Cross channel check out!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it's not too far to France, why don't you suggest that instead of a checkout followed by a cross channel checkout, that your initial checkout is a cross water checkout with the CFI...combine the two into one?
Everyone's happy...
Everyone's happy...
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 47
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I came up against this a couple of years ago. Had a cross channel check with one flight school, school closes down. Joined new school had local checkout all fine, few local flights solo completed. Booked aircraft for a day trip to L2K.
On day of flight I was confronted by the CFI who said I need a CC check.
He was not happy even when I showed him my logbook showing a flight with a instructor 3 months before!
He only gave in when I started flashing life jackets about, presented him with flight plans, customs forms & W&B sheet all completed correctly and started questioning him about the aircrafts papers & who will be claiming the fuel drawback.
Have since completed a IMC rating. One of the reasons for doing so was to get logbook evidence of my experience on instruments for cross channel flights. I don't want to take a instructor everytime I hire from a different flight school its just a way to con a bit more money from you.
On day of flight I was confronted by the CFI who said I need a CC check.
He was not happy even when I showed him my logbook showing a flight with a instructor 3 months before!
He only gave in when I started flashing life jackets about, presented him with flight plans, customs forms & W&B sheet all completed correctly and started questioning him about the aircrafts papers & who will be claiming the fuel drawback.
Have since completed a IMC rating. One of the reasons for doing so was to get logbook evidence of my experience on instruments for cross channel flights. I don't want to take a instructor everytime I hire from a different flight school its just a way to con a bit more money from you.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cross Channel Checkouts are generally a total waste of time. You can cover everything you need to in a 30 minute chat. Any remotely competent PPL should be able to manage a trip to Le Touqet.
I've never understood why schools get their knickers in a twist about crossing the channel.
Actually that's wrong, I do know why. There are too many inexperienced FI's and CFI's who actually consider crossing the channel to be a "big thing" when it really isn't.
It might be in the flying order book, but all that needs to be done is to insert a line such as "..or at the CFI's discretion if the member has relevant experience."
Not rocket science. I've done many trips to Le Touqet with PPL's, but only at their bequest. Many times I've done it for the price of lunch, since I often did naff all. I was just there as a backup and unneeded, especially with members who are hour building. They wanted someone there for a bit of confidence which is fine, but to insist that someone with log book proof and an obvious knowledge of flying abroad needs a checkout is utter madness.
I've never understood why schools get their knickers in a twist about crossing the channel.
Actually that's wrong, I do know why. There are too many inexperienced FI's and CFI's who actually consider crossing the channel to be a "big thing" when it really isn't.
It might be in the flying order book, but all that needs to be done is to insert a line such as "..or at the CFI's discretion if the member has relevant experience."
Not rocket science. I've done many trips to Le Touqet with PPL's, but only at their bequest. Many times I've done it for the price of lunch, since I often did naff all. I was just there as a backup and unneeded, especially with members who are hour building. They wanted someone there for a bit of confidence which is fine, but to insist that someone with log book proof and an obvious knowledge of flying abroad needs a checkout is utter madness.
I love a good misquote:
As old Groucho once said, "I wouldn't want to belong to any Flying Club that would have me as a Member", so buy your own aeroplane and fly it to France if that's what you want to do.
But quite honestly and on a serious note, I do not see what the fuss is all about. If you want to borrow someone else's aircraft you have to comply with their rules, however silly.
Like many of us, I've driven abroad quite a lot and it doesn't phase me. If you're a competent driver you won't have any problems. IMHO driving a car on the Continent is no more complicated than flying to L2K by aeroplane.
Sure, for anyone who hasn't crossed the Channel before, sit them down in the Clubhouse and go through the paperwork with them, but IMHO any PPL holder should be quite capable of flying to France for a bacon-bagette. If he or she is not, how did they get their Licence and how did they pass the Club's check ride?
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others"....is another Marx quote...
As old Groucho once said, "I wouldn't want to belong to any Flying Club that would have me as a Member", so buy your own aeroplane and fly it to France if that's what you want to do.
