EASA aerobatics training

[Zonkor]

I'm considering doing some aerobatics training and eventually getting the EASA aerobatics rating (ASEL / SEP).

What are good places in the UK for that? (Doesn't have to be in a Extra 300 or so, rather looking for good stick & rudder skills and clean aerobatics fundamentals.)

The other option: I'll be in Florida over New Year's, so I'm contemplating doing the training there in the sun. But then I'd probably still have to start from scratch in the UK to get the EASA rating, right (due to the minimum flight time and ground school requirements)?

Thanks for any input!

[sharpend]

Turweston flying club. They have two ex RAF instructors and a Firefly.

[Ampage]

Cranfield Flying School can offer you it in the C152 - not the greatest of aircraft but the course isn't bad at all. Great instruction with heaps of experience and great fun.

If you change your mind and did want something with considerably more kick:
angels-high.co.uk can do it. (Extra 300L).

Along with you basic aero-rating you can learn much more advanced manouvres such as gyroscopic tumbles, torque rolls, inverted spinning etc.

I own 20% of that extra and one of the guys is a highly experienced instructor (13,000 hrs across many types) - Highly recommended. We are not for profit, money generally just goes towards keeping the aircraft flying

[Mickey Kaye]

You will struggle to find a nicer slingsby t67m that Yorkflying school based at breighton hire out for 100 pounds dry.

[foxmoth]

Don't do it in a Cessna and dont do it in the Extra, the first is no fun, and you want it to be fun, the second is too easy (for aeros) and will not teach you to fly aeros well in anything less, Bulldog/Chippie/Robin 2600/Decathlon will all be good or anything else at that level. AIUI ATM you do not HAVE to do an approved EASA course but can do any course that at the end of it a qualified Aeros instructor will sign you off as being competent and it can be added.

[LTCTerry]

Similar

I am returning to Europe next month for a three-year job.


I have an aerobatic rating in my EASA SPL. I recall reading that only some form of orientation is required to expand that to my EASA PPL(A). I didn't bookmark the reference. Can anyone help me with that rule?


I'm not interested in trying powered aerobatics w/o real training. I'd like to try the AOPA course in something I think of as "uniquely British" such as a Bulldog, Chipmunk, Firefly, Tiger Moth, etc.


How much of this training can count towards the 12 hours in the last 12 months to renew my PPL(A)? Dual doesn't count as PIC, etc. Can the end of course evaluation count as renewal with an evaluator (presuming he/she is indeed an evaluator)?


To the OP - consider Patty Wagstaff's school in St. Augustine, Florida, if you are going to be in that part of the state.


Terry

[n5296s]

the second is too easy (for aeros) and will not teach you to fly aeros well in anything les

Not sure I follow that...? flying a nice loop or slow roll is just as hard whatever you're flying. I did my initial training in a Grob, then a Decathlon, and finally 100+ hours in the Pitts S2C. The Pitts is a delight to fly (if only you didn't have to land it afterwards) and I imagine as good as an Extra (which unfortunately I've never flown) in most regards - but apart from energy management not sure it really makes life easier.

[BEagle]

LTCTerry, the reference concerning the extension of aerobatic rating privileges from one aircraft category (e.g. sailplane) to another (e.g. SEP Class aeroplane) is FCL.800 (c):

(c) The privileges of the aerobatic rating shall be limited to the aircraft category in which the flight instruction was completed. The privileges will be extended to another category of aircraft if the pilot holds a licence for that aircraft category and has successfully completed at least 3 dual training flights covering the full aerobatic training syllabus in that category of aircraft.

For details of the AOPA course, see Aerobatics Course

The dual training should count towards your SEP Class Rating revalidation, however it won't reduce the PIC time requirement. In your case, you might find it more convenient to complete an SEP Class Rating revalidation Proficiency Check with an FE whilst you're doing your aerobatic training.

[foxmoth]

Not sure I follow that...? flying a nice loop or slow roll is just as hard whatever you're flying.

Whilst I might agree on the loop a slow roll is certainly harder in some aircraft than others as are many other manoeuvres - try slow rolling a Tiger Moth! The other thing that you learn better in the less capeable aircraft is better energy management.

