Why bother with a UK PPLH
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why bother with a UK PPLH
If you have a UK PPLH with several type ratings on it then you have to do an annual LPC test each year on each machine to remain current, which apart from the logistics involved is obviously very expensive.
Where as with a USA PPLH a BFR test every other year on one machine will suffice for all the single engine helicopters you are competent to fly (up to a given weight).
Current legislation dictates this annual check but is it really necessary as a pilot who fly's regularly or more than 12 hours a year is obviously keeping current by the very fact he is flying. The examiner sits there going through the same motions you both went through for the previous god knows how many times before with the inevitable end result of yes you are still safe to fly and that will be ex pounds thank you good buy.
So why bother with the CAA licence when the FAA one offers a more sensible deal and better value for money.
I don't think it matters where you learn to fly in the world so long as you have a good instructor who you get on with and you can relate to.
I don't know how you guy's out there that do hundreds of hours a year put up with this as it must be very frustrating especially when you have probably done more hours than the person who is checking you out.
Its a rip off and unnecessary, when is the Committee Against Aviation going to toe the line and see common sence.
Where as with a USA PPLH a BFR test every other year on one machine will suffice for all the single engine helicopters you are competent to fly (up to a given weight).
Current legislation dictates this annual check but is it really necessary as a pilot who fly's regularly or more than 12 hours a year is obviously keeping current by the very fact he is flying. The examiner sits there going through the same motions you both went through for the previous god knows how many times before with the inevitable end result of yes you are still safe to fly and that will be ex pounds thank you good buy.
So why bother with the CAA licence when the FAA one offers a more sensible deal and better value for money.
I don't think it matters where you learn to fly in the world so long as you have a good instructor who you get on with and you can relate to.
I don't know how you guy's out there that do hundreds of hours a year put up with this as it must be very frustrating especially when you have probably done more hours than the person who is checking you out.
Its a rip off and unnecessary, when is the Committee Against Aviation going to toe the line and see common sence.
It´s not just UK CAA that requires LPC for each type. It´s required in all JAA member countries.
I myself hold 8 JAA helicopter type ratings and I see it as necessary to stay current in each type to do LPC in each and every type. Some of the type I don´t get to fly much and when I do it´s doing emergency manuevers as I am Flight Examiner.
However if you hold type ratings in several piston helicopters it is enough to do just LPC (Licence proficiency check) in just one of the types if you have at least logged two hours on all type´s within the year. So it´s not all bad
JAR-FCL 2.245
I can see that your comment regarding BFR is relevant in the US. Where a 200hr CFI wonder can give the BFR.
However in JAA land all LPC are done by Examiners who are very experienced.
I myself hold 8 JAA helicopter type ratings and I see it as necessary to stay current in each type to do LPC in each and every type. Some of the type I don´t get to fly much and when I do it´s doing emergency manuevers as I am Flight Examiner.
However if you hold type ratings in several piston helicopters it is enough to do just LPC (Licence proficiency check) in just one of the types if you have at least logged two hours on all type´s within the year. So it´s not all bad
JAR-FCL 2.245
(3) for single-engine piston helicopters,
as listed in Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 2.245(b)(3),
at least the proficiency check in accordance with
JAR-FCL 2.245 (b)(1) on one of the applicable
types held provided that the applicant has fulfilled
at least 2 hours pilot-in-command flight time on
the other type(s) during the validity period to
which that revalidation proficiency check shall
carry across.
as listed in Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 2.245(b)(3),
at least the proficiency check in accordance with
JAR-FCL 2.245 (b)(1) on one of the applicable
types held provided that the applicant has fulfilled
at least 2 hours pilot-in-command flight time on
the other type(s) during the validity period to
which that revalidation proficiency check shall
carry across.
I can see that your comment regarding BFR is relevant in the US. Where a 200hr CFI wonder can give the BFR.
I don't know how you guy's out there that do hundreds of hours a year put up with this as it must be very frustrating especially when you have probably done more hours than the person who is checking you out.
Last edited by Aesir; 23rd Nov 2006 at 11:55. Reason: check out by low timers
See how many FAA helicopter guys there are in the Uk befors deciding. A question for you - how many types do you carry on your licence ? If you are only flying a few hours a year in each then should you have a one off check ride ?
