LAA membership for group owned aircraft????

[NigelOnDraft]

However I don't support the idea that a member should be penalised because someone else is not a member

Why should anyone be penalised? Presumably it is a group condition of being an owner that they are an LAA member? Not keep membership up to date, forfeit ownership share

NoD

[oscarisapc]

Biennial flight review - not in a group owned aircraft

AIC W071/2009 specifically excludes LAA members with a group owned aircraft from engaing a paid instructor to conduct the biennial flight review in the permit aircraft. OK if the instructor does it for free (hard on the instructor as most don't earn much and this is work for them) but otherwise it is forbidden. However, if you are a sole owner you are allowed to engage an instuctor.

As far as members of a group not all being members of the LAA, if it is a condition of the permit that all members should belong then it is up to all the members to ensure that they do. It is not the LAA's place to police this. It could be interesting in the event of an accident if the insurance company finds that a pilot is flying outside the conditions of the permit, but it is certainly a situation where the other members of the group should put pressure on the non member to play fair.The LAA provides good value in its permit system and those of us operating a permit aircraft should be aware of our responsibilities in return.

[Rod1]

“Presumably it is a group condition of being an owner that they are an LAA member? Not keep membership up to date, forfeit ownership share ”

NO.

In the case of an existing group there would be no such clause. Remember that the LAA used to support groups and advertised the only one member required as a sign of this. Most group rules also require a unanimous agreement to mod the rules. Add this together and one member from an 8 man group can cause a lot of problems for the fully paid up 7. This did happen!

“that a pilot is flying outside the conditions of the permit”

There is no requirement to be a member to fly an LAA aircraft, only for owners to be members. In some cases this includes your wife…

There is no problem with one member owning 100 aircraft and loaning them out to 1000 non members to fly… Or running the group as a company, or having a side letter agreement or any one of a 1000 other dodges.

If you want the full arguments have a look at the PFA BB, as we did many many pages and it is far too boring to do it all over again.

Rod1

[Maoraigh1]

Post#22 "AIC W071/2009 specifically excludes LAA members with a group owned aircraft from engaing a paid instructor to conduct the biennial flight review in the permit aircraft."
I searched " AIC W071/2009 ", and the suggested "AICW071/2009" on the CAA site, and nothing was found. I know of LAA group members who have done their PPL biennialflight with an instructor in a group permit aircraft. Neither instructor nor examiner appeared to have heard of this. (I thought a group aircraft could not be used for instruction, for a qualification, unless on a public C of A, but this is not instruction.)

[Mark 1]

AIC white 71 is Here.

I think there is an exemption for PFA coaches (mostly CRIs) but best check with them. Letting people do their revalidation in their own aircraft seems eminently sensible. Pity the powers that be aren't more enlightened.

[Mike Cross]

Nowt wrong with doing your revalidation in a group owned aircraft providing the instructor is not paid for it.

It's in similar vein to the nonsense that says that you can be taught to fly by a PPL FI with a Class 2 medical. However the exchange of spondulicks renders it a much more dangerous practice, requiring a CPL and a Class 1 (presumably to ensure the instructor does not have a heart attack while carrying the dosh to the bank). At least that one is being addressed.

FWIW LAA does not set the Permit Conditions, CAA does. CAA is the regulator, LAA is an approved organisation.

[Solar]

Mike

While I agree that if you want to fly a permit aircraft it's only right that you should be a member I'm not sure about forcing it on everyone in a group owned aircraft, as far as implying that it's the CAA who sets the requirements for the permit that may be so to some extent but I understand that it's the LAA that have the group/member requirement.

I know it's been done to death on other forums but isn't that the point of forums.

[Maoraigh1]

Thanks Mark 1. The situation is clearly as I believed. Revalidation is O.K. I've copied the CAA statement below.
"3.3 This means that it is not possible to conduct training towards the grant of a licence or rating in a jointly owned aircraft but it is possible
to renew or revalidate existing licences and ratings or to undertake differences, familiarisation and refresher training."

[Steve N]

Recently clarified by CAA so all ok now:

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4_784.pdf

Steve

[oscarisapc]

Biennial review in group owned LAA permit aircraft

Thanks Steve for that link. It appears to say that group owners of aircraft licenced under EASA (which I think includes those with a Permit to Fly issued by the LAA) can pay for instruction in their own aircraft provided they have a licence to do so and the instruction is for the purposes of certification, renewal etc. This contradicts the table at the end of AIC W071/2009 which quite clearly says they cannot. (For the folk who found this AIC difficult to locate, it is easily traced with Google). Since this exemption to the ANO presumably outranks a mere AIC, we ought to be thankful for an outbreak of common sense at the CAA.

[Mike Cross]

An LAA Permit is NOT an EASA Permit to Fly. It is a National Permit to Fly.

From the ANO, readily accessible and not Rocket Science.

'EASA permit to fly' means a permit to fly issued for an EASA aircraft under and in accordance with subpart P of Part 21;

'EASA aircraft' means an aircraft which is required by the Basic EASA Regulation and any implementing rules adopted by the Commission in accordance with that Regulation to hold an EASA certificate of airworthiness, an EASA restricted certificate of airworthiness or an EASA permit to fly;

'National permit to fly' means a permit to fly issued under article 21;

21 (1) Subject to paragraph (2), the CAA must issue for any non-EASA aircraft registered in the United Kingdom a national permit to fly if it is satisfied that the aircraft is fit to fly having regard to the airworthiness of the aircraft and the conditions to be attached to the permit.

