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

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

    Read it here:
    http://ukga.com/news/view?contentId=35264

    Any idea what it means?

  • #2
    CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

    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

    Comment


    • #3
      CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

      The only link I found on that page took me to the CAA site and then I lost the will to live. It's like when Geoff posts links to links to links )

      I think removing a licence requirement for SSDR would be very bad. We'd end up with the problems they used to have in the states with lots of deaths. What keeps us safe is the licence or, more correctly, the rigour of student training required to get the licence. Much as with motorbikes when they introduced the 1 day compulsory training (CBT) many years ago now the number of serious/fatal accidents reduced by about 90% (I was told this, have not verified myself).

      It's bizarre, I'm all for getting rid of red tape but let's not throw away the stuff that actually does keep us safe! The fact that they've even suggested it ahead of other red-tape reductions makes me worry about whether they know what they're doing.

      Training on non-factory-built aircraft (is that in progress now?) is a no-brainer. If it's ok to take your friend's kid up in it then it's good enough for an instructor to teach you to fly in it!

      Comment


      • #4
        CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

        Training on homebuilts is part of the ANO consultation - please make the effort to find it read it and respond to the consultation supporting that. Several of those nice A1 microlight companies are opposing such a change - so it only stands a chance of happening if we respond positively.

        https://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%20...O%20Review.pdf

        Not co pletely sure where they are coming from with the licensing thing, but maybe it's achance to raise the issue of paramotor training without wanting to think they are picking on them?

        Paul

        Comment


        • #5
          CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

          Paul Dewhurst wrote: 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..
          That's true, but would it remain foot launchable by the average paramotor pilot?

          The average pilot with a back pack with a 582 in it and a 10m^2 canopy will need to have serious body strength and the ability to spring like Linford Christie in his heyday to take off or land without face planting.

          Comment


          • #6
            CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

            "The average pilot with a back pack with a 582 in it and a 10m^2 canopy will need to have serious body strength and the ability to spring like Linford Christie in his heyday to take off or land without face planting" :rofl:

            Personally I welcome any form of Deregulation in our Sport, however when the council in their wisdom had a chance to assist in making Permit Time, just a little more flexible. They choose not to. The BMAA is a member funded organisation paid by ALL of US. Next time perhaps a little consultation of the members would be a little more Democratic. Such as Terry Viners poll, on paying instalments on membership. Well done Terry.

            Comment


            • #7
              CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

              Steve Uzochukwu wrote:
              Originally posted by Paul Dewhurst
              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..
              That's true, but would it remain foot launchable by the average paramotor pilot?

              The average pilot with a back pack with a 582 in it and a 10m^2 canopy will need to have serious body strength and the ability to spring like Linford Christie in his heyday to take off or land without face planting.
              PPC Steve - the ones with the wheels.... That was the whole thrust of my post, making a distinction between footlaunched and wheeled.

              Paul

              Comment


              • #8
                CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                Having done my NPPL on a Quantum to qualify me to fly a Dragonfly I became convinced of the need for a SSDR-level NPPL. It took me a long time to learn to get a Quantum onto the ground in an airmanlike fashion but I could have learnt to do it with a Dragonfly in about an hour. I have spent the last 300 hours flying an aircraft with no pod, no screen, no passenger, no magnetos, no brakes, no foot-throttle, no trimmer and no instruments with a 4-stroke engine that is warmed up after one minute year-round and which lands at walking pace. It does have a retractable undercarriage of course, which the Quantum did not prepare me for. To me it was like learning on a Learjet and keeping current on a Chipmunk.

                I have let my two-seat rating lapse because I just don't need it and I would now struggle greatly to fly a 'proper' flexwing, it would be like starting from scratch.

                The problem is, of course, that SSDR now includes 'proper' flexwings of much greater mass and speed and some very tricky 3-axis types. How on earth could a licensing system be flexible enough to grant my wish now? I don't think I'd like to see an unlicensed pilot getting into Rick Goddin's new toy.

