Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

    Paul Dewhurst wrote: Just google cap1271, or ANO review or try this https://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%20...O%20Review.pdf

    I just followed the links form your post and I know you are much more tech savvy than me

    Cheers
    Paul
    Seems to be an issue with the forum software not properly forming the https link... Ok, so I'm in the consultation.. now I must be really dumb because I can't find the question that relates to training on kit builds.. you may start your response with "You are really dumb, it's question xx"

    g

    Comment


    • #17
      CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

      Paramotor trikes could be kept safe and low energy by simply removing the "must be foot launched" part of the ANO. The existing 70kg weight limit could stay thus preventing high powered small winged trikes. I do however think that wing registration should be introduced for paramotors.t

      Comment


      • #18
        CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

        John Kendall wrote: I do however think that wing registration should be introduced for paramotors.
        I don't, as it wouldn't be that practical. I fly mine with different wings, including ordinary paraglider wings. I suspect the registration hassle and expense would mean most people simply wouldn't comply. Add to that the difficulty of reselling a wing with letters on it.

        Comment


        • #19
          CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

          Gwyn Carwardine wrote:
          Seems to be an issue with the forum software not properly forming the https link... Ok, so I'm in the consultation.. now I must be really dumb because I can't find the question that relates to training on kit builds.. you may start your response with "You are really dumb, it's question xx"

          g
          Yes, any link with a % sign in it doesn't work, but don't ask me why. Try this one http://goo.gl/AOcH1y

          Comment


          • #20
            CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

            "
            Steve Wilson wrote: I have always thought of my Dragonfly as a rigid-winged paramotor. Like all responsible paramotor pilots I undertook training with a highly-recommended instructor, so what was I taught? I was taught how to take off from a forward and reverse launch and how to abort a bad one; I was taught how to ground-handle the wing in various conditions; I was taught how to land and was closely watched from the ground as I did so including spot landing from a high deadstick position. I didn't fly dual and there was no test flight. Modern paramotors perform in a similar way to my flexwing.

            In getting a licence to fly a Dragonfly I could have had steep turns, stalls, recovery from unusual positions and forced landings demonstrated in the air with me reproducing the actions to prove understanding. Once take off and landing was adequate for first solo in a Quantum I could have bashed the circuit in my Dragonfly while my instructor drank gallons of tea at the touchdown point. Having ticked all the boxes there would have been no need for a GST. One dual and two solo navexes was over the top, even for a newbie. Hours spent perfecting actions to meet a test standard when I was already safe enough was expensive, but, then again, I also spent hundreds of pounds watching my instructor's 912 warming up.

            However, as I said above, this all applies to my aircraft (not my previous experience level note) and would not work in the new SSDR world.
            I wouldn't disagree with the main thrust of that. And it's mostly possible within the current syllabus and requirements. There was no reason why you couldn't have done most or all your solo in the dragonfly. It wasn't that long ago that it wasn't possible to go solo in a school machine and you had to do your first on your own aircraft. And it worked perfectly well given the right instructor, and training.

            It is possible to do a solo observed GST. However the guidance is that there should be a very good reason to do so If training has had a dual element then it's sensible to have the GST in the dual machine to be able to check checks and procedures, lookout and correct handling. In short it's a final check to make sure that no further training is required to get a basic safe foundation to move forwards on.
            As for navigation. It might have been easy for you with previous experience, but for most folks it's a big challenge and they need quite a bit of practice before they get it in a reliable fashion. Lots of folk need several dual cross countries. But the game is for enough dual to get a competent standard and that they are happy and not overly anxious. And at the moment it has to be done by basic navigation techniques - without GPS.

            Around 20 years ago I worked at a school who's owner didn't hold with dual Nav training and told people it was easy. The syllabus actually doesn't require any dual Nav training - then or now., and he went that way - and just sent them off. Result was that most were terrified, many got lost and then lost confidence and most folk went for a restricted license. Result was a a club where a lot of people just flew locally and never felt confident for longer trips and a high drop output rate after the first year or two when the novelty of just flying in sight of the airfield wore off.