One purpose of the EASA PtF is to allow an aircraft that is required to have a C of A but which does not have a valid one (e.g. due to damage) to be ferried.


Incidentally, in respect of the original question that started this thread I think LAA would be on a very sticky wicket if they tried to refuse Permit issue on grounds other than the CAA requirements. Art 21 of the ANO reproduced above mandates that the CAA SHALL issue a Permit to a qualifying aircraft. LAA is an Approved Organisation and issues the Permit on behalf of the CAA, not on its own account. As I hope I've made clear, I'm all in favour of owners of LAA Permit Aircraft being members but I think it's daft to have a rule that you cannot enforce.

[mikehallam]

Mike Cross I applaud your detailed knowledge of various national & international aviation Quango bodies' regulations & your help in providing answers here to difficult questions as to their interpretation.

However I wouldn't accept your proposition that LAA rules which can, or are broken & difficult to enforce, should not be in place. That's a poor reason: criminals also manage to elude the full power of our Kindom's Law, but we don't repeal the respective Acts.

Mike, can't you please accept that the LAA is a mutual organisation, run for its members by its members, after much consideration we have ruled that all folk benefitting from their Permit services must be ordinary members & pay accordingly.

Why do you keep banging on about hypothetical or potential recalcitrant Group owners not contributing ? Is it that you know of a single unresolved example, or do you just like controversy? ..............................

mikehallam.

[ak7274]

Why is it unenforcable?.........The inspector could ask for all relevant paperwork before issuing a recommendation for permit. Any pilot who wishes to do his/her Biennial in a permit a/c must be a member of the LAA and a part owner.

Or according to some obscure annexe "have 'free' access to a permit a/c"

I am starting to get concussion with all the why's and wherefores of this.

If you fly an LAA machine you should be a member of the LAA. If you aren't......then sell your share and go easa or C of A. If you don't like the rules.......get out of the Club.

I think it's time for a clarification by the LAA on this. It seems a lot of people are reading the rules their own way. EASA Permit isn't LAA Permit. Nor are the rules governing Private and Public cat a/c

[Mike Cross]

Hi Mike

I didn't start this thread and have simply put my view, which is one I'm entitled to. You disagree with me, which you are equally entitled to do.

My concern is that the reputation of our Association is good and that it operates in an equitable manner. Rules should be adhered to and enforced, otherwise they become counter-productive. When I tell my child "If you do xxxx you won't go to the party on Saturday" I have to be prepared to stop her going to the party if she transgresses. Otherwise she'll have no respect for me and take no notice of what I say. If the police did not enforce the drink-driving Law then drunken drivers would have no respect for that Law. If our Association has a rule but does not have the ability to enforce it then people will lose respect for the rule, which is the danger here.

You ended with three questions for me. Above is the answer to the first one. The answer to your second question is yes. As for your third question, no I don't stir the pot simply for the sake of it but because I hold a view that I'm prepared to explain and defend.

[Rod1]

“If you fly an LAA machine you should be a member of the LAA.”

This has never been put forward as a rule. I would like all qualified pilots to be a member, but that is not a rule either.

Rod1

[ak7274]

I meant own or part own Rod. I also said should which means that it's my opinion and not a statement of fact

[Rod1]

ak7274

But it is the pilots that get the benefit. I could loan my aircraft to my son every other weekend and he would have lots of benefit but would not own a share. On the other hand my wife probably thinks she owns ˝ but is not a pilot and gets limited benefit.

I think we should encourage people to join because we are good, not compel them into thinking of us as a “tax”.

Rod1

[hatzflyer]

I have had my say on the LAA BB. This has been done to death.
Why have a controversial rule ( there was a move to stop it becoming a rule at one of the agm,s) that cannot be enforced? all it will ever do is encourage discontent.

For my part I have decided to forget it. It doesn't affect me as a sole owner, however if I were a member of a group and I was stopped from flying by this rule , as much as I support the LAA on every opportunity that I get , I would not hesitate to take legal action.

I am saddened that the LAA have put themselves in this vulnerable position.

[peter272]

Relationships in groups can get very fraught, as I've observed (and experienced) over many years.

I'm no longer a member of the LAA/PFA, and don't need to be as my a/c is on CofA. But when I was and flew a Permit aircraft as part of a group, the leader used to borrow someone else's membership to fly in at a discount to the rallies.

He used to get us to do the test flights for Permit renewal, so that that a membership mumber could be written on the form.

I was young and innocent then, but there are people who will and do continue to take this line.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Originally Posted by peter272

Relationships in groups can get very fraught, as I've observed (and experienced) over many years.

I'm no longer a member of the LAA/PFA, and don't need to be as my a/c is on CofA. But when I was and flew a Permit aircraft as part of a group, the leader used to borrow someone else's membership to fly in at a discount to the rallies.

He used to get us to do the test flights for Permit renewal, so that that a membership mumber could be written on the form.

I was young and innocent then, but there are people who will and do continue to take this line.

I think it's called freeloading.

G