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you have a UK PPLH with several type ratings on it then you have to do an annual LPC test each year on each machine to remain current,
By all means do your FAA PPL(H). I chose not to because I eventually wish to fly commercially in the UK and an FAA ATPL(H) would make that a bit tricky!
Personally I don't mind being checked out once a year as I enjoy having my wrists slapped by my examiner for all the bad habits that I've got into (in a year!!) and it forces me to revise and practice emergency procedures - a good thing in my mind. The marginal cost of the examiner's time is really only a few quid on top of the hire of the machine itself.
Cheers
Whirls
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whirlygig,
The way I read it, if you look at the types covered by this rule it won't help the vast majority of helicopter pilots who fly Robinsons as they aren't included in the appendix. Ok if you fly Enstroms and Schweitzers though.
FP.
The way I read it, if you look at the types covered by this rule it won't help the vast majority of helicopter pilots who fly Robinsons as they aren't included in the appendix. Ok if you fly Enstroms and Schweitzers though.
FP.
HeliFirst
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lincoln & Norwich
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Experience? what experience?
Aesir you said "However in JAA land all LPC are done by Examiners who are very experienced."
Are you sure?? Ask to see their log book and even then to a check on them!!
Sadly You will be surprised.
Check JAR to see how little experience is needed now to be a FE.
Its CAA uk allows Each Training School to nominate their own.
Heilds at present has the least experienced examiner but thats only a rumour perhaps you know one with even less.
Are you sure?? Ask to see their log book and even then to a check on them!!
Sadly You will be surprised.
Check JAR to see how little experience is needed now to be a FE.
Its CAA uk allows Each Training School to nominate their own.
Heilds at present has the least experienced examiner but thats only a rumour perhaps you know one with even less.
I think you can also do just one checkride on single turbines as well which will cover you for all, but again you must have logged x hrs pic and be current on the other types. This is a sensible move , so i guess it must be a mistake
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have just looked at the most recent JAR-FCL2 appendix 1 as quoted by Aesir and Robinsons are listed. Why shouldn't they be? I don't understand your interpretation.
What the new JAR-FCL2 DOES say though that is interesting is that the LPC must be taken on the type least recently used!
Cheers
Whirls
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.jaa.nl/publications/jars/444077-updated.pdf
Page 102 of 170 page 1-F-12 - I see Robinson!
Why would this not be included amongst other SEPs?
Cheers
Whirls
Page 102 of 170 page 1-F-12 - I see Robinson!
Why would this not be included amongst other SEPs?
Cheers
Whirls
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robinsons not included as FAA ,JAA and even its manufacturer wants Robbo pilots to have a check out every year .I think its smart as Robbos have low-enertia rotor systems and have lots of problems with mast bumping and the older ones with carb icing.
Aesir SET are also grouped together now for the purpose of LPC providing one has +300hrs rotor +15hrs on type and 2 hrs in the previous 12 mths on each type to be revalidated .You must do the annual LPC on a dfferent type each year ,in rotation if possible.ie Say you have 5 types :B206 H500 AS350 EC120 EC130 e.g.
yr1 B206
yr2 H500
yr3 AS350
yr4 EC120
yr5 EC130
Aesir SET are also grouped together now for the purpose of LPC providing one has +300hrs rotor +15hrs on type and 2 hrs in the previous 12 mths on each type to be revalidated .You must do the annual LPC on a dfferent type each year ,in rotation if possible.ie Say you have 5 types :B206 H500 AS350 EC120 EC130 e.g.
yr1 B206
yr2 H500
yr3 AS350
yr4 EC120
yr5 EC130
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can only imagine it's because of the reasons Helilad has mentioned. As I only have half an hour in an R22, I'd never noticed! However, ultimately, I don't think it's a bad thing to do LPCs. I dread them every year and get nervous when my nasty little habits are pointed out to me but hopefully I end up wiser after the event.
Cheers
Whirls
Better red than ...
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Appleby-in-Westmorland Cumbria England
Posts: 1,412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text....1.1.2&idno=14
Robinson pilots should read SFAR 73 on this thread .The first line in red.
Robinson pilots should read SFAR 73 on this thread .The first line in red.
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do appreciate that this is different to the licence skills test.
Cheers
Whirls
!!
