Polite discussion about EASA, the CAA, the ANO and the delights of aviation regulation.
Forum rules: Please keep it polite!
#1990524
My son has recently obtained his PPL and can now start the 150 hours building towards CPL.

Question: Does anyone have real world experience of legally using an LAA registered land-based aircraft (not microlight) on a Permit to Fly, for this purpose? e.g. Luscombe.

There is much theoretical and technical advice out there, most of which is ambiguous or contradictory, (including a recent statement from 'an advisor' in the LAA. who says only aircraft on a CofA are suitable!).

So I'm looking to see if there is anyone here who has actually done this recently....and who can give a real-world amswer to this question. Many thanks.
#1991645
Drop Bear wrote:
Bathman wrote:Tens of thousands have done it.

Stop listening to the marketing department of some big flying school


I'm sure they have.....but can you give me one name.....just one....! I'd like to talk to that person, before shelling out 1000£££'s.

Show me a log book that has one column for certified aircraft and another column for LAA aircraft.
Rob P V2.0, Kittyhawk liked this
#1991646
@Dropbear
I would be interested to know why you think your son cannot log PtF hours towards the 150 for a cpl.
I know of someone who bought a Luscombe to allow his son to obtain his ppl, and then tugged at a local
gliding club whilst flying the Luscombe and a chippie to hours build for his cpl, which he eventually obtained. Never heard that the school he attended for his cpl made any comment about his hours.
Also if he is going for his cpl he will no doubt be doing an IR/IRR, which more likely will be done in a CoA aircraft.
#2034594
Apologies for resurrecting this thread from last year, but I think it's an important one.

I'll start by saying I'm very heavily invested in the answer to this, having already bought a homebuilt aircraft this year and being about 20 hours my 'hours building' so far.

I must admit, I'd never even though to ask this question until I randomly came across this page on the CAA website, while searching for the answer to an entirely different question:

https://www.caa.co.uk/general-aviation/pilot-licences/part-fcl-requirements/part-fcl-pilot-licence-recency-and-revalidation-requirements/

Amongst the other information that is ostensibly about SEP rating revalidation, it contains this throwaway comment:

The hours flown in non-EASA aircraft cannot be used to obtain a Part-FCL licence, rating, or certificate or towards meeting their prerequisites.


Which seems pretty damn final, except I can't find any reference to that 'rule' anywhere else on the website (like in information about obtaining licences or logging hours) or anywhere in any regulations (including the ANO and Part-FCL), or indeed anywhere else at all. And it's not for the want of searching!

Meanwhile, the LAA say (in TL 2.08):

Remunerated training and skills testing may be carried out in ‘sole owned’ or ‘group owned’ LAA aircraft towards initial issue of a rating or certificate. It may also be carried out in aircraft that have been hired from individuals, groups or organisations.

Training and skills testing towards the IMC or IR(R) rating is acceptable in LAA aircraft provided it is suitably equipped. However, it is recommended that some training is conducted in an aircraft which is certified for flight in IMC conditions so that a student can experience actual IMC conditions during training.


Now I believe the IR(R) is a national rating, which may be why it's allowed specifically. Yet I think it's a little misleading not to mention the fact (if it is a fact) that training or hour building towards Part-FCL licences and ratings is not valid in permit aircraft.

I'm very interested to hear any more views or experiences on this. I'm in sufficiently deep that I'm very much erring towards cracking on with my plan and hoping for the best, because I think there's a very good chance that no-one would look that closely. However, it would be nice to have more data points to go on either way!
#2039941
Recent response from the UK CAA.

"We can confirm that flight experience amassed in a non-Part 21 (formerly non-EASA) aeroplane can be counted towards meeting the pre-course requirements for gaining a CPL(A) via the modular training route.

It is important to note however that flight experience amassed in microlight aircraft, even three axis microlights cannot be used."
#2040200
This https://regulatorylibrary.caa.co.uk/117 ... wledge.htm

"(4) All hours flown in aeroplanes or TMGs that are subject to a decision of the CAA taken in accordance with point (a) or (c) of Article 2(8) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 or that fall within the scope of Annex I to that Regulation shall be credited in full towards fulfilling the flight time requirements of point FCL.140.A(a)(1) and point FCL.740.A(b)(1)(ii) of this Annex, provided that the following conditions are met:

(i) the aeroplane or TMG concerned is of the same category and class as the Part- FCL aircraft in respect of which the hours flown are to be credited;

(ii) in case of training flights with an instructor, the aeroplane or TMG used is subject to an authorisation specified in point ORA.ATO.135 of Annex VII (Part-ORA) or point DTO.GEN.240 of Annex VIII (Part-DTO)."

& this https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/opt-out-article-28-211

"(a) aeroplanes, other than unmanned aeroplanes, which have no more than two seats, measurable stall speed or minimum steady flight speed in landing configuration not exceeding 45 knots calibrated air speed and a maximum take-off mass (MTOM), as recorded by the Member State, of no more than 600 kg for aeroplanes not intended to be operated on water or 650 kg for aeroplanes intended to be operated on water;"

The microlight exclusion would appear to fall foul of not being the same category and class as an SEP.