Carriage of Passengers on Training Flights
Guest
Posts: n/a
Carriage of Passengers on Training Flights
I have read in the past under which circumstances it is acceptable to carry "passengers" on training flights. I believe I understand when it is acceptable but cannot find a definitive answer published anywhere.
Can anyone help?
Can anyone help?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no definitave answer. So long as no money changes hands for the purpose of the flight it is not illegal.
It is only sensible that the instructor should consider it appropriate for a passenger to be carried and that the student does not object.
It is only sensible that the instructor should consider it appropriate for a passenger to be carried and that the student does not object.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Noggin thanks for the reply. I am fairly certain I understand when passengers can be carried. What I am looking for is a definitive and official statement on the subject.
In the past this information was published but I have searched high and low in AICs, Newsline, CAA web site, etc and can no longer find the information.
In the past this information was published but I have searched high and low in AICs, Newsline, CAA web site, etc and can no longer find the information.
Delta T - Noggin will be far more knowledgeable about this than me, but a 'Trial Flight' must include a ground brief and some element of flight instruction - even if it's only to consist of Air Experience. Hence it must take place in an aeroplane with a Transport(Passenger) category CofA from a licensed or government aerodrome flown at least by a FI(R).
There should be no reason why a non-paying passenger may not come along on such a flight if instructor, student and passenger agree - but the passenger must not be charged anything for the flight either by the pilot or by the student - or by anyone else. The 'free flight with every £25 cup of coffee' scam has also been tried in the past - it is 100% illegal!!
A while ago the CAA were, quite rightly, red hot on stopping 'illegal Public Transport' being conducted under the guise of 'trial flying lessons' - some cowboys were stretching the definition to absurd limits. A 'joyride' (in the old sense) is emphatically not a 'trial flying lesson' - it is a commercial passenger flight for which the aeroplane operator, aeroplane, pilot and aerodrome must be suitably licensed and approved.
There should be no reason why a non-paying passenger may not come along on such a flight if instructor, student and passenger agree - but the passenger must not be charged anything for the flight either by the pilot or by the student - or by anyone else. The 'free flight with every £25 cup of coffee' scam has also been tried in the past - it is 100% illegal!!
A while ago the CAA were, quite rightly, red hot on stopping 'illegal Public Transport' being conducted under the guise of 'trial flying lessons' - some cowboys were stretching the definition to absurd limits. A 'joyride' (in the old sense) is emphatically not a 'trial flying lesson' - it is a commercial passenger flight for which the aeroplane operator, aeroplane, pilot and aerodrome must be suitably licensed and approved.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Delta T. Yes provided that the passenger does not pay for the privilege.
The only definitive statement is the ANO. There is no such thing as a "trial lesson" its either a "Lesson" or it isn't. If any instruction is given and that may not even involve handling the controls, then it could be classed as a lesson.
At the end of the day one just has to be sensible. If you charge someone to fly and they receive no instruction it is public transport.
The only definitive statement is the ANO. There is no such thing as a "trial lesson" its either a "Lesson" or it isn't. If any instruction is given and that may not even involve handling the controls, then it could be classed as a lesson.
At the end of the day one just has to be sensible. If you charge someone to fly and they receive no instruction it is public transport.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with all that has been said so far.
Here's a couple more to think about.
1. Someone rings up and asks for a trial lesson for their spouse and 'by the way could two other passengers sit in the back?'........in other words the intent to fly 3 people was there from the outset.
2. If a friend asks me to fly them on a 'jolly with their missus' and I still sit in the right hand seat and 'teach' is this flight legal?
The point I am making is that in each case these flights are booked and agreed in advance, does this make them any more 'grey' than if they were spur of the moment.
As an instructor if I invite the trial lesson students partner along then I see this as quite OK but if they ask me in advance I am not sure what the answer should be.
Confused? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
JWF
Here's a couple more to think about.
