Single seat differences training
 

Here's an interesting (so far non) problem.

I'm a CRI, plenty of hours, quite content and competent to conduct and sign off microlight differences training, amongst other things. Ditto tailwheel.

I'm thinking of buying a Minimax - little single seat taildragger in the microlight category.


I have a friend I might want to let fly the Minimax. He's got more hours than me, UK/JAR/EASA CPL, including 3-figure Chipmunk hours and various other taildraggers. However, he's never flown a microlight.


I'd trust him to fly something like a Minimax, with adequate briefing. I'd be content that I could brief and debrief him adequately on flying it until he'd be fine unsupervised.

Early microlight training in the UK of-course was all ground supervised in single seaters, until aeroplanes like the Thruster TST came along in the mid 1980s.

Can I legitimately conduct differences training in it (or entirely by briefing)? I suspect that the answer's "no", but would love to have it proven otherwise.

G

I can't think of any reason why not. Differences training is EASA and quite specific, this is not an EASA aircraft. Your proposal sounds quite reasonable and perfectly legal.

I recently did the same for a pilot with much more experience than your pal. Guidance given to me was that appropriate two-seat differences training to get the microlight sign-off in his log book was needed. Then he could go and fly single seat micros.

We did a couple of hours because he felt that was what he was comfortable with. But frankly he was OK after two circuits.

The big gotcha is the low inertia of the microlight aircraft that catches out the pilot used to heavier stuff at the round-out stage of landing. My view is that that should be experienced first with an instructor in the other seat. But an experienced pilot will "get" it after one or two attempts at landing and shouldn't have any other issues.

Undoubtedly, and I'd not contemplate it with many pilots. Problem is, a Eurostar or C42 would be no preparation for an aircraft like this, and Thruster TSTs are like hens-teeth these days.

I recall when I went from microlights to "group A" being taken aback by the sheer length of landing and take-off runs and particularly the need to keep steering the aeroplane for such a long time when I was used to aircraft that just left the ground a few seconds after opening the throttle, and you landed by pointing at the ground, then missing at the last second.

G

Genghis, I think that since microlight training cannot any longer be conducted solo in a single seater, it follows that differences training cannot either. That's my understanding of the legalities, whether or not it makes practical sense is another matter of course.

You can find microlight schools using Thrusters and AX2000s - some of us feel they're the right aircraft to learn on for exactly the reason you mention!

There is no such thing as single seat differences therefore you can't give any.

Single seat is a personal choice not an EASA or national requirement.

No, but there is such a thing as microlight differences training.

My question was about delivering that on a single seater.

G

Therefore, you cannot conduct differences training on a single-seat aircraft - it is familiarisation training since no dual flight training takes place. If your student holds a SEP rating and has not flown tailwheel, for example, they would require differences training (including flight training) before exercising those privileges on a single seat aircraft.

You may be surprised to find that for a microlight class rating, there is no requirement for an instructor to sign off tailwheel differences (see ANO Schedule 7 Part B Section 2). However, if they are exercising the privileges of their SEP rating in a UK or EASA licence to fly microlights there is.

ifitaint...

My starting assumption also. However, nobody's yet done other than express opinions - mostly agreeing with my original assumption, Whopity thinking that I may be wrong. I'd like if anybody has a reference to see a document reference one way or the other.

Actually I think that most microlight pilots knew that. I'm not sure it's ever caused a problem either - although interpretations that 3-axis.v.flexwing differences, and group-A.v.3-axis are sometimes not required have certainly caused accidents.

G