But quite honestly and on a serious note, I do not see what the fuss is all about. If you want to borrow someone else's aircraft you have to comply with their rules, however silly.
Like many of us, I've driven abroad quite a lot and it doesn't phase me. If you're a competent driver you won't have any problems. IMHO driving a car on the Continent is no more complicated than flying to L2K by aeroplane.
Sure, for anyone who hasn't crossed the Channel before, sit them down in the Clubhouse and go through the paperwork with them, but IMHO any PPL holder should be quite capable of flying to France for a bacon-bagette. If he or she is not, how did they get their Licence and how did they pass the Club's check ride?
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others"....is another Marx quote...
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hotel this week, hotel next week, home whenever...
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuji,
Seems about what I’m trying to say.
LH2,
Yet again, it seems you have not read my post. I am not expecting nor suggesting rigid implementation of the rules for CC's. I am allowed a degree of flexibility by my employer, to use my judgement, to make a ‘club check’ as long as I deem it necessary to be, to include what I deem is needed – to ensure the pilot is safe to operate IN WHATEVER ENVIRONMENT they choose to operate.
The Nanny Ideology – my ar5e.
Everybody seems to accept that it is ‘responsible’ to show a new PPL the ropes, be it on a trip to L2K or Carlisle. What you seem to fail to grasp here is my argument that acting with a responsible attitude often, unfortunately, incurs a cost. You seem happy that that cost is paid by anyone except you.
So.....
“In any case, just to make it clear: I am accusing you and any proponents of the idea of a "compulsory cross channel check" and similar superfluous, ad-hoc "rulemaking" of not acting with your customer's safety and best interests in mind. Whether that's out of greed, fear, or stupidity I wouldn't know and it probably doesn't make a difference anyway.”
....demonstrates that you don’t read....
“Perhaps, as a training venue, it would be better to put your efforts into taking IO540's suggestion onboard and making sure your students come out properly trained in the first place.”
....
Sir, with respect, you know nothing of me, my training methods, my schools philosophy or the quality of the training we provide or the quality of pilot we produce. Sweeping statements based on such limited knowledge speak volumes.
Pistongone
It is not a question of charging someone to show them the local area. All schools will expect a new hirer to demonstrate a degree of competence in the aeroplane before they rent you the kit. I note that you see this as fair.
I also view this as an opportunity for the hirer to review some of the exercises your average PPL doesn’t practice day to day – just to refresh, just to bring the important aspects of each drill back to the forefront of the pilots mind. Just because someone has X hours in the logbook doesn’t mean that they can fly a reasonable or in some cases, SAFE, profile.
Unfortunately, due to the location of the aerodrome I work from, there is a transit to the LFA. So, during the journey into and back from the LFA, we will discuss the local area, the ways in and out – where the local ‘honey pots’ are, where the noise sensitive areas are, local landmarks which define a safe boundary from the alpha airspace to the south and Lutons delta to the North.
Or are you advocating that we do the stalls, unusual attitude recovery, steep turns, PFLs, slow flying, or whatever else I decide is appropriate over the populated areas of Northwest London and all below the 2,500 floor of the TMA? Thought not.
BTW....my shoulder braid and peak cap were put away many years ago. Chinos and Polo for me. Occasionally I’ll even shave for work. I don't expect anybody I fly with to buy me lunch - quite often I buy the coffee's.
Seems about what I’m trying to say.
LH2,
Yet again, it seems you have not read my post. I am not expecting nor suggesting rigid implementation of the rules for CC's. I am allowed a degree of flexibility by my employer, to use my judgement, to make a ‘club check’ as long as I deem it necessary to be, to include what I deem is needed – to ensure the pilot is safe to operate IN WHATEVER ENVIRONMENT they choose to operate.
The Nanny Ideology – my ar5e.
Everybody seems to accept that it is ‘responsible’ to show a new PPL the ropes, be it on a trip to L2K or Carlisle. What you seem to fail to grasp here is my argument that acting with a responsible attitude often, unfortunately, incurs a cost. You seem happy that that cost is paid by anyone except you.
