Is it possible...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it possible...
to learn for the PPL on a PFA approved group A aircraft that is part owned?? As I understand it there would possibly be a significant excess or premium as regards insurance
I have tried searching this and other forums with no joy. I have had a look at the PFA website but to register for their forums you need to be a member..
Any advice would be appreciated..
Rudenot2
I have tried searching this and other forums with no joy. I have had a look at the PFA website but to register for their forums you need to be a member..
Any advice would be appreciated..
Rudenot2
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SE England
Age: 70
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The document you are looking for is on the PFA website under "Engineering", then "Techincal Leaflets". Don't ask me why.
You do not need to be a PFA member to access this information.
Try here:
http://www.pfa.org.uk/Engineering%20...20Aircraft.pdf
Alternatively, if you are a PFA member, contact the PFA Pilot Coaching Scheme for advice.
Regards,
Cookie
You do not need to be a PFA member to access this information.
Try here:
http://www.pfa.org.uk/Engineering%20...20Aircraft.pdf
LEARNING TO FLY IN A PFA AIRCRAFT
Learning to fly in a PFA aircraft is quite legal, but the following conditions apply.
1. An owner may receive remunerated (or un-remunerated) flying instruction in his own
PFA aircraft provided he is a ‘sole’ owner and not part of a group ownership.
(Members of the owner’s immediate family would also be acceptable).
2. The solo part of the PPL syllabus can be carried out in a single seat PFA aircraft as long as the aircraft is similar to that being used for dual instruction, is suitably equipped, and the instructor is satisfied that it is compatible with accepted flying instructional practices.
3. ‘Simulated’ instrument training, as required by the PPL syllabus, is acceptable in a PFA aircraft provided it is suitably equipped.
4. Examination, as required by the PPL syllabus, may be carried out in a PFA aircraft, but only if un-remunerated.
5. All flying training must be conducted from a licensed airfield.
6. All flying instruction has to be at the discretion of, and under the control of the flying instructor who is legally responsible for the student pilot when that student is flying.
There is a mandatory requirement for certain types of remunerated flying instruction to be given and received by members of the same flying club, depending largely on the qualifications held by the instructor. Broadly this applies to PPL and restricted BCPL instructors but not to holders of non-restricted BCPLs, CPLs and ATPLs who also hold a (qualified) flying instructor rating and have a Type Rating for the aircraft being used for
the instruction. Assistant flying instructors can only work under the supervision of the holder of a flying instructor rating.
Further information is available from the CAA’s Flight Crew Licensing Department at Gatwick, Telephone 01293 573700.
Additionally, PFA Members may contact PFA Engineering for advice.
Learning to fly in a PFA aircraft is quite legal, but the following conditions apply.
1. An owner may receive remunerated (or un-remunerated) flying instruction in his own
PFA aircraft provided he is a ‘sole’ owner and not part of a group ownership.
(Members of the owner’s immediate family would also be acceptable).
2. The solo part of the PPL syllabus can be carried out in a single seat PFA aircraft as long as the aircraft is similar to that being used for dual instruction, is suitably equipped, and the instructor is satisfied that it is compatible with accepted flying instructional practices.
3. ‘Simulated’ instrument training, as required by the PPL syllabus, is acceptable in a PFA aircraft provided it is suitably equipped.
4. Examination, as required by the PPL syllabus, may be carried out in a PFA aircraft, but only if un-remunerated.
5. All flying training must be conducted from a licensed airfield.
6. All flying instruction has to be at the discretion of, and under the control of the flying instructor who is legally responsible for the student pilot when that student is flying.
There is a mandatory requirement for certain types of remunerated flying instruction to be given and received by members of the same flying club, depending largely on the qualifications held by the instructor. Broadly this applies to PPL and restricted BCPL instructors but not to holders of non-restricted BCPLs, CPLs and ATPLs who also hold a (qualified) flying instructor rating and have a Type Rating for the aircraft being used for
the instruction. Assistant flying instructors can only work under the supervision of the holder of a flying instructor rating.
Further information is available from the CAA’s Flight Crew Licensing Department at Gatwick, Telephone 01293 573700.
Additionally, PFA Members may contact PFA Engineering for advice.
Regards,
Cookie
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The main prob is that remunerated flying instruction is Aerial Work, for which the a/c needs to be maintained to Public Transport Standards, which a PFA aircraft cannot be.
The requirement for training to be carried out from a licensed a/d referrred to in the PFA "advice" is diddly squat to do with the aircraft, it applies to all ab-initio training in what used to be called Group A (now SEP). I'd also be wary of the advice because it is dated May 2005 whereas the current ANO came into force in August 2005 and Art 126 was amended in October 2005
The ANO
Art 126 covers the requirement for the a/d to be licensed.
Art 11 (4)
I haven't turned up anything that would prevent un-remunerated flying training in a PFA type (i.e. not aerial work).
The requirement for training to be carried out from a licensed a/d referrred to in the PFA "advice" is diddly squat to do with the aircraft, it applies to all ab-initio training in what used to be called Group A (now SEP). I'd also be wary of the advice because it is dated May 2005 whereas the current ANO came into force in August 2005 and Art 126 was amended in October 2005
The ANO
Art 126 covers the requirement for the a/d to be licensed.
