Peter wrote:
See port #16. It is real. The only Q seems to be current applicability.I have this by email from someone
The quoted legislation was true, but after SERA they reworked the whole Verordnung and the passage got kicked out. Now German national law complies with EASA law and the pilot can sit on the right if the owner/operator decides so.
I also like to use the term ‘commander’.
Forumites despite being very experienced in consuming AMUs (aviation monetary units), I am surprised that you didn’t recognise that the term Commander has a special aviation meaning: Command-er high price!
Peter wrote:
It is real. The only Q seems to be current applicability.
What you originally wrote and what you now quoted doesn’t exactly correspond. It’s quite clear they allow (allowed) for a different arrangement than the default (prevalent) which addresses my objection.
Peter wrote:
But assuming the regulation is indeed like that (the PIC can sit anywhere the “operator” decides) what evidence does one need of the operator’s decision, in the most common GA scenario where the owner is sitting in the plane and there is no defined operator.
In cases where it’s relevant (i.e. of the people occupying seats with controls, more than one has the necessary qualifications, especially when PIC isn’t sitting at the primary station) I heard/ read suggestions that this decision should be recorded somewhere on the ground or made with a witness that won’t fly with you so that there is evidence or witness as to who was responsible. AFAIK there is no mandatory evidence. AIUI one does this to cover one’s ass so that whoever survives can’t conveniently change the arrangement or you’re not blamed by default just because you happened to sit at the primary station.
In a typical owner-pilot situation, operator would be the owner.
Some aircraft define in the AFM the station where the PIC has to sit – usually single crew pressurised types, where emergency oxygen controls are accessible only at one station. I think this is the rationale.
LeSving wrote:
Flushed out by SERA/NCO ?
mh wrote:
The quoted legislation was true, but after SERA they reworked the whole Verordnung and the passage got kicked out.
I presume you mean part-NCO. SERA are the traffic rules. NCO are operational rules.
No, after introduction of SERA they reworded the Luftverkehrsordnung (LuftVO) governing the rules of the air. This regulation also defined who was pilot in command (Verantwortlicher Luftfahrzeugfügrer / responsible aircraft operator would be a word-by-word translation) and where he sits in case the manual did not mention a seat. That bit of regulation didn’t make it in the new LuftVO. Operations are dealt with in the Betriebsordnung für Luftfahrtgerät (LuftBO)and for some parts in the Verordnung über die Flugsicherungsausrüstung für Luftfahrzeuge (FSAV). Both latter regulations are still waiting to be updated or revoked completely as they contradict NCO in some substantial issues.
Graham wrote:
My biggest question around doing this is who makes the decision to change commander? And if that decision is made by the person taking over command, doesn’t that essentially make them the commander from the start?Thoughts?
The law says:
Before every flight, the roles and duties of each crew member must be defined. The pilot in command must be responsible for the operation and safety of the aircraft and for the safety of all crew members, passengers and cargo on board.
So, there is no change in commander under EASA; until the next flight.
Refer Basic Regulation Annex IV.
Note that this is different from which pilot is at the controls. Some aircraft can be flown wholly from the right hand seat. Others have a statement in the Flight Manuals stating that a pilot has to occupy the left hand seat.
I don’t see how the law cited above would prohibit a change of command. It states that the roles must be defined before the flight, but not that they must not be consensually changed afterwards.
I recently did a flight with someone who is training to be FI. He needs to get used to flying from the right. So we agreed before the flight where we’d go and that I would do the outward flight, and him the return. At destination I did a couple of touch and go’s, then we had these choices for the change of command: Do a full stop and shut down the engine (end of flight), full stop without shutting down, or change command in the air. We actually changed during taxi (I think I said “you have control” because in French “you have command” would sound very weird among friends).
I don’t think that what we did was prohibited if you re-read the wording of the law. Even in the air, if it is pre-arranged and agreed upon and follows a defined protocol, it would be OK. Because we did define “the roles and duties of each crew member” before the flight.
Of course if we had crashed on the return, it could be hard to prove when we had changed command. But that would be the same if we had shut down, taken a coffee, and taken the same seats afterwards.
Annex IV also contains this:
8.e. The operator must designate one pilot amongst the flight crew as the pilot in command.
While I’m not against the idea of changing PIC in flight (landing just to do it seems silly), I don’t think the law was written with this possibility in mind.
