Reasons not to fly on a permit
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reasons not to fly on a permit
Reasons not to go Permit.
If you go back in time to the 90’s (I started power flying in 91) the main reasons not to go permit were lack of over flight and limited to 2 seats. LAA owners were told endlessly that this would never change and the critic would never switch. Roll on to present day and we have over flight, we have 4 seat aircraft. Now we are told we need IFR and Night. The official position of the LAA is that these restrictions should be lifted for suitable aircraft and I agree with that, but how much effort should we put in? Should we go all out, spend what it takes and win, or should we take it very slowly. Will IFR / Night make a huge difference to our membership numbers? What is the impact on our hard won privileges to use uncertified parts? My personal opinion is that IFR / Night is almost irrelevant and this is from a pilot who passed his IMC and night back in 1992 and has used both a lot.
The IFR argument
Lets look at some numbers. Back in 1990’s around 15% of pilots held a current IMCR. That number is now rumoured to be around 10 – 12%. Many Permit machines spend significant time touring Europe and the IMCR is not valid in Europe. Under UK rules VFR on top was only allowed with an IMCR. In Europe VFR on top was allowed on a basic PPL. The new EASA licences have VFR on top included. VFR on top was one of the biggest advantages for the average IMCR holder.
If the LAA gets IFR use it will come at a cost. It is probable that all aircraft will have to be individually cleared for IFR. The equipment will need to be certified and installed professionally. This equipment is likely to be quite wide ranging and will remove most of the cost savings that the LAA fleet generally enjoys. We may well end up with a class of aircraft which are LAA C of A at considerable disruption to the LAA engineering day job and very little relevance to the average pilot (the 90% with no current IMCR). Many c of a aircraft in the typical 180hp class may theoretically be capable of IFR flight but the equipment in them has long since fallen behind what is required. Back in the 90’s most training aircraft were IFR capable, now most are not. Would the majority of LAA resources not be better used in clearing more aircraft types to fly under the UK LAA system and wait till the need for IFR grows to a worthwhile level (or not).
Night is somewhat different. The recent study that gained us over flight showed that LAA machines were 2.5% less likely to suffer critical mechanical issues than C of A machines (over the 20 years studied). Night VFR is imminent and your average LAA builder could wire up and get approved the necessary lighting in next to no time. Individual aircraft could be cleared with standard inspector oversight and the large fleet of factory built aircraft, like the bulldog etc already have all the necessary lighting etc. I am very sceptical that Night clearance would bring any significant new members as most PPL’s only use it to revalidate on the few weeks a year when the local licenced airfield stays open to do Night qualifications. Back in the 90’s there were many brave souls who used to land on strips with a few lights from cars, but I have not seen or heard of this done for many years. Is the Night qualification being widely used in the UK? What is the wisdom of the forum on these points?
Rod1
If you go back in time to the 90’s (I started power flying in 91) the main reasons not to go permit were lack of over flight and limited to 2 seats. LAA owners were told endlessly that this would never change and the critic would never switch. Roll on to present day and we have over flight, we have 4 seat aircraft. Now we are told we need IFR and Night. The official position of the LAA is that these restrictions should be lifted for suitable aircraft and I agree with that, but how much effort should we put in? Should we go all out, spend what it takes and win, or should we take it very slowly. Will IFR / Night make a huge difference to our membership numbers? What is the impact on our hard won privileges to use uncertified parts? My personal opinion is that IFR / Night is almost irrelevant and this is from a pilot who passed his IMC and night back in 1992 and has used both a lot.
The IFR argument
Lets look at some numbers. Back in 1990’s around 15% of pilots held a current IMCR. That number is now rumoured to be around 10 – 12%. Many Permit machines spend significant time touring Europe and the IMCR is not valid in Europe. Under UK rules VFR on top was only allowed with an IMCR. In Europe VFR on top was allowed on a basic PPL. The new EASA licences have VFR on top included. VFR on top was one of the biggest advantages for the average IMCR holder.
