You need to take a pan-european view. In Germany, I had to get differences training even when I moved from a C172 to a PA28 with the same engine. And then, again, to a Morane. For every aircraft one difference training. This thinking is still present in many german AeroClubs. We are MUCH better than that today.
I agree, SLPC difference training is rubbish and you could discuss the sense of difference training for an EFIS. But I think for some items it is feasible to have someone guide you through learning or have a look if you understood. e.g. when handling characteristics are changed (taildraggers) or your life is influenced (pressureization)
Plus, in the old days you’re referring to, you would start out flying in a Moth or J3 or Auster. You’d be trained to be an aviator and not a pilot. This approach would exclude a LOT of people flying around these days.
I think the differences training regulation is spot on as it allows for a common sense approach. How this is interpreted seems to be the problem.
Yes, exactly.
How much of this diff training is regulatory and how much is the school/club either making sure their plane doesn’t get wrecked or just wants to extract extra money?
A lot of these debates lead to say a G1000 equipped plane needing a de facto “type rating”, simply because the panel is not understood by a newcomer (and in some cases is never understood; I have known of G1000 equipped planes used mainly for the Shoreham to LeT run being flown with an app in an Ipad).
As pilots, we don’t want such an onerous regulation – even though it is absolutely standard in the commercial world, via the TR system. But if you owned a G1000 plane which you were renting out, you would make sure the renters get the training (might not advertise that openly, perhaps), not least because if somebody mis-programs it and busts some P area, he will walk away from it, fly home on Ryanair while you are left to collect the plane while paying the fine. In practice, smaller but equally inconvenient things happen fairly regularly e.g. renters abandoning a plane in N France due to wx and flying home on Ryanair and the school has to send an instructor out (in another plane, with a second instructor along to fly that plane back) to collect it.
So it is very different if you are a lone pilot flying out of your own strip, versus a renter who expects to be able to rent anything he can legally fly on a PPL. The latter will never work regardless of what is legal.
I know a fair bit about this because I used to rent mine out, many years ago. Back then, I never found an instructor who could program even a KLN94!
Example:
One completes PPL training using DA20 Katana and C172 G1000 and then flies the 172. Is the „SEP land EFIS“ sign off by an instructor still required even though most training was done on the C172 G1000 (and thus, familiarity with type can be assumed)?
Continued:
Same pilot then rents a 1970 non EFIS Piper 28 Turbo Arrow from a local who owns this plane. It is with retractable gear. During a flight the engine quits and an emergency landing is performed. The plane is destroyed, the pilot unharmed but a passenger friend is paralyzed. The pilot does not have differences training signed off by a FI for „turbocharged“ or „retractable undercarriage“.
The owner (no FI rating) explains he did a thorough check out flight with the pilot.
What are the legal ramifications because of the missing sign offs for TC, VP, RU? Can the insurance step out?
Side note: In Austria, for companies that rent out airplanes (national legislation), there is a law that says a plane may only be rented to a person holding the applicable license. So maybe the owner has some liability to verify the customers license is adequate?
And regarding the above post:
I want to get differences training with a local FI done for VP, TC, RU, SLPC and EFIS.
Every FI happily agrees to fly with me and give me the sign off, however, must they themselves have the sign off in their logbook, or can they issue any diff training because they are FIