For any one worried that only the RAF know how to regulate flying activity, this might be of interest.
Attempting to add a few dozen layers of ACO procedures on top of this will not go well. Just add “Gliding at a BGA gliding club” to the approved activities list with perhaps a dispensation of the CRB requirement for when an instructor is actually in a glider with a cadet.
I doubt all BGA clubs will want to fly visitors, but most probably do, especial Junior Gliding Centers, and they all operate strictly to the rules linked above. It would not be cheap, and is no substitute for a network of fully functioning VGSs, but just let Sqns sort it out locally the same as a trip to the bowling alley or a what ever, as an occasional treat to keep the interest up until ATC gliding proper returns.
As far as I can understand, this is EASA driven rather than additional encumbrance from the ACO.
Consequently, it will be a “standard” FTO approval rather than individual to each separate BGA establishment.
From the CAA EASA FAQs:
I fly gliders, how will the changes affect me?
In collaboration with the BGA the CAA compiled a Conversion Report in accordance with Article 4 of the Aircrew Regulation, proposing the terms for issuing Part-FCL license on the basis of BGA issued documents. This has been notified to EASA and the conversion terms are to be published within CAP 804 during 2014.
(I haven’t looked through CAP804 to see what the licensing requirements are.)
BGA will not be an FTO until at least 2018 due to the regulatory battles with EASA so that is not an option (completely different story in it’s own). If we’re still at a situation where Gliding is still ‘paused’ then it’ll be an absolute joke!
Putting it into perspective I am a ex-cadet now BGA instructor at a large club in Hampshire, even when I was a cadet the GIC slots were twice a year! At my BGA club we have a cadet scheme (Junior Gliding) with well more than 100 youths, quite a few of them ex-cadets simply because of the lack of flying. The ACO just doesn’t seem to be wanting to cooperate with the BGA (Lets face it also the GS syllabus doesn’t meet the minimum solo requirements of any BGA club either so it’s not suprising unless the CGS change their ways!)
Compared to the Australian Air Cadets with their brand new DG1000 Club gliders and ASK21MIs the ACO is a laughing stock. Take a note 2FTS!
The gliding club operating from the ex-RAF station where my sqn parades offers ‘scholarships’ to pupils of the local school which most of our cadets attend. It has been suggested to the oiks that if they want gliding to go for it that way; several of them have taken up the offer.
We might not be in the fiasco (much better word than ‘pause’) in 2018 but I still don’t believe gliding will be anywhere near in terms of pre-fiasco delivery.
As such having a relationship with other providers should have been (and still be) an imperative.
However the ACO not wanting to cooperate or even forge a working relationship will not surprise anyone, regardless of why.
What some of the opinions and comments expose is just how ropey, despite the hype, some of the things we offered are/were. I didn’t know that the GS didn’t meet the requirments to fly any glider solo. Sort of loses some of its gloss, as I had always assumed it was all that was needed and always pushed it as such. In that respect what is the ‘real world’ status of the VGS Instructors? Could they, if they so wished, turn up and start instructing outside the Corps?
Strange you feel the GS does not meet the requirements of the BGA solo when post GS solo trainees are issued with BGA A badge applications. As such it isn’t the course that falls short but if the trainee has the aptitude to solo or not within the limits of time that don’t apply to an individual undergoing BGA training.
No VGS instructors could not just turn up and instruct outside the ACO but could convert their “military” category for a “civi” one. Indeed many have been or are dual rated at various levels including BGA regional examiners.
Talking from the personal viking point of view here, Indeed the solo endorsement (replacement of ‘A’ badge) can be awarded, however if any cadet does turn up at a BGA club even with an ‘A’ badge they are required to go through a full conversion training to BGA standard so the qualification is hardly useful. (http://www.juniorgliding.co.uk/uploadedFiles/Junior_Gliding/Documents/Air_Cadets/Air_cadets_cross_training_v5[1].pdf). The reason for these conversions mainly is simply because of no spinning on the GS syllabus. Spinning is a huge risk and has lead to many fatal accidents of all experiences and no glider is unspinnable, the Grob 103 can and will spin if provoked and as a result it is imperative that the training is done. I am aware that there is time and financial constraints and with the controlled solo environment of a GS it is unlikely ever a spin could occur but then sport gliding solo’s are really no different to VGS solos so why the difference? Also the Square circuit is still used by the VGS when the BGA have been incorporating diagonal legs for years. It’s a case of Gliding in the UK should be all to the same and perhaps it’d make it a lot easier.
With instructing if you are purely an ‘A’ Cat with no BGA gliding experience you are required to do the same Instructors Course as a newbie to instructing BGA pilot would, on completion you will be awarded a ‘Assistant Catagory Instructor’ BGA rating which does not permit you the same level of authority as an ‘A’ cats have at VGSs.
Though I support and applaud the work of the VGSs for getting so many people into aviation and having their first solo, I personally feel the VGSs do not make enough awareness of sport gliding, maybe that’s to ensure FSCs continue to come but for those with Silver Wings and not becoming FSCs the BGA has tried to attract but have not been successful which is a real shame.
Well, we shall continue to jump through the long-winded hoops for ACTO35 “compliance” - I have also messaged the “tTg & Standards” person in BGA to try to establish the EASA FTO timeline.
So a Cadet can go solo on a GS (or could have done ounce upon a time long long ago) but will need to do a little more training to attain the BGA solo endorsement. Meanwhile a young member of a BGA club who gets to solo, and also happens to be an Air Cadet in his spare time does not qualify for his silver wings.
