cabair ripoff or bar room bull ?

[A and C]

c*bair ripoff or bar room bull ?

The other night wile propping up a bar I was told that C*bair would not rent an aircraft to a holder of a frozen ATPL for a trip to Le Touquet without an instructor going along to perform a "cross channel check".

Can this be true ? or is it just bar room bull ?.

[FlyingForFun]

Can't speak for C*bair, but I do know that West London Aero Club have a similar rule: no flying to France until you've had a cross-channel check-out with an instructor.

I asked my instructor to do a cross-channel check-out. Only problem was that she'd never flown cross-channel herself, and didn't know if the rule also applied to instructors! She checked with the CFI, and he gave her a few pointers, then cleared her to do my check-out. But, given that this needed special permission from the CFI - and she was actually an instructor working for the club in question - wouldn't surprise me at all if schools need an ATPL(f) holder to do a check-out.

Have fun!

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

[FNG]

I'd be interested to hear from an instructor who honestly thinks that a properly trained new PPL needs a "cross channel check". My instructor simply gave me a few tips, and suggested that I go with another bloke he had just finished teaching, which I did. Have clubs just got into the habit of requiring these checks? Do their insurers request it? Was there a specific iincident involving a new PPL over water? I recall reading not long ago about a PPL who became disoriented flying to or from the Channel Islands, but his case sounded not dissimilar to other cases of inadvertent IMC/getting lost.

[Stampe]

Every case needs to be looked at individually but bear in mind that a " frozen ATPL" can under the new rules be a very inexperienced pilot with as little as about 160 hours all gained in a structured training enviroment.I like to look at each case individually when renting my companies club aircraft out but don,t generally believe in "cross channel checks" if the individual has "rounded experience" a verbal brief will suffice.An aeroplane has no idea of the level of license held by its pilot its their physical skill and thinking that determines the standard of operation,some of the best pilots I know are very experienced PPLs with the "right attitude".Large clubs of course set rules to protect their operation and of course fulfill their main role revenue generation,small clubs can have more flexibility.

[DFC]

Many clubs have that rule.

IMHO it is only right.

A PPL is a licence to learn. Far better to learn in safety without making mistakes.

If a cross water check is required then it must be more than a mere jolly for the instructor.

The usual format of long briefing(s), pre-flight brief and actual flight followed by post briefing are required.

Long briefings should cover -

Legal aspects of going foreign
Customs, Immigration, Special Branch requirements
ICAO Rules and differences from UK SOPs
Flight Plans
Survival Equipment - requirements and use
Ditching procedures
Survial Aspects
Emergency Signals
Interception Signals
Revision - Basic Radio Nav, GPS, Attitude Flying.
Revision - Passenger Care and Briefing
Aircraft Escape methods and sequence

Short Briefing-

Proposed Flight in Detail planned by the student and checked by the instructor with pointers and changes as required.

Flight Training-

Organising the passing of estimates
Importance of Coast Out and Coast In reports and times.
The visual problems when out of sight of land on hazy days.
Basic instrument flying in conditions of reduced horizon in VMC
Radio Navigation to back up DR
Preparation for and joining procedures
Language problems
Immigration and Customs requirements
Flight Plan and Westher Checks
Departure procedures

Post Flight Briefing.


The whole idea is not merely to do a quick jolly cross the channel but to provide instruction in many areas which are either skimmed over or not covered in the PPL and areas which may have not been practiced if it is a long time since the PPL was completed.

Result- A pilot who can safely and efficiently take an aircraft foreign even if this includes a cross water trip and not just a pilot who can repeat the Le Touquet drag by rote.

DFC

[AC-DC]

Sorry guys, I can't see any difference between flying in the UK or crossing 19m streach of water to LFAT or LFAC. I don't see a need for an instructor on board.

[Jepp]

Well said AC-DC

Some renters wont let you F*rt without an instructor sitting next to you !!

Jepp

[Final 3 Greens]

AC-DC

I would just point out very gently that cross channel conditions can be rather different to the experience over the UK.

e.g. little discernible horizon, sea and sky blended together.

When dealing with an inexperienced pilot, it seems sensible for a club to send an instructor the first time. I was lucky that my FI did a cross channel trip when I was a student and invited me to go along, whereupon he took me through the procedures and how to cope with thedifferent codnition.

I am not going to comment specifically on the individual merits of checking out a particular frozen ATPL, but I found the cross channel flight a great confidence boost and have crossed happily by myself over the subsequent years.

Finals

[DFC]

AC DC,

Are you saying that there is no difference between flying outside the UK and the little bit of knowledge about UK flying that the average new PPL has?