So.....
“In any case, just to make it clear: I am accusing you and any proponents of the idea of a "compulsory cross channel check" and similar superfluous, ad-hoc "rulemaking" of not acting with your customer's safety and best interests in mind. Whether that's out of greed, fear, or stupidity I wouldn't know and it probably doesn't make a difference anyway.”
....demonstrates that you don’t read....
“Perhaps, as a training venue, it would be better to put your efforts into taking IO540's suggestion onboard and making sure your students come out properly trained in the first place.”
....
Sir, with respect, you know nothing of me, my training methods, my schools philosophy or the quality of the training we provide or the quality of pilot we produce. Sweeping statements based on such limited knowledge speak volumes.
Pistongone
It is not a question of charging someone to show them the local area. All schools will expect a new hirer to demonstrate a degree of competence in the aeroplane before they rent you the kit. I note that you see this as fair.
I also view this as an opportunity for the hirer to review some of the exercises your average PPL doesn’t practice day to day – just to refresh, just to bring the important aspects of each drill back to the forefront of the pilots mind. Just because someone has X hours in the logbook doesn’t mean that they can fly a reasonable or in some cases, SAFE, profile.
Unfortunately, due to the location of the aerodrome I work from, there is a transit to the LFA. So, during the journey into and back from the LFA, we will discuss the local area, the ways in and out – where the local ‘honey pots’ are, where the noise sensitive areas are, local landmarks which define a safe boundary from the alpha airspace to the south and Lutons delta to the North.
Or are you advocating that we do the stalls, unusual attitude recovery, steep turns, PFLs, slow flying, or whatever else I decide is appropriate over the populated areas of Northwest London and all below the 2,500 floor of the TMA? Thought not.
BTW....my shoulder braid and peak cap were put away many years ago. Chinos and Polo for me. Occasionally I’ll even shave for work. I don't expect anybody I fly with to buy me lunch - quite often I buy the coffee's.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is good to see a CFI posting here and in my book you have redeemed yourself with your last post 
- if indeed you needed to redeem yourself.
There is an issue in that most of the people on here are solid pilots. Lest we sometimes forget there are a few around who show the most extraordinary degree of recklessness and incompetence. A friend of mine runs a club and you would not believe what a few of the new renters get up to each year - which inevitable is the usual mix of either being unsafe and having absolutely no regard for the aircraft or subsequent users (assuming they are even fit for purpose on return!). The club check usually spots the unsafe ones, but sadly not those who have so little regard for the aircraft - the ones who behave themselves on the check out, but, for example, do everything humanly possible to minimise the tac time with complete disregard to the engine.
Sadly it is inevitably the school and another renter thay pays for their disregard.
- if indeed you needed to redeem yourself. There is an issue in that most of the people on here are solid pilots. Lest we sometimes forget there are a few around who show the most extraordinary degree of recklessness and incompetence. A friend of mine runs a club and you would not believe what a few of the new renters get up to each year - which inevitable is the usual mix of either being unsafe and having absolutely no regard for the aircraft or subsequent users (assuming they are even fit for purpose on return!). The club check usually spots the unsafe ones, but sadly not those who have so little regard for the aircraft - the ones who behave themselves on the check out, but, for example, do everything humanly possible to minimise the tac time with complete disregard to the engine.
Sadly it is inevitably the school and another renter thay pays for their disregard.
"
"
Yes, up to a point, and if I'm there for some other reason, maybe, but I'm not employed, I'm retired and wonder how I ever found time to go to work, and if I agree to fly with you on a day when I had expected to be at home, and therefore drive to the airport just for you - it costs, and I'm on a pension. I ask for a 'donation to my travelling expenses - QED.
I 'give' my 'time' to the club, and enjoy getting some flying, even if it does turn my hair white at times ( did you know that some tractor throttles are pulled BACKWARDS to increase speed ? I didn't, until with an elderly, retired, farmer learning to fly who got low, and slow, at about 100 ft on finals - go on, you work it out - nearly broke his wrist, I did ) but should it also cost me. It doesn't, or I don't instruct, s'easy.
