Pilot categories question
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Carlisle
Age: 70
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot categories question
I recently read Incident 2 on Page 40 of the Autumn/Winter 2013 edition of Clued Up concerning an incident cause by a misunderstanding as to who was P1 when requalifying to carry passengers under the 90 day rule. It contained the following statements:
"The CAA provided the following clarification: “The pilot was certificated for single-pilot operation and therefore the only person who can be a member of the flight crew in addition to the handling pilot is a flying instructor or supervising handling pilot...
A pilot wishing to regain 90-day currency to be entitled to carry passengers must complete at least three take-offs and three landings as the sole manipulator of the controls. These manoeuvres must be flown either solo or under the supervision of a flying instructor, as a passenger cannot be carried until the currency is regained."
This made me wonder about whether the flights in the following scenarios should be logged as P1, PICUS or PU/T.
The pilot concerned holds a valid EASA PPL(A). In addition to the licence requirements the flying club requires that a pilot shall have flown within the previous 42 days otherwise a check flight with an instructor is required. The pilot has not flown within 42 days and so goes up with an instructor, who does not touch the controls at any stage of the flight and does not offer instruction as such.
1. The pilot has satisfied the 90 day rule and so is entitled to carry passengers.
2. The pilot has not satisfied the 90-day rule and so can only carry the instructor as flight crew. They do 3 circuits at the start of the flight, after which the pilot may carry passengers.
3. The pilot has not satisfied the 90-day rule and so can only carry the instructor as flight crew. They do not land until the end of the flight so the pilot remains out of 90-day currency for the whole flight.
Any suggestions?
"The CAA provided the following clarification: “The pilot was certificated for single-pilot operation and therefore the only person who can be a member of the flight crew in addition to the handling pilot is a flying instructor or supervising handling pilot...
A pilot wishing to regain 90-day currency to be entitled to carry passengers must complete at least three take-offs and three landings as the sole manipulator of the controls. These manoeuvres must be flown either solo or under the supervision of a flying instructor, as a passenger cannot be carried until the currency is regained."
This made me wonder about whether the flights in the following scenarios should be logged as P1, PICUS or PU/T.
The pilot concerned holds a valid EASA PPL(A). In addition to the licence requirements the flying club requires that a pilot shall have flown within the previous 42 days otherwise a check flight with an instructor is required. The pilot has not flown within 42 days and so goes up with an instructor, who does not touch the controls at any stage of the flight and does not offer instruction as such.
1. The pilot has satisfied the 90 day rule and so is entitled to carry passengers.
2. The pilot has not satisfied the 90-day rule and so can only carry the instructor as flight crew. They do 3 circuits at the start of the flight, after which the pilot may carry passengers.
3. The pilot has not satisfied the 90-day rule and so can only carry the instructor as flight crew. They do not land until the end of the flight so the pilot remains out of 90-day currency for the whole flight.
Any suggestions?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 84
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1: P1 though debate able whether the school would let you. But CAA rules should make it legal.
2: PUT if Pax are taken on after the 3rd landing & further flying continues ,P1.
3: PUT, after landing do two more, solo
2: PUT if Pax are taken on after the 3rd landing & further flying continues ,P1.
3: PUT, after landing do two more, solo
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
usual stupidity of the caa trying to apply a rule which isn't legal.
It even contradicts itself.
Supervisory pilot that will be the none instructor PIC then.
And then they say
It gets quite amusing when they obviously want to change something which has been happening for years but they don't have the legislation to do it. More than likely they have been waiting for 20-30 years for someone to have a prang getting there 90 day currency back without an instructor sitting next to them. Lest ban it, bollocks there is nothing legally we can say to stop it. Lets make a statement and hope everyone believes it.
It even contradicts itself.
the only person who can be a member of the flight crew in addition to the handling pilot is a flying instructor or supervising handling pilot...
And then they say
These manoeuvres must be flown either solo or under the supervision of a flying instructor
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3 circuits doesn't cut it.
must be 3 flights to a full stop landing.
i.e. circuit, land, stop, taxy back, takeoff for next circuit
touch down, power on for the next circuit doesn't meet the requirements.
(under australian rules.)
must be 3 flights to a full stop landing.
i.e. circuit, land, stop, taxy back, takeoff for next circuit
touch down, power on for the next circuit doesn't meet the requirements.
(under australian rules.)
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dubbleyew eight, touch and goes are perfectly acceptable for passenger recency (using the correct EASA terminology) in the UK, and the OP was talking about the UK. Clued Up is a UK CAA magazine, but you probably wouldn't have known that.
In response the the OP, any flight where the instructor will take over in case of something not going right will mean the instructor is P1 and the PPL will be PUT (except for a skills test or LPC - which will be P1S).
If you are P1 then the instructor can only be a passenger. For check rides I wouldn't have thought the instructor can be a passenger to satisfy insurance or club requirements - so he will be P1 and you will be PUT. After you have completed the three take-offs and landings then it is for you and the instructor to agree who will be in charge should anything go wrong. If it's you, and the instructor will not takeover at any time, then you are P1. Otherwise, he is P1 and you are PUT.
The only time you can be P1S is for a skills test or LPC - not for check outs, or any other post-PPL flight with an instructor. It's seems quite common for PPLs to log P1S for check rides, which is incorrect.
In response the the OP, any flight where the instructor will take over in case of something not going right will mean the instructor is P1 and the PPL will be PUT (except for a skills test or LPC - which will be P1S).
If you are P1 then the instructor can only be a passenger. For check rides I wouldn't have thought the instructor can be a passenger to satisfy insurance or club requirements - so he will be P1 and you will be PUT. After you have completed the three take-offs and landings then it is for you and the instructor to agree who will be in charge should anything go wrong. If it's you, and the instructor will not takeover at any time, then you are P1. Otherwise, he is P1 and you are PUT.
The only time you can be P1S is for a skills test or LPC - not for check outs, or any other post-PPL flight with an instructor. It's seems quite common for PPLs to log P1S for check rides, which is incorrect.
The only time you can be P1S is for a skills test or LPC - not for check outs, or any other post-PPL flight with an instructor. It's seems quite common for PPLs to log P1S for check rides, which is incorrect.
However I do wonder why we have a flight logging category specifically for a test though - what's the point?
P1S would seem eminently sensible for someone to log if they are being supervised by an instructor. Quite why the rules (apparently) say otherwise defeats me.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P1S would seem eminently sensible for someone to log if they are being supervised by an instructor. Quite why the rules (apparently) say otherwise defeats me.
In Single Pilot Flying: If the 'Checkee' is logging PICUS then they are
not a student so the other pilot, although PIC, could not claim it as an
Instructional Flight (so no need to be an Instructor at all). Instructors
do need to have logged a certain amount of instructional hours and
if it wasn't an instructional flight then (in all likelihood) the PIC would
not legally be allowed to be paid.