[Zonkor]

Thanks for the useful input, everybody! I'm leaning toward foxmoth's advice to complete the initial aerobatics course in a mid-range aircraft.

In the meantime, two more questions on regulations arose:

1. Annex II aircraft:

What if the aerobatics course is done in an EASA Annex II aircraft? Is the rating then limited to this specific type, or to the broader category (e.g., SEP)?

2. On the AOPA aerobatics course:

The AOPA website [1] describes the three AOPA aerobatics certificates and cite CAP 804 as follows:

"If you complete an AOPA Aerobatic Certificate before 8 April 2018 there are no minimum flight time requirements as PIC .

The AOPA Aerobatic Certificate will be recognised as an EASA Aerobatic Rating, though will need to be added to an EASA licence from 8 April 2018."

A. Which of the three certificates is equivalent to the Part-FCL aerobatics rating and may be used for the issuance of an initial Part-FCL aerobatics rating?

B. In CAP 804 I found only that the AOPA Aerobatic Certificate may be used to convert UK National Aerobatic Privileges to a Part-FCL license (part I, section 4, part P, page 32). There's no mention that it might be used for the issuance of an initial Part-FCL aerobatics rating. Where is this mentioned by CAA?

[1] Aerobatics Course

[BEagle]

The UK CAA will recognise completion of the AOPA/BAeA basic aerobatic certificate course (or any other AOPA aerobatic course) for the purposes of including an EASA Aerobatic Rating in UK-issued Part-FCL pilot licences, because it is the conversion of a national qualification.

So if your Part-FCL licence has been issued by another Member State, it is unlikely that they will recognise the AOPA/BAeA certificate. Of course you could always change your State of Licence Issue to the UK, if you don't hold a UK-issued Part-FCL licence.

The course can be flown on any aerobatic SEP Class aeroplane, whether EASA (e.g. Cessna 'Aerobat') or Annex II non-EASA (e.g. Chipmunk). Both the AOPA Aerobatic Certificate and EASA Aerobatic Rating will then be valid for aerobatics conducted in any SEP aeroplane certified for aerobatics.

[Tay Cough]

If you don't have the AOPA certificate or a BAeA qualification and have otherwise suitable previous aeros experience, you can gain the aerobatics rating by flying with an aerobatics instructor.

[BillieBob]

What if the aerobatics course is done in an EASA Annex II aircraft?

By definition, an 'Annex II' aircraft is not an EASA aircraft. While the UK CAA will currently accept training completed in some non-EASA aircraft towards the issue of an EASA licence, rating or certificate, some other national authorities will not.

[Camargue]

several options

tiger club at pent farm - cap10c. has inverted capability and generally much more capable than say a bulldog/lower powered firefly yet still requires energy management and skill to fly some of the trickier manoeuvres. Personally think the best all round beginners aerobat and wold be my suggestion

Cambridge aero club and Adrian Willis at Bourne have extra 200's - can do anything a 300L can but at half the cost. you still need to learn energy management as you can fly around at 65% power but they are easier for things like Cubans due to the fast rate of roll

[BackPacker]

flying a nice loop or slow roll is just as hard whatever you're flying.

Couldn't disagree more.

Loads of aircraft are certified for aerobatics, but a significant proportion of them don't have an inverted flight system. This means that as soon as you roll inverted (or otherwise push negative g's) the engine will stop producing power. And without an inverted oil system it's maybe 20 seconds until the cylinder walls have been scraped dry and you start doing damage.

Furthermore, roll rates are different and the induced drag when pulling g's will be different. And you may have tighter G limits, lower entry airspeeds for snap rolls, less rudder/elevator authority for crisp spin recovery, whatever. All this makes a huge difference.

I learned aeros on an R2160. No inverted flight system, high induced drag when pulling g's, and a slow roll rate. It took me several years to be able to perform an acceptable Immelman (half roll up, roll to the horizontal) because of the immense trade-offs you have to make: At the end of the half loop your airspeed is low - near Vs actually - so your roll rate is low too. You have two options: End the loop slightly early so you can more-or-less barrel roll out, maintaining positive g's so a running engine throughout but lose poins from the judges, or continuing the loop to the horizontal, push to -1G, lose engine power and now try to roll to the upright with no engine power (no torque, diminishing airspeed), and hope the roll ends before you fly below stall speed. Or that you are able to power out of the stall (if the engine regains power quickly) quickly enough, and in the meantime keep the aircraft from spinning with the rudder.