OK so only flying across the channel at the shortest hop on a good day may be easy. What about the next trip to say Jersey via ORTAC on a Hazy day. Is that the same?

If your school gave you all the info you required about Special Branch requirements and operating outside the UK etc, then I think that is great. Unfortunately most schoold don't cover the topic in enough detail.

What I am in favour of is schools recognising that a "going foreign" check at one club is good enoygh for them provided it was signed off by an instructor.

Regards,

DFC

[AC-DC]

Finals
You wrote:
"I would just point out very gently that cross channel conditions can be rather different to the experience over the UK.
e.g. little discernible horizon, sea and sky blended together."


I agree with you about the conditions, you can experience them on your second fly when the instructor is not with you, than what? For these conditions you need an IMC, not an Instructor.

I think that the barrier is psychological and not flying difficulty. The clubs use the fear as a nice earner.

[BEagle]

Whilst it's hardly difficult to cross from Dover to Calais per se, there are a number of traps for the unwary in international flights as has already been mentioned. So we also insist that before anyone can hire an ac to fly across the Channel without restriction that they are given a check-out by a FI the first time.

Because as an organisation hiring an ac to an individual we have a Duty of Care, we cover all the legal and admin stuff, the survival aspects and flight planning aspects. We also teach the safe use of GPS on such trips - no-one has ever complained about the requirement and personally I consider it to be essential.

...and we also remind people about the non-validity of the IMC Rating outside the UK FIR and the appropriate continental VFR requirements.

[Final 3 Greens]

AC-DC

I have to disagree with you about your view of the requirement of an IMC rating to cross the channel in hazy VMC conditions.

Surely there is more of a comparison with a night rating where the flight is made in very different visual conditions, but visual conditions nonetheless.

As a non IMC holder I am very comfortable flying in hazy conditions so long as I can see the surface and am legal with respect to visibility.

Having said that, I wouldn't fancy Jersey via ORTAC - the longest routing I have done is DVR KOK and that is within my concentration envelope and also not class A airspace.

So I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

[A and C]

Wile I can see that clubs may well be reluctant to let a PPL holder of across the channel without some further instruction and being sure that the pilot is OK to fly when they meet the conditions of reduced visual referance that has been mentioned above and that the pilot knows the leagal requirments of international flight.

However in this case the pilot was a holder of a CPL/IR (f ATPL) so all the major saftey problems of reduced visibility are not an issue to the holder of an IR as they can clearly fly without outside visual referance.

The ATPL exams have covered the leagal / flight planning issues and wile a diching drill would be usefull most people are happy to take the advice in the CAA saftey sense leaflet as a guide.

So what are we left with as a reason to require a "cross channel check" for the holder of an ATPL(f) ?

[BEagle]

Basically the difference between theory and practice! Of course you can always buy your own aeroplane and then it's up to you. But if you want to hire an aeroplane, then is it surprising that the hirer will want to be certain of proof of actual competency, not just a level of theoretical knowledge?

I would sooner hire an aeroplane to an experienced PPL holder who has demonstrated competency than to any licence holder who hasn't! Particularly to a low-time CPL/IR holder who lacks the experience and judgement to know when supervision is appropriate!

[andrewc]

Pootling down the coast between Lydd and Dorset last
month I was struck by the difficulty of telling where the
sea stopped and the sky started. The conditions were
clear but there was no visual horizon looking out to sea.

I rapidly found myself flying on my instruments...

-- Andrew

[BRL]

andrewc there is a good chance of getting 'sea-mist' when flying along the south coast. Many a time i have gone off on a local VFR flight and the old sea mist has come in all of a sudden. Nothing you can do except land........

[DFC]

Going down the road of "the guy has an ATPL: so they must be able to do it" is not very good from a safety viewpoint.

If one was to use that idea then there would be an end to club checkouts. After all the pilot has a licence.

B747 drivers can have more difficulty than PPLs on such trips because they work in an environment where everything is done for them and they alwas have the support of an ops department to answer any questions.

Anything that imporoves safety must be good.

DFC

[A and C]

DFC I,m told that this guy could rent the aircraft to fly over land but the "check" was required to fly across the channel.

I,m all for saftey but I dont like it IF it used as an excuse to line the pocket.

I would dearly like to know if these reports are true , after all the title of this thread is in fact a question.

[sickBocks]

Wycombe Air Centre insist on this as well.

[Rory5]

I was new group member, & had never crossed the channel. Went with another group member & have been regularly on my own since.

That said, I would not have benn 100% going on my own for the first time.