Logging landing during instruction
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Logging landing during instruction
A Brand new FI has asked me a good question. I have never come across that issue as I also fly SEP and MEP myself so I can log landing when I fly myself.
Can a FI log the landing made by his student either in SEP or MEP. If he cannot then he cannot prove that he made 3 landings in 90 days.
Majority of FI, they only fly during instruction and rarely fly themselves so are not landing the aircraft.
EASA FCL.050 is not very clear on that.
thanks
Can a FI log the landing made by his student either in SEP or MEP. If he cannot then he cannot prove that he made 3 landings in 90 days.
Majority of FI, they only fly during instruction and rarely fly themselves so are not landing the aircraft.
EASA FCL.050 is not very clear on that.
thanks
EASA FCL.050 is not very clear on that.
FCL.050 Recording of flight time The pilot shall keep a reliable record of the details of all flights flown in a form and manner established by the competent authority.
FCL060 specifies the recency requirement:
A pilot shall not operate an aircraft in commercial air transport or carrying passengers:
(1) as PIC or co-pilot unless he/she has carried out, in the preceding 90 days, at least 3 takeoffs,approaches and landings in an aircraft of the same type or class or an FFS representing that type or class.
(1) as PIC or co-pilot unless he/she has carried out, in the preceding 90 days, at least 3 takeoffs,approaches and landings in an aircraft of the same type or class or an FFS representing that type or class.
Majority of FI, they only fly during instruction and rarely fly themselves so are not landing the aircraft.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hotel this week, hotel next week, home whenever...
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite often I'll 'nick' aircraft after the student training detail is complete and 'land or touch and go' to ensure I do meet the 3-in-90 rule - more so in the multi as I get enough SEP stuff
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: South East England
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the question is there a requirement to be “the sole manipulator of the controls” for 3 landings in 90 days.Many instructors doing only advanced instruction and examiners could easily fal foul of this one.I,ve seen it written in the past not sure if it’s still in force in today’s mishmash of regulations.I,m lucky I own my own aircraft in addition to instructing!Regards Stampe
Personally I keep a tally of take-offs and landings on my PLOG and logbook, and find that if I'm doing much instructing I invariably end up demonstrating a few circuits in the course of the month, so it's little issue.
And if I'm not instructing, I'll usually be doing a bit of private flying and will often ensure an approach or a couple of circuits on the end of a sortie - but I appreciate that is an expensive luxury on the salaries many full time instructors earn.
That said it certainly can be an issue, particularly if you are mostly instructing existing qualified pilots, that you don't get much hands-on time. It hardly seems appropriate to log take-odds and landings where your student handled the controls.
G
And if I'm not instructing, I'll usually be doing a bit of private flying and will often ensure an approach or a couple of circuits on the end of a sortie - but I appreciate that is an expensive luxury on the salaries many full time instructors earn.
That said it certainly can be an issue, particularly if you are mostly instructing existing qualified pilots, that you don't get much hands-on time. It hardly seems appropriate to log take-odds and landings where your student handled the controls.
G
I think the question is there a requirement to be “the sole manipulator of the controls”
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Demonstrating take off and landing will only be part of the initial PPL training.
Now, "stealing" one circuit once in a while might be ok, but what about on a Seneca where the rental price is not the same as C152..
If an instructor is carrying out dual instruction (and is therefore PIC) with a PPL or with a student - providing there is no one else on board - he is not flying with passengers.
In theory, that instructor could be way past 90 days and still be legal. Doesn't make it right of course.
Dead easy, at the end of a training session, to say; "Let me show you a slightly different landing technique." Or; "Do you mind if I do this landing?"
I've never been refused.........yet.
In theory, that instructor could be way past 90 days and still be legal. Doesn't make it right of course.
Dead easy, at the end of a training session, to say; "Let me show you a slightly different landing technique." Or; "Do you mind if I do this landing?"
I've never been refused.........yet.
That said, it's hardly unusual that an instructor has reason to demonstrate and patter a "gold standard" circuit for their student's benefit is it? There is no need to steal a circuit, simply to construct the lesson so that it's done in a particular way from which everybody benefits.
G
If an instructor is carrying out dual instruction (and is therefore PIC) with a PPL or with a student - providing there is no one else on board - he is not flying with passengers.
In theory, that instructor could be way past 90 days and still be legal. Doesn't make it right of course.
In theory, that instructor could be way past 90 days and still be legal. Doesn't make it right of course.
