PPL conversion from EFT
 

Hi there,

The RAF have an agreement with the CAA which allows Elementary Flight Training students to be granted a JAR PPL(A) once they have completed the EFT crs, EFT ground school and in addition:-

1) Air Law and Radio ground exams
2) A solo qualifying cross country flight of 150nm including 2 full stops etc.

Not all students get the chance to finish this on their EFT squadron.

That’s the back ground info... Now for the questions...

How many hours of refresh/conversion training would an RAF flying club want one to do to be able to fly this solo x/c flight? (Based on 60hrs EFT training and only the Tutor type)

Can the qualifying cross country be in a TMG but still allow you to claim a JAR PPL with SEP as you have completed all other flying, including the Skills test (FHT), on an SEP (Grob Tutor 115e)?

If not would licence would you get?

Any FIs out there willing to help out???


Many thanks and best wishes,

OL

1. If you have your course accreditation certificate, then your additional theoretical knowledge requirements are as you state and you will be exempt the radio practical test.

2. How long to convert onto a different SEP Class aeroplane will be entirely up to you and the Club. You will obviously need to cover general handling, circuits etc - probably 2-3 hours minimum plus some solo? You probably have not covered 'precautionary landings' (forced landings with power) before, so you will need to be taught these as the Examiner may require you to fly one on your PPL Skill Test.

3. You will have to have completed a total of 5 hour solo cross-country, including the Q X-C, before you submit your licence application. This must all be completed on SEP Class aeroplanes.

4. The PPL Skill Test includes a navigation section, including some use of radio navigation aids. The aircraft used for the test must therefore be suitable for this purpose.

Historically, we have noted that many ex-EFT pilots are rather weak at VFR navigation and have a tendency to feature-crawl on the 1/4 mill map. Some have been unable even to plan a basic navigation exercise using a Dalton computer. Still-air timing and MDR drift are not accurate enough - you must know how to use a navigation computer. You will also be required to produce a weight and balance calculation and a take-off performance calculation for the PPL Skill Test.

Beags, i am intrigued by this comment. Firstly, the reason for lack of Dalton Confuser proficiency is that it's not taught on the EFT syllabus any more. Are you implying that it should be used in the air? If so, that would have a dramatic impact on the lookout (OK, so not a factor for most PPLs := )
If you mean using it in the planning phase, then you would still require the original MDR when, inevitably, the planning wind is incorrect. The Nav cycle, with FPs/Tps every 4-6 mins allows for the minor innacuracies of MDR whilst maintaining optimum airmanship, IMHO.

Would you like to clarify how the PPL Nav syllabus teaches planning and flying Trk/ETA?

TVM,
Uncle G:ok:

Thanks for your reply Beagle,

As far as I know a skills test is not a requirement for those wishing to convert their EFT into a PPL as the Final Handling Test (done as part of EFT) more than covers this aspect of the PPL requirement.

The EFT syllabus also includes the required amount of cross – country flying for PPL accreditation.

Is it then possible to fly the cross country using a TMG and still apply for a JAR-PPL?

Then adding an SEP licence to the PPL?

OL

OL - as far as I'm aware, there is no credit towards the TMG Rating requirements allowable for military training other than 10% of your PIC time to a maximum of 10 hours.

If you have been presented with an EFT partial course completion certificate (annotated with a Yellow Border) you will be credited only the elements completed during EFT training. You will be required to complete the outstanding elements to qualify for licence issue. You will indeed be given credit for the PPL(A) skill test - but only for a period of 24 months from the date of the Final Handling Test.

You have 2 options:

1. Complete PPL(A) requirements on SEP aeroplanes, including the Q X-C on an SEP aeroplane. You will need to prove that you can plan and fly a dual navigation exercise before anyone will let you fly a Q X-C solo! Once you have completed all PPL(A) SEP requirements, you could then do some TMG training and take the TMG Class Rating Skill Test.

2. Receive JAR TMG dual and solo training on TMGs, including the Q X-C on a TMG. Then add a SEP Class Rating later.

You cannot complete part-SEP and part-TMG training for a PPL(A) - it has to be one or the other.

Your cheapest option would be to finish your PPL(A) requirements first on SEP Class aeroplanes at a RAFFCA club. Then do some TMG training and take the TMG Class Rating Skill Test. When you have a licence with both ratings, you will be able to keep both valid with hours flown on either class - which can work out substantially cheaper than revalidating on SEP Class aeroplanes.

Uncle Ginsters, I'm not suggesting for a moment that anyone should use a Dalton in flight for PPL navigation. God knows how you deduced that.... What I am saying is that some ex-EFT folk haven't even been able to use a navigation computer to plan a simple navigation flight on the ground! They have assumed still-air IAS = planned GS and only applied MDR to the track to obtain the heading. That is insufficiently accurate - unless you happen to be flying on a still-air day!