If the LAA gets IFR use it will come at a cost. It is probable that all aircraft will have to be individually cleared for IFR. The equipment will need to be certified and installed professionally. This equipment is likely to be quite wide ranging and will remove most of the cost savings that the LAA fleet generally enjoys. We may well end up with a class of aircraft which are LAA C of A at considerable disruption to the LAA engineering day job and very little relevance to the average pilot (the 90% with no current IMCR). Many c of a aircraft in the typical 180hp class may theoretically be capable of IFR flight but the equipment in them has long since fallen behind what is required. Back in the 90’s most training aircraft were IFR capable, now most are not. Would the majority of LAA resources not be better used in clearing more aircraft types to fly under the UK LAA system and wait till the need for IFR grows to a worthwhile level (or not).
Night is somewhat different. The recent study that gained us over flight showed that LAA machines were 2.5% less likely to suffer critical mechanical issues than C of A machines (over the 20 years studied). Night VFR is imminent and your average LAA builder could wire up and get approved the necessary lighting in next to no time. Individual aircraft could be cleared with standard inspector oversight and the large fleet of factory built aircraft, like the bulldog etc already have all the necessary lighting etc. I am very sceptical that Night clearance would bring any significant new members as most PPL’s only use it to revalidate on the few weeks a year when the local licenced airfield stays open to do Night qualifications. Back in the 90’s there were many brave souls who used to land on strips with a few lights from cars, but I have not seen or heard of this done for many years. Is the Night qualification being widely used in the UK? What is the wisdom of the forum on these points?
Rod1
Last edited by Rod1; 10th Oct 2012 at 13:50.
Trying to understand, but it's not easy. Particularly, in
, is over flight the contrary of under flight? Or what else may be intended? Flight over cities? Controlled airports?
lack of over flight and limited to 2 seats
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Jan,
Up until about 5 years ago permit aircraft were not allowed to fly over built up areas unless landing or taking off. Known as the over flight restriction, this has now been consigned to history!
Rod1
Up until about 5 years ago permit aircraft were not allowed to fly over built up areas unless landing or taking off. Known as the over flight restriction, this has now been consigned to history!
Rod1
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why re-invent the wheel. Look to America where there are many "experimental" aeroplanes that are IFR approved. Look on Controller.com and I am sure you'll find many Vans aeroplanes "IFR".
Regarding professional fitting - well anyone can fit an IFR GPS, and as long as they do it to certain specifcations (i.e. antenna in a certain position etc.) then I can't see a problem with it.
All you require to fly IFR is a single VOR and AI really. I have flown PA28's with little else IFR.
One thing though, many people I know who have funky aeroplanes like the RV6 (which I really like) and an IMCr don't really pay too much attention to the rules and might fly it in IMC enroute anyway.
Regarding professional fitting - well anyone can fit an IFR GPS, and as long as they do it to certain specifcations (i.e. antenna in a certain position etc.) then I can't see a problem with it.
All you require to fly IFR is a single VOR and AI really. I have flown PA28's with little else IFR.
One thing though, many people I know who have funky aeroplanes like the RV6 (which I really like) and an IMCr don't really pay too much attention to the rules and might fly it in IMC enroute anyway.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Night is somewhat different. The recent study that gained us over flight showed that LAA machines were 2.5% less likely to suffer critical mechanical issues than C of A machines (over the 20 years studied). Night VFR is imminent and your average LAA builder could wire up and get approved the necessary lighting in next to no time.
As for night flight many of the typical LAA machines have limited electrical power and pilots would need higher levels of skill than a standard Cessna flier to overcome the limitations.
A year ago I was part of a group returning to base late in a December day. How the others got back I don't know, landing on grass strips in the gloom.
Flying at night is an acquired taste and you need a lot more than LEDs stuck on the side, as I'm sure the CAA will confirm. However we all know Permit fliers who fly legally in the last vestiges of daylight, hm, hm.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by robin
As for night flight many of the typical LAA machines have limited electrical power
Originally Posted by robin
and pilots would need higher levels of skill than a standard Cessna flier to overcome the limitations.
Last edited by DaveW; 10th Oct 2012 at 16:52.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love the idea of going permit; but it's precisely the lack of IFR (essential) and night (nice to have) that has stopped me. I seethe whenever I visit the USA and read Kitplanes or similar magazines, showing proud owners of Experimental types with their Dynon IFR setups.
From where the OP appears to sit within the existing LAA movement, IFR might seem like a waste of resources. For me, at least, outside, it's what's keeping me out.