It's a club, they do it for the benefit of the club .....
Yes, up to a point, and if I'm there for some other reason, maybe, but I'm not employed, I'm retired and wonder how I ever found time to go to work, and if I agree to fly with you on a day when I had expected to be at home, and therefore drive to the airport just for you - it costs, and I'm on a pension. I ask for a 'donation to my travelling expenses - QED.
I 'give' my 'time' to the club, and enjoy getting some flying, even if it does turn my hair white at times ( did you know that some tractor throttles are pulled BACKWARDS to increase speed ? I didn't, until with an elderly, retired, farmer learning to fly who got low, and slow, at about 100 ft on finals - go on, you work it out - nearly broke his wrist, I did ) but should it also cost me. It doesn't, or I don't instruct, s'easy.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CCC
It should be a judgment call on behalf of the club/school.
A brand new PPL wanting to go to France may be very nervous about the prospect and an initial check would be prudent. Its not un-common for new pilots to be nervous just flying somewhere 50 miles away.
An experienced pilot who may have joined the club and done a few trips abroad would obviously not need it.
I have done CCC and one of the main points i highlighted was that when the sea and sky were the same colour at some times of the day, it could be dis-orientating and made sure they could ref the instruments etc,etc.....
That stuff you all know and as others have said, the rest can be briefed and completed on the ground.
A brand new PPL wanting to go to France may be very nervous about the prospect and an initial check would be prudent. Its not un-common for new pilots to be nervous just flying somewhere 50 miles away.
An experienced pilot who may have joined the club and done a few trips abroad would obviously not need it.
I have done CCC and one of the main points i highlighted was that when the sea and sky were the same colour at some times of the day, it could be dis-orientating and made sure they could ref the instruments etc,etc.....
That stuff you all know and as others have said, the rest can be briefed and completed on the ground.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote "I came up against this a couple of years ago. Had a cross channel check with one flight school, school closes down. Joined new school had local checkout all fine, few local flights solo completed. Booked aircraft for a day trip to L2K.
On day of flight I was confronted by the CFI who said I need a CC check.
He was not happy even when I showed him my logbook showing a flight with a instructor 3 months before!
He only gave in when I started flashing life jackets about, presented him with flight plans, customs forms & W&B sheet all completed correctly and started questioning him about the aircrafts papers & who will be claiming the fuel drawback."
It sounds like there are some very arrogant people here, who feel that they are above everybody else just because they might have some experience. Throwing toys out the pram cos you are asked to comply with a schools/clubs rules is a very good example of why these people need to be checked out thoroughly - although sadly these are also the sorts of people who feel it is beneath them and will not listen or learn on such a check flight.
Every time, every single time, I have ever had an instructor along with me I have learnt something new, or different or revised certain things. You are never too old or experienced to learn, and attitude is everything here.
On day of flight I was confronted by the CFI who said I need a CC check.
He was not happy even when I showed him my logbook showing a flight with a instructor 3 months before!
He only gave in when I started flashing life jackets about, presented him with flight plans, customs forms & W&B sheet all completed correctly and started questioning him about the aircrafts papers & who will be claiming the fuel drawback."
It sounds like there are some very arrogant people here, who feel that they are above everybody else just because they might have some experience. Throwing toys out the pram cos you are asked to comply with a schools/clubs rules is a very good example of why these people need to be checked out thoroughly - although sadly these are also the sorts of people who feel it is beneath them and will not listen or learn on such a check flight.
Every time, every single time, I have ever had an instructor along with me I have learnt something new, or different or revised certain things. You are never too old or experienced to learn, and attitude is everything here.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every time, every single time, I have ever had an instructor along with me I have learnt something new, or different or revised certain things. You are never too old or experienced to learn, and attitude is everything here.
There is a difference between having a flight with an isntructor enforced on you and your chosing to engage an instructor. Applying your logic you might just as well make every flight with an isntructor.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point I was making is that if you have to do a check flight, make the most of it!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point I was making is that if you have to do a check flight, make the most of it!
