Student pilots learning in aircraft On Condition??

[Koosaima]

Hi, I'm a student pilot 21 hours in and after much thought I decided to buy a Socata TB-10, the owner and I have come to an agreement and the insurance company has written out a policy for me.

.....however

Yesterday I came across a small problem. The aircraft's engine has only done about 1600 hours (which is within its lifespan) but its more than 12 years old. which means it's "on condition".

I learn't that student pilots might not be able to learn in aircraft on condition.

I need to know whether myself and a friend can learn to fly in this aircraft legally if the aircraft is privately owned by myself.

My instructor is happy to teach us, the abinitio insurance policy means he can and he will be under the policy as a named pilot as well.

I'm confused because at the moment I'm learning to study in Robins which are 30 years old. (mind you I suppose the engines are overhauled within 12 years because of he amount of usage).

Anyway this question about students fly on condition will make or break the sale. Sadly they'll be no point in me buying this aircraft if I cant learn to fly in it.

If anyone can help me on this topic and give me a solid answer that would be great


Many thanks

Karl.

[Genghis the Engineer]

If you are the sole owner, it's fine.

You can't learn on an "on condition" aircraft unless you own all of the aeroplane.

If nobody beats me to it, I'll dig out the references for you later and expand on the correct terminology and the various caveats.

G

[wsmempson]

Also, tbo on the engine can be extended by a further 20% (subject to condition) so a 2,000hr tbo can be ekked out to 2,400 (subject to there being no nasty cylinder life issues) and 12 years can become 14.4 years. Having said that, GR24 in 747 may now say something different again...!

[Koosaima]

Thanks for your rapid response.

Thanks for getting back quickly, that's disappointing news. My friend and I were hoping to both finish learning in this aircraft, if either one of us cannot use it there's no point in buying it.


I'm gunna have to kick my heels and tell the sellers I cannot purchase it.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I shouldn't worry too much - it's a buyer's market at the moment, there are plenty of good aeroplanes out there at good prices right now.

Nothing wrong with the TB10 incidentally, very nice aeroplane.

G

[Koosaima]

..More frustrating than anything, we've been planning to buy this plane for about two months, on a budget got a really good deal, and we've even test flown it.

talk about dangle a carrot. I do think it's a bit ridiculous if the CAA can let the owner learn to fly on condition, what's the difference in letting a second person fly

Just out of curiosity are the consequences an instant ban?, fine? or is it more severe?

There are some good aircraft available, but I think after all this I'm going to leave it and concentrate on my ppl first. thanks again.

[DeeCee]

I can imagine that others are thinking the same as me. Owning an aeroplane is a time consuming thing and at this stage it might be best to concentrate on your PPL. Once you have got it, go and talk to clubs and owners to find out all the issues and potential expenses. As Gengis says there are a lot of aeroplanes out there. Good luck!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Originally Posted by Koosaima

..More frustrating than anything, we've been planning to buy this plane for about two months, on a budget got a really good deal, and we've even test flown it.

talk about dangle a carrot. I do think it's a bit ridiculous if the CAA can let the owner learn to fly on condition, what's the difference in letting a second person fly

Just out of curiosity are the consequences an instant ban?, fine? or is it more severe?

There are some good aircraft available, but I think after all this I'm going to leave it and concentrate on my ppl first. thanks again.

The logic is that if you are not yet a qualified pilot, you are not yet fully qualified to accept the risks of an aeroplane that is partly the responsibility of other people, unless it is at the highest standard of airworthiness oversight.

Once you have licences, running that aeroplane as a syndicate is no problem at-all.

It's just how it is to be honest - in this case your choices are either get that airframe back onto full maintenance (which probably means resetting the engine, which is expensive), buy something else, or get your licences then buy the aeroplane you want.

That said, if setting up a syndicate, it's a good idea to have at-least one member who has owned an aeroplane, or part of an aeroplane, before. Or an experienced owner willing to provide a bit of support and mentoring.

Originally Posted by Koosaima

Just out of curiosity are the consequences an instant ban?, fine? or is it more severe?

Primarily for the instructor - I think he could be looking at quite severe penalties. A recent fatal accident led to prison after an instructor was found to have cut legal corners in a student's training on their own aircraft. BBC News - Fatal helicopter flight instructor Ian King found guilty

G

[Level Attitude]

My understanding is that it is nothing to do with Training per se, but rather
the "commercial" operation of the aircraft - although it has the same effect.