(e) the night rating, provided that the FI:
(1) is qualified to fly at night in the appropriate aircraft category;
(2) has demonstrated the ability to instruct at night to an FI qualified in accordance with (i)
below; and
(3) complies with the night experience requirement of FCL.060(b)(2);
(1) is qualified to fly at night in the appropriate aircraft category;
(2) has demonstrated the ability to instruct at night to an FI qualified in accordance with (i)
below; and
(3) complies with the night experience requirement of FCL.060(b)(2);
No doubt unintentional; a typical case of poor drafting and even poorer checking.
I’m pretty sure you do t let a SEP student land without having demonstrated multiple times and I’m pretty damn sure you wouldn’t let a MEP student do their first engine out landing without a demonstration.
SEP:
First 3-4 landings demo regardless
Partial flap landings demo
No flap landings demo
Forward slip landings demo
EFATO demo
Low viz or bad weather circuit
Sim eng failure from overhead/circuit
Night landing demo
You’re supposed to teach each one and why they’re different from the other ones.
MEP:
First landing demo and why it’s different from a SEP
Assymetric landing demo
EFATO and SE circuit to landing
Plus all the times you say “my controls” before you head for the weeds.
I’ve never had currency issues and never had to use the students dime.
SEP:
First 3-4 landings demo regardless
Partial flap landings demo
No flap landings demo
Forward slip landings demo
EFATO demo
Low viz or bad weather circuit
Sim eng failure from overhead/circuit
Night landing demo
You’re supposed to teach each one and why they’re different from the other ones.
MEP:
First landing demo and why it’s different from a SEP
Assymetric landing demo
EFATO and SE circuit to landing
Plus all the times you say “my controls” before you head for the weeds.
I’ve never had currency issues and never had to use the students dime.
Last edited by B2N2; 6th Mar 2018 at 12:10.
Originally Posted by Whopity
In the case of instructor and student is there a passenger on board?
Originally Posted by CAP 1335
A flight classified as aerial work is normally a flight where some form of payment is made by one of the parties involved in connection with the flight, but does not involve the carriage of passengers. Remunerated flight instruction is probably the most common example of this.
A student must come under the ANO definition for flight crew member rather than passenger
In my view there is a bit of a grey area here. Should I only log the landings where I'm the sole manipulator of the controls? Should I also log the landing if the student did most of it but I grabbed the controls at the last moment to avoid a tailstrike during the bounce? Can I log the landing if I was directly coaching the student through the entire process?
The way I did it when I was instructing for a larger school (SEP/VFR only), I kept track of the total number of landings during a lesson. I then logged this in my logbook, the aircraft journal and had the student log the same number. During one day I would sometimes fly up to five different lessons with between 3 and 11 landings per lesson. Keeping track of who flew during which landing, although possible, became difficult and for logging purposes I just ignored this.
It certainly never led to a situation where I was unable to carry passengers, as there were plenty of demonstrations and other situations where I flew most if not all of the landing. Was I cheating? Perhaps a bit, but passenger carrying is the only thing that this has any influence on. In my logbook, I had plenty of landings to show that I could carry passengers. For myself, I always made sure to be 'in practice' before I carried passengers.
In my view the responsibility still lies with you to make sure that you are capable of carrying out a flight with passengers to the highest possible level of safety. The 3 landings in 90 days bit is just a bit of a legal backstop to prevent pilots with oversize egos to redefine the 'capable' bit in the previous sentence.
The way I did it when I was instructing for a larger school (SEP/VFR only), I kept track of the total number of landings during a lesson. I then logged this in my logbook, the aircraft journal and had the student log the same number. During one day I would sometimes fly up to five different lessons with between 3 and 11 landings per lesson. Keeping track of who flew during which landing, although possible, became difficult and for logging purposes I just ignored this.
It certainly never led to a situation where I was unable to carry passengers, as there were plenty of demonstrations and other situations where I flew most if not all of the landing. Was I cheating? Perhaps a bit, but passenger carrying is the only thing that this has any influence on. In my logbook, I had plenty of landings to show that I could carry passengers. For myself, I always made sure to be 'in practice' before I carried passengers.
In my view the responsibility still lies with you to make sure that you are capable of carrying out a flight with passengers to the highest possible level of safety. The 3 landings in 90 days bit is just a bit of a legal backstop to prevent pilots with oversize egos to redefine the 'capable' bit in the previous sentence.