Sorry Beags, Uncle G is not the only one to have misunderstood your comments. Through training I was taught to use both the dalton and MDR, the only thing I use now (apart from GPS!!) is MDR. It works an absolute treat, tell me when a PPL holder has ever had to be that accurate their timing??

Boy

If you gash your planning by using 'still air' timing and IAS = TAS, you will introduce an avoidable error of at least 10-12% in even a 10kt W/V at 2000ft. This will mean that on a typical 50 mile leg you will begin the leg with an error already greater than that allowed in the PPL Skill Test.

If your TLAR/still air 'planning' results in an estimate greater than the maximum allowable for the PPL Skill Test before you take-off, you will fail the test before even getting airborne.

Your choice to be gash - but it takes a very short time indeed to plan using a navigation computer. Which is more essential the slower the aicraft, due to the greater effect of wind.

All PPL examiners have a mandate to reduce airspace violations by private pilots. To do this, we insist on the applicant planning correctly. I understand that the RN and Army do still require the use of a navigation computer for pre-flight planning, but for whatever reason the RAF does not?

Beagle I'm not suggesting that you can fly a route based on still air, I am suggesting that MDR (albeit if done on the ground and backed up in the air) applied to both the heading and speed will be as accurate as the Dalton (or whatever planning computer). I don't ever remember my Navy mates at linton or valley using a computer for pre flight planning. In my opinion MDR is the quickest and easiest way to reach your target/turning point.

Fair enough if you can work out the MDR groundspeed with sufficient accuracy... I haven't seen any ex-EFT pilot bother to do that - or to work out estimates at fix points with acceptable accuracy after having MDR'd the groundspeed.

But in a recreational flying environment, why make things so hard for yourself so that, in flight, you have to correct for not just airborne errors, but also basic planning errors? A few minutes with a navigation computer makes things much, much easier!

Where MDR certainly does come into its own is for unplanned in-flight diversions.

Beags,

Surely to correct IAS to TAS at lowish level (a few thousand feet) one merely multiplies the NM per minute that you're flying at by the thousands of feet you're flying at and subtract that from your desired TAS to reach your IAS.... or something to that effect... seem to remember doing something like that in the days before I solely flew at low level or high level... One can then use ones clock face rule to relatively accurately calculate your necessary heading and IAS to achieve track & TOT (or revise your eta).

Still wind planning and no need to ever touch the confuser (haven't even touched it since EFT Groundschool, found it in the bottom of a box whilst re-orging my loft the other day!) Never seen anyone in my neck of the woods using one!

"Still wind planning and no need to ever touch the confuser (haven't even touched it since EFT Groundschool, found it in the bottom of a box whilst re-orging my loft the other day!) Never seen anyone in my neck of the woods using one!"

Why do you find it so very hard to do something which any 17 year old PPL student is required to do?

Or do you somehow view the use of navigation computers as a sign of inadequacy?

Do make sure you plan accurately if you ever end up driving one of Pusser's boats near any rocks.......

MDR seems accurate enough at 420kts :O
Anyhow, with a computer you are working out a very precise figure with a smaller tollerence than you can fly within and all on a met mans guestemate! Whilst the calculation is accurate you need accurate info to start with. Its often much MORE accurate to have an idea before you fly and amend your MDR as you see fit in the air as the wind changes.
Always comes out as 2 degrees anyway! ;)
(I do however feel I am preaching to the converted, all bar one here though!)

bpster; at a TAS of 90Kt a wind speed of just 18 Kt will have about the same effect as a wind speed of 82Kt will have on you at 420Kt! I tend to use MDR myself for preflight planning but, and I think we can all agree here, accuracy is very important!

Regular practice is required to keep up MDR skills and indeed to keep up to speed on the spin wheel; if you are a part time leisure pilot why spend time doing both? I can plan just as accurately with MDR as I can with the spin wheel and as a professional I have time to keep up to speed on both so I can and do use either as convenient.

3 Point

Sorry Beags, I'm not too familiar with the PPL syllabus. As you know, in the RAF at EFT we're training to leave some capacity for actually doing a job, not just getting from 'a' to 'b'. They are taught to use TAS corrections for ML Nav, though.

The MDR is never going to be 100% accurate but it does enough to funnel the student pilot into a reasonable area to apply 'Big to Small' to find their Fix or Turning Pt without undue effort. Surely for the lowest common denomenator PPL, that should also ring true, although they may be using a higher %age of their grey matter to even "gash it" , as you so eloquently put it.

And if you can "gash it" routinely, then i might suggest that you also have a better chance of successfully "gashing it" when under the duress of an emergency diversion-type situation?!?

Uncle G :ok:

You might consider the 'PPL student' to be the lowest common denominator, but my experience does not support that.

The lowest common denominator is someone who is gash and can't be ar$ed to put in any effort pre-flight. Saw it at the UAS when I was an A2 on the 'dog, and I see it now from some ex-EFT people converting to PPL.

