Agreed. Completely.

You have not answered the question. Are you allowed to fly the aircraft totally ALONE? It would seem not, even though you have the licence.

If your friend has to be there with you it is for a reason....probably because he is involved with the group.

As there can only be one PiC then that would obviously be him.

As I said before you have your answer!

It makes a huge difference, as air law in Spain is not the same as air law in the UK.

I've not flown in Spain without a flight plan, but didn't think that was the law so much as the local requirement at some airports? In any case, as I'm certainly not an expert in Spanish air law (and nor I suspect are most other people posting on here) I think that getting local advice might be a really good idea.

It's a good working assumption that when flying a G-reg outside the UK, basically the most restrictive of the state of registration permissions, and local permissions, apply. If there's uncertainty about that, you need more expert advice than a bunch of us on an internet forum.

G

"Every aspect of the flight needs to be legal in order for you to act as commander."

So, as a PPL and an owner, if I took off solo and flew straight over Heathrow at 400ft AGL what would happen ?

I suspect the owner of my plane (me) would get a letter asking - amongst other things - who the Commander was. My reply would be 'nobody, as the flight wasn't legal' Is that where the correspondence would stop ?:rolleyes:

If you happen to get audited by the CAA, where is the paper trail that these are your hours to log if your name isn't on the tech log?

When the owner says you cannot sign the tech log, does he mean to authorise the flight like flying schools do? Signing as PIC and signing to authorise the flight can mean different things, and if the owner is happy for you to put your name as PIC and countersign it with your pal, then that's the only way I could see you logging these hours for licencing purposes.

If a flight being illegal meant that there was no commander, I suspect that CAA Enforcement branch would have to be largely made redundant.

Of course you can be pilot in command of an illegal flight. A stupid thing to do knowingly, but you'd still be in command.

G

Is it a legal obligation to have a document detailing every flight done by the plane?

I have one, and indeed most aircraft do - but I believe it's not an obligation?

There is an obligation for the servicing intervals, prop, engine etc., but noting each and every flight?

Journey Log
 

Under latest rules you have to have a journey log for the aircraft. Trouble is the rules don't seem very specific about how far back it needs to go. Entries need to be signed by pilot. As I've always kept a "tech log" I'm using this with the addition of "usual captains signature" inside front cover. Not that I ever expect anybody ever to ask to see it..........

(It doesn't have to be carried in the aircraft, but be available if requested). Whereas your current journey, plog etc, does.

Is this under EASA?

I had a US registered aircraft and there was no requirement to put every flight in the aircraft logbook. Just an annual summary of hours flow.

AIUI the UK requires all flights to be entered in the logbook.

It is eminently sensible to keep a log of all flights as I found out when the Drawback people came to see me! There was no problem at all but the guy did say there would have been one had I not got a set of log sheets. No proof of flight....etc...

Okay, that all makes sense. I've not (ever) flown a plane, or heli, without some sort of little book for every flight but was confident that it wasn't a legal requirement in FAA land.

Thanks.

Yes EASA rules
 

Seem to remember it's part of Part NCO.......sure it's searchable, but currently too busy trying to stop new puppy destroying latest copy of Pilot magazine 😠

It is perfectly normal and legal in both CAAland and EASAland to simply list "December 10th, 4 flights, 5:30 TT, serviceable". The individual flights are not required in the logbook.

G

If you are a shareholder you can fly. If you are not a shareholder, then technically, what you are doing is "hiring" the plane. As such, it needs to be on a Public Transport C of A, just like other rental planes ... it is very unlikely that a group owned aircraft would be on a Public Transport C of A.

All non-equity groups are really rentals and operate on a Public Transport C of A.

If it is a "permit" aircraft, you are also bang out of luck, as it is impossible to put an LAA type craft onto a Public Transport C of A, and this is why there are no non-equity groups on permit aircraft.

Tl;Dr; you probably can't legally fly it.

You can still log the hours...

Are you sure about this paperHanger? It would be helpful if you could provide a reference for this. I know of a situation where shareholders approve non-shareholders to use an aircraft without payment. The non-shareholders are insured.

The Public/Private Category CofA system disappeared a while back - a CofA now simply exists, supported by its ARC and current CRS. When it comes to operating private aircraft under a CofA, there are provisions for limited owner maintenance under the EASA Part-M regulation. The main issue for hire in this instance is likely to be engine life: while CAP747 is rather out of date in some areas and definitions, it remains the declaration of UK policy and under GR24 specifies that aircraft with engines "on condition" may not be used for aerial work. Aerial work is no longer defined in the UK ANO, but previously (and within the intent of CAP747) would have included hire.

In this instance, I would ask if the constitution/binding rules of the group or trust operating the aircraft forbids the aircraft to be hired out. If not, then assuming the aircraft is appropriately insured and in possession of a current CRS then it is simply down to the group members whether they wish to allow their aircraft to be hired to or flown by the individual. It is ultimately down to an operator to designate who may or may not fly its aircraft, so the legality of being allowed to command that aircraft rests there. This would also apply to a cost sharing flight where the aircraft was not hired to a non-owner, but one of the individuals sharing the cost was not an owner but still allowed by the operator to command the aircraft.

When it comes to national Permit aircraft, there are changes on the way... The ANO already allows the hire of national Permit aircraft when permission is given by the CAA - they are working on how and when to give this permission.

Are you sure about that? Non-equity does seem to be an option in some groups based around Permit aircraft. A case of 'don't ask, don't tell' perhaps?

It's illegal, plain and simple.

Of course the pilot is still in command (and can be prosecuted for commanding an illegal flight!).

G

errrm.....

How so? If, in a single pilot aircraft (which I am guessing this is what we're talking about) there is either crew or non-crew (i.e. Passengers!). The clue is in the title, SINGLE pilot. The only time there is legally two 'crew' in a single pilot aircraft is when the person manipulating the controls is under instruction from an instructor. The instructor logs P1 the 'student' logs U/T. If you're a passenger then you could put the flight in a logbook to the record, but non of the totals/flight time would be eligible for inclusion in flight time totals.

There is discussion about AOC operators declaring multi-crew ops on SPA, but that is a whole different ball game.

As GTE says, any flight, legal or not has to have a commander - someone who will be responsible at all times (and carry the can) for the safe operation of the flight.