                Comment


                • #9
                  CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                  Link doesn't work - may be an issue with the CAA site or perhaps a duff link. Do you have another way to get to the doc? Will happily write to support training on non-factory built machines, and will encourage those within the club to do so also.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                    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

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                      Steve Wilson wrote: Having done my NPPL on a Quantum to qualify me to fly a Dragonfly I became convinced of the need for a SSDR-level NPPL. It took me a long time to learn to get a Quantum onto the ground in an airmanlike fashion but I could have learnt to do it with a Dragonfly in about an hour. I have spent the last 300 hours flying an aircraft with no pod, no screen, no passenger, no magnetos, no brakes, no foot-throttle, no trimmer and no instruments with a 4-stroke engine that is warmed up after one minute year-round and which lands at walking pace. It does have a retractable undercarriage of course, which the Quantum did not prepare me for. To me it was like learning on a Learjet and keeping current on a Chipmunk.

                      I have let my two-seat rating lapse because I just don't need it and I would now struggle greatly to fly a 'proper' flexwing, it would be like starting from scratch.

                      The problem is, of course, that SSDR now includes 'proper' flexwings of much greater mass and speed and some very tricky 3-axis types. How on earth could a licensing system be flexible enough to grant my wish now? I don't think I'd like to see an unlicensed pilot getting into Rick Goddin's new toy.
                      I would disagree Steve. I have taught peole to fly in lots of trikes from dual strikers, XL's through to the modern fast ships. No one learns to land in an hour. And it really doesn't take an less time to teach someone to land in an XL ( which is an Xtra large Typhoon hanglider wing) than a Quantum, in fact maybe the reverse. And it's the feel of round out and hold off and balancing the pitch inputs against height and energy decay that you are learning. Once you have that it's relatively easy to transfer to different trike types - aand quantum is a nice bridge between the slower and faster types so less of a jump.

                      even it it was easier to learn to land an SSDR, in the absense of a two seater of identical characteristics how could it be 'fast forwarded' - it's impossible for an instructor to judge at what level of being incapable to fly the two seater you would be capable of flying the single seater..!

                      If you aspirations are simple local flying on a slow type SSDR then restricted license provides a lower hour, quicker, cheaper license type.

                      Paul

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                        Funny old thing Paul, we disagree again. What on earth has local flying and restricted licence got to do with it? My contention is that I could have completed the NPPL to Dragonfly standards in half the time it took on a Quantum, ie aircraft handling. Don't get me started on the nav and RT qualifications when I already had a lifetime PPL and 19 years as a professional air navigator. Pretend I never mentioned anything about landing.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                          Sorry Steve, seems to be irritating you, but I am trying to understand how it could have been done more quickly? - what would be in your SSDR level NPPL? are you advocating that solo training might have worked better, or some other way to get to dragonfly standard more quickly or effectively? Was it becuase your instructor lacked knowledge if the type you were going to fly or something else. You say it's just handling you are talking about, yet also mentioned this SSDR level license - so presumably there would be some additional simplifications?

                          It is relevant because it is one of the questions in the ANO review - it does ask whether a sub 115kg grouping should be treated differently.

                          And also bear in mind it would have to work for those that didn't have previous experience. Cross credits is another ( valid) subject.

                          We have an aircreation Fun which on the face of it would seem closer aligned to a dragonfly for landing training - having an 18 M wing with low loading, no pod etc. But actually we have more success teaching them to land a GT450 first as it has extra energy which extends the hold off float period and allows them more time to learn to feel the landing. We have four Flexwing instructors all very experienced in the light stuff - as you would expect with us making the things, and have racked our brains on the best way to do it.

                          Paul

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                            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.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              CAA looking at Deregulate the pilot licensing of small single occupant aircraft

                              Interesting difference of opinion between you two :-) I think I come down on Paul's side though Steve. However here's a psychological conundrum that your preference would solve. Flying dual with an instructor behind me I never believed I 'had control' no matter how many times the instructor assured me that was the case. The only time it was really apparent was of course in the first solo. It took me a very long time to reliably land a 2-seater flexwing (I paid an instructor in South Africa to do 3 continuous hours of landing practice which eventually got it for me). I don't really think that learning to land solo in my Dragonfly would have helped me but it would have certainly made Paul and Ben some money on supplying spares.
                              My biggest fear in landing my Dragonfly is doing so with the undercarriage retracted. As you say that can't be taught in a two-seat flexwing other than as part of an acronym checklist. Anyway these days I don't bother to retract as apparently it makes little difference to the aerodynamics at 37mph .... but it does look cool. I like the colour scheme of your new one by the way.
                              Mike

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X