Logging time in homebuild
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
From: belgium
Logging time in homebuild
Hi guys,
I was wondering, if I log time in a homebuild airplane (1320 pounds) registered in Europe, do all those hours count for the CPL I'd maybe take? Or does the homebuild airplanes fall under microlight or ultralight? I'm speaking for planes registered in the EU, not the USA...
I'd love to know,
Thanks
I was wondering, if I log time in a homebuild airplane (1320 pounds) registered in Europe, do all those hours count for the CPL I'd maybe take? Or does the homebuild airplanes fall under microlight or ultralight? I'm speaking for planes registered in the EU, not the USA...
I'd love to know,
Thanks
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2000
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 14,480
Likes: 178
From: UK
Yes, it's over 472.5kg MTOW, so cannot fall into the microlight category - so it cannot be counted as anything other than an aeroplane.
The hours will count for your CPL.
G
The hours will count for your CPL.
G
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 1
From: In the boot of my car!
What am I missing here? Exactly what is going to change as regards hours building on permit aircraft?
pace
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
From: UK,Twighlight Zone
When EASA take over you will not be able to count flight time in non CofA aircraft towards the issue or revalidation of an EASA licence.
This includes permit and Annex II aircraft. So you will have a ludicrous situation where someone flying a chipmunk at the moment can use those hours towards issue or revalidation of a JAA licence. Next year those hours wont count. You won't be able to fly a non CofA aircraft on an EASA licence or a CofA aircraft on a national licence!!!
The UK are proposing to amend the ANO to allow EASA licence holders to fly non EASA aircraft, not sure what other states are doing. The current proposal is for states to issue national licences again to cover non EASA aircraft.
This includes permit and Annex II aircraft. So you will have a ludicrous situation where someone flying a chipmunk at the moment can use those hours towards issue or revalidation of a JAA licence. Next year those hours wont count. You won't be able to fly a non CofA aircraft on an EASA licence or a CofA aircraft on a national licence!!!
The UK are proposing to amend the ANO to allow EASA licence holders to fly non EASA aircraft, not sure what other states are doing. The current proposal is for states to issue national licences again to cover non EASA aircraft.
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 549
Likes: 2
From: The frozen north....
Huh? So I wont be able to fly my LAA Permitted Cassutt on my JAR CPL? Or even if I did my hours on that wouldnt count for keeping my Grp A SEP vaild ?!?!?!
What are those idiots doing.....??? Just as well my CAA Issued PPL has a lifetime validity, so I'd fly my Cassutt on my old PPL and if I then fly my CofA Tri Pacer that would be on my JAR / EASA CPL with hours in each type not being interchangeable for revalidation purposes ?
What are those idiots doing.....??? Just as well my CAA Issued PPL has a lifetime validity, so I'd fly my Cassutt on my old PPL and if I then fly my CofA Tri Pacer that would be on my JAR / EASA CPL with hours in each type not being interchangeable for revalidation purposes ?
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,524
Likes: 1
From: United Kingdom
Until next year of course.......
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
From: Not a million miles from EGTF
...courtesy of Andy Appleby for the Devon Strut Newsletter
So, when the lunacy of Brave New Euroland finally arrives:
a. You can fly a Cub but not a Cherokee on a NPPL.
b. You might be able to fly a Cub on a LAPL, you would be able to fly a Cherokee, but not a Spitfire.
c. You can fly a Cub or a Spitfire on a UK PPL, but not a Cherokee.
d. You might be able to fly a Cub or Spitfire on an EASA PPL, but you would be able to fly a Cherokee.
e. The NPPL and LAPL have different revalidation / renewal requirements and the LAPL might also have reissue
requirements. None of which are the same as for the UK PPL or EASA PPL.
f. The UK PPL doesn't need to be reissued whereas the EASA PPL does.
But then it would be OK if you have a Jodel instead of a Cherokee, Spitfire or Cub.
What do you mean "Which Jodel ?...................”
So, when the lunacy of Brave New Euroland finally arrives:
a. You can fly a Cub but not a Cherokee on a NPPL.
b. You might be able to fly a Cub on a LAPL, you would be able to fly a Cherokee, but not a Spitfire.
c. You can fly a Cub or a Spitfire on a UK PPL, but not a Cherokee.
d. You might be able to fly a Cub or Spitfire on an EASA PPL, but you would be able to fly a Cherokee.
e. The NPPL and LAPL have different revalidation / renewal requirements and the LAPL might also have reissue
requirements. None of which are the same as for the UK PPL or EASA PPL.
f. The UK PPL doesn't need to be reissued whereas the EASA PPL does.
