Question - carrying passengers
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
From: Leeds
Question - carrying passengers
Hi all
Can anyone tell me whether or not flights logged as P1/S I.e. my Skills Test can be be used as a takeoff/landing for the purposes of the 90 day rule? I've only flown as P1 twice since my test and my previous time logged as P1 during training has just ticked over 90 days.
Apologies if this is daft question but can't seem to find the answer.
Thanks
Can anyone tell me whether or not flights logged as P1/S I.e. my Skills Test can be be used as a takeoff/landing for the purposes of the 90 day rule? I've only flown as P1 twice since my test and my previous time logged as P1 during training has just ticked over 90 days.
Apologies if this is daft question but can't seem to find the answer.
Thanks
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 557
Likes: 0
From: Up North
GtW is correct, your operating capacity during the flight is irrelevant. You can be PIC (P1), P/UT, or PICUS (P1 U/S), it doesn't matter, you simply have to be the handling pilot, "sole manipulator of the controls" to use the correct wording
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
From: Amsterdam
Pato, I was thinking the same thing. If you are so desperate for landings that you need to worry whether the landings during your skills test count, you probably should not be carrying passengers by a long shot. Even though legally you may be entitled to it, it is wise? Better do an hour or so of T&Gs and general handling first.
When the ink is still wet on your license, the legal minimum for currency might not be enough, as you don't have experience to fall back on.
When the ink is still wet on your license, the legal minimum for currency might not be enough, as you don't have experience to fall back on.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
From: Leeds
Thanks for the replies. Point taken re level of experience having only recently passed. That said if someone wishes to fly with me and they are aware of this, I'd be happy for them to join me.
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 21
Likes: 2
From: Manchester
Archbishop, I too have just passed and I reckon of course experience is an important factor however so is currency, having taken 11 months to do my PPL I've done 105 landings and 46 hours in the last 12 months and of course been supervised by a 9000 hour instructor on many of those.
To be honest Ive been shocked to see some very experienced old hands do some terrible landings after a winter without flying, some embarrassing. I realise that you dont go if you dont feel competant as a new pilot, safety first.
Maybe its a lot of these old know it alls knocking you!
To be honest Ive been shocked to see some very experienced old hands do some terrible landings after a winter without flying, some embarrassing. I realise that you dont go if you dont feel competant as a new pilot, safety first.
Maybe its a lot of these old know it alls knocking you!
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
From: Northampton
charliejulietwhiskey, I would rather fly with you than an 'old hand' that hasn't flown for the Winter anyday.
On the whole, I find that currency is more important than total experience. It's a close call (obviously total time being conductive to total experience), but in general, I've felt totally safe with somebody who is relatively inexperienced but has done a lot of recent flying and is very self critical.
Some of the moments during which my pants became most brown occurred when I was sat next to one of your 'old hands', with whom complacency had obviously set in and regular items were being forgotten until prompted by myself. Flaring at 20 feet, speed to 50 kts on final (PA28), flaps staying down until climbing past 3,000 feet, no regular checks (FREDA etc), the list goes on.
We're all guilty of forgetting, and leaving things a little late sometimes, but it's easy to identify the ones with further 'issues' that need addressing.
On the whole, I find that currency is more important than total experience. It's a close call (obviously total time being conductive to total experience), but in general, I've felt totally safe with somebody who is relatively inexperienced but has done a lot of recent flying and is very self critical.
Some of the moments during which my pants became most brown occurred when I was sat next to one of your 'old hands', with whom complacency had obviously set in and regular items were being forgotten until prompted by myself. Flaring at 20 feet, speed to 50 kts on final (PA28), flaps staying down until climbing past 3,000 feet, no regular checks (FREDA etc), the list goes on.
We're all guilty of forgetting, and leaving things a little late sometimes, but it's easy to identify the ones with further 'issues' that need addressing.
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 21
Likes: 2
From: Manchester
I'm just saying that some people talk a good flight! To be honest I don't mind being inexperienced, self critical and always looking to improve, I'm no expert and would like to go forward always remembering that, I have still a lot to learn but at the end of the day the most important factor is......
I know that.
I know that.
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,366
Likes: 0
From: UK
The first 100 hours or so after licence issue is the real danger zone in terms of over confidence and lack of experience. I'd be very careful, and if you have a passenger lined up book an aircraft for two hours, do an hour of circuits and then all being well take the passenger up later. Certainly don't rush into passengers on your first ever flight after licence issue and constantly watch your back and evaluate every flight to analyse any problems creeping in.
As above currency is better than total experience, but I feel this only really applies once you have 150-200+ hours.
As above currency is better than total experience, but I feel this only really applies once you have 150-200+ hours.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
From: UK
I dont think so.
I thought the evidence pointed in another direction.
The first 100 hours is pretty safe. The next few can be a bit dodgy, and then you should be ok.
At least intuitively that makes sense. You have had good habits drummed into you, most don't have the confidence to go too far or fly in more challenging conditions, that's the first hundred hours or so, then the confidence grows but not necessarily the skills to go with it, which have interestingly enough started to get a little sloppy, with luck you scare yourself and the experience starts to take over so you get less susceptible to being involved in an accident.
I think that's what the evidence points to, unless of course you know other wise.
I thought the evidence pointed in another direction.
The first 100 hours is pretty safe. The next few can be a bit dodgy, and then you should be ok.
At least intuitively that makes sense. You have had good habits drummed into you, most don't have the confidence to go too far or fly in more challenging conditions, that's the first hundred hours or so, then the confidence grows but not necessarily the skills to go with it, which have interestingly enough started to get a little sloppy, with luck you scare yourself and the experience starts to take over so you get less susceptible to being involved in an accident.
I think that's what the evidence points to, unless of course you know other wise.
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
From: uk
Just to raise the mood somewhat & worth £20.00
The killing zone is reckoned to be the 50 - 350 hour period for new pilots being most at risk.
Either way go steady and do not put to much pressure on your self, the more on-going training and practice you can invest in the better and generate a healthy respect for passenger safety.
The killing zone is reckoned to be the 50 - 350 hour period for new pilots being most at risk.
Either way go steady and do not put to much pressure on your self, the more on-going training and practice you can invest in the better and generate a healthy respect for passenger safety.
Last edited by 007helicopter; 24th June 2012 at 08:07.
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 1
From: Cambridge, England, EU
The Killing Zone - we have debated that one before. In fact there is no evidence to support the statistical conclusions reached; it is never the less a good read.
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Yes; the stats are largely rubbish because nearly everybody with a PPL chucks it in very roughly around the 100hr mark, and most of those people were doing just very easy very boring very low risk good-weather mission profiles (which is probably why they chucked it in 
). So the accident stats are bound to be skewed to show that those who hang in there a little longer start to have a few prangs.
). So the accident stats are bound to be skewed to show that those who hang in there a little longer start to have a few prangs.