Manipulation of controls

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Edited for wrong content.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Edited for wrong content.

[Mach Jump]

Hi Chuck.

I've no doubt from reading many of your previous posts, that you would make a great mentor for any new pilot.

You ask, however:

The pilot I will be teaching is current and licensed, so what exactly can go wrong that the other pilot can not fix?

The fact that both you and she agree that she needs 'mentoring' is the answer to your own question and during the 'mentoring' process, she might easily exceed her own abilities, relying on you to save the day.

I have to say that I agree with Genghis.


MJ

[Whopity]

Why not just tell her what to do and then let her go do it? She is qualified you are not! No need for you to be there!

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Edited for wrong content.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Originally Posted by Chuck Ellsworth

I guess I should never offer any opinions on flying on these forums because I have forgotten everything I ever knew in the past two years.

Or you could simply answer the original posters question without making every thread about you.

To answer the OP's question I would suggest that regardless of what country you are regulated by nobody is going to care if you give the passenger control in cruise flight and at a safe altitude. In fact I would recommend it, as other posters have, as a way to promote private flying. The only caveat I would make is to brief the "I have control" , "you have control" actions before giving them the airplane,

If you are not an instructor I would also suggest keeping things simple and taking care of the rudder and power controls for the passenger.

[Pull what]

Can anyone clear up a point for me? I always understood that PPLs could NOT allow their friends a "shot" at the controls and the only people who could legally allow an unlicensed person to manipulate the controls are instructors.

Since May a PPL can now legally do an 'introductory flight' at a flying school or club. There is nothing in the new regulations to prevent a passenger from manipulating the controls but as the CAA suggests there may be some restrictions that each club or school may want to incorporate into their own regulations or operations and training manual.

[Whopity]

Since May a PPL can now legally do an 'introductory flight' at a flying school or club.

Which is of course a "passenger flight" and doesn't provide any answer to the origial question.

[ifitaintboeing]

Pulling ICAO, EASA and the ANO together, the strict interpretation is that a pilot is a person manipulating the controls of an aircraft. Such a person requires an appropriate licence unless undergoing flight training in accordance with EASA Aircrew regulation as amended from time to time. It follows that a passenger who manipulates the controls of an aircraft is acting at that time as pilot and needs to hold the appropriate valid licence unless undergoing flight training.

Having had the discussion about 'letting passengers have a go' with the policy department in the CAA I would agree with the above quote from Legalapproach.

ifitaint...

[Pull what]

Can anyone clear up a point for me? I always understood that PPLs could NOT allow their friends a "shot" at the controls and the only people who could legally allow an unlicensed person to manipulate the controls are instructors.

So the above is not a passenger flight then. What would you call his friend then, freight, ballast, perhaps?

Anyone unlicensed person can manipulate the controls of an aircraft legally unless it is expressly forbidden in an approved document such as the pilots order book, operations manual etc..

There is nothing to stop someone on an introductory flight allowing the passenger to handle the controls and on that flight that passenger may be a complete stranger-so how would there be a problem when two friends are flying.

One assumes then if the legal eagle is correct the CAA will be bringing a case against the passenger at Humberside who did two go arounds and a landing at night after the pilot died!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Originally Posted by ifitaintboeing

Having had the discussion about 'letting passengers have a go' with the policy department in the CAA I would agree with the above quote from Legalapproach.

ifitaint...

That may be true - but I think that as a community we should not accept this sort of legalistic view.

The captain is always responsible for the safety of the flight. I really don't see value in deciding where on the scale of doorcatch, via transponder, to primary controls we draw the line and say that the passenger has become a "pilot" and so needs a licence.

In a single pilot aeroplane, except for formal instruction, only one person needs a licence - and they are the captain. Anybody else should be doing what they're told, and if their actions cause problems, it's still down to the captain.

G

[Pull what]

I really don't see value in deciding where on the scale of doorcatch, via transponder, to primary controls we draw the line and say that the passenger has become a "pilot" and so needs a licence.

Exactly-if a passenger pulls out the carb air control he is manipulating the a/c contols but that doesnt make him the pilot!

[Whopity]

If you can drive a Glasgow bin lorry with a medical obtained on the basis of a false declaration I don't think anyone is likely to take action against a control manipulator.

[Parson]

Ultimately, the PIC is responsible for the safe operation of the flight. Should anything go wrong (eg infringements, near misses etc.) it would be his/her licence on the line.

If the PIC is an FI, they would obviously be able to advise from an instructor's point of view when 'giving a mate a go', but it still wouldn't be a formal lesson unless arranged as such with the usual insurances, permits etc.