But then it would be OK if you have a Jodel instead of a Cherokee, Spitfire or Cub.
What do you mean "Which Jodel ?...................”
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
From: UK,Twighlight Zone
Huh? So I wont be able to fly my LAA Permitted Cassutt on my JAR CPL? Or even if I did my hours on that wouldnt count for keeping my Grp A SEP vaild ?!?!?!
What are those idiots doing.....??? Just as well my CAA Issued PPL has a lifetime validity, so I'd fly my Cassutt on my old PPL and if I then fly my CofA Tri Pacer that would be on my JAR / EASA CPL with hours in each type not being interchangeable for revalidation purposes ?
What are those idiots doing.....??? Just as well my CAA Issued PPL has a lifetime validity, so I'd fly my Cassutt on my old PPL and if I then fly my CofA Tri Pacer that would be on my JAR / EASA CPL with hours in each type not being interchangeable for revalidation purposes ?
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
From: Not a million miles from EGTF
Quite
The CAA in their letter make it clear that they can't decide what EASA will permit, but they can allow hours on EASA type aircraft to count against the UK licence.
So the UK-PPL/NPPL can be used for Permit aircraft - perhaps, and they could allow EASA PPL holders to use them as well.
But they are powerless to allow the experience in reverse.
There is no sign of anyone with a spine taking EASA on though. It will lead to the stupidity of someone flying, say, a Jodel 150 on CofA having the hours counting, but it was of those on Permit not.
Our boys in the Belgrano only point out the paradoxes and, as far as I can see, they have only asked for a transitional period (and more staff). When asked to jump they only ask 'how high'.
The French won't take that line and neither should we
The CAA in their letter make it clear that they can't decide what EASA will permit, but they can allow hours on EASA type aircraft to count against the UK licence.
So the UK-PPL/NPPL can be used for Permit aircraft - perhaps, and they could allow EASA PPL holders to use them as well.
But they are powerless to allow the experience in reverse.
There is no sign of anyone with a spine taking EASA on though. It will lead to the stupidity of someone flying, say, a Jodel 150 on CofA having the hours counting, but it was of those on Permit not.
Our boys in the Belgrano only point out the paradoxes and, as far as I can see, they have only asked for a transitional period (and more staff). When asked to jump they only ask 'how high'.
The French won't take that line and neither should we
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
From: UK
...courtesy of Andy Appleby for the Devon Strut Newsletter
So, when the lunacy of Brave New Euroland finally arrives:
a. You can fly a Cub but not a Cherokee on a NPPL.
b. You might be able to fly a Cub on a LAPL, you would be able to fly a Cherokee, but not a Spitfire.
c. You can fly a Cub or a Spitfire on a UK PPL, but not a Cherokee.
d. You might be able to fly a Cub or Spitfire on an EASA PPL, but you would be able to fly a Cherokee.
e. The NPPL and LAPL have different revalidation / renewal requirements and the LAPL might also have reissue
requirements. None of which are the same as for the UK PPL or EASA PPL.
f. The UK PPL doesn't need to be reissued whereas the EASA PPL does.
But then it would be OK if you have a Jodel instead of a Cherokee, Spitfire or Cub.
What do you mean "Which Jodel ?...................”
So, when the lunacy of Brave New Euroland finally arrives:
a. You can fly a Cub but not a Cherokee on a NPPL.
b. You might be able to fly a Cub on a LAPL, you would be able to fly a Cherokee, but not a Spitfire.
c. You can fly a Cub or a Spitfire on a UK PPL, but not a Cherokee.
d. You might be able to fly a Cub or Spitfire on an EASA PPL, but you would be able to fly a Cherokee.
e. The NPPL and LAPL have different revalidation / renewal requirements and the LAPL might also have reissue
requirements. None of which are the same as for the UK PPL or EASA PPL.
f. The UK PPL doesn't need to be reissued whereas the EASA PPL does.
But then it would be OK if you have a Jodel instead of a Cherokee, Spitfire or Cub.
What do you mean "Which Jodel ?...................”
But since my childhood years I've always dreamed of flying a Cherokee :-)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
From: Gt. Yarmouth, Norfolk
Probably me being thick, but where does it say all of this?
The draft FCL appears to say:
"Revalidation of single-pilot single-engine class ratings.
