Let’s say a FI and a PPL go flying in a SEP.
Can the FI log PIC/dual given and the PPL log dual received? Let’s assume the PPL just wants a refresher on basic flying or stalls… or anything else. Is this „instruction“ in a (EASA) legal sense?
Or is this only possible if there was specific instruction towards a rating/license?
This definitely is instruction, and the typical way to log the one hour every two years.
Thanks! Any source to a definition from Easa?
I think instructor doing really nothing does also count as instruction as long the reason to have him on RHS is he may jump “I have control” or getting hanged for any mis-shap (he is pic by default ), the safer way for an instructor to log PAX is to sist in the backseat leaving front seats empty for two PPLs, we tried that one on a club fly out
I think instructor doing really nothing does also count as instruction as long the reason to have him on RHS is he may jump “I have control”
Anyone can do that, there is no “instruction” going on. Who is the PIC has to be decided up front. It’s the same with instruction basically. If it is decided up front that you are the instructor on this flight, then so it is.
I think that something bad happens, it will be difficult to prove that say a long cross country flight was instruction. Instruction needs to be towards something, that can be desumed from the regulation as a whole. If the PPL already has all required ratings and endorsements to legally do the flight, what is it for? If the PPL is still within the first year of validity of his class rating, you can‘t argue it‘s for renewal of that rating. Likewise if the one hour training flight has already been completed.
So in these cases, if the instructor wants to be PIC, that‘s fine of course, but the PPL would not be able to long anything on that flight.
Could be that in the scope of EASA that’s how it is?
On the other hand, what if I hire a FI to improve XYZ skill. While not towards a rating, wouldn’t that still be instructing?
I can’t find any direct definition in Part-FCL to it but I am an instructor and the way I see it is that it absolutely is possible to log PIC and DUAL even though it is not training for a license or actual revalidation.
In Sweden(just to clarify that I do not know the culture in other countries) it would never be a problem “if something happens” during this flight. There are many reasons to get flight instruction other than for revalidations.
I would be very surprised and concerned if this kind of flying would be a problem in another state.
Well, if nothing happens, then nothing will ever happen Things will just dwell in people’s logbooks and nobody is ever going to take interest in whether things have been logged strictly in accordance with Part-FCL.
It only ever interests if there is an accident, or an violation. Take the case of an accident on a flight as construed above. Nothing has been noted in the jouney log before the flight. After the accident, the FI that sat RHS wants to get out of the liability. He will say, “LHS was PIC, I was merely a passenger”. In that case, the LHS Pilot will likely have a hard time arguing that it was instruction and that he was merely the DUAL pilot if before the flight did not need or seek any formal instruction whatsoever.
There may be one other (more practical) case where this may be of interest: in countries / airport which charge pax fees. If you want to insist that both pilots on board were crew, it might be to be able to say that it was instruction… but in these cases, Airports do what they want to do anyway, so unless you want to start endless discussions with the airport or CAA staff, you have to accept what they say anyway.
It’s an interesting Q.
Take the case where a pilot has lost his medical. On the flight with an FI he is not training “towards” anything but still logs as PU/T. That’s under Euro regs; FAA would be PIC…
So I think any instructional flight can be thus logged. PIC for the FI and PU/T for the other one.
As Bosco suggests you have to watch out for this scenario.