LAPL Test - why can I fly solo after it?

[OrbitalFracture]

Hi there,

Looking for some advice.

I'm due to sit my LAPL skills test on Friday. I am also the owner of a beautiful Cessna FR172J Reims Rocket which I have about 12 hours Dual time in now.

The question is, when am I allowed to fly the Rocket solo?

I've heard conflicting reports.

Please advise

Standing By,

Many thanks

Bruce

[Whopity]

When you receive your licence and sign it, but in the mean time, provided you operate under the auspicies of a Flight Instructor, you can fly it at any time the instructor authorises the flight. One further provision is that the aircraft insurance covers student solo flight.

[OrbitalFracture]

Hi there,

And thanks for that,

Does that mean the aircraft needs to be signed on under a ATO?

Regards

B

[rudestuff]

When you have a LAPL in your hand you can fly it solo. Before then you'll only be able to fly school aircraft with your FIs authorisation. You could conceivably get an ATO to take your aircraft on it's fleet, but it would be cheaper to just wait for the licence.

[Whopity]

Does that mean the aircraft needs to be signed on under a ATO?

Or RTF or DTO soon to be. I don't see why there should be any cost involved if you go to the school who trained you, especially as you have aleady used it for 12 hours dual training.

[172510]

And once you have flown solo 10 hours after your license has been issued, you'll be allowed to fly with passengers.

[Whopity]

What a nonsensical rule that is!

[Duchess_Driver]

Maybe nonsensical in the eyes of legality, but perfect “advice”. Seen so many freshly minted PPL holders rush into the most complicated flights with passengers immediately after licence arrives and nearly ending in tears.

[Whopity]

And how will 10 hours of unsupervised flying improve the situation? One of the primary functions of the PPL Skill Test is to determine if the candidate is safe to carry passengers, if they are not, then they should not pass it.

In most cases the LAPL will have taken exactly the same time as a PPL and the test will have been conducted to the same standard.

[172510]

Originally Posted by Whopity

In most cases the LAPL will have taken exactly the same time as a PPL and the test will have been conducted to the same standard.

I agree. I can see two good reasons to go for the LAPL instead of the PPL.
1 A medical condition that would prevent the student from obtaining a class 2 certificate, and would allow him to obtain a LAPL certificate.
2 A previous flying experience (Glider for instance) that would enable the ATO/DTO to grant the full credit allowed by the regulation.
I can see one bad reason: a cheaper quotation than the PPL made by a flying school on the basis of the minimum flight time permitted by the regulation.

[Whopity]

A medical condition that would prevent the student from obtaining a class 2 certificate, and would allow him to obtain a LAPL certificate.

Thats an interesting one however; we have just discovered that if you can't get a Class II, you won't get a LAPL certificate either! Lots of NPPL holders have found this out leading to the UK producing a Medical Declaration.

[Ascend Charlie]

And how will 10 hours of unsupervised flying improve the situation? One of the primary functions of the PPL Skill Test is to determine if the candidate is safe to carry passengers, if they are not, then they should not pass it.

For the same reason that a newly-qualified driver (in Oz) can only carry 1 passenger, for the duration of their 12-month "P" plates, due to the chances of distraction and the possibility of showing off to the pax.

The licence is a "licence to learn" and the pilot needs to have a lot more experience before trying anything outside the syllabus - the school doesn't teach you to fly with the machine fully loaded with noisy pax.

[Whopity]

the school doesn't teach you to fly with the machine fully loaded with noisy pax.

Neither does flying 10 hours solo! In fact it is likely to develop a level of overconfidence and then when the aircraft is fully laden and not performing as well, it is potentially more dangerous rather than more safe.

Perhaps we should examine where this half baked rule came from, put simply it was the result of a reaction to lowering the hours required for a LAPL and the fact that most cannot acheive it. So we keep the reduced training requirement and then hope that a magical 10 hours of unsupervised flying over an undefined time period with no further check will resolve the issue. The work of a halfwit! Perhalps the same halfwit expects an Examiner (who for a LAPL needs half the experience) to require half the standard after half the training!

[spitfirejock]

I'm with Whopity 100% - such a stupid rule must have been the work of a halfwit.

[spitfirejock]

Coming to think of it, one of the important questions I usually ask during the briefing phase of the skill test is "upon successful completion of today's flight test, what privileges will you have with your new PPL (or LAPL) that you don't have now?" I am surprised at how often applicants get stumped and can't think of the answer. Once the penny drops, I go on to remind them that one of my essential duties and responsibilities is to ensure his/her future passengers are in competent and safe hands and that their goal today is to demonstrate this as well as just fly the aircraft. I am always impressed when I see the glint in their eye about how great that will be and how much they have achieved in getting this far.

I must admit, apart from first solo, which I'm sure we all remember very well, the first ever flight to LeTouquet for lunch with friends, for me was an enormous highlight, a day I will never forget and the first day I ever really believed I was a qualified pilot.

[OrbitalFracture]

Thank you so much!

enlightening......

b

[MadamBreakneck]

Originally Posted by Whopity

...Perhaps we should examine where this half baked rule came from... !

Is it possibly nicked, and then corrupted in translation, from the requirement that a (UK) microlight pilot who gets a licence "with operational limitations" must have 10 hours total PIC before being allowed to carry passengers? This microlight 10 hours, however, includes any time as solo student - full detail here on BMAA site.

[Whopity]

Is it possibly nicked, and then corrupted in translation

No! This is what happens when you let clerks try and interpret things they have no comprehension of! EASA would certainly not take anything from Microlight flying.

I go on to remind them that one of my essential duties and responsibilities is to ensure his/her future passengers are in competent and safe hands and that their goal today is to demonstrate this as well as just fly the aircraft.

So, if they don't meet the goal they do not pass. The LAPL test is not a lower standard than the PPL test. The reality is that very few will pass at 30 hours.

[MadamBreakneck]

Originally Posted by Whopity

... No! ... EASA would certainly not take anything from Microlight flying...

So they invented the rule all by themselves? Wow! Indeed then, I'm with you - how on earth did they come up with that?! At least the UK microlight version has some detectable justification.

MB

[Whopity]

So they invented the rule all by themselves?

Not quite; the comment was 30 hours is not enough so they just added 10, not thinking about where they added it or what it would acheive You can do a Microlight course in France in half a day.!