Doubt it - Pilots are not CAA qualified Flying Instructors, so couldn’t countersign the logbook entries !
Please prove me wrong !!
CAP 2254 - as per my later comment UAS hours can count towards a LAPL, so surely arangements can/should be made for ACPS hours to count too.
3 Likes
As per my previous comment on this @Cab (and I appreciate as you are new here you may not have read everything in the thread!) can you confirm if I am right to believe that solo flight by cadets and cross-credit of hours towards civilian licences won’t be possible as cadets are not military personnel (and can therefore not benefit from the exemptions in the ANO from the requirement to hold appopriate licence(s) to fly civil aircraft which are available to ‘military personnel on duty’)?
If so, has the CAA been approached to find out what RAFAC might need to do to make this possible?
AEF pilots are literally the same people who are already doing this for UASs.
No they aren’t: AEF pilots are not the same thing as UAS QFIs. AEF pilots are not (usually) either civilian or military instructors - and the cadets are passengers, not trainees.
Of course, a number of UAS QFIs also volunteer as AEF pilots.
1 Like
It’s been made clear that it’ll be the QFIs doing ACPS.
Yes, so I don’t understand what AEF pilots have to do with it? AEF pilots don’t sign off the logbook entries for UAS cadets.
My understanding, based on a chat with AEF staff, was that the AEF was the second flt of the UAS. Maybe this applies to the OC, QFI(s) and aircraft: rather than all the pilots?
UAS students are now on either an air experience or flying stream. Those on air experience can fly with approved AEF pilots; those on the flying stream follow the UAS syllabus with QFIs. Students completing elements of the flying stream with UAS QFIs can credit that flying experience towards a U.K. Part FCL LAPL iaw CAP2254 credits.
There still exists legacy credits towards the U.K. NPPL but these are largely defunct due to the obsolete nature of U.K. ANO licences. When the CAA licensing simplification project hopefully sweeps away the Part FCL and legacy licences differences in 2025 (fingers crossed) there may be opportunities to refresh and update the credits in line with that.
3 Likes
So there is some crossover then, especially when it comes to those who’ll be involved in ACPS (i.e. the QFIs).
Right then, now that we have better visibility of the ACPS aspects for the time being, please can @Cab direct OC 2FTS to look at cadets flying in non-Service aircraft. Many thanks in advance.
11 Likes
This has just been sent out by my Aerospace Officer
The key details of the course are:
- Flown on the Tutor at selected (not all) UAS/AEF
- Approx 13 hrs following the current UAS Elementary Flying Syllabus up to and Including 1st Solo
Pre-requisites set by the DDHs, MAA, CAA and CFMO- F6424
- Class 2 Med
- Completed GS (including if solo not achieved because, and only because, of weather).
The requirements, especially the requirement for a GS solo means this will be extremely competitive, and there is likely to be an increase in the selection criteria of gliding scholarships, however this will be confirmed in due course.
2 Likes
As a WAvnO I’ve not had anything to send my wing. So either they’ve jumped the gun, or trickle down comms haven’t made it here yet.
Usually we’re pretty well informed.
Last I heard was “bronze wings” would be the criteria, so maybe different regions will have different selection criteria.
Interesting. I think this is more strict than ACPS used to be, as I’m sure it didn’t require a F6424.
Also, I seem to a remember a discussion on here about issues getting additional medical tests that are often required for Class 2 funded by HQAC. I wonder if this will still be the case?
I wonder if this requirement will be ignored like the recommendation/requirement for GS was for ACPS before (due to lack of GS).
1 Like
So let me get this straight…in order to go on ACPS and be awarded the coveted Silver Flying Badge, the pre-requisite is the cadets must already have the coveted Silver Flying Badge?
That is absolutely genius!!!
Why give as many cadets as possible an opportunity, when you can give one cadet two top end opportunities?
Since gliding is already a postcode lottery, you’ve just made ACPS a postcode lottery by default!
2 Likes
Please see my post above.
I’m not convinced this is entirely accurate.
So the safety of the scheme has NOT been assessed yet?
Is there a possibility that ‘Phase 1’ will be completed and the scheme is axed because;
- It is not effective?
- It is not safe?
- It has too much effect on 6FTS output?
RAFAC standard operating procedure!
@Cab, if the GS requirement is real, is this intended to be a permanent prerequisite or is it a more stringent initial qualifying factor during Phase 1 please?
I can understand that, where there is initial reticence while exploring something new, it may be beneficial to ensure a higher skill/experience floor for participants, but long term it seems counter to the idea of effort and cost benefitting the maximum number possible (a reason why many national or large courses and camps have received scrutiny or criticism as poor value for money).
It doesn’t feel right morally to guarantee that all ACPS students are previous GS students, purposefully concentrating the best opportunities into only a very small minority.
No, for the reasons I explained to you previously.