Ken

I fully agree on the carrot and stick approach. I think what we need is an aircrew professional managed pathway - for all types of aircrew. The use of Enhanced Learning Credits, Standard Learning Credits, accredited learning, preferred suppliers with military discount, the use of Service flying clubs and the removal of the stigma of doing civilian licences will definately help. Also, growing some of our own rear-crew into pilots that will bring with them plenty of experience into the front seat. It won’t fix things over night, but the development of such a pathway will help people manage their own expectations, allow them to be up front with the Service about their aspirations, improve their professional knowledge for the efficiency of the Service and mean that they don’t feel the need to rush off as soon as the get a CPL/fATPL/ATPL.

By the way, for those dreaming of an easy life with the airlines then perhaps they should go with their eyes wide open? This is a good read from BALPA http://blog.balpa.org/Blog/October-2...alance-Pilot-A

LJ

Those articles refer to the operation of military aircraft, not to the licensing of civil pilots.

Methinks thou doth protest too much....:hmm:

Nope, when the nonsense of MFTS fails, as ultimately it surely must, I suspect that there will be a strong sense of Schadenfreude amongst those to whom officialdom failed to listen all those years ago.

Banggearo

Have a look at RA2101 - Aircrew Qualifications https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...01_Issue_3.pdf

It states in para 2 and 2d that a civilian pilot must hold an appropriate civil licence to fly a military registered aircraft. If it’s civil registered its the same. Surely an “appropriate civil licence” requires a suitable rating to fly the aircraft? If the aircraft had no civilian aircraft equivalence then a military CQT would be appropriate, but in the Phenom’s case this is not correct as it has a civil type rating.

I might be wrong, but I hope you are right with your viewpoint.

I do agree, making MFTS work is the only way ahead for us all. :ok:

LJ

Banggearo

I would suggest that it is not clear, is it not worth checking with the CAA to esnure that PART-FCL and the ANO is not going to be broken? Or has that already occurred? I would suggest that just denying it is not a defence because you thought it was alright!

Sorry to be a pain, but to me the ANO and the RA make your position unclear to me. A quick email or phone call to the SARG would clarify. As I say, I hope someone has already checked!

LJ

Whether or not the nonsense of MFTS ultimately fails is one thing, expecting the snake oil companies' civil-licensed pilots to hold the requisite Part-FCL certificates and ratings for the aircraft they fly is quite another.

Banggearo, what legitimate excuse is there for a civil-licensed pilot flying the Phenom 100 not to hold a valid TR?

If the aircraft are military registered (or dual mil/civ) then this should applyif your civilian instructors are ex-military

A bit like a fitness test run
 

MFTS will start lumbering like a fat oaf until it gets underway and start to work.

I maintain serious misgivings about the level of prep for its delivery (rotary side) and I think with everything else going on around defence the goodwill of the experienced will be eroded. So they will start to leave if economic conditions allow.

I don't think it will be anywhere near PFA level - might be lucky to manage the Rockport walk or the grip test with assistance:E

Just give it a fabloned biff-chit now and get it over with:ok:

Paul Livingston moved onto and remains on the board of Ascent to ensure continuity of knowledge - try checking for your facts.

One gathers that 'appropriate civil licence' will indeed now mean a Part-FCL professional licence, Class 1 medical certificate and Class / Type Rating for the aircraft in question. Hence an EMB-550 TR for the Phenom 100, for example.

Then there's the Ford Prefect. That will require civil pilots to hold an SET Class Rating, rather than the SEP Class Rating required to fly Das Teutor....

But I'm sure that the MFTS snake oil salesmen factored this into their business plan....

Only applies if they are still current or reserve and flying for the military not a civilian company as a civilian Instructor.

Does anyone have any more information on where the multi engine outsourcing is likely to go? I’ve heard that there is likely to be a gap between the cease of king air flying and the beginning of Phenom student training?

Read elsewhere the Phenoms are still civil registered because they have not yet had the MoD airworthiness/fit for purpose dhobi mark. And when is that likely. Does anyone else use the Phenom for training?

I think Pakistan has some but for VIP transport not training

Shawbury has it's own issues....
 

Apparently the new helicopters at Shawbury as so small that 90% of crewmen are unable to 'fit' into the cabin safely, which means airworthiness is a huge issue due to crash protection...

Perhaps I think in an unusual way, but surely someone asked a crewman at some point to have a look at the aircraft before they bought an entire fleet of them?!? :ugh:

Or you specify something like “airframe provided must be suitable for 5-95 percentile male/female aircrew”, and “must provide crash worthy seating for all aircrew”...

Bump:

Anything happening, or not happening?

The Pakistan Air Force operate 4 Phenoms for (VIP)? transport. They are not trainers. For the record they are serialled V-4101 to V-4104 and were delivered in 2009.

FYI Airbus Helicopters only supplies crashworthy seating for all of its civil and mil versions..If the seats are removed preventing occupants from using them in flight....?

Many questions still to be answered about who will 'hold the risk' if the aircraft are used yet have been deemed to be unsuitable/unsafe for rearcrew operations.

There still isn't a syllabus for anyone to look at and very few instructors know if they will have a job yet post contract change.

The mil/civ balance has been been constantly assured yet the mil don't look like they have enough QHIs to fill their slots - and since so few are A2s anyway, all the experience will still be in the civ cohort.

The belief is that the contract was significantly underbid so what will be the plan B if it falls over commercially?????

Slow motion train-crash anyone?