We also tried starting the loop with a higher entry speed or making the loop tighter by pulling more g's. Neither solution worked. It's one of the hardest maneuvers to fly well in a competition.

Now compare this to a Pitts or Extra. Pull the half loop, push to the inverted, roll with the engine torque, full throttle to regain airspeed. Simple.

I agree with others: Learn to fly aeros on something basic. That will teach you energy management above all. Once you've mastered that aircraft and are flying to its limits, move on to something more capable.

[Camargue]

The other thing to look at is cost and what you are getting for it

ultimate high charge £325 per hour for a bulldog which is excessive
redhill seems to charge £250 or so for a t67m. (205 plus 42 instruction)
cap10c with the tiger club is £235 per hour
extra 200 at Cambridge and Bourne about £255 per hour.

to me its a no brainer - its far better to be challenged doing something difficult than doing something easy in a plane that makes it difficult.

[Zonkor]

Cost of aerobatics flying

Originally Posted by Camargue

The other thing to look at is cost and what you are getting for it

ultimate high charge £325 per hour for a bulldog which is excessive
redhill seems to charge £250 or so for a t67m. (205 plus 42 instruction)
cap10c with the tiger club is £235 per hour
extra 200 at Cambridge and Bourne about £255 per hour.

to me its a no brainer - its far better to be challenged doing something difficult than doing something easy in a plane that makes it difficult.

Maybe a naive question, but I have to ask: What exactly makes aerobatics instruction / rental so much more expensive, especially with something like an Extra 200/300, but even with relatively modest aircraft?

Are these aircraft really that much more expensive in maintenance, hourly operation costs, or insurance?

What would be a reasonably affordable aerobatics-capable aircraft to own (inverted flying, tail slides)?

[BackPacker]

Maybe a naive question, but I have to ask: What exactly makes aerobatics instruction / rental so much more expensive, especially with something like an Extra 200/300, but even with relatively modest aircraft?

A thoroughbred aerobatics aircraft (Pitts & up) is basically a single purpose aircraft. Yes, people do tour in them, but they're the exception rather than the norm. They are mostly bought and used for aerobatics. But aerobatics flights tend to be short, and few and far between. This leads to a relatively low utilization, which means that the annual costs have to be spread out across relatively few flying hours.

Insurance is likely to be more expensive than a regular spamcan. There may be things on the aircraft that may require more maintenance than a regular spamcan. And then you get things like the Extra 300 canopy, which is relatively fragile, extremely expensive and essentially uninsurable. You break it, you buy it.

There are fewer instructors around that can teach aeros, and like to do those day in day out. That in itself may have an effect on prices. But also, aeros lessons tend to be relatively short, with relatively long briefings, so hourly rates need to go up to lead to reasonable daily income.

And lastly, the fuel burn on serious aerobatics aircraft is eye-watering. You can easily burn through 75 liters of avgas an hour. In fact, 100% power in an Extra 300 is probably over 90 liters per hour.

[foxmoth]

to me its a no brainer - its far better to be challenged doing something difficult than doing something easy in a plane that makes it difficult

The idea is to learn on a challenging aircraft that teaches you more, then go onto the "easy" aircraft

Maybe a naive question, but I have to ask: What exactly makes aerobatics instruction / rental so much more expensive, especially with something like an Extra 200/300, but even with relatively modest aircraft?

Much as backpacker says!

What would be a reasonably affordable aerobatics-capable aircraft to own (inverted flying, tail slides)?

Single seater Pitts is probably as cheap as you will find with this capability, two seat I would say a Cap10

[yhuubert]

If you do it in UK, and want it to be added to EASA license in another country, I believe there is the issue if the organization who provided the training is ATO for Aerobatic Training and has that listed on their certificate.

When you look at Doc 31 at Pilot Training Organisation Approval | Training and Exams | Personal Licences and Training there are just 10 who have aerobatic rating. Many other offer the AOPA or British course, but don't have it on their ATO cert.