is it possible to train for a PPL in your own aircraft?

[mark b]

Is this possible - ie get my own plane & hire the "instructor", or even buy into a syndicate?

Alternatively can I buy into a syndicate without a PPL and build hours/practice with another pilot (ie non formal training)?

thanks

[Genghis the Engineer]

(1) Yes, so long as either you are sole owner, or it's syndicated but maintained to public transport CofA standards (as flying school aeroplanes are required to). (Or is a "type approved" microlight.)

(2) Yes, but

(a) You can't log the hours, and;
(b) May well pick up bad habits - unless they are a very competent and experienced (commercial?) pilot you'd be better off sticking with flying with an instructor until you have got your licence, and;
(c) You may well find that the other syndicate members feel that they have better things to do.

G

N.B. Aeroplane or aircraft, a plane is a woodworking tool.

[IO540]

All very true but I bet the vast majority of those (few) pilots who got their PPL in 45hrs did actually have a large amount of unlogged RHS time

I helped one chap get his PPL. He did it in 45hrs. Obviously I have no idea if he would have taken longer otherwise, but I have a feeling that pre-PPL "mentoring" is pretty damn effective.

And when I think of my mostly dreadful PPL training, I wish I had a half decent pilot to fly with at the time.

I've just started with my 14 year old son.

[BackPacker]

Is this possible - ie get my own plane & hire the "instructor", or even buy into a syndicate?

Couple more remarks.

First, ask yourself whether this is wise. An airplane, any airplane, is by definition a compromise between things like speed, range, useful load, maintenance requirements, acquisition/maintenance/operating costs and so forth. Until you have your PPL and have rented aircraft for a while you have no idea what your typical mission is going to be, and what aircraft is most suitable for that. By buying (a share in) an aircraft now you might just be investing in an airplane that doesn't in any way fit your mission requirements.

Now if you buy into something stock standard, like a C172 or PA28 there's actually a fair chance that it will eventually fit your mission profile, and otherwise it's probably not too hard to sell. But if you buy into something exotic you might be stuck completely.

Another issue to consider is that the insurance fee or excess might be higher for ab-initio training and the first few (100) PIC hours after you obtained your PPL. If you buy into a syndicate, this is something that you have to check beforehand, and come to an agreement with the syndicate holders about.

For me personally, I'm still renting (from a decent club) because I enjoy the option of renting the plane that suits my mission at that moment.

[Whiskey Kilo Wanderer]

You want to build and fly a WHAT?

Hi Mark,

You might like to get hold of a copy of Dick Starks' book You Want to Build and Fly a WHAT?

He buys a Cessna 120 and finds an instructor to teach him. This is all in the USA, where the rules are somewhat different, but the book is an entertaining read anyway.

Safe Flying,
Richard W.

[Hugh_Jarse]

Why not ? I did ... bought an aircraft on a public cat CofA and used instructors from the local flying school. Worked brilliantly : with the added bonus that once I'd passed the PPL I was already extremely familiar - and trusted - the aircraft I was going to do my first couple of hundred hours in, which I think was a serious benefit.

[mark b]

Why not ? I did ... bought an aircraft on a public cat CofA and used instructors from the local flying school. Worked brilliantly : with the added bonus that once I'd passed the PPL I was already extremely familiar - and trusted - the aircraft I was going to do my first couple of hundred hours in, which I think was a serious benefit.

Well this is exactly my thought. I am really excited about getting involved with flying and although I have only just started my PPL training with a flight school I cannot wait to get my own aircraft and start flying!

I figured if I got my own aircraft then I would quickly become very familiar with it and would have little restriction other than getting an instructor to come with me!

I might check out that book as recommended, sounds like an ideal read for me. The kind of aircraft Id be looking at would probably be something like a PA-28. I haven't done the calculations yet but assuming (and hoping) there were no major problems then there could be some cost savings to be had which in turn would allow me to fly more.

[RTN11]

It has it's pros and cons.

With your own aircraft, you will become very familiar with it, both in flight and on the ground, and depending on how often you fly it could cost you less than hiring the club aircraft.

However, if it goes tech, runs out of hours, or needs some serious work at a critical time in your course, i.e. close to first solo, first nav solo, QXC, or test, this will really throw a spanner in the works and cost you more hours in the long run.

A good school will have a fleet of very similar aircraft, so if one goes for check, you just jump in the next one and are perfectly happy.

[FleetFlyer]

I believe the rules have recently changed or are about to change with regard to training on LAA Permit aircraft. I.e. it might now be allowed. Also the training of the NPPL syllabus may be conducted at a non-licensed airfield.
If this is the case the you could potentially save a fortune on your training and legally be able to fix your aircraft if it 'goes tech' (subject to inspection).

Is there anyone out there who can confirm or deny the above?

I tried to get training for my NPPL on a shared aircraft and although the group I was going to join and the insurer were happy, the instructors and the schools I approached said 'no' when I told them the type I was planning to fly as it had an open cockpit and winter was coming.

I now fly a diffferent aircraft entirely but wince when I think how I missed out on not training on my own aircraft. Its definitely a good way to go though probably only cost effective on a sole ownership basis with a permit aircraft.

[BillieBob]

The instruction for a JAA PPL must be completed at an FTO or an accepted Registered Facility (or, after April 2012, at an Approved Training Organisation). Consequently, you will have to find an amenable training organisation to take your aircraft onto its books and use its instructors and operating procedures. This is not impossible to arrange but it's not quite as simple as buying an aircraft and finding an amenable instructor.

The current rules for training in permit aircraft are contained in ORS4-803

Flight training (for any licence or rating) has been allowed at unlicensed airfields since April 2010. The relevant guidance document is CAP 793

[mark b]

hmmm that kind of rules things out for me then doesn't it? Or at least make it a lot more difficult than expected.

[mark b]

If it was £105 then I'd probably stick with it, but the current training rates in a Tomahawk are about £150 per hour plus landing fees etc.

[BillieBob]

I'm not convinced that RTF/FTO is that much of a hurdle though, would someone like Irv Lee be an RTF by himself?

There is no hurdle whatever to becoming a Registered Facility and many of the existing registrations are held by individuals. It is simply a case of filling out an application form, the accuracy of which the CAA do not check, and until April 2011 there is not even a fee. Provided that you keep a low profile, the CAA will not bother you - their 'hands-off policy is such that they don't even know how many Registered Facilities are currently operating!

In the CAA's proposed Scheme of Charges to be introduced next April, there is a new charge of £100 per year for registration intended, in part, to fund an inspection programme of PPL training facilities.

[172driver]

their 'hands-off policy is such that they don't even know how many Registered Facilities are currently operating!

You might not want to hear this, but this attitude is grist on the mill of these idiotic EASA Eurocrats....

[IO540]

Indeed, and the US system of freelance CFI/CFII instructors and freelance DPE examiners (who can examine everything including the ATPL) explains why the USA is littered with wreckage, of everything from Cessnas to 747s, and why most planes crashing in Europe are N-reg

[BillieBob]

You might not want to hear this, but this attitude is grist on the mill of these idiotic EASA Eurocrats....

Having recently conducted a standardisation inspection of the UK CAA, I expect that EASA is well aware of its failings in this and other areas.

[150commuter]

"....explains why the USA is littered with wreckage, of everything from Cessnas to 747s, and why most planes crashing in Europe are N-reg"

IO540 Could you tell us where the basis for that assertion comes from ?
According to the NTSB the fatal accident rate in the US for GA in 2009 was 1.33/100 000 hours.
In the UK any single year would not be statistically valid as fortunately fatal accidents are relatively uncommon but CAP667 examined ten years during which the fatal accident rate ranged from 1-3.7 / 100 000 hours.
This would indicate that GA in the US is about as safe as it is in the UK. Obviously there are more accidents in total in America since there is vastly more flying going on..

Though I got my PPL in the UK I have flown with US instructors including freelances and found them to be every bit as thorough as their British counterparts.

[IO540]

That was my usual attempt at irony, which is always difficult on the internet

The USA has an excellent safety record; better than Europe, despite the gold plated European way of doing everything.

[mrmum]

Irony/sarcasm/humour

irony, which is always difficult on the internet

Indeed, perhaps PPRuNe needs to make the smilies much bigger