Can you hour build in a Grob 109B (Vigilant T1)?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rugby
Age: 33
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you hour build in a Grob 109B (Vigilant T1)?
Hi all,
Apologies if this in the wrong forum and I have tried searching for the answer, but to no avail.
I'm a CI in the Air Training Corps and I have spoken to the CFI at my nearest VGS about becoming an instructor on the Vigilant (Grob 109B).
I have a PPL + Night Rating + Complex and was wondering whether I would be able to count any of the time flown in the Vigilant in order to build my hours to start my CPL? If that is possible, would the fact that it is RAF not Civil flying make any difference? - Hour building is not my sole aim of wanting to join a VGS, it'd just be a nice bonus!
I understand I will need a TMG rating, which I assume I will get via the training should I be accepted on to the Squadron?
I won't be starting my CPL for a time yet as I don't have the funds available, so I am hoping to join the VGS to have some fun!
I look forward to your replies and thanks in advance
Apologies if this in the wrong forum and I have tried searching for the answer, but to no avail.
I'm a CI in the Air Training Corps and I have spoken to the CFI at my nearest VGS about becoming an instructor on the Vigilant (Grob 109B).
I have a PPL + Night Rating + Complex and was wondering whether I would be able to count any of the time flown in the Vigilant in order to build my hours to start my CPL? If that is possible, would the fact that it is RAF not Civil flying make any difference? - Hour building is not my sole aim of wanting to join a VGS, it'd just be a nice bonus!
I understand I will need a TMG rating, which I assume I will get via the training should I be accepted on to the Squadron?
I won't be starting my CPL for a time yet as I don't have the funds available, so I am hoping to join the VGS to have some fun!
I look forward to your replies and thanks in advance
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Rolling Off The Top
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of the 200 hours total time required for the issue of the CPL, up to 30 hours of pilot in command of a glider or motorglider (including vigilant) can be credited.
The Vigilant T1 does not meet the requirements of CS.22 for a motorglider, therefore legally it is a light aeroplane. Specifically the maximum permitted MAUW for a motorglider (as shown in CS.22) is 850kg, whilst the Vigilant has an MAUW of 908kg.
However, around 10 years ago, CAA PLD ceased to accept this and chose to regard it as a motorglider. So far as I know, they haven't changed this position. In my opinion this is not a supportable position on their part, and I did provide the written proof for a couple of people some years ago, but they've not changed it. You could always try again.
Flying within the Air Cadets organisation will be subject I think to their own training and qualications, and your civil qualifications are likely only to be taken as proof of experience.
G
(In a previous life, the engineer at Boscombe Down who wrote most of the Vigilant certification reports.)
However, around 10 years ago, CAA PLD ceased to accept this and chose to regard it as a motorglider. So far as I know, they haven't changed this position. In my opinion this is not a supportable position on their part, and I did provide the written proof for a couple of people some years ago, but they've not changed it. You could always try again.
Flying within the Air Cadets organisation will be subject I think to their own training and qualications, and your civil qualifications are likely only to be taken as proof of experience.
G
(In a previous life, the engineer at Boscombe Down who wrote most of the Vigilant certification reports.)
Scott C
I think existing VGS instructors were able to add a TMG rating to their licences based on their air cadet time. However, this was allowed, I believe, as they had many hours on the Vigilant.
You really need to ask the CAA as it's their opinion that counts in the end. A friend of mine who is airline examiner mentioned that this may change under EASA rules anyway. If you look in LASORS I believe that TMG time, if you hold the rating, will count towards the experience for your biannual.
I think existing VGS instructors were able to add a TMG rating to their licences based on their air cadet time. However, this was allowed, I believe, as they had many hours on the Vigilant.
You really need to ask the CAA as it's their opinion that counts in the end. A friend of mine who is airline examiner mentioned that this may change under EASA rules anyway. If you look in LASORS I believe that TMG time, if you hold the rating, will count towards the experience for your biannual.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: On top of a hill
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Scott
As has been stated already, you can count up to 30 hours of Vigilant PIC time towards the CPL licence issue. However, ISTR a little footnote in LASORS that says you can't count it towards the 100 hours PIC requirement, so it may or may not end up being useful (depending on how many dual hours you already have...)
