[skydriller]

As an Examiner there is zero obligation to sign anything if you don't want to..

Out of interest...scenario for you :

I pitch up this summer to the UK. I've flown 12+hrs in the previous 12 months including 2-3hrs night instruction signed off (with his licence number) by my french instructor over the winter, if I presented my CAA issued EASA PPL/logbook to you, would you sign off the SEP rating for another 2 years? I mean, you dont know me from Adam, do you?

Bonus question: If my rating expires January/February 2018, if you sign off, will the new date of expiry be January/February 2020, or July/August 2019?

Regards, SD..

[Dave W]

... I've flown 12+hrs in the previous 12 months including 2-3hrs night instruction signed off (with his licence number) by my french instructor over the winter...

Bonus question: If my rating expires January/February 2018, ...

I am but a lowly CRI,but the very first thing I'd be doing in this scenario is seeing whether you have 12+ hours, including instructional hour and TO/landings, post Jan/Feb 2017 - what came before that is irrelevant.

[skydriller]

I am but a lowly CRI...

So if I understand correctly you couldnt sign it off, right?:wink:

[Dave W]

Ah, well... I can't - because, as an aforesaid lowly CRI, I would have had to fly an instructional hour with you - those are the only circumstances where I could sign.

It's only Examiners who can sign the licence when somebody else instructed the hour.

[chrisbl]

Four pages of comment going absolutely nowhere.

This is not difficult stuff and the phoney effrontery displayed is quite depressing.

I always include my instructor number / examiner number in my signature when acting in either capacity.

[Dave W]

Well, that certainly helped a lot. Especially the baseless accusation of phoneyness.

[ChrisRowland]

How does an instructor or examiner check that the information in the log book is correct? The log book is entirely under the pilot's control and they can write what they like in it, including forging an instructor's signature.

Ultimately it comes down to trust, one thing with people that you know but how many degrees of separation would be reasonable?

[Miscellaneous]

Well, that certainly helped a lot. Especially the baseless accusation of phoneyness.

Oh, I so enjoy it when you get riled, Dave.

I'm enjoying your contributions to this thread.

[Dave W]

Thankfully, you are easily pleased, Misc.

[QSD]

It is quite simple. Mere FCL.945 instructors have to do the training flight themselves because only examiners have the magical ability to varify a log book entry and the signature of an FI that they have never heard of, and may in fact live in another country.

I recall asking examiners how they did this mystical feat on the Pprune instructor forum, but the answers were a bit vague. I suspect they are not allowed to reveal such secrets to the unitiated

[skydriller]

....only examiners have the magical ability to varify a log book entry and the signature of an FI that they have never heard of, and may in fact live in another country...

Mystical superpowers eh....So I should be alright this summer then...

Regards, SD..

[allout]

"How does an instructor or examiner check ......... "
You put your finger on the essential point.
Its down to trust and common sense, and can never be anything else, whatever regulations those idiots in Koln dream up.

[Europaul383]

1. The original requirement was for a training flight of at least 1 hr.
2. The CAA introduced an AltMoC to relax this to a total of 1 hr minimum, flown with the same FI in no more than 3 flights.
3. A couple of weeks later, after CAP804 had been edited to reflect the CAA AltMoC, Regulation (EU) 2015/445 relaxed the requirement yet further, to allow a total of 1 hr with no other stipulations. See FCL.740.A (b) (1) (ii):

.... at least 1 hour of total flight time with a flight instructor...

4. That trumps the CAA AltMoC as it is 'hard law' and not open to national interpretation.
5. The typical €urobabble leading to the erroneous implication of FCL.945 referring only to a single flight has already been pointed out to EASA. Whether they'll ever find someone who can actually write unambiguous English to correct matters remains to be seen. Don't hold your breath!

Exactly as you say, Nick. The problem first arose because the UK AltMoC (2012-0009: "...a maximum of 3 flights.") was immediately superseded by the reg being amended (in 2015) to "at least 1 hour of total flight time".

Unfortunately, the confusion continued (and continues?) because the 8 April 2015 consolidated version of 1178/2011 (Part-FCL), which was supposed to be amended by 2015/445 to read "at least 1 hour of total flight time" in fact did not contain this change - and was the copy in use by the chap who issued the AltMoC, so they didn't see any need to change it ... in fact they still believed it to be a relaxation of the original "training flight of at least 1 hour".

I have today confirmed with Licensing at the CAA (he said I could quote him, but I have withheld the name) that the AltMoC will be submitted for withdrawal and the mismatch with FCL.945 "Upon completion of the training flight" will again be raised at the next meeting with EASA.

Until it is changed* to reflect FCL.740, CAA Licensing will not apply the erroneous implication of 1 flight in 945, nor will they require the instructor who signs (if authorised as per 945) to be the same one who conducted some or all of the "1 hour of total flight time".

That said, this is a statement from Licensing; what is circulated round the Instructors' and Examiners' groups may vary.

*something like "Upon completion of the refresher training required for..."

[ak7274]

"nor will they require the instructor who signs (if authorised as per 945) to be the same one who conducted some or all of the 1 hour of total flight time".

As a CRI with 945 that bit scares me. If it's not on a gold plated piece of vellum, I won't be doing it.

[Human Factor]

Likewise. I'll only be signing if I've done the whole hour, either in one flight or several.