1. Someone rings up and asks for a trial lesson for their spouse and 'by the way could two other passengers sit in the back?'........in other words the intent to fly 3 people was there from the outset.
2. If a friend asks me to fly them on a 'jolly with their missus' and I still sit in the right hand seat and 'teach' is this flight legal?
The point I am making is that in each case these flights are booked and agreed in advance, does this make them any more 'grey' than if they were spur of the moment.
As an instructor if I invite the trial lesson students partner along then I see this as quite OK but if they ask me in advance I am not sure what the answer should be.
Confused? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
JWF
Just so long as the person who receives flight instruction (Transport (Passenger) Category C of A, licensed aerodrome etc) in your first example is the person who pays, then I'd say it's fine. The others aren't receiving any benefit in kind - unless, for example, someone asks for a trial lesson from UK to France and the 2 people in the back say "Thanks a lot" and go off on a week's holiday.......
Your second example is a bit less clear. If the person in the LHS is receiving legitimate flight instruction, then in my opinion that's fine - and you can be paid for your services as a FI. But if it's just a touring jolly with no form of instruction at all, you mustn't receive any remuneration as that would almost certainly be viewed as illegal public transportation.
It's probably safest (legally) for you as the FI to lay down the content of a 'trial lesson' - no-one could then accuse you of entering into an agreement under conditions required or imposed by your 'customer'? I'm no legal expert, but I'd certainly steer clear of anything involving landing at a different aerodrome with anyone who isn't at least a temporary member of your flying club!
Your second example is a bit less clear. If the person in the LHS is receiving legitimate flight instruction, then in my opinion that's fine - and you can be paid for your services as a FI. But if it's just a touring jolly with no form of instruction at all, you mustn't receive any remuneration as that would almost certainly be viewed as illegal public transportation.
It's probably safest (legally) for you as the FI to lay down the content of a 'trial lesson' - no-one could then accuse you of entering into an agreement under conditions required or imposed by your 'customer'? I'm no legal expert, but I'd certainly steer clear of anything involving landing at a different aerodrome with anyone who isn't at least a temporary member of your flying club!
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am informed by a highly experienced UK FE that no passengers are permitted to ride in the back whilst training is taking place unless the passenger is a member of the school/club and undergoing training for a PPL.
Haven't seen it written anywhere yet, but based on what I have been told I think it's worth looking into.
Haven't seen it written anywhere yet, but based on what I have been told I think it's worth looking into.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ivan
That sounds like a "school rule" to me. It is not official, and has not been communicated to examiners in general. The content is however familiar and I think reflects one schools interpretation of a sensible approach.
Most schools are sensible in their approach however, one or two are not, and so called "trial lessons" have been seen to be flown by a pilot withot a FI rating. This is clearly illegal public transport. Another involves photographers who go to the local flying club rather than an AOC holder when they wish to capture a specific building. Again quite illegal.
[ 30 December 2001: Message edited by: Noggin ]</p>
That sounds like a "school rule" to me. It is not official, and has not been communicated to examiners in general. The content is however familiar and I think reflects one schools interpretation of a sensible approach.
Most schools are sensible in their approach however, one or two are not, and so called "trial lessons" have been seen to be flown by a pilot withot a FI rating. This is clearly illegal public transport. Another involves photographers who go to the local flying club rather than an AOC holder when they wish to capture a specific building. Again quite illegal.
[ 30 December 2001: Message edited by: Noggin ]</p>
Moderator
Not sure about elsewhere, but here in Australia CAR 249 states that
"...an aircraft that carries a passenger shall not engage in any of the following types of flying:
a) Flying training given to a person who has not passed a general flying progress flight test for aircraft of the category concerned
[categories being aeroplane, helicopter, gyrpolanes and airships].
b) practice of emergency procedures in the aircraft
c) low flying practice
d) testing an aircraft or its components, power plant or equipment" [unless a maintenance engineer is required as part of the test flight]
So no, you can't carry passengers on a "trial lesson" in Australia.
