90 Day Rule Changes

[Fuji Abound]

I am trying to understand the legal view of the 90 day rule mentioned recently in a couple of the fly mags. As I understand it, Groups usually have a lower currency rule. Members who exceeded the 90 day rule as well as the Group rule would fly with a Group pilot, who was not considered to be a passenger (or so the position was before the lawyers got involved), complete the required 3 T & Ls and all was well. The lawyers I think tell us the group pilot IS a passenger. What about the out of timer flying with a group member, but not logging the flight. Seems to me if he "manipulates the controls" he satisfies to the Group check pilot he is proficient. He then does his 3 T & Ls solo - all is now well. VIEWS PLEASE?

[A and C]

The group rule is not the law and so if the pilot exceeds the group rule he is not breaking the law ,eny one who sits in the aircraft has not got an instructor rating is a passenger.
So if your group insurance insists on 60 day currentcy it is leagal for a pilot who has not flown for 65 days to fly because insurance is not a legal requirement .When he has not flown for 90 days+ if he needs a checkout due to the group rules it must be with an FI as he cannot fly leagaly with a passenger.

[FlyingForFun]

A and C,

I always thought there was no need to fly with an instructor under these circumstances, although I haven't (yet) been involved in group ownership, so I may be wrong.

I thought that, if you haven't flown for 90 days and your group requires, say, 60 days currency, you do the following:

• Fly with a member of the group (doesn't need to be an instructor). The other member is P1. You are not a required member of the crew, and not receiving instruction, therefore you can't log the time. But, under the command of P1, you can take the controls, which will satisfy the requirements of most groups
  
• Having sorted out the group's currency requirements, you are now free to fly solo, do 3 t+g's, and therefore satisfy the 90-day rule. (You must do this, even if you did three t+g's in the first flight, because you weren't able to log the first flight.)

Am I missing something? I'll be looking to get into a group in a few months time, and although I can't imagine myself not flying for that length of time, I'd still like to understand the rules!

Cheers,

FFF
----------

[A and C]

If your insurance has a 60 day rule and you cant put the flight with another group member in your log book what evidence do you have that the flight took place ?
these aircraft are single crew and unless the other person is an FI.

[FlyingForFun]

Of course. I was thinking of the case where it was a group-imposed rule, rather than an insurance company imposed rule.

Thanks,

FFF
---------------

[Land After]

As an aside......

If you're out of time on the 90 day rule, then take a flight with an FI and do 3 T&G's do you then need to do 3 more solo T&G's before taking passengers?

(Not a group aircraft BTW)

[A and C]

As long as the FI was happy and you did all three TO,s& landings thats enough.

[bcfc]

I understand the rule as you must have made at least 3 take offs and landings in the last 90 days as handling pilot. If flying with an FI under instruction you're Pu/t but still the handling pilot (am i reet or am i wrang?)

[Noggin]

The 90 day rule appears in Schedule 8 of the ANO. The requirements for logging flights appears in Art 28. You will note that there is no legal requirement to log take-offs and landings, so how do we ever know if a pilot is current? Even if you have 3 flights logged, there is no guarantee of how many take offs or landings you actually performed. Think how many flights a FI does where he does not land or take-off. At the end of the day it must be based upon trust, the onus is on anyone disputing your claim, to prove otherwise.

Maintaining currency is fairly straight forward, you need 3 take offs and landings in 90 days, you are not required to log them. How you obtain them does not matter so long as you do obtain them. If you are outside the 90 days, you either do them solo or take an instructor along if you are not happy, as the only way you can have two crew members in a SPA is for one to be an instructor. That way you comply with Sched 8.

[Fuji Abound]

I wanted to get back to the point I was trying to make - probably badly.

I understand Group rules are not a matter of law and may, or may not be an insurance condition.

I had understood that until recently a current Group member could fly with another Group member who had exceeded the 90 day rule. Great! The "expired" Group member now has the comfort of a current pilot to help sort out any problems arising during the three required "movements".

Now, if my understanding is correct he has only two alternatives. Fly solo or with a FI.

OK, flying with a FI may solve the problem BUT how many will go solo? How does the latter promote safety? - and yet it is quite legal? How does flying with a curent Group member who choses to undertake the flight and IS current on type, not promote safety?

Finally, why should we have imposed a legislative change wich involves us in additional cost without there being any evidence of which I am aware that safety is improved in consequence?