Am I correct in thinking that a GS is a prerequisite to the ACPS? Yet there has been no way to obtain a GS for 18 months, or twice that in some squadrons like ours. Is there a big reserve of past GS cadets filling the ACPS places?
I asked that very question very recently, as I’ve got cadets who’ve not got past GIC1 (last 3 gliding sorties pre-pause were all weathered off, so we’ve not been in the air since mid 2013). They’ve had no possible chance of solo, are now 17 years old and I see no reason to deprive them of the opportunity to have a stab at the ACPS.
The ACTO relating to ACPS applications has been changed to add a clause about allowing for cadets unable to have completed solo due to the pause. However I’m led to believe that the application process “scores” the cadets, and one of the key scoring points is their GS !
So I’m still none the wiser…I’m just going to submit the paperwork regardless and put a covering note on with an explanation of why I believe the cadet is worthy of consideration from their non-gliding activities.
Have attended a Gliding Scholarship (GS). GS solo standard (Silver Wings) is desirable but not essential. Exceptionally, cadets who have not completed a GS may also be considered; for example due to a pause in gliding operations or Cadets who may be a member of a remote squadron from which it is difficult to regularly attend a Volunteer Gliding Squadron (VGS). In these circumstances staff are asked to consider the Cadets interest in aviation, motivation, past achievements and their ability to follow instruction before making recommendations.
I will ask the 2FTS sponsor what is the current state of play for “scoring” considering the gliding inability.
Why should remoteness to a VGS (or lack of a GS I imagine as well) require extra justification? We aren’t that remote to the nearest VGS (when it’s operational), but then it’s not easily reached by public transport and the road journey’s (c.55 miles) no picnic and requires parental input.
I’m bloody sure that if a youngster hasn’t got what is essentially the aptitude, it will be self-evident. I thought they had a selection process for flying scholarships?
Currently, there is no scoring system; as far as I can ascertain, no changes planned.
Lack of gliding scholarships has led to a slight reduction in cadets completing the ACPS cse aims (solo sortie).
As per application form, the nomination chain is started at Sqn level -> 3 levels of scrutiny (Sqn OC/WEXO/Reg Comdt -> up to 2FTS desk officer for staffing action.
So, the dedicated or worthy cadet can still stand a good chance of being selected based on recommendation.
When I got an RAF flying scholarship back in 1988 (when it was a decent number of hours and open to civvies) I had to go down to OASC at RAF Biggin Hill for a day for aptitude testing and selection. To be awarded a FS you had to have pilot aptitude. None of us on the course had any issues with going solo in in around 8 hours or less.
It looks like OASC is no longer part of the process and that GS is being used as a substitute. They should perhaps consider reversing that move and spreading out the gucci flying opportunities rather than sticking with what has become a bit of a production line.
I’m sure OASC has far more time to devote to this process than 27 years ago and would open it up, rather than the lazy approach of already having a GS.
Looking at the qualifications required, how on earth is a BTEC in Aviation Studies a replacement for Mathematics GCSE or equivalent? I know GCSEs aren’t great, but the Aviation Studies BTEC a replacement for a GCSE? Under the current exam process it is utterly worthless. Where is the maths in the cadet syllabus and subsequent testing of that knowledge, that is anywhere near that of a formally sat exam. I’ve passed syllabus subjects that I’ve never even done on Ultilearn in 2 attempts, by educated guesswork. If I’d done them with the material to hand (‘open book’) I’d have passed no problem. I’ve got cadets who are at classification levels they wouldn’t have achieved previously, which makes treating it as a replacement nonsensical.
Also why do cadets need to be over 18 to a ‘FS’ with no solo element and yet only over 16 to do one with a solo element? Seems backwards to me.
As far as I’m aware, OASC & other options have been considered at length but discounted; the logistics would be considerable & for a 15 3/4 yr old cadet going to OASC, somewhat over-powering! I also did the “full” flying scholarship + OASC aptitude testing - not sure how/what I passed at OASC to this day! It probably helped me though for when I applied successfully for the RAF.
However, Tayside tailor the syllabus for each cadet depending on prior flying experience, & considering the lesser flight hrs involved (& inability to transfer this towards getting a PPL very quickly), i would consider aptitude testing to be a bit on an over-kill.
Which would you prefer, a cadet who attended the sqn as & when, but has good aptitude scores, or, the dedicated cadet who invariably turns up, helps out at all the external events, tries for most sports, etc, but doesn’t have such a good aptitude score? For me, the second cadet would be nominated every time.
Right then, I have been in contact with the BGA CEO.
Forget EASA FTO status for gliding for a while; UK has formally opted out of elements of EASA regulation until Apr 2018, including those applicable to gliding/motor gliding licensing & trg.
There would seem to be a bit of a disparity between 2FTS’ statistics for accident fatalities & those provided by BGA. There are also Junior Gliding Centres, with at least one (Lee on Solent) having been approved in the past by 2FTS for introductory fits by cadets.
Hopefully the BGA information can help move things forward with 2FTS.
Think positive. If this has been a route/method in the recent past that has set a “standard” for the relevant approval protocol, then it could be a step forward.
Moreover, if BGA can help 2FTS to ratify BGA establishments as being the equivalent to CAA-approved powered flying FTOs (as per ACTO35), then it will be a huge improvement & remove many (if not all) of the current impediments.
So Tayside Aviation, Syerston, Cranwell, Linton on Ouse, Boscombe Down etc etc all ideally and centrally located for the things we do.
Even AEFs and VGS aren’t local ie within 15 miles radius of probably >95% of their ‘audience’ and we won’t mention parent stations.
So Lee on Solent … ideally located for Air Cadet courses.
It probably helped me though for when I applied successfully for the RAF.