It sounds like there are some very arrogant people here
I fly with an instructor maybe three or four times a year what with the MEP and instrument renewals and then I just "enjoy" an added flight every once in a while. There is indeed usually something to learn.
However I fit my flights around my convenience which is why I agree that imposing a check flight without good reason is an unsound policy.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wherever i lay my hat, that's my home...
Age: 44
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the debate here is interesting but seems to have developed into two distinct paths, that are now argueing against each other. There is the path of the necessity of a Check Ride and the necessity of a Cross Channel Check.
My feeling is that yes a Check Ride should be expected, as you have to prove to the club/owner/group/syndicate that you are up to the standard to fly the aircraft. However the Cross Channel Check is not a legal requirement.
I would argue that a club that required you to do a Cross Channel Check in addition to a Check Ride, or refused to combine a Cross Channel Check and Check Ride together are simply out to skin you for another few quid. If they are truly interested in people and flying would take a judgement on cross channel ability based on a conversation with the individual to check for the knowledge of what is required. The only difference, apart from the academic paperwork, between a flight to the continient and a domestic flight is the call at the FIR boundary, and the paperwork could be filled in for a ficticious flight at no real cost.
My feeling is that yes a Check Ride should be expected, as you have to prove to the club/owner/group/syndicate that you are up to the standard to fly the aircraft. However the Cross Channel Check is not a legal requirement.
I would argue that a club that required you to do a Cross Channel Check in addition to a Check Ride, or refused to combine a Cross Channel Check and Check Ride together are simply out to skin you for another few quid. If they are truly interested in people and flying would take a judgement on cross channel ability based on a conversation with the individual to check for the knowledge of what is required. The only difference, apart from the academic paperwork, between a flight to the continient and a domestic flight is the call at the FIR boundary, and the paperwork could be filled in for a ficticious flight at no real cost.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only difference, apart from the academic paperwork, between a flight to the continient and a domestic flight is the call at the FIR boundary, and the paperwork could be filled in for a ficticious flight at no real cost.
The trouble is a check flight will probably not encounter these conditions so becomes of no value from that point of view.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wherever i lay my hat, that's my home...
Age: 44
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Conditions over the Channel can verge on instrument flying and can come as a surprise to the "novice".
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A winter high pressure holds haze and as the sun descends through this layer, it can completely take away your horizon.
However, over the channel you can be in perfect CAVOK conditions and still be in IMC, for all practical purposes. Simply because CAVOK means a flight visibility of more than 9999, but at FL45 (a typical channel crossing altitude, to remain clear of controlled airspace above), the horizon is more than 10 km away. This means that the sea blends into the sky and you see no horizon whatsoever around you. The solution is to fly lower, or look below you for clues about your attitude. Or switch to instruments/AP.
This is something that has to be seen and understood, and is one of the reasons that I can imagine a cross-channel checkout would be required for novice pilots.
Although I have to say I've flown cross-channel a number of times now, never had a checkout, and never had a problem either.
The only difference, apart from the academic paperwork, between a flight to the continient and a domestic flight is the call at the FIR boundary, and the paperwork could be filled in for a ficticious flight at no real cost.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Derby
Age: 45
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Club rules
Flying order book signed.
Whatever it says, you abide by.
As for Cross channel checkouts...
It's not a bad idea.
It is a bad thing though if a club requires you to done again and again. (unless you really managed to bust and bust and bust when you went on your own).
1/60
Whatever it says, you abide by.
As for Cross channel checkouts...
It's not a bad idea.
It is a bad thing though if a club requires you to done again and again. (unless you really managed to bust and bust and bust when you went on your own).
1/60
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone really justify why a PPL with more than minimum hours and an obvious brain in their head who's already undergone a checkout and has flown in Europe many times, needs to have an FI sitting next to them to go across the water?
No? Because I can't and I always been very hot on making sure people are safe before letting them loose in our aircraft.