Elsewhere if there is no definitve regulation it would be worth checking with your insurance company to see if passengers carried on training flights were covered if something went wrong, or if they could sue the pants off everyone involved. I believe in the UK this is often covered by those passengers becoming a temporary member of the club.
Anyway how many 'legit' studes would want their friends or family witnessing their lesson?! *cringe*
"...an aircraft that carries a passenger shall not engage in any of the following types of flying:
a) Flying training given to a person who has not passed a general flying progress flight test for aircraft of the category concerned
[categories being aeroplane, helicopter, gyrpolanes and airships].
b) practice of emergency procedures in the aircraft
c) low flying practice
d) testing an aircraft or its components, power plant or equipment" [unless a maintenance engineer is required as part of the test flight]
So no, you can't carry passengers on a "trial lesson" in Australia.
Elsewhere if there is no definitve regulation it would be worth checking with your insurance company to see if passengers carried on training flights were covered if something went wrong, or if they could sue the pants off everyone involved. I believe in the UK this is often covered by those passengers becoming a temporary member of the club.
Anyway how many 'legit' studes would want their friends or family witnessing their lesson?! *cringe*
Dir. PPRuNe Line Service
Passengers who come along for the ride during a training flight at White Waltham (West London Aero Club) must be members of the club for insurance purposes and day membership is available.
So far I've taken my wife along for two flights (including my first land away) and a friend on a nav. exercise flight. Very good experience as naturally I'm then expected to brief the pax. on emergency procedures, check they have their seatbelts done up correctly and that of course they are enjoying the flight.
--Mik
So far I've taken my wife along for two flights (including my first land away) and a friend on a nav. exercise flight. Very good experience as naturally I'm then expected to brief the pax. on emergency procedures, check they have their seatbelts done up correctly and that of course they are enjoying the flight.
--Mik
...and that's absolutely fine, in my opinion, Mik. Plus it keeps your good lady out of the shops?? But if she gets the flying bug as well, perhaps it'll turn out to be an expensive result!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: South Coast
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this all boils down to what is the purpose of the flight from the outset. If it is a flying lesson (trial or otherwise), then it is aerial work. Passengers can be carried as observers to that lesson. If it is sold as solely a passenger flight, then it is flying for public transport. The selling of a trial flight with passengers and suggesting that all concerned can share the cost is clearly public transport.
So as I said at he beginning, consider what has been sold and the purpose of the flight. The purpose indicates whether it is aerial work or public transport. Whether passengers are subsequently carried or not does not alter the original purpose of the flight. Hope this helps.
So as I said at he beginning, consider what has been sold and the purpose of the flight. The purpose indicates whether it is aerial work or public transport. Whether passengers are subsequently carried or not does not alter the original purpose of the flight. Hope this helps.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know that the subject of this discussion is taking passengers on training flights, but please allow me to make a slight tangent.
I understood that the requirements of a private flight was that the pilot did not receive personal gain, i.e. no profit margin. I am a little confused. Does the cost of the aircraft now constitute 'personal gain'?
As an example; a recently qualified PPL wants to show off his/her new skills to his family. Dad, recognising that son/daughter is probably skint from financing the training offers to cover the cost of the aircraft for the "show-off flight". Does that then constitute a commercial flight?
Before I get bombarded, I am in the early stages of my PPL training, so this is purely hypothetical.
I understood that the requirements of a private flight was that the pilot did not receive personal gain, i.e. no profit margin. I am a little confused. Does the cost of the aircraft now constitute 'personal gain'?
As an example; a recently qualified PPL wants to show off his/her new skills to his family. Dad, recognising that son/daughter is probably skint from financing the training offers to cover the cost of the aircraft for the "show-off flight". Does that then constitute a commercial flight?