Tim
From where the OP appears to sit within the existing LAA movement, IFR might seem like a waste of resources. For me, at least, outside, it's what's keeping me out.
Tim
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Texas and UK
Age: 66
Posts: 2,886
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The difficulty I guess is deciding where the cutoff point is. In my opinion if you are going to fly with passengers in IFR conditions then you need the safety and redundancy of the minimum equpment stipulated by the CAA. There is no similar tolerance for equipment failiure as there is in VFR daylight flight.
Personally I stopped flying at night (other than IFR, on a flight plan in an airway, in a turbine or twin) after I suffered an engine failiure at night in a piston single on a flight as an instructor. To much risk for me!!! Prior to that I had the "it will never happen to me attitude"
It is nice to get home if the weather is poor - but at what risk?
The LAA do a fantastic job with what they look after, is a move towards permit IFR aircraft just going to stretch things a little to far from the whole ethos that they operate in?
Personally I stopped flying at night (other than IFR, on a flight plan in an airway, in a turbine or twin) after I suffered an engine failiure at night in a piston single on a flight as an instructor. To much risk for me!!! Prior to that I had the "it will never happen to me attitude"
It is nice to get home if the weather is poor - but at what risk?
The LAA do a fantastic job with what they look after, is a move towards permit IFR aircraft just going to stretch things a little to far from the whole ethos that they operate in?
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Scotland
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all very well to imagine IFR in your LAA permit RV8, 9, 10 or whatever with your multiple glass panels and synthetic vision, but what about the total absence of airframe anti-icing/de-icing gear?
Last edited by DeltaV; 10th Oct 2012 at 19:25.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sth Bucks UK
Age: 60
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some good points here.
AIUI it's not currently a legal requirement for an A/C to have de-ice/anti ice eqpmt for IFR flight so why would LAA be any different?
I'm 100% sure that if IFR were allowed on LAA a/c then there would be a mass exodus from CofA a/c. The modern LAA a/c are leagues ahead in terms of equipment capability when compared to your average PA28.
My Falco costs me £85.00 ph to run wet and is equipped with dual screen glass cockpit, (I have a GNS430w that I can install in a weekend), auto-pilot, strobes etc.
I have an IMC although not current, and would be delighted if I were able to use the capability in the same way as I could a crappy PA28 at 1/3 the cost with no safety cost to anyone.
I would fully expect to have to pay more for the permit and don't understand why there would be any extra burden at all on the LAA save for the initial effort of making the change in law.
AIUI it's not currently a legal requirement for an A/C to have de-ice/anti ice eqpmt for IFR flight so why would LAA be any different?
I'm 100% sure that if IFR were allowed on LAA a/c then there would be a mass exodus from CofA a/c. The modern LAA a/c are leagues ahead in terms of equipment capability when compared to your average PA28.
My Falco costs me £85.00 ph to run wet and is equipped with dual screen glass cockpit, (I have a GNS430w that I can install in a weekend), auto-pilot, strobes etc.
I have an IMC although not current, and would be delighted if I were able to use the capability in the same way as I could a crappy PA28 at 1/3 the cost with no safety cost to anyone.
I would fully expect to have to pay more for the permit and don't understand why there would be any extra burden at all on the LAA save for the initial effort of making the change in law.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Texas and UK
Age: 66
Posts: 2,886
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about the extra burden of inspection to ensure reliability in IFR conditions, for example altimeter pressure testing, ASI calibration, radio certification, dual systems where needed, the list could just go on. Who would be competent and qualified to do such certification? Surely you are fast approaching a CofA aircraft with its attendant costs again?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slightly at a tangent but I've noticed whenever IFR is mentioned on this forum that we are talking about Arctic weather and zero visibility to the ground. 99% of GA IFR isn't like that. I did a perfectly normal IFR flight today. Cloudbase a bit crappy, vis not great under it so I went IFR and VMC on top at FL45 in gin clear sky. I could have gone VFR under it but it was safer (IMO) to go on top.
I don't get these extreme views on IFR and the IMC rating. You get the IMC rating for a reason and that's to make your flying safer by opening up the options available, not to fly in 20 meter visibility fog and -50C weather.
I don't get these extreme views on IFR and the IMC rating. You get the IMC rating for a reason and that's to make your flying safer by opening up the options available, not to fly in 20 meter visibility fog and -50C weather.
