Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
#1819213
PeteSpencer wrote:
I have a sneaky suspicion this forum will turn into a band of FR24 dobbers :roll:


Sadly I don't have an a/c at this time, but at the moment if did I suspect I'd forget to turn the transponder on even more than I (unintentionally!) usually do.

I might also be at a bit slow in writing up log books.
By rdfb
#1819214
A4 Pacific wrote:The law says stay at home, other than for reasonable ‘excuses’ non of which includes GA.


For the umpteenth time. The law lists things that are reasonable excuses, but the list is not exhaustive.

The Law wrote:the circumstances in which a person has a reasonable excuse include where one of the exceptions set out in paragraph 2 applies


(emphasis mine)

Whether GA currency or maintenance, or even "going for a jolly" is a reasonable excuse is entirely up to interpretation.

To be clear, I'm not claiming that "going for a jolly" is allowed under the law; just that the law doesn't actually state whether that would be a reasonable excuse or not, just as it doesn't state whether a GA maintenance or currency flight would be a reasonable excuse or not. My point is that it's been deliberately left open to interpretation. You are quite entitled to state your opinion on how it should be interpreted, or refer to government guidance to claim that a reasonable interpretation would be consistent with it. But it is outright wrong to say that the law does not include GA as a reasonable excuse - because the law deliberately leaves it open.
Tim Dawson, PeteSpencer, 2Donkeys and 1 others liked this
#1819223
TheFarmer wrote:
Why on earth a fellow pilot would have an issue with people doing that is somewhat beyond me.


As I keep saying, maybe because they’re part of the ever-growing breed of anonymous people here who don’t actually fly, and can’t bear the rest of us doing it?


There has always been a bit of a jealous "Ooooo...look at that...shouldnt be allowed" attitude from some people, even on here. The problem has got worse because now everyone has a buddy phone with a camera and instant access to social media. A prime example being this :

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9079215/Moment-two-small-planes-swoop-estuary-just-eight-FEET-surface.html

Regards, SD..
#1819224
If you ring the CAA they will not authorise a particular individual GA service flight and will re-iterate their right to prosecute transgressors.
They will however say that evidence of carrying out a formal risk assessment of the need for such a flight may be considered in mitigation should a prosecution be launched .
Ask me how I know.......
#1819237
If you ring the CAA they will not authorise a particular individual GA service flight and will re-iterate their right to prosecute transgressors.


For the simple reason that it is not up to the CAA to authorise flights. It's down to the DfT. The CAA only take action if they see a blatant transgression of the law. DfT GA policy is guidance.

As I've posted on here before. I've had personal dealings with AOPA/CAA/DfT/Welsh Government to get my aircraft to and from maintenance. None raised any objection to my plans so long as I had carried out a full risk assessment and had taken the decision to operate as a personal one. So long as I thought the journey was in line with current policy then it was up to me.

The one thing that the DfT and Welsh Government made clear is that their policies are not finite in definition. Flexibility in interpretation is to be expected and encouraged. Abuse and circumvention however is not.

I have two maintenance companies telling me I'm currently able to fly into them for work under the premise of accessing facilities that are open and also obtaining vehicle service. (Vehicles have previously been defined as 'any form of motorised transport' under Corona legislation.

The authorities will not 'authorise' your flight. It's your judgment call to make it. However you will be expected to justfify your decision if so challenged at a later stage.

No doubt our two resident 'experts' who seem to have also had personal contact with the authorities will tell me I'm wrong. :roll:
Last edited by BoeingBoy on Sun Jan 10, 2021 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
skydriller, 2Donkeys, patowalker and 4 others liked this
#1819259
BoeingBoy wrote:
If you ring the CAA they will not authorise a particular individual GA service flight and will re-iterate their right to prosecute transgressors.


For the simple reason that it is not up to the CAA to authorise flights. It's down to the DfT. The CAA only take action if they see a blatant transgression of the law. DfT GA policy is guidance


The authorities will not 'authorise' your flight. It's your judgment call to make it. However you will be expected to justfify your decision if so challenged at a later stage.

Now doubt our two resident 'experts' who seem to also have defined contact with the authorities will tell me I'm wrong. :roll:


Apols: My wrong use of terminology : Our member was merely seeking to confirm whose ultimate responsibility it was to make the flight and what might be the consequences.

I guess ‘condone’ would have been a better word .

It was put to him quite clearly that it was the pilot's ultimate decision (which we knew anyway) and that proper appraisal of the risks while not shielding us from prosecution which privilege the CAA retained, it might mitigate any outcome of such prosecution.
@BoeingBoy I think we're singing from the same hymn sheet.
Never was much of a fan of sarcasm
Last edited by PeteSpencer on Sun Jan 10, 2021 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#1819716
A very interesting conversation ensued from my original query serving to highlight a lack of clarity in the current situation.
My judgement call, supported by my maintenance organisation (vested interest notwithstanding), was that repositioning my aircraft for its annual was permissible as essential maintenance. One short flight and one deserted train trip later I was back home with neither me nor anyone else endangered.
Thanks to all who responded.
Dodo, BoeingBoy, PeteSpencer and 3 others liked this
#1819736
After the lockdown, I wonder how much of the GA fleet will be grounded because the engine wont start for the pilot? (even if the battery has been on a charger) ... and there is no local engineer that knows how to get it going.
User avatar
By BoeingBoy
#1819848
I see that there are a handful of engine health flights taking place and my own dilema is whether to sacrifice this months and go to sixty days non ops in the hope that things might be looser in a months time or join those who feel that their Lycoming won't be so forgiving. The aircraft is hangared but close to the coast.

I shelled out £10k for four new cylinders two years two years ago due to corrosion caused by a three month lay up and don't want to do that again.

That said, it's more the safety aspect that worries me. I can access my aircraft safely without human contact whilst risking a minimal chance of carrying or contracting the virus. Or I can 'do the right thing' and stay at home whilst risking a far more significant chance of dying in an accident in a few months time.
#1819868
BoeingBoy wrote:...whether to sacrifice this months and go to sixty days non ops in the hope that things might be looser in a months time...

Go fly it. If things are looser in a month's time there's nothing lost, however if things are tighter in a month's time you run the risk of missing this month's opportunity. That certainly won't be good for your mental health. :wink:

Use it whilst you can, don't risk losing the opportunity, is my opinion. :thumright:
User avatar
By BoeingBoy
#1819878
It's the mental health aspect that's very relevant. I'm the sort of responsible citizen that is actually wide awake at four in the morning agonising over the ethics of 'engine health' vs 'do the right thing'.

At the rate I'm going I won't be fit to fly through anxiety and stress anyway.

Just need some decent weather. Sadly I missed out yesterday.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8