Nope, last time I was at Wyton, preponderance of ex-RAF (currently civvie) pilots, with a couple of serving RAF.
No chance of the AEF “customer base” dropping significantly, even if a new version of ACTO35 is issued, far too expensive to pay for commercial flying - even gliding isn’t so cheap if you are trying to get 10-15 cadets airborne. Likewise, they have the various Pilot/ Nav scholarships to consider.
Agreed.
But HQAC doesn’t pay for non-service flying if it were to take place. It is at the cost of the unit.
So althoughit’s not cheap…it doesn’t affect the budgets.
Yes it then means the cadets pay…but they also go flying. It’s a case of getting what you pay for. We currently pay nothing and get a handful of places every quarter and have to travel an hour away for twenty minutes flight.
Or pay for a service which ~30 minutes away (our unit has 2x flying schools and a BGA centre within 35 minutes drive) and we can turn up more frequently, with more cadets and get longer flight time
Cost isnt the issue.
I simply want the opportunity to say on a nice sunny day, ‘lets go gliding’ take the Sqn pays for each cadet to have a couple of launches.
Not asking for much! Especially if at a BGA club!
Some time ago I asked a very senior HQAC officer if RAFAC saw the CAA’s standards as being less than those of the RAF. The answer was that in the case of ‘flying clubs’ then this was indeed the case, but that ‘flying schools’ may pass muster.
I have since made some enquires that suggests that both fall under the same regulatory regime to offer flying lessons to the public. It sounds like HQAC need to understand the CAA’s regulatory arrangements better than they do.
Why don’t your cadets go as private individuals? If they’re paying for it themselves then why complicate things trying to do it as an air cadet?
It negates the option of the sqn funding such flying / gliding. After 2FTS was persuaded to include gliding in ACTO35, I think we were the first sqn to get cadets gliding under the ACT35 provisions - but we paid for it. We want to do it again (BGA site is quite close to us), but of course, completely stymied by the current situation.
There are 2 types of flight school, either approved training organisations (ATOs) and registered training facilities (RTFs). You can train at either type of flight school. From Apr this year, a Registered Training Facility (RTF) had to be registered as either a Declared Training Organisation (DTO) or Approved Training Organisation (ATO) to be able to train for EASA licences and ratings. Of course, with Brexit, the future EASA options are very much cloudy in the crystal ball!
A flying “club” could be more of a shared aircraft facility where you can rent / operate an aircraft as part of club rules; they may, or may not have a pilot qualified as a flight instructor to revalidate skills testing, conduct PPL trg, etc.
However, a flight instructor rating would be the same at any such flying facility.
Yea, so it looks like I may be able to take cadets for some flying training next year if we hire an ATO aircraft.
Can we apply now for permission or must we wait for a new policy document to be published?
The old ACTO 35 had a requirement for 50 hours on type for instructional flights which could cause a problem if the ATO introduces a new type. Also maximum age 65 will probably apply. Maybe 90 day recency for stalling, spinning and PFLs?
Do you think we could get civilian training flights approved for blue / bronze wings? AFIK blue wings is basically Ex 4 effects of controls.
Wait for new document/policy
I doubt it. A non-RAFAC gliding scholarship will only lead to the C Wings and if you don’t get to go solo you get nada. Even if you have done your time in the PTT.
this was never in the old ACTO035, only a minimum of 2 hours in the last 30 days
iirc, and I can’t find it in my (old) copy of ACTO035, stalls, spinning and PFLs were not permitted as part of PAX flying expriences (although appreciate just because they are not permitted during the flight there is an argument for recency in completing these manoeuvres)
I think something like this is required for the AEF pilots so maybe if they are looking to demonstrate equivalent level of safety.
But then we could be looking at fire retardant flying clothing, electronic conspicuity (FLARM, TAS, ADSB-in), etc.
But until the new policy is published we don’t know
That’s a very interesting question, and I will ask, if and when ACTO35 returns.
In theory, as blue wings only requires air experience, not stick time, there would be a strong case for counting it.
That could be a showstopper; since the introduction of JAR (late 90s?) spinning has been an optional part of the PPL(A) syllabus and is, therefore, almost never taught, because insurers don’t like it. The argument (based on cold hard fact) was that practising spinning was killing more people than it was saving. Please don’t give them ideas!
Glider pilots do spinning, because they are much more likely to be carrying out increased-G manoeuvres close to the stall (i.e., thermalling) and adverse yaw is much more of an issue.
Stalls and PFLs though are fair game.
i would agree, but how would this be recorded?
Hours flown and take off/landings are recorded in a pilot and aircraft logbook but should we expect pilots (many of who will be unknown based at civilian clubs and schools) to be recording the last time they conducted a Stall or PFL in the off chance the MOD/RAF asked them to prove 90 day recency before approving them as a P1 pilot of a Cadet flight??
Looks like the pilot requirement will be for ATPL, CPL or PPL FI. Full spin training is required for FI and for the aerobatic rating. Incipient spin training will be required for new CPL multi crew pilots under UPRT from next month. I think full spin recency is required for AEF pilots because they do aerobatics, would not be needed for non aerobatic flight. Personally I do record PFL and stall / spin practice in the remarks column of my log book.
Write it in the comments box on the logbook, like every other note associated with a flight.
ok but…
snap - nor do i know of anyone who would be that thorough - hence my question. how would it be recorded as pilots do not record it…?
edit - i do NOT record such events in my logbook.
I agree. My cadet for a non-RAFAC GS but weather prevented the solo. 2FTS said no to any recognition as they couldn’t be sure of the standard of teaching, or that it covered all the requirements.
What about training cadets in powered aircraft to first solo and qualify for “civilian wings”?
Any 16 yo with well off parents can go to an ATO / DTO and pay the going rate for flight instruction, but we should be able to do better than that for cadets.
Instructor time could be free for cadets, which just leaves the cost of the aircraft and there are ways that could be subsidized. AFIK there is only one ATO that can authorize cadets solo in powered aircraft (Tayside Aviation). Do you think they could allow solo at other ATOs?
If it was a requirement then from that point they could simply start recording it if they weren’t previously.
Also, I think you misread Ortac’s post.