A member of a Group owned aircraft would be paying the Group for use
of the aircraft and, probably, the instructor.
The CAA have given exemptions to this - but not for ab-initio training.

The sole owner of an aircraft does not pay anyone else for the use of their
aircraft. So they could be taught to fly in it (provided the Instructor works
for free?)

[BillieBob]

A payment to the instructor does not constitute payment "for the use of the aircraft, as you put it.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Level is right I'm afraid - this is the basic mechanism, even if the logic is rather odd.

The ANO says that if the aircraft is not on public CofA, then only a single payment can be made. If the aircraft is jointly owned it's assumed that there's a payment into the syndicate; add in a payment is made to the instructor as well, that's two, and verboten.

In the meantime, this document seems to have vanished from the CAA / AIP websites, but here are some extracts I made a while ago for my own use:-

Extracts from CAA AIC: W 001/2011 27-JAN-2011 (FLYING TRAINING AND FLYING TESTS IN PRIVATE AIRCRAFT.)

2.2 Therefore, individuals are permitted to pay an instructor for training in their own private solely-owned or jointly-owned EASA aircraft....
3.2 ... a person who owns an aircraft outright and does not have to pay for anything else in relation to the flight is permitted to pay an instructor for training in their private aircraft. Likewise, a person who has free use of an aircraft is also permitted to pay an instructor for training in the aircraft, although this situation usually only arises when a close friend or member of the owner's family wishes to use the aircraft....

4.2 ...it is not possible to pay for instruction in a jointly owned non-EASA private aircraft; however, provisions have been made to allow some kinds of remunerated training in certain of these aircraft. The circumstances and conditions depend on the airworthiness regime that the aircraft is subject to and its intended use.

4.3 Operating under a CofA
4.3.1 A General Exemption (ORS4 No. 804)3 has been issued to allow owners of a jointly owned private aircraft operating under a CofA to pay for instruction in their aircraft with the following conditions and limitations:
a. The training cannot be for the purposes of becoming qualified for the grant of a licence or a rating in a licence (training and testing for revalidation or renewal is permitted).
b. For aircraft with a maximum take-off weight not exceeding 2730 kg, the last scheduled maintenance inspection must have been carried out by an appropriately licensed engineer or maintenance organisation and a Certificate of Release to Service issued.
c. There must have been no pilot maintenance since the last scheduled maintenance inspection.
d. The person undergoing the training must hold a pilot's licence that entitles them to act as pilot in command, or would entitle them except that they need to fly with an instructor/examiner to obtain a Certificate of Test, Experience or Revalidation and the
purpose of the flight is to gain such a certificate.

Note: Training for the initial issue of an NPPL, PPL, CPL, IMC Rating, Instrument Rating or other 'ab initio' training is not permitted. The intention is to allow individuals to pay for training that enables them to regain currency, renew a licence, learn a new skill (such as short field landings), become familiar with a new type etc.

ORS4 804 which is referred to in there has been superceded several times and is now ORS4 No.968 ORS4 No. 968: Flying Training / Checking | Publications | About the CAA

This *probably* shoots you down in flames I'm afraid [incidentally, the TB10 is an EASA aircraft for the purposes of the document. That said there's a reference at the bottom to:-

White AIC ‘Flying Training and Flying Tests in Private Aircraft’.

Which I suggest you try tracking down, as it sounds like there's a slim chance it might prove me wrong. Rather odd referring to an AIC by title only however, so that might be a small challenge.

G

[3 Point]

So, why not borrow half the cash from your mate, buy the aeroplane outright then learn to fly in it. Once you are finished you sell the aeroplane to him, he learns then finally, after he is qualified he sells half of it back to you? You both get to learn on it legally as sole owners but then end up in joint ownership.

You need to trust each other but, to be honest, if you don't have that level of trust the I'd think again about joint ownership of an aeroplane.

good luck

3 Point

[Maoraigh1]

I seem to remember that FAMILY members could all learn on the aircraft, ie the owner's kids. If spouse was included - you and mate could marry - your sex no longer matters. (With a suitable pre-nup agreement.)

[Genghis the Engineer]

Originally Posted by Maoraigh1

I seem to remember that FAMILY members could all learn on the aircraft, ie the owner's kids. If spouse was included - you and mate could marry - your sex no longer matters. (With a suitable pre-nup agreement.)

Have you seen what weddings cost these days ?????

Much cheaper to just rent.

G

[BillieBob]

But then there's the decision of which to rent - aeroplane or spouse?