[foxmoth]

I think the “hour with an instructor” should be extended by 12 months to help out

Personally I disagree. Whilst some pilots will be ok there are also a number that think they will be ok and really need to fly with an instructor.

[Earl Grey]

Why are pilots so concerned at doing an LPC instead of revalidating by experience?

I am not so much concerned as irritated! I have managed 43 hours in my second year but missing the one hour with an Instructor. My SEP rating revalidation is required by 31st March. So unless there is a small miracle I will need an LPC with an Examiner instead of a one hour bimble with an Instructor. I have access to an aircraft and I'm sure I could find an Instructor to join me on a "maintenance flight" but with dual GA flights not permitted I'm sure the CAA will be watching the dates on the paperwork very carefully!

EG

PS All bright ideas gratefully recieved!

[riverrock]

The only examiner I personally know just lost his medical ( hopefully temporary) but I'd be hesitant finding someone else.

Here's a question. Can said examiner still sign off renewal by experience?

No

I believe he can and is.
The examiner certificate ( separate from licence) remains valid, despite loss of medical. See 8.5.2 in standards document 24(a).

[MattL]

That is for simulators - SFI and SFE. You cannot undertake revalidations by experience for FCL single pilot ratings without a medical - I had this directly from the CAA Staff Examiners when I lost my medical for a period last year.

[riverrock]

You just need to be an examiner - eg an SFE can revalidate a Part FCL PPL. See the FCL extract in 12.3 of the document.

This is coming second hand but I'm told he has checked.

[skydriller]

Why are pilots so concerned at doing an LPC instead of revalidating by experience?

I am not so much concerned as irritated! I have managed 43 hours in my second year but missing the one hour with an Instructor. My SEP rating revalidation is required by 31st March. So unless there is a small miracle I will need an LPC with an Examiner instead of a one hour bimble with an Instructor. I have access to an aircraft and I'm sure I could find an Instructor to join me on a "maintenance flight" but with dual GA flights not permitted I'm sure the CAA will be watching the dates on the paperwork very carefully!

EG

PS All bright ideas gratefully recieved!

Not that I would ever condone bending any rules...

But if you look is there actually anything about the date of the hour or even multiple flights to make up an hour on the SRG1157 sent to the CAA for rating revalidation by experience??

Regards, SD..

[Kemble Pitts]

Here's a question. Can said examiner still sign off renewal by experience?

No

I believe he can and is.
The examiner certificate ( separate from licence) remains valid, despite loss of medical. See 8.5.2 in standards document 24(a).

Not what it says in that reference sadly:

8.5 Examiner medical status
8.5.1 A TRI/TRE who encounters a loss of class 1 medical certification may continue to conduct tests
in an FFS only under the following circumstances:
• The TRI/TRE has FFS privileges on existing certificates;
• Respective SFI and SFE certification has been applied for and in process;
• Validity requirements to hold and exercise an SFI and SFE are complied with;
• Acceptance has been gained from the UK CAA Flight Operations; a temporary
licensing certificate (SRG1100) for the SFI and temporary Examiner Certificate
(SRG1100a) for the SFE has been issued by an Authorised UK CAA Inspector;
• The examiner and ATO must state that they have adopted the risk and assessed the
examiner as fit to conduct the detail without any detriment to safety, the effectiveness
of the test to be conducted or the well-being of the instructor or examiner.
8.5.2 Once an SFI/SFE has been issued, they may remain on an examiners licensing certificate and
the SFI/SFE privileges may be exercised at any time provided the validity requirements of the
SFI and SFE as defined in Part-FCL subpart J and K are fulfilled. Upon regaining class 1 medical
certification the examiner may return to exercising TRI and TRE privileges, provided the validity
requirements of a TRI and TRE as defined in Part-FCL subpart J and K respectively are fulfilled.

So simulator stuff only without a medical.

[Miscellaneous]

That is a peculiar stance if all the examiner is doing is signing off the criteria has been met. Does not having medical invalidate his reasoning?

[MattL]

Having being involved in one alcoholism and one serious mental health case, I can kind of see the reasoning.

[Miscellaneous]

@MattL good point, well made.

[riverrock]

I don't pretend to know what he has / doesn't have - not fair for me to give any more details about him as it might identify him, albeit he is very experienced.

There was a clarification in 2018 I believe on this (this doc was amended then) also.

Firstly I believe you don't need a medical to be an SFE.
My reasoning (without talking to the examiner) is that the doc says that you can have an SFE without a medical (with a temporary examiner certificate SRG1100a) as part of 8.5.1 as quoted above. That wont be open to everyone - depends whether they can be an SFE.

It says any examiner can sign a revalidation - see 12.3 of that doc which is an extract from Part FCL:

3) If an examiner (e.g. TRE, SFE, CRE, etc) has satisfied himself/herself that the requirements
above have been fulfilled, they may revalidate the rating

So therefore, he can sign for revalidation without a medical via SFE.

[Kemble Pitts]

I don't pretend to know what he has / doesn't have - not fair for me to give any more details about him as it might identify him, albeit he is very experienced.

There was a clarification in 2018 I believe on this (this doc was amended then) also.

Firstly I believe you don't need a medical to be an SFE.
My reasoning (without talking to the examiner) is that the doc says that you can have an SFE without a medical (with a temporary examiner certificate SRG1100a) as part of 8.5.1 as quoted above. That wont be open to everyone - depends whether they can be an SFE.

It says any examiner can sign a revalidation - see 12.3 of that doc which is an extract from Part FCL:

3) If an examiner (e.g. TRE, SFE, CRE, etc) has satisfied himself/herself that the requirements
above have been fulfilled, they may revalidate the rating

So therefore, he can sign for revalidation without a medical via SFE.

I don't read it like that. Logic says he can sign a sim check as an SFE but not an SEP reval/renew.

However, give it a go and see what happens.

[Kemble Pitts]

Firstly I believe you don't need a medical to be an SFE.

I don't think anybody was suggesting otherwise, that case is clearly covered in the regulation that you quoted and I cut and pasted.

[oldbiggincfi]

I seem to remember a certain FI/E having a restriction of " only with a qualified Pilot "

"Bloggs" turned up for test frequently .

[RipAndTear]

I think the “hour with an instructor” should be extended by 12 months to help out

Personally I disagree. Whilst some pilots will be ok there are also a number that think they will be ok and really need to fly with an instructor.

Whilst I don't really think that extending the deadline will truly help some people, the LAPL seems to be the one with the easiest route to getting back on the 'horse' - well for me anyway. Some people I know definitely need to fly with an instructor just normally and they are within the 24 months and worryingly sure that they won't have any issues. I seem to remember a report of pilots failing to lower their gear and other minor skill infarctions due to the previous lockdown skills 'fogginess'. I look forward to getting in to the left-hand seat (that is right isn't it? I seem to remember it's the left... ) with our club instructor, just as a safety net, and hope the engine hasn't rotted away and leave us the necessity to having to land in a field.

R&T