Standards Document 55
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Standards Document 55
Looking into all this approvals stuff for RTF.
Saw mention of this Standards Document 55.
Is it published yet as i can't find it, or is it still on the merrygoround?
Saw mention of this Standards Document 55.
Is it published yet as i can't find it, or is it still on the merrygoround?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: York
Age: 53
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well its on their website now.
doesn't seem that proportional to your small rf or club.
i maybe reading this wrong but it states that an instructor can have a max of six students. not sure how that's going to work or give me enough money to eat.
doesn't seem that proportional to your small rf or club.
i maybe reading this wrong but it states that an instructor can have a max of six students. not sure how that's going to work or give me enough money to eat.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do a search for standards document 55 - works for me.
Its not just the small guys that will suffer from this piece of regulation, but the AOC holders that have invested thousands of £s in their own TRI/TREs and now find they have to produce a complete extra manual to continue doing what they have always done.
Only winner is the CAA as the fees are not exactly cheap !
Its not just the small guys that will suffer from this piece of regulation, but the AOC holders that have invested thousands of £s in their own TRI/TREs and now find they have to produce a complete extra manual to continue doing what they have always done.
Only winner is the CAA as the fees are not exactly cheap !
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An AOC holder, that can at the moment revalidate and renew type ratings for their own pilots will need to become an ATO to continue to do this.
Extra regulation for no real advantage ....lots of work and cost to comply
Extra regulation for no real advantage ....lots of work and cost to comply
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see part of the approval process is to submit accounts to show how viable the company is.
So is this to see how much money they can screw out of us, because they will be in for a shock when they see the minimum returns the average club is operating on.
Having processed several PPL flight tests, applications and paperwork, i'm thinking of billing the CAA for the paper, ink and wear and tear of our printer!
After 35 years in aviation, might be time to give up.
So is this to see how much money they can screw out of us, because they will be in for a shock when they see the minimum returns the average club is operating on.
Having processed several PPL flight tests, applications and paperwork, i'm thinking of billing the CAA for the paper, ink and wear and tear of our printer!
After 35 years in aviation, might be time to give up.
Last edited by BigEndBob; 30th Jul 2013 at 22:55.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: York
Age: 53
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
are the caa aware of the damage that these changes are going to do to the uk flight training industry and in turn ga in the uk as a whole. these regulation will destroy it.
do they do any form of impact assesment when they introduce new regulation?
to me doc 55 seems an awful waste of time. why don't they just produce example manuals for rf to adopt. like the bmma have done for microlight schools?
do they do any form of impact assesment when they introduce new regulation?
to me doc 55 seems an awful waste of time. why don't they just produce example manuals for rf to adopt. like the bmma have done for microlight schools?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because, as i have been told, if that was to happen, especially with sms, it will just sit on a shelf unread. Whereas if someone as had to collate the info. they would be more knowledgable and more likely to use the info. in the docs.
Unfortunately small flying clubs are being treated like the big commercial schools. Someones being very lazy and just copy and pasteing to create stds doc 55. Unless of course they come up with something different for RTF's.
Example being the 6 to 1 ratio student/instructor. That sounds sensible for a commercial school, but not a flying club.
One size doesn't fit all.
Unfortunately small flying clubs are being treated like the big commercial schools. Someones being very lazy and just copy and pasteing to create stds doc 55. Unless of course they come up with something different for RTF's.
Example being the 6 to 1 ratio student/instructor. That sounds sensible for a commercial school, but not a flying club.
One size doesn't fit all.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IN-2013/131: The transition of Registered Training Facilities to Approved Training Organisations | Publications | About the CAA
This is interesting. Play the game , fee £100, don't, fine £1000.
And this;
IN-2013/118: Guidance for ATOs conducting PPL(A), PPL(H), LAPL(A) or LAPL(H) courses, for which there are new Theoretical Knowledge (TK) requirements | Publications | About the CAA
This is interesting. Play the game , fee £100, don't, fine £1000.
And this;
IN-2013/118: Guidance for ATOs conducting PPL(A), PPL(H), LAPL(A) or LAPL(H) courses, for which there are new Theoretical Knowledge (TK) requirements | Publications | About the CAA
Last edited by BigEndBob; 21st Aug 2013 at 20:07.