            The big thing is that no two people are alike and they all have different requirements for training, their own particular set of fears, competencies and lacks, and all need to be treated differently and with different lengths of time on different aspects of training to train them well.

            Paul

            Comment


            • #21
              CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

              Fair enough, the system's fine, let's leave it.

              Comment


              • #22
                CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                Gwyn Carwardine wrote:
                Originally posted by Paul Dewhurst
                Just google cap1271, or ANO review or try this https://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%20...O%20Review.pdf

                I just followed the links form your post and I know you are much more tech savvy than me

                Cheers
                Paul
                Seems to be an issue with the forum software not properly forming the https link... Ok, so I'm in the consultation.. now I must be really dumb because I can't find the question that relates to training on kit builds.. you may start your response with "You are really dumb, it's question xx"

                g
                Question 45 is I believe the one to make the point. It's. Bit obtuse to follow all the text but there is a section about expanding training on permit types, and the area I feel we could have some expansion is the use of homebuilts.

                I also believe the 51% amatier built rule should go for hombuilt microlights - it isn't an EU requirement for microlights, and hence UK are 'gold plating'. It makes no sense and is widely abused - lots of commercial building going on behind the scenes and some fairly blatantly. Better if it were out in the open and properly inspected. And an owner could chose what level of involvement they have. Nothing so sad as a part built plane languishing in a barn as owner has run out of enthusiasm. Most folk who ask what the system is are quite surprised that help is outlawed and that an experienced person can't legally help.. There are also many inconsistencies - once built if crashed on its first flight it can be completely rebuilt commercially. And if course an A1 factory machine can be co pletely rebuilt by an amateur - yet is still deemed to be fine for training and hire...

                I am sure we can find a question to make that point in 6,8 or 69 maybe.

                Paul

                Comment


                • #23
                  CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                  I've submitted a response in respect of questions 45 and 60. I can still make further responses in respect of 6, 8 and 69.

                  I've also drawn their attention to the ludicrous situation that exists in terms of pilot licensing and eyesight. I cannot get, should I want, a CAA CPL or ATPL because my eyesight is worse than -6.0. However the FAA rules are "20/20 vision with or without correction" which I would pass. Given that the CAA allow FAA licensed pilots to fly in UK airspace this cannot be a safety issue. Therefore my claim is that this is discrimination on the grounds of disability. Given enough spare time I would pursue. I met a new chap at my field yesterday, he works for the CAA and told me to write to Dr Sally Evans and also, with eyesight outside the CAA criteria, agreed that this rule is inappropriate.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                    You need training to fly an SSDR on wheels; I'm a known Mr Angry with regard to nannying overregulation, but removing training on even the smallest single seat aircraft is a step far too far.

                    Currently fly a small low-tech flexwing with a cruise of around 60mph and range of 250 miles on 2/3rd of a tank, that puts you on the Isle Of Wight and through all sorts of airspace, plus you need a decent level of experience of weather and how it bites, especially in the UK. Been in two or three situations in the last twelve months which would probablyhad very bad results but for old instructor's words ringing in the ears from 1993.

                    As SSDR machines inevitably grow more capable this will increase, not decrease the need for instruction. I've had training on a chainsaw and valued it, an SSDR is way more likely to kill or injure you.

                    Paul and Gwyn are right, hope the BMAa retain some control over this, it's Geoff's specialist subject.

                    Kev
                    G-KEVA
                    BMAA 5696

                    "If anybody ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me: it's all balls."

