Polite discussion about EASA, the CAA, the ANO and the delights of aviation regulation.
Forum rules: Please keep it polite!
User avatar
Scratching my head over this one a bit. My own searches have drawn a blank, so I am hoping someone smarter than me can point me in the right direction.

Form SRG 2141 (The Declaration of a Flight Crew Licence Issued by an ICAO Contracting State for use in UK Airspace in Non Commercial Activities for under 28 days per calendar) requires an “Acclimatisation Flight” to be completed by an EASA Flight Instructor.

1. Is there any definition of what constitutes an acclimatisation flight in this context? If so where is it defined?

2. Can a CRI complete such a flight with an applicant, or does it have to be an FI?
User avatar
By Irv Lee
My free thought-dump BEFORE i dig out the original announcement of this scheme is:
The form signature needed seems to be by an easa instructor not easa flight instructor. So it either allows a cri or it is poorly written. The problem being that the guy cannot fly until a validation comes through so guessing that the form is designed ok (and subsequently being wrong about that) could add weeks to the timeline to get this guy flying.
I was doing what i think they mean by acclimatisation for 20 years (ironically until it became a legal requirement). If I were dealing now with people who have flown here for years, then to go along with what i think is the spirit of this would be very different to dealing with someone who had learned abroad and just rolled up with low hours.
With fresh faced "never flown in UK before" low hours pilots i used to use 3 short navexs bringing in different aspects of UK fun flying including matz, cas, atsocas, atz and land away at an obvious fun-flying non controlled destination that they might want to visit in future. I cannot remember any of the many not welcoming this approach or thinking i was over the top.
The form seems to suggest one flight which I would interpret as the final flight of whatever was needed to ensure that i had no personal concerns that this guy would fly into trouble when p1.... but thinking on terms of protecting them from problems rather than ticking any legal tick box. Others will interpret the form and process very differently.
And of course:
Obviously Aopa members should ignore all this and ask Aopa if they cannot get timely advice from the CAA ;-)
kanga liked this
User avatar
Thanks for this Irv. I have of course asked the CAA, but I don't expect a prompt response.

I cannot find any announcement about this. The only mention of an acclimatisation flight I can find is on the form itself, and that gives no details.
User avatar
By Irv Lee
[Traditional sideline]
During the English level sign off discussion with one guy who had converted faa to uk years ago there is sipposed to be a discussion about nav routes. During this I found this guy had no idea what an ATZ is or what significance it has. He had never really clocked some airfields had them and others don't.
I also had a list of points to discuss for anyone arriving fresh from Florida with a brand new 3 or 4 week faa ppl . This included explaining qnh was what we called altimeter settting and the millibar/inches of Hg diffetence. I then found one who had no concept of either system. For his month in Florida his instructor had told him to just set the altimeter to zero feet as he started as the home runway was about sea level and not touch it again. He would have done this at any airfield he was based at, he had no concept of altimetry.
[/Traditional sideline]
kanga liked this
User avatar
By Irv Lee
flybymike wrote:Probably because virtually everywhere in Florida is at sea level!

Yes and he could have put down roots at Popham, Compton Abbas, Dunkeswell, Leeds etc and be over 500' out on every flight. I learned something new myself every time i did a uk familiarisation but this one just astounded me.
(I also intro'd a caa employee who had not had a crosswind ever on his 4/5 week Florida course)
flybymike liked this
By bookworm
The EASA regulatory text reads:

8. Notwithstanding the provisions of the paragraphs above, Member States may accept a PPL, SPL or BPL issued in compliance with the requirements of Annex 1 to the Chicago Convention by a third country for a maximum of 28 days per calendar year for specific non-commercial tasks provided the applicant:
(a) holds an appropriate licence and medical certificate and associated ratings or qualifications issued in accordance with Annex 1 to the Chicago Convention; and
(b) has completed at least one acclimatisation flight with a qualified instructor prior to carrying out the specific tasks of limited duration.

I would interpret that as a CRI as well as an FI. I'm sure it wasn't thought through when it was drafted, but it was pushed through in a bit of a hurry.

There's no guidance as to the nature of an acclimatisation flight. I'd hope most instructors would look at the context and do something sensible, as Irv suggests.