Last edited by thing; 10th Oct 2012 at 20:09.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by robin
As for night flight many of the typical LAA machines have limited electrical power
And many of them don't. I think you may be falling into the trap of thinking LAA=rag & tube. Seen (e.g.) a Van's RV-7?
Quote:
Originally Posted by robin
and pilots would need higher levels of skill than a standard Cessna flier to overcome the limitations.
It may be true that THIS pilot has a lower level of skill than many but that's far from the case for a high proportion of the LAA flyers that I know. One reason for that could be that I have a feeling that your typical LAA flyer gets more hours than a typical CoA flyer (with all that means for currency and aggregated experience) - possibly because the latter numbers are skewed by renters, perhaps?
Originally Posted by robin
As for night flight many of the typical LAA machines have limited electrical power
And many of them don't. I think you may be falling into the trap of thinking LAA=rag & tube. Seen (e.g.) a Van's RV-7?
Quote:
Originally Posted by robin
and pilots would need higher levels of skill than a standard Cessna flier to overcome the limitations.
It may be true that THIS pilot has a lower level of skill than many but that's far from the case for a high proportion of the LAA flyers that I know. One reason for that could be that I have a feeling that your typical LAA flyer gets more hours than a typical CoA flyer (with all that means for currency and aggregated experience) - possibly because the latter numbers are skewed by renters, perhaps?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It should be simple to specify the equipment required to night fly or go IFR.
This could then be checked aircraft by aircraft. For example some LAA permit aircraft can do aerobatics and some cannot. This is clearly identified in the permit paperwork. Night flying and IFR could be handled in a similar manner.
I'm not sure there is a typical LAA permit type any more than there is a typical GA aircraft. About the only thing all LAA aircraft have in common is that they are single engine and max 4 seats
This could then be checked aircraft by aircraft. For example some LAA permit aircraft can do aerobatics and some cannot. This is clearly identified in the permit paperwork. Night flying and IFR could be handled in a similar manner.
I'm not sure there is a typical LAA permit type any more than there is a typical GA aircraft. About the only thing all LAA aircraft have in common is that they are single engine and max 4 seats
Last edited by Zulu Alpha; 10th Oct 2012 at 22:17.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Glasgow
Age: 40
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the advantages of going LAA is cost, but in reality, many aircraft are forced to go LAA rather than C of A due to being orphaned or they are experimental in some way.
What advantage does certified equipment actually have? Is it really a quality guarentee? What is the evidence?
Can it not instead be left to a minimum spec, engineers and inspectors to provide quality control, then pilots / owners to do their own risk assessment as to whether their plane is safe / capable in the conditions? If you want the extra checks, you pay for them an amount which is probably larger for an initial assessment, then a slightly higher ongoing permit amount.
Is this really that hard?
What advantage does certified equipment actually have? Is it really a quality guarentee? What is the evidence?
Can it not instead be left to a minimum spec, engineers and inspectors to provide quality control, then pilots / owners to do their own risk assessment as to whether their plane is safe / capable in the conditions? If you want the extra checks, you pay for them an amount which is probably larger for an initial assessment, then a slightly higher ongoing permit amount.
Is this really that hard?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can it not instead be left to a minimum spec, engineers and inspectors to provide quality control, then pilots / owners to do their own risk assessment as to whether their plane is safe / capable in the conditions? If you want the extra checks, you pay for them an amount which is probably larger for an initial assessment, then a slightly higher ongoing permit amount.
That brings us to the middle bit.......Unless one bears a grudge against a particular Pilot, the average pilot/Owner has a vested interest in the safe operation of ANY flight by the aircraft concerned.
Most Darwin Award candidates would not bother with a license or any of the associated ratings.....therefore the proposed system would most likely be self-regulating,despite the forgoing reservations.
Last edited by cockney steve; 11th Oct 2012 at 12:03. Reason: "regurrent" corrected
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 419 Likes
on
221 Posts
Only bats and t***s fly in the dark! Sorry, a crewman adage from yore. CG
And before CG jumps straight back in with the usual banter, no, there wasn't enough room for the other, longer word....
The rumour that I also used to sleep upside down in the wardrobe, was slightly exaggerated.
