Part-Gliding Licences RMT.0701 Non minor changes Licence entries - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Part-Gliding Licences RMT.0701 Non – minor changes

Licence entries (SAC.GEN.115(b)) Part-FCL stipulates that additional licence privileges be entered on the licence by the Competent Authority. The privileges described in this part are gained by completing training and, in the case of TMG, a skill test; none of these involve authority involvement other than the administrative action itself of licence entry. It is proposed to remove the administrative burden from authorities by permitting examiners to make the licence entry after a successful skill test and, when no test is required, by instructors authorised by the ATO or DTO concerned. Provision is made for notification of such entries when required by the Competent Authority.

Single Licence and Medical (SAC.GEN.140) The two licences specified in Part-FCL (SPL & LAPL(S)) bring complication without associated value. They differ in ICAO compliance, each resting on continued validity of the class of medical held, but almost nothing else. The SPL is compliant and carries the privilege, permitted after further conditions have been met, to fly for remuneration in commercial operations. The LAPL(S) does not permit such commercial flying. There are no other differences at all. By contrast, a single licence would reduce complexity eliminating, for example, the disproportionate administrative burden and costs faced by pilots whose medical situation changes. It is proposed to make ICAO compliance dependant on the medical held rather than dependant on the type of licence. The single licence that this permits sweeps away unnecessary administration.

Sailplane Training in TMGs (SAC.SPL.115) Part-FCL limits the amount of LAPL(S)/SPL training that may be conducted in TMGs. Experience has shown that sailplane training across Europe has been conducted, over many decades, to similar standards, even though circumstances such as terrain, training aircraft available and weather vary widely. The proportion conducted on TMGs has also varied, from none to (pre Part-FCL) 100%. TMGs often provide a vital component of this training, adding helpful elements such as flexibility and repeatability to their characteristics as sailplanes. There is no evidence that the proportion has any effect on ultimate standards (unchanged from Part-FCL): the Part-FCL limit can reduce the training opportunities and value that TMGs bring without any commensurate benefit. It is proposed not to specify any maximum for TMG hours within SPL training. The training requirements and standards set by the Skill Test are unchanged from Part-FCL, as are the requirements for extending the SPL to TMG.

Solo flying for self-launch qualification Training for self-launching requires both dual and supervised solo. Part-FCL permits the dual flying to be carried out in either a self-launch sailplane or TMG, but restricts the supervised solo to self-launch sailplanes. Self-launch sailplanes are in increasing use and the dual training for them in TMGs is well established, but limited aircraft availability can make it difficult to make arrangements for the required supervised solo flying. The flying techniques required are identical in the two types of sailplane. As the pilot concerned will have been trained with a TMG, there is no added risk in permitting the supervised solo to be flown in the same training sailplane. It is proposed to permit the supervised solo for self-launching (otherwise unchanged from Part-FCL) to be flown in the TMGs used for the dual training.

Aerobatics (SAC.SPL.135) Sailplane aerobatic flight involves a range of manoeuvres, progressing from simple loops, through rolling to prolonged inverted flight and on to unlimited competitions. The Part-FCL aerobatic rating requires a pilot to complete training in a range of these manoeuvres, notably including inverted flight, before gaining the privilege of performing any aerobatics at all, even simple loops. While some Member States are content with this requirement, others have a long history of developing aerobatic privileges in stages, with progressive training matched to corresponding privileges. Available data shows such staged progression to carry no more risk than non-aerobatic flying. The Part-FCL requirement precludes this progressive approach. A two stage privilege is proposed which permits training organisations that so wish to continue to offer courses unchanged from Part-FCL, while also allowing the more progressive approach that has worked so well.

TMG banner towing and mountain Inclusion of TMG banner towing and mountain flying privileges each add complexity to sailplane regulation. These privileges are all available to holders of LAPL(A) TMG or higher. There is negligible (if any) demand for these privileges from LAPL(S)/ SPL holders who do not also hold an aeroplane licence. Similarly, there is negligible (if any) expertise amongst LAPL(S)/ SPL holders without an aeroplane licence. It is proposed not to include these privileges in the SPL.

Sailplane Cloud Flying (SAC.SPL.150) The Part-FCL Sailplane Cloud Flying Rating has enabled pilots to continue to exercise the privilege in areas where national regulations permit. The design of this rating borrowed much from the Instrument Rating for aeroplanes, even though the practices and procedures involved are quite different. While the specified training has been well proven, being little changed from arrangements in place long before Part-FCL, the skill test, adapted from aeroplanes, added nothing. It is proposed to place cloud flying in line with other sailplane privileges: require confirmation of training completion but no skill test.

Instructor training (SAC.FI.100(a)(2) Part-FCL precludes instructors under training from gaining experience of actual students before completing the instructor training course. By contrast, some member states previously included live supervised instruction with students as an integral part of an instructor training course. Such instruction was permitted only when supervised and only when an integral part of the specified course: it proved to be invaluable. In order to enable member states who so wish to continue to include this in their instructor training it is proposed to make it possible to continue this practice.

Instructor revalidation (SAC.FI.140) 1. Under Part-FCL, the two day seminar requirement for instructor revalidation imposes a heavy burden, both time and financial, on predominantly volunteer instructors without allowing alternative training options. It is proposed to replace the seminar with a refresher training requirement, in alignment with Opinion 05/2017.

Instructor revalidation (SAC.FI.140) 2. The Part-FCL requirement for an Assessment of Competence with an examiner at least every 9 years was disproportionate for volunteer instructors. Replaced with a more practical: (3) undertake a demonstration of instructing skills, and any examination of technical or theoretical knowledge considered appropriate, to a standard deemed satisfactory by an instructor qualified in accordance with SAC.FI.125(c)

Examiner certificates The Part-FCL structure, specifying multiple examiner certificates imposes complexity without benefit. It is proposed to support a single examiner certificate with multiple privileges.

Validity, revalidation and renewal of sailplane examiner certificates (SAC.FE.125) 2 tests every year requirement for revalidation … … is redundant in Part-FCL If 2 tests every year achieved: revalidation – seminar & AoC If 2 tests every year not achieved: renewal – seminar & AoC So not required: omitted.