Art 11 (4)
(4) With the permission of the CAA, an aircraft flying in accordance with a national permit to fly may fly for the purpose of aerial work which consists of the giving of instruction in flying or the conduct of flying tests, subject to the aircraft being owned or operated under arrangements entered into by a flying club of which the person giving the instruction or conducting the test and the person receiving the instruction or undergoing the test are both members.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike,
The leaflet I linked to refers to advice on Learing to Fly in a PFA aircraft, which was the initial question asked, and is therefore ab-initio. Your quote from the ANO below is almost verbatim what is said at point six on the leaflet.
If there is anything which is factually incorrect on the leaflet, please contact me and I will get it changed.
Regards,
Cookie
The requirement for training to be carried out from a licensed a/d referrred to in the PFA "advice" is diddly squat to do with the aircraft, it applies to all ab-initio training in what used to be called Group A (now SEP). I'd also be wary of the advice because it is dated May 2005 whereas the current ANO came into force in August 2005 and Art 126 was amended in October 2005
Art 11 (4)
Quote:
(4) With the permission of the CAA, an aircraft flying in accordance with a national permit to fly may fly for the purpose of aerial work which consists of the giving of instruction in flying or the conduct of flying tests, subject to the aircraft being owned or operated under arrangements entered into by a flying club of which the person giving the instruction or conducting the test and the person receiving the instruction or undergoing the test are both members.
Quote:
(4) With the permission of the CAA, an aircraft flying in accordance with a national permit to fly may fly for the purpose of aerial work which consists of the giving of instruction in flying or the conduct of flying tests, subject to the aircraft being owned or operated under arrangements entered into by a flying club of which the person giving the instruction or conducting the test and the person receiving the instruction or undergoing the test are both members.
Regards,
Cookie
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not necessarily saying it's factually incorrect, simply that it's including stuff that is a requirement anyway and has nothing to do with whether or not it's on a Permit (and please note that there's no difference in the rules if it's on a PFA Permit or a CAA Permit).
I have a little bit of an issue with the provision of what to the unitiated might appear to be authoritative information without any reference to the law. TL 2.09 doesn't provide any references. Paras 1 to 4 refer to PFA aircraft as though there is some difference between them and any other Permit aircraft and paras 5 and 6 are no different to the requirements for learning to fly in any SEP, Permit or otherwise.
Sorry if that sounds pedantic or curmudgeonly, it's not intended to be. As you probably know, I am a PFA member and fly an aircraft that is on a PFA Permit. The real issue is not whether or not it's a PFA aircraft but whether or not the instruction is remunerated. That's the question that determines whether or not it is aerial work, which in turn determines the airworthiness certification requirements of the aircraft. There is an exemption for C of A maintained to Private Cat standards, which is explained in AIC 48/06 (White125) and there's another exemption for Ex-Mil Permit Aircraft explained in AIC 60/06 (White 128). There is also an exemption in the ANO that allows instructors to be remunerated when giving instruction in Microlights. As far as I am aware there is no exemption for Permit a/c that are not Ex-Mil or Microlights, though I will be happy to be proved wrong. In the absence of any exemption its back to "With the permission of the CAA", a bit of wording noticeably absent from the PFA advice.
All of that said, it is my personal view that a Permit and a C of A are simply two different ways of satisfying the powers that be that an aircraft is airworthy. If the aircraft is airworthy (you find me someone in the CAA prepared to say that an a/c with a valid Permit is not) then it's suitability as a training machine should be determined by its characteristics not by the method by which its airworthiness is certified. Just my 2p's worth.
Mike
I have a little bit of an issue with the provision of what to the unitiated might appear to be authoritative information without any reference to the law. TL 2.09 doesn't provide any references. Paras 1 to 4 refer to PFA aircraft as though there is some difference between them and any other Permit aircraft and paras 5 and 6 are no different to the requirements for learning to fly in any SEP, Permit or otherwise.
Sorry if that sounds pedantic or curmudgeonly, it's not intended to be. As you probably know, I am a PFA member and fly an aircraft that is on a PFA Permit. The real issue is not whether or not it's a PFA aircraft but whether or not the instruction is remunerated. That's the question that determines whether or not it is aerial work, which in turn determines the airworthiness certification requirements of the aircraft. There is an exemption for C of A maintained to Private Cat standards, which is explained in AIC 48/06 (White125) and there's another exemption for Ex-Mil Permit Aircraft explained in AIC 60/06 (White 128). There is also an exemption in the ANO that allows instructors to be remunerated when giving instruction in Microlights. As far as I am aware there is no exemption for Permit a/c that are not Ex-Mil or Microlights, though I will be happy to be proved wrong. In the absence of any exemption its back to "With the permission of the CAA", a bit of wording noticeably absent from the PFA advice.
All of that said, it is my personal view that a Permit and a C of A are simply two different ways of satisfying the powers that be that an aircraft is airworthy. If the aircraft is airworthy (you find me someone in the CAA prepared to say that an a/c with a valid Permit is not) then it's suitability as a training machine should be determined by its characteristics not by the method by which its airworthiness is certified. Just my 2p's worth.
Mike