Flying order books aren't always fantastic documents. Though if you sign it, then you should abide by it, but they can be rewritten if there is something silly in there.
Commonsense should always take precedence over things like FOB's and they can be challenged. I should know. I've rewritten them on many occasions to take into account different things.
The original post in this thread wasn't about Cross Channel Checkouts, but about why someone experienced should have to do it when it is obviously a total waste of time.
I'd always advocate someone going abroad taking someone experienced with them, but it doesn't necessarily have to be an FI. Many PPL's are far more au fait with cross channel flying than your average FI.
The argument about renters damaging aircraft is moot and for a different thread than this. There is no basis that someone coming along will bash your aircraft around just because they like to go to Europe.
Schools/clubs should be encouraging people to be more adventurous, not sticking stupid restrictions on their members. They need the hire business and someone going off for a European jaunt is worth far more than someone who just comes along and bimbles in the local area for an hour a month.
Why make life difficult for people? Is it about managing risk? Is it f**k. It's about inexperienced Schools and FI's trying to excercise control and not really understanding anything about allowing your members to use their discretion or encouraging them to spread their wings. Both of which will actually help the school/club.
Of course checkouts need to be rigourous and standards must be maintained, but there is a time and a place for it. Insisting on stupid unnecessary checks makes no difference to flight safety and might just annoy your customers enough for them to go elsewhere.
No? Because I can't and I always been very hot on making sure people are safe before letting them loose in our aircraft.
Flying order books aren't always fantastic documents. Though if you sign it, then you should abide by it, but they can be rewritten if there is something silly in there.
Commonsense should always take precedence over things like FOB's and they can be challenged. I should know. I've rewritten them on many occasions to take into account different things.
The original post in this thread wasn't about Cross Channel Checkouts, but about why someone experienced should have to do it when it is obviously a total waste of time.
I'd always advocate someone going abroad taking someone experienced with them, but it doesn't necessarily have to be an FI. Many PPL's are far more au fait with cross channel flying than your average FI.
The argument about renters damaging aircraft is moot and for a different thread than this. There is no basis that someone coming along will bash your aircraft around just because they like to go to Europe.
Schools/clubs should be encouraging people to be more adventurous, not sticking stupid restrictions on their members. They need the hire business and someone going off for a European jaunt is worth far more than someone who just comes along and bimbles in the local area for an hour a month.
Why make life difficult for people? Is it about managing risk? Is it f**k. It's about inexperienced Schools and FI's trying to excercise control and not really understanding anything about allowing your members to use their discretion or encouraging them to spread their wings. Both of which will actually help the school/club.
Of course checkouts need to be rigourous and standards must be maintained, but there is a time and a place for it. Insisting on stupid unnecessary checks makes no difference to flight safety and might just annoy your customers enough for them to go elsewhere.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd have to agree with those against this checkout. Like many have said its not a "big thing", and I personally believe it's blown totaly out of proportion.
Sure there are differences in airspace etc, but do you really have to go into this "different" airspace with an instructor to understand it? I don't think so, a bit of reading of the airlaw will do i think.
In my opinion it is a bit of a marketing scheme, sure its their aircraft and they have every right to make sure people are safe, but going all the way across the channel to prove it, what a jip!
The majority of my flying is in Scotland, and I'll tell you, I certainly didn't do a "North Channel" or "Irish Sea" checkout! And no one else at my club does/did either! Is it not much the same?!.. Personally I haven't conquered the infamous channel ...yet.
Sure there are differences in airspace etc, but do you really have to go into this "different" airspace with an instructor to understand it? I don't think so, a bit of reading of the airlaw will do i think.
In my opinion it is a bit of a marketing scheme, sure its their aircraft and they have every right to make sure people are safe, but going all the way across the channel to prove it, what a jip!
The majority of my flying is in Scotland, and I'll tell you, I certainly didn't do a "North Channel" or "Irish Sea" checkout! And no one else at my club does/did either! Is it not much the same?!.. Personally I haven't conquered the infamous channel ...yet.