[GrahamB]

One wonders how many pilot owners fit a pair of G5s and fly around fat and happy without realising that they need an EFIS differences training sign-off for both VFR and IFR.

[T67M]

The G5 situation is particularly bizarre. My shareoplane currently has a failed attitude indicator, thus only operates VFR. I am taking it to have a pair of G5s fitted later this year, and whilst it is perfectly legal for me to operate it with no AI at all on the way to the upgrade, as I only have a G1000 EFIS sign off, not a G5 EFIS sign off, I can't legally fly it home again even VFR.

[MattL]

@T67M there is no legal requirement for differences training for each different EFIS installation

[Cookie]

@T67M there is no legal requirement for differences training for each different EFIS installation

There is a CAA recommendation for further training when converting between different EFIS installations which can be found in AIC Pink 070/2010 para 4.3. This can also be found in CAP 804 Section 4 Part H Subpart 1, page 16, para 4.3.10.

Cookie

[Irv Lee]

One wonders how many pilot owners fit a pair of G5s and fly around fat and happy without realising that they need an EFIS differences training sign-off for both VFR and IFR.

Or nppl-ssea holders switching to something like an RV and cruising over 140kts. I suspect that is ssea only, and the "faster microlights" are approaching.... errr... fast!

[T67M]

@T67M there is no legal requirement for differences training for each different EFIS installation

There is a lot of contradictory "guidance" on this, with varying levels of legal standing. The "hard" law (as in FCL.710) lacks any specifics, and there is nothing in the GM to clarify things. The AMC adds a little bit, but doesn't completely clarify things.

(b) Recommended Training Syllabus
(3) Electronic Flight Instrument Systems (EFIS)
The primary reference for any Differences Training should be the Manufacturers’ and/or Aircraft Flight Manual.
Training should cover at least the following:

• Power supplies and controls;
• Malfunctions and remedial actions;
• Display visual settings control;
• Significance of colours used in the displays;
• Instrument scanning techniques;
• Importance of attitude selection and monitoring;
• Flight information selection and display;
• Trend indications, if appropriate;
• Navigation information selection and display;
• Interface with communications equipment, if appropriate;
• Standby instruments;

Note that the training should be based upon the manufacturers' manual, and the G1000 and G5 manuals are separate books. Furthermore, the minimum list of topics to be covered includes many things which vary between systems. Thus the "law" - as in Part-FCL, the GM and AMC - really sets up a framework under which the CAA can mandate Differences Training whenever they deem necessary. This again is not the easiest thing to find, especially since the withdrawal of CAP-804:

4.3.10 Converting between different EFIS installations
Pilots converting to another Integrated EFIS display should obtain further differences training, whether or not the same manufacturer produces the new system.

Whilst the word "should" could be argued to imply recommendation rather than compulsion, and CAP-804 is only now used for "reference", it is notable that exactly the same wording currently appears on the CAA website. This has then been replicated and arguably amplified by various other usually reliable sources, for example https://flighttraining.easyppl.com/differences_efis.html states:

Legally, you should obtain differences training for each type of EFIS installation (e.g. one for G1000, and another for Avidyne).

In short, is formal G1000->G5 training required? It's definitely a good idea, and it may be legally required at the gift of the CAA who are certainly indicating their preference.

[Andrew Sinclair]

I can't help thinking about the ATA "Ferry Pilot's Notes" with each 'type' (including variants) typically being just another flip page-pair away .. This included the Meteor, which ISTR was classed as a 'light twin', and all of the wartime ones of which were single-seaters

I remember going to a lecture by a member of the ATA who said something along the lines of…

“I remember being late delivering an aircraft and it got so dark I had to use my cigarette lighter to see the ‘Ferry Pilot’s Notes’ to read the landing techniques and speed”

Classic!

[Flyin'Dutch']

One advantage of getting long in the tooth is that at the time of the introduction of this new fan dangled stuff no regulations existed (yet) so after learning it 'on the hoof' one got grandfathered when regulations were introduced.

[Andrew Sinclair]

Hi Frank,

Yup too true.

BTW - Glad to didn’t disappear from here for long …

[Flyin'Dutch']

Hi Frank,

Yup too true.

BTW - Glad to didn’t disappear from here for long …

I am not here..

[Andrew Sinclair]

I am not here..

[kanga]

One advantage of getting long in the tooth is that at the time of the introduction of this new fan dangled stuff no regulations existed (yet) so after learning it 'on the hoof' one got grandfathered when regulations were introduced.

I was 'grandfather'ed for 'complex' only because, soon after getting my UK PPL on Cessnas (140, 150) and Pipers (Colts, TriPacers), while revisiting a Canadian friend who had just acquired a Mooney having himself just qualified on a similarly basic Cherokee, he was happy to lend it to me for a local bimble after a couple of circuits!

However, having self-taught myself how to use ADF VOR and DME in rentals and taught their theory to Air Cadets for many decades, I had to have formal instruction in Radio Navigation to get my UK PPL 'upgraded' to an EASA one. And I similarly had to have formal Differences Training on (3-axis) Microlights, a 'Class' which did not exist when I got my first UK (BoT) PPL ..

[russp]

Oddly differences training is necessary for glass cockpit if you have a PPL or LAPL but not if you're flying on a NPPL !!