Before I get bombarded, I am in the early stages of my PPL training, so this is purely hypothetical.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that (in the UK at least), the relevant legislation for the original question is Article 21 of the Air Nav Order (2000). Para 5 covers the specific point and reads as follows - the conclusion being that no pax can be carried on a training sortie:
(5)
(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), a person may, unless the certificate of airworthiness in force in respect
of the aircraft otherwise requires, act as pilot of an aircraft registered in the United Kingdom for the purpose of undergoing
training or tests for the grant or renewal of a pilot's licence or for the inclusion, renewal or extension of a rating therein
without being the holder of an appropriate licence, if the conditions specified in sub-paragraph (b) are complied with.
(b)
(i) No other person shall be carried in the aircraft or in an aircraft being towed thereby except:
(aa) a person carried as a member of the flight crew in compliance with this Order;
(bb) a person authorised by the CAA to witness the aforesaid training or tests or to conduct the aforesaid
tests; or
(cc) if the pilot in command of the aircraft is the holder of an appropriate licence, a person carried for the
purpose of being trained or tested as a member of the flight crew of an aircraft.
(ii) The person acting as the pilot of the aircraft without being the holder of an appropriate licence either:
(aa) within the period of six months immediately preceding was serving as a qualified pilot of an aircraft in any
of Her Majesty's naval, military or air forces, and his physical condition has not, so far as he is aware, so
deteriorated during that period as to render him unfit for the licence for which he intends to qualify; or
(bb) holds a pilot's, a flight navigator's or a flight engineer's licence granted under article 22 of this Order and
the purpose of the training or test is to enable him to qualify under this Order for the grant of a pilot's licence or
for the inclusion of an additional type in the aircraft rating in his licence and he acts under the supervision of a
person who is the holder of an appropriate licence.
(5)
(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), a person may, unless the certificate of airworthiness in force in respect
of the aircraft otherwise requires, act as pilot of an aircraft registered in the United Kingdom for the purpose of undergoing
training or tests for the grant or renewal of a pilot's licence or for the inclusion, renewal or extension of a rating therein
without being the holder of an appropriate licence, if the conditions specified in sub-paragraph (b) are complied with.
(b)
(i) No other person shall be carried in the aircraft or in an aircraft being towed thereby except:
(aa) a person carried as a member of the flight crew in compliance with this Order;
(bb) a person authorised by the CAA to witness the aforesaid training or tests or to conduct the aforesaid
tests; or
(cc) if the pilot in command of the aircraft is the holder of an appropriate licence, a person carried for the
purpose of being trained or tested as a member of the flight crew of an aircraft.
(ii) The person acting as the pilot of the aircraft without being the holder of an appropriate licence either:
(aa) within the period of six months immediately preceding was serving as a qualified pilot of an aircraft in any
of Her Majesty's naval, military or air forces, and his physical condition has not, so far as he is aware, so
deteriorated during that period as to render him unfit for the licence for which he intends to qualify; or
(bb) holds a pilot's, a flight navigator's or a flight engineer's licence granted under article 22 of this Order and
the purpose of the training or test is to enable him to qualify under this Order for the grant of a pilot's licence or
for the inclusion of an additional type in the aircraft rating in his licence and he acts under the supervision of a
person who is the holder of an appropriate licence.
Wading through the typical ANO doublespeak, it would seem that someone being given a demonstration of flying training by a fully qualified licence holding Flight Instructor is not catered for.....nor is their chum in the bacK?
Fairly obviously you can't take someone along on a 'solo' navex, but if you need a co-pilot before your test (as the mil. do in the Jetsteam) that's OK.
But it's all still as clear as poo...
[ 02 January 2002: Message edited by: BEagle ]</p>
Fairly obviously you can't take someone along on a 'solo' navex, but if you need a co-pilot before your test (as the mil. do in the Jetsteam) that's OK.
But it's all still as clear as poo...
[ 02 January 2002: Message edited by: BEagle ]</p>