Bear in mind the minimum legal in-flight conditions in which a basic PPL holder may fly with passengers after obtaining his/her licence (3km, clear of cloud and in sight of the surface), compared to the mollycoddling weather in which the EFT pilot will be grudgingly allowed to fly solo and perhaps you might understand why we insist on proper planning.

Capacity for actually doing a job? Oh purrleaze - that's nonsense.

I'm always amazed at the comments from UAS/EFT QFIs about navigation. Maybe it's because it's now as it always was on the UAS, they simply can't be bothered to put in any effort to teach navigation properly. Much easier to sit there and criticise a 28-day "Show us yer aeros" check than to teach medium level VFR navigation properly.....

Except that they can't even afford to teach aeros these days...:rolleyes:

Beags,
Without turning this into an 'us and them' scenario, i do beg to differ.
I was not implying that PPL flyers are the lowest common denominator, but referring to the fact the the techniques must cater for the lowest common denominator amongst PPL students, which, from my knowledge is lower than anything that i've seen in the full-time teaching of EFT (not UAS!). Of course, i'm sure that would not include anyone lucky enough to benefit from your teachings. But there are others out there.....

I think that you'll find the new (or rejuvenated) EFT system somewhat different from your days on the 'dog with a UAS. We are teaching full-time students on a consolidated course. If we don't teach something, it's not because we can't be arsed, but because it has been deemed superfluous the the requirements of basic VFR Nav in a SEP, and leads on to the techniques required to fly other aircraft downstream.

The PPL clearly has some other aims including, as you say, the students' desire to go off solo in the minimum weather just because he can. That still doesn't necessarily make it sensible if said pilot hasn't the required experience to deal with those conditions, even if he can work out his ETA beforehand on a Dalton Computer.

Uncle G:ok:

Eft - Ppl
 

Dont get me started on RAF flying hours compared with PPL. EFT fine I can cope with but these t**ts who fly for UAS and then leave who have then got hours towards PPL. Somebody like me ground trade pays the full whack to fly!!!!!!!!!!!...............grrrrrrrrrrrrrr

NM

and relax..............

To put in a view from both sides of the fence, the planning that i did for my RAF flying compared to the PPl nav using the old dalton/crp5 was easily as good if not more flexible than the intricate PPL way.

I have flown with civillian freinds that think that the planning on the ground is all that is needed and they become a bit lost when it comes to MDR in the air as opposed to RAF EFT that gives a bit more mental flexability when you encounter these problems.

Another point is that many of these PPL holders rely way too much on their GPS to get them anywhere, in my opinion the RAF training enables you to read maps to a higher standard enabling better emerg/div planning.

As for the comments about flying weather limits, i would say that the PPL limits are too lax and there is lip service paid to them from my experience of civi flying clubs (including ones on RAF bases). For the experience levels of a new PPL pilot this can get them into a whole world of hurt.

Beagle, your comment about route crawling by RAF EFT studes doing PPL surpriuses me as if i had even attempted to do this during the nav in EFT and on i would have got my head in my hands to play with.

Neilmac the hours that these guys do on UAS should count towards their PPL as it is the best flying trainig that they will get compared to some of the civillian training on offer out there.

Finally, if you wait until you get your wings you can get a PPL by doing the exams and a skills test only! A bit cheaper than the other option.:)

Cheers, HE77:ok:

Neilmac

Interesting sentiments there old bean

Errrm the UAS used to/teaches??? EFT so how can you not have a problem with EFT accreditation but yet have a problem with the UAS system providing it. As I am sure is the case, EFT accreditation will die a death with no studes getting anywhere near enough experience henceforth, however there are enough guys still around who benefitted from EFT on the UAS and will, quite rightly IMHO be able to obtain a PPL relatively simply/cheaply.

It is or certainly was a competitive issue getting onto a UAS, even more so staying on it in a flying capacity for the required amount of time to walk away with EFT in the bag.

.....and quite rightly so;)

Detect a strong whiff of sour grapes there me old. :

HE77
with regards to getting a PPL when you have your 'wings', I beg to differ. I think the term they use is Qualified Service Pilot (QSP) which is more than just your 'wings', after all they are only on loan to you 'til you are CR. (may vary depending on role) At ther very least I think you need to have completed an OCU course before the CAA considers you worthy of a mighty PPL............cue BEagle as this may well be complete bolleaux.

You're partially correct - the bolleaux of 'CR' before being considered a 'QSP' for PPL purposes was changed over a year ago.

By me - with some supportive comments from HQ CFS - after liaison with the CAA.

For FW pilots who have just been awarded their wings, all you need is:

1. JAA Class 2 medical certificate.
2. Pass Air Law&Op Procs, Human Perf. and Comms (PPL).
3. Become current on a SEP Class aeroplane.
4. Pass the PPL Skill Test (you will be credited the navigation section).
5. Fill out forms and pay money to CAA.