                    R.J. Mitchell :- Designer of the Supermarine Spitfire

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                      Gwyn Carwardine wrote:
                      I've also drawn their attention to the ludicrous situation that exists in terms of pilot licensing and eyesight. I cannot get, should I want, a CAA CPL or ATPL because my eyesight is worse than -6.0. However the FAA rules are "20/20 vision with or without correction" which I would pass. Given that the CAA allow FAA licensed pilots to fly in UK airspace this cannot be a safety issue. Therefore my claim is that this is discrimination on the grounds of disability.
                      An applicant has to meet that standard at initial examination to be assessed fit for a licence, however if he/she already has an ICAO compliant licence, that requirement is waived.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                        Donald Walker wrote:
                        Originally posted by Gwyn Carwardine
                        I've also drawn their attention to the ludicrous situation that exists in terms of pilot licensing and eyesight. I cannot get, should I want, a CAA CPL or ATPL because my eyesight is worse than -6.0. However the FAA rules are "20/20 vision with or without correction" which I would pass. Given that the CAA allow FAA licensed pilots to fly in UK airspace this cannot be a safety issue. Therefore my claim is that this is discrimination on the grounds of disability.
                        An applicant has to meet that standard at initial examination to be assessed fit for a licence, however if he/she already has an ICAO compliant licence, that requirement is waived.
                        What does that mean in layman's language? Sorry but I'm not au fait with "ICAO compliant licence".

                        Incidentally I have also written under separate cover to the CAA's chief medicalist, Sally Evans. It's been passed on to the CAA's Office of General Counsel.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                          FAA medicals are not accepted for UK licenses.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                            FAA medicals are not accepted for UK licences, but an FAA licence with a valid medical, is accepted by the CAA as a an acceptable means of compliance with the initial vision assessment standards.

                            The notification of denial of medical certificate I got from the CAA Aeromedical Centre included this " I am sorry that we could not take into account your extensive experience as an NPPL holder, but we would be able to reassess you to revalidation standards, which do not have an absolute limit for the astigmatic component, should you apply with an ICAO PPL." The same applies for other visual conditions, and probably other medical issues too.

                            The reason is that initial assessment standards are higher than revalidation standards. Meaning that a CAA ATPL flying regularly with hundreds of passengers may have lower visual acuity than you or I Gwyn.

                            Less than three years after getting my FAA licence, the LAPL came into being, with medical standards similar to the FAA Class 3.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                              Paul Dewhurst wrote: Read the ANO review document the links take you to and there is explanation.

                              Personally I think removing a license requirement for SSDR would be a bad thing. The basis of us proving the initial case for SSDR to CAA and Dft was made on evidence that training had the big safety impact not airworthiness regulation. There are also potential problems of insurance and access to aerodromes for SSDR if there was no license required.

                              However the review also asks about SPHG ( paramotors and footlaunched powrred hangliders) and whether mandatory licensing should be introduced for them. Or a mandatory air law exam pass. Here I am personally inclined to think that mandatory licensing would be less useful, there being an intrinsic level of risk mitigation from low energy, and difficulty of enforcement. However the air law exam might have merit. Compliance would be low cost and nit difficult, and it would remove concerns about inadvertent flight into airspace, and nuisance from ignorance of the

                              I also think that it might be a good idea for powered parachute single seaters to be considered for not requiring a license. It's widely ignored now - lots flying and very few have licenses. And they are largely very easy and safe to fly - but against that it is really only because so far they are very low energy. Canopies are getting smaller and speeds higher and a sub 10m PPC with a 582 might be capable of quite high speeds and being far less foolproof to fly..

                              Paul
                              There were no licensing for weightshifts in Lithuania until 2009. Nobody died ... . Licensing requirements and regulations were pushed by instructors-businessmen who dreamed about huge incomes. Nobody trained me to fly hanggliders, nor weightshifts and nobody trained me how to train others to fly And I'm not alone

                              Not the requirements and regulations and administration make aviation safe, but good training, self-training, holistic education and participation in championships.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                                Hi all,

                                The BHPA position on Paramotors has been that what is required is training to an approved standard, not licensing. After all, that is exactly what we have run for HG and PG pilots for many years.

                                I anticipate that we will respond to the CAA suggesting that this is the correct approach for SSDR Microlights and that we are in a position to produce a syllabus for their approval in very short order.

                                The intention would be that this would reduce the bureaucracy imposed on SSDR pilots even further. Perhaps, thereafter, given a track record of incident free flying, we could lobby to remove the legal requirement to register such aircraft, or offer to maintain a register ourselves.

                                Food for thought..

                                Regards

                                Marc.
                                BHPA Chairman
                                Vice President RAeC
                                Barrister at Law

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X