logbook to issue a FI rating, do they need to see every flight made to obtain a FI countersign by the FI instructor?
thx
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Somewhere in Southern England
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an examiner if I am revalidating an SEP by experiencce then I require to see either:-
a) a successfel flight test with an appropriate licence endorsement
or
b) a one hour flight with an instructor. In this case I would insist that the instructor had signed the log book. Otherwise the flight might have been a total disaster.
a) a successfel flight test with an appropriate licence endorsement
or
b) a one hour flight with an instructor. In this case I would insist that the instructor had signed the log book. Otherwise the flight might have been a total disaster.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
or does a FII need to sign all the hours he has flown with a trainee FI. The CAA is checking the logbook to issue a FI rating, do they need to see every flight made to obtain a FI countersign by the FI instructor?
Once you have a licence and are flying alone, you can log what you want and no one will certify it. For a course of training for the issue of a licence or rating, each flight would not need to be signed individually, it would all be signed off at the end.
Under JAR-FCL the issue is somewhat blurred by the fact that we are talking about requirements and not regulations. Different authorities have different interpretations of the requirement and impose, in addition, their own legal requirements. Once the EU Regulation is in force, however, this will not be possible - the law will state only that, for revalidation of a class rating, an applicant must have completed "a training flight of at least 1 hour with a flight instructor (FI) or a class rating instructor (CRI)." There is no requirement in law for any specific content nor for a specific standard (or even a safe standard) to have been achieved. Nor is there a legal requirement for the instructor to endorse the logbook (in case of doubt it would be for the competent authority to prove that the relevant logbook entry was fraudulent).
Provided, therefore, that the applicant's logbook shows evidence of 1 hour's dual flight instruction within the 12 months preceding the expiry of the rating (and all other requirements have been met) , the competent authority has no choice (assuming that the logbook has not been falsified) but to revalidate the rating. The fact that the the flight may have been a complete disaster is totally irrelevant in law, all that matters is that it was conducted.
Provided, therefore, that the applicant's logbook shows evidence of 1 hour's dual flight instruction within the 12 months preceding the expiry of the rating (and all other requirements have been met) , the competent authority has no choice (assuming that the logbook has not been falsified) but to revalidate the rating. The fact that the the flight may have been a complete disaster is totally irrelevant in law, all that matters is that it was conducted.
Welcome to the brave new world!
Otherwise the flight might have been a total disaster.
As an instructor you always have the right to refuse to sign off a two-yearly flight if you deem it to be unsatisfactory
It does rather beg the question as to the point of the JAA biennial if the pilot being "instructed" has apparently no requirement to demonstrate satisfactory flying, or to have made any attempt to learn anything from their instructor.
The FAA BFR, where certain things have to be refreshed, and the pilot under review has to demonstrate a minimum level of safe flying to the instructor, is arguably a rather more rational approach.
G
The FAA BFR, where certain things have to be refreshed, and the pilot under review has to demonstrate a minimum level of safe flying to the instructor, is arguably a rather more rational approach.
G
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Somewhere in Southern England
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If EASA means that the only requirement is that the one hour flight took place then the instructor has a simple remedy if he/she is not satisfied with the conduct of the flight - simply ensure that the flight is a maximum of 55 minutes!
A 50 minute flight and a robust debrief covers much!
G
An interesting moral position.
Choice between not getting paid for an hour's work, or being the name associated with what you consider to be a dangerously inept pilot being cleared to fly for another 2 years.
What a choice!
Widening this a little, has anybody actually found themselves up against this? I'm glad to say that to date (in a short and limited instructional career, to be fair) anybody I've suggested needs some more instruction to be safe, has accepted the point.
Maybe the dangerously inept pilot who won't take an instructor's advice is a fiction? Somehow however, I sort of suspect he isn't.
G
Choice between not getting paid for an hour's work, or being the name associated with what you consider to be a dangerously inept pilot being cleared to fly for another 2 years.
What a choice!
Widening this a little, has anybody actually found themselves up against this? I'm glad to say that to date (in a short and limited instructional career, to be fair) anybody I've suggested needs some more instruction to be safe, has accepted the point.
Maybe the dangerously inept pilot who won't take an instructor's advice is a fiction? Somehow however, I sort of suspect he isn't.
G