We are well aware no one said that, we are simply applying the same logic used by AOC22 Gp / 2FTS to similar circumstances.
The same logic dies not apply, it the level of risk a risk ownership that seems to be the issue. Look up the MAA it will show you why we can’t just jump in joe bloggs flying club plc although Joe blogs may be the best pilot with best aircraft in the world
i fail to see how you reach this conclusion.
the IBN is clear - non service aircraft flying is not permitted. It is obvious that anything that is not operated by the MOD is “non-service” so doesn’t matter if it is me in my club PA-28 or BA operating a flight to Cyprus or anything in-between if the aircraft is not MOD operated is is not “a service aircraft” and thus by the wording of the IBN is not only not permitted, but should not be paid for with public money nor should it be promoted by the organisation
5 Likes
Maybe they could change the wording so it is clear that travel as a fare-paying passenger is permitted (scheduled/chartered etc)
but General Avaition flights can be considered scheduled and chartered flights can they not?
I can “charter” a flight instructor for an hours flight over the peak district - if he happens to show me the effects of the controls or even hands control over is that against the rules?
But you’d need to have that charter flight linked to another activity for it to count as travel. Good luck getting that through approvals
1 Like
Also you need to be careful here about moving into the murky waters of “grey charter”…
Offering a charter flight requires the aircraft to be on a specific maintenance schedule and pilots to have specific license privileges.
Not all flying instructors would necessarily hold a CPL for example.
i was under the impression to be “paid” as a pilot a CPL is required? I accept there are probably different levels of CPL but any “professional”/career pilot held a CPL?
No. You can have an FI rating with CPL theory but not hold a full CPL.
And the aircraft has to be on the right CofA.
ahh but Tayside is set to become a centre of excellence so it will have ore than just an MOD stamp of approval behind it soon!
I stand corrected in that case…
Not even CPL theory if you just want to instruct for the LAPL.
Latest IBN - huge pile of horse 
Absolutely furious - why on earth do they think that military over-sight of a CAA (or BGA) -approved facility is required? Beyond belief.
9 Likes
Now now.
That’s rhetorical right?
Because they are the metaphorical end of the bell.
The ibn does not include being a passenger on a civi airline
The IBN literally states that cadets cannot fly in Non-Service Aircraft with Non-Service pilots.
Aka a civilian airliner 
It doesn’t differentiate between passenger or P/UT
1 Like
The RAF clearly believes their engineering oversight standards are better than the CAA’s. I’d like to see some statistics to support that, however we have someone at the helm that has been part of that military engineering hierarchy and is unlikely to challenge his peers still in that world.
There aren’t any.
There is however plenty of evidence that 2 and 6 FTS have historically been unable to keep a maintenance log up to date.
But the CAA is the real danger.
4 Likes
I remember the biggest laugh, on submitting a cadet log book for C-Wings, his handwriting was a bit scruffy.
When I submitted to 2FTS as was then the procedure the remark came back “We are satisfied that XXX cadet can be awarded c-wings, but his logbook is a bit messy and illegible in parts…”
After I’d picked myself up off the floor, It took every ounce of my being not to send a sarcastic reply.
2 Likes
I would like to know what this now means for the future of Royal Air Force Flying Clubs Association and the Royal Air Force Gliding and Soaring Association, which use civvie powered aircraft and civvie gliders respectively to provide training to serving RAF personnel - If the RAF can’t assure the safety of such aircraft for cadets, how they can be assured they are safe for their personnel?
4 Likes