Trial lessons without an instructor rating
 

Can a professional pilot with no flight instructor rating, who works at a flight school, (but not as an instructor), conduct trial flights for the school?

In other words, "can a pilot who is not an instructor give flying lessons?". What do you think?

the "trial lessons" bit gives it away a bit no?

why would bloggs pay when he/she can't log any time?
how is the school going to charge for it? as a pleasure flight? will that be covered under the school's aoc and/or insurance?

then again i could be completely wrong...who knows.

He can do e.g. tourist flights under an ' A to A ' AOC, but not lessons of any sort.

Which anybody who has passed the air law segments of a professional license should know very well of course.

G

The problem would then come if that person wanted to carry on flying as they couldn't put the flight in their log book. It's one of those things, realistically 45mins in a log book is neither here nor there especially if you're looking at 50+hrs for your average PPL. Not technically correct tho.

bit more of an issue than that Taff. If the CAA got to hear of an operation taking punter's cash in exchange for flights flown by a non-instructor and that organization did not hold an AOC there would be some tricky questions for the Accountable Manager of said organization.

seems like a really good post to emphasise always reading the small print.

"come for a trial lesson at our school*"

*you won't recieve any instruction. you will pay for the hour but not be able to log it. if anyone asks if the flight took place you must respond "negative". you will only touch the controls if the pilot suffers a heart attack (n.b. good luck). if you have any questions then don't expect an answer. thanks for the cash (sucker)

I think we are short changed by our woeful regulator, as these joy rides (which many of them are) can only be done under the guise of "flight training".
IMHO these should be done under an A to A AOC, but generally are not in the UK due to absurd requirements for that piece of paper.
:rolleyes:

In my humble opinion....

The 'trial lesson', or what we call it in the trade - excercise three is actually part of the PPL syllabus where the prospective student can have an experience of the sensations of being on board and in control of a light aircraft for the first time... The Air Experience Flight.. Some people are bought these as gifts etc..

I normally approch this with the normal safety brief but no explanation except for a brief description of the controls etc. I usually brief the prospective student on the actions for takoff then talk him or her through it as they do it. They will do as much flying as they want during this 'lesson' and I will normally attempt to get them to do as much of the landing as possible.

This flight is usually any flying clubs front window and if undertaken as above can't see what the problem is. You can't expect prospective students to indulge in spending money before they try the flying out - god knows they may not like it!!

As to CPLs doing it without FI --- don't think so!!! Spend the money get and FI!!!

Once EASA comes in next year trial lessons are banned. They are to be called "Introductory Lesson".

A CPL without FI rating cannot conduct a trial lesson as it is an introductory flight. It would count as a PPL hire and the CPL should pay 50% of the cost.

Which particular part of the EU Regulation 'bans' trial lessons?

There is surely a big difference between "banned" and "the name will be changed".

G

Trial Flight and Introductory Lesson are just fancy names used to attract customers who are not initially coming with the intention of learning to fly.

A flying lesson is exactly that no matter what else you might call it, and can only be given by a person holding a Flight Instructor rating. If a person pays for a flight that is not a lesson, then its public transport and needs to be conducted under the auspices of an AOC. Flying clubs are exempt from the requirement to have an AOC solely for the purpose of giving lessons. Private flights are another issue, people who walk through the door and pay for a flight are not going on a private flight. Ask yourself a very simple question, would the flight still go if the said person did not pay to go on it!

There are numerous reports of unqualified pilots giving trial lessons, if they are caught the CAA will prosecute them if they can get enough evidence. Usually the punter doesn't complain, so its down to people in the industry to report such activity.

Different countries have different rules. In France an aeroclub can allow members with PPL and over 200 hours P1, 30 hours in the last 12 months, and a class two medical within the last year (whatever the pilot's age) to conduct air experience flights as long as this does not represent more than ten per cent of the club's total hours on its SEP fleet. The aircraft can be full, back seats occupied, and the club can charge any rate it chooses, no payment to the pilot. This is in addition to any air experience flights sold at an airshow run by the club. Not saying if it is good or bad, just pointing out that not everyone has the same rules. The time can't count towards the passenger's licence if he or she decides to do a PPL.

:} :8: :yuk: :p :)... Very Funny ......... Oh wait you appear to be serious :rolleyes:

Would a professional pilot, who works at a flight school, but is not an instructor, conduct trial flights for the school? A professional pilot will know the bounds of his privilege to fly for hire, and fly within them....

Why would a "professional" pilot who is not an instructor work at a flying school? This would imply that he is either the owner, a ground instructor or perhaps the cleaner!

Because there's a job to be done and he's still looking for a flying job presumably.

G

Almost as good as the FI without a CPL getting paid a relative fortune for washing aircraft and answering the phones. :eek:

Anyone got a reference regarding EASA's potential line on trail lessons?

do you mean trail or trial...