As far as the TMG rating goes, I believe you can use Vigilant hours towards satisfying the training requirement, but you will have to fly with a TMG examiner in order to gain the rating (i.e. you will not get it directly through the VGS system). Everything you need to know is in LASORS (just make sure you read it all carefully!!
Finally, I can't recommend the VGS system enough. A great way to gain experience doing something different, and will improve your flying no end (not least your capacity and general handling skills!). Hope that helps.
LAI (VGS instructor and current IR student)
P.S. Genghis. I always thought I'd enjoy chatting with you over a pint...now I know!! Did you have a hand in the very interesting spin testing writeup in the ACM by any chance?
As has been stated already, you can count up to 30 hours of Vigilant PIC time towards the CPL licence issue. However, ISTR a little footnote in LASORS that says you can't count it towards the 100 hours PIC requirement, so it may or may not end up being useful (depending on how many dual hours you already have...)
As far as the TMG rating goes, I believe you can use Vigilant hours towards satisfying the training requirement, but you will have to fly with a TMG examiner in order to gain the rating (i.e. you will not get it directly through the VGS system). Everything you need to know is in LASORS (just make sure you read it all carefully!!
Finally, I can't recommend the VGS system enough. A great way to gain experience doing something different, and will improve your flying no end (not least your capacity and general handling skills!). Hope that helps.
LAI (VGS instructor and current IR student)
P.S. Genghis. I always thought I'd enjoy chatting with you over a pint...now I know!! Did you have a hand in the very interesting spin testing writeup in the ACM by any chance?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rugby
Age: 33
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all,
Many thanks for all of your replies, they're just what I was after.
If i've understood it correctly, I can claim up to 30 hours flight time, but not P1 and I will not need a TMG rating to log hours unless I want to fly the same or similar type of aircraft in Civvie street?
Also, so far I have 47:25 hrs P1 and 53:50 hrs Dual, so the hours could still be useful.
Thanks again.
Many thanks for all of your replies, they're just what I was after.
If i've understood it correctly, I can claim up to 30 hours flight time, but not P1 and I will not need a TMG rating to log hours unless I want to fly the same or similar type of aircraft in Civvie street?
Also, so far I have 47:25 hrs P1 and 53:50 hrs Dual, so the hours could still be useful.
Thanks again.
The CAA counted all my hundreds of hours of Vigilant time as Group A and they said that for a FI rating all I needed was to take the test and whatever part of the FI course I thought I needed..
Alas this was 1998 and pre-JAA. Since then its all changed and all for the worse. Life used to be so sensible.
WWW
Alas this was 1998 and pre-JAA. Since then its all changed and all for the worse. Life used to be so sensible.
WWW
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scott,
I believe that holding a PPL also counts towards the minimum hours required to be tested for the awarded of a grade, G2 or G1 my memory fails to recall as indeed it does for the hours required! I also can't recommend the VGS system enough but, it takes commitment and at least one full day per weekend plus week long courses (at least it did when i was instructing a couple of years back). It was frowned upon to be seen to be purely 'hours building' but if your there putting the time in, I think any VGS these days would be welcoming....well maybe not all!
I believe that holding a PPL also counts towards the minimum hours required to be tested for the awarded of a grade, G2 or G1 my memory fails to recall as indeed it does for the hours required! I also can't recommend the VGS system enough but, it takes commitment and at least one full day per weekend plus week long courses (at least it did when i was instructing a couple of years back). It was frowned upon to be seen to be purely 'hours building' but if your there putting the time in, I think any VGS these days would be welcoming....well maybe not all!
The flight testing of the Vigilant came in two chunks, separated through diversion of resources by the Gulf war, which mucked up quite a few non-urgent trials programmes. The first half would have been about 75% of the flying and about 25% of the report writing, I ran the second half - post the gulf war, so probably got the poorer end of the deal. Five of us were heavily involved in the programme over the two stages.
Vaguely attempting to preserve everybody's anonymity, those five became subsequently Chief Test Pilot at BAe Warton, Chief Test Pilot at CAA, Chief Test Pilot to MoD, Head of FAAM at Cranfield, and one very well regarded part time FI at Old Sarum. Two of those have also built quite substantial reputations as display pilots. Bar possibly the fellow who became CTP at Warton, none of us particularly looked like high fliers at the time.
As for the spin wording in the ACM; I probably did write it (bear in mind you'd talking 18 years ago!), but didn't manage that bit of the flight testing.
G