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Redeye:
That's £185 plus VAT? For an LPC? And who got the 'dual' bit of the hire fee? Examiner or operator? Sounds a bit steep!
The CAA 'guideline' charge for a PPL skills test carried out by a FE(H) is, I believe, the same as the CAA would charge for a staff examiner. That's currently £175. (Which has to be one of the CAA's bargain offers!) Guidance is that the workload required for the FE is such that normally no more than 2 tests should be carried out in one day. So, half a day's work, OK. But an LPC (flight time about 25 to 30 mins) should be a matter of an average of 1.5 hours work for a Brief, Flight Test and Debrief, including checking logbook hours and signing the forms etc. So on the PPL skills test guidance criteria, I wouldn't dream of charging more than £85; a bit more when it's an initial type rating test.
I do not distinguish between PPL and professional pilots in setting a fee: same either way.
(And no, I'm not touting for business and anyway, I'm anonymous!)
As it happens, I pay my own examiner auth fees to the CAA personally, and any examinees pay me directly. I can understand a FTO/TRTO bumping up the test fee passed on to candidates in order to cover general overheads, if the fee is recovered through the school for an employee.
If the examiner is not local, it would be reasonable for him/her to ask for travel expenses.
Personally, I encourage all the PPLs that I test to have a flight with an instructor every 6 months. OK, so thats £45-£50 per hour on top of normal hire charges, or operating costs for owners, but still money well spent: and it generally shows, to the good, when pilot turns up for his LPC.
The common SEP/SET is good for us all. Shame about the R22 and R44. BTW, when AL4 to FCL-2 is implemented, the current LTE allowing 3 hours for conversion to R22 and R44 will go: it'll be back to 5 hours for these two types.
That's £185 plus VAT? For an LPC? And who got the 'dual' bit of the hire fee? Examiner or operator? Sounds a bit steep!
The CAA 'guideline' charge for a PPL skills test carried out by a FE(H) is, I believe, the same as the CAA would charge for a staff examiner. That's currently £175. (Which has to be one of the CAA's bargain offers!) Guidance is that the workload required for the FE is such that normally no more than 2 tests should be carried out in one day. So, half a day's work, OK. But an LPC (flight time about 25 to 30 mins) should be a matter of an average of 1.5 hours work for a Brief, Flight Test and Debrief, including checking logbook hours and signing the forms etc. So on the PPL skills test guidance criteria, I wouldn't dream of charging more than £85; a bit more when it's an initial type rating test.
I do not distinguish between PPL and professional pilots in setting a fee: same either way.
(And no, I'm not touting for business and anyway, I'm anonymous!)
As it happens, I pay my own examiner auth fees to the CAA personally, and any examinees pay me directly. I can understand a FTO/TRTO bumping up the test fee passed on to candidates in order to cover general overheads, if the fee is recovered through the school for an employee.
If the examiner is not local, it would be reasonable for him/her to ask for travel expenses.
Personally, I encourage all the PPLs that I test to have a flight with an instructor every 6 months. OK, so thats £45-£50 per hour on top of normal hire charges, or operating costs for owners, but still money well spent: and it generally shows, to the good, when pilot turns up for his LPC.
The common SEP/SET is good for us all. Shame about the R22 and R44. BTW, when AL4 to FCL-2 is implemented, the current LTE allowing 3 hours for conversion to R22 and R44 will go: it'll be back to 5 hours for these two types.
I think Up & Away is referring to Hields' (not Heilds) Chief Pilot who has circa 2000hrs and flies at least 5 types. He's 24 and has been working & flying in the industry since he started on work experience.
U&A - sour grapes?
Its the same old cack in industry. The only way to have experience is to build it. If you can take a gruelling to get the FE/TRE qualification is that not enough? Is U&A suggesting that the CAA Chief Examiner is too lax?
What is the industry supposed to do when the more senior experienced pilots hang up their flying boots? Surely its too late to react then?
U&A - sour grapes?
Its the same old cack in industry. The only way to have experience is to build it. If you can take a gruelling to get the FE/TRE qualification is that not enough? Is U&A suggesting that the CAA Chief Examiner is too lax?
What is the industry supposed to do when the more senior experienced pilots hang up their flying boots? Surely its too late to react then?