(1) Single-engine piston aeroplane class ratings and TMG ratings. For revalidation of single-pilot single-engine piston aeroplane class ratings or TMG class ratings the applicant shall:
(i) within the 3 months preceding the expiry date of the rating, pass a proficiency check in the relevant class in accordance with Appendix 9 to this Part with an examiner; or
(ii) within the 12 months preceding the expiry date of the rating, complete 12 hours of flight time in the relevant class, including:
- 6 hours as PIC;
- 12 take-offs and 12 landings; and
- a training flight of at least 1 hour with a flight instructor (FI) or a class rating instructor (CRI). Applicants shall be exempted from this flight if they have passed a class or type rating proficiency check or skill test in any other class or type of aeroplane."
I can't see anything here restricting the aircraft to EASA C of A as opposed to permit or Annex II. There is mention of "relevant class" but this is not defined, other than saying that "class" refers to a class of aircraft not requiring a type rating, e.g. SEP or TMG.
The CAA document on the impact of the changes makes no mention of any effect on revalidation nor anything about re-issuing national licences. In fact, they indicate that the reverse is the case and that they will have no power to issue national licences except in the case of giroplanes, microlights and some ex military aircraft requiring a type rating, hence the amendment to the ANO, so that there will be no requirement to also hold a National Licence to fly Annex II aircraft. They clearly contemplate that the majority of national licences will ultimately be converted to EASA Licences. They mention some 15,000, hence their concern at the time scale.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/620/srg_l&...s_Sept2010.pdf
The draft FCL appears to say:
"Revalidation of single-pilot single-engine class ratings.
(1) Single-engine piston aeroplane class ratings and TMG ratings. For revalidation of single-pilot single-engine piston aeroplane class ratings or TMG class ratings the applicant shall:
(i) within the 3 months preceding the expiry date of the rating, pass a proficiency check in the relevant class in accordance with Appendix 9 to this Part with an examiner; or
(ii) within the 12 months preceding the expiry date of the rating, complete 12 hours of flight time in the relevant class, including:
- 6 hours as PIC;
- 12 take-offs and 12 landings; and
- a training flight of at least 1 hour with a flight instructor (FI) or a class rating instructor (CRI). Applicants shall be exempted from this flight if they have passed a class or type rating proficiency check or skill test in any other class or type of aeroplane."
I can't see anything here restricting the aircraft to EASA C of A as opposed to permit or Annex II. There is mention of "relevant class" but this is not defined, other than saying that "class" refers to a class of aircraft not requiring a type rating, e.g. SEP or TMG.
The CAA document on the impact of the changes makes no mention of any effect on revalidation nor anything about re-issuing national licences. In fact, they indicate that the reverse is the case and that they will have no power to issue national licences except in the case of giroplanes, microlights and some ex military aircraft requiring a type rating, hence the amendment to the ANO, so that there will be no requirement to also hold a National Licence to fly Annex II aircraft. They clearly contemplate that the majority of national licences will ultimately be converted to EASA Licences. They mention some 15,000, hence their concern at the time scale.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/620/srg_l&...s_Sept2010.pdf
Last edited by Justiciar; 6th January 2011 at 12:36.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 1
From: In the boot of my car!
There is no sign of anyone with a spine taking EASA on though
Hundreds of aircraft arrived at a GA airfield near the EASA headquarters.
Thousands of pilots and those involved in aviation carried a petition outside the EASA headquarters which was handed to an MEP.
Windows were smashed as the angry pilots demanded that EASA keep to its mandate on safety.........
I WISH but more likely
Five pilots turned up at the rally and after tea and biscuits and false reassurances returned to their aircraft with smiles on their faces at a job well done.
Sad but hey ho we are a disjointed lot and especially the British only too happy to obey anything that comes out of Brussels with as much resistance required to punch out of a paper bag.
Pace
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
From: Not a million miles from EGTF
Probably me being thick, but where does it say all of this?
It is simply because EASA's writ only extends to those aircraft on the EASA list.
Anything on Permit or Annexe II are outside the scope of EASA and so the CAA can choose to do anything it wants for those that fly them.
What it can't do is to allow what it permits for the national PPL to be accepted by EASA rules. As the French have just found out after years of effort with their Brevet de Base.
They expected it to be nodded through into the new EASA LAPL but it was rejected be everyone else. So under normal rules, when flying an aircraft on EASA CofA, the EASA rules would apply, so no Brevet de Base. Of course if you look at what is happening, the French are looking at ways of ensuring it will continue despite EASA.
There has been talk that EASA cannot take away existing privileges. AOPA I believe are investigating further to see if this will permit IMCR to continue, but it could also apply to those of us with the UK-PPL that, if we do nothing, will be down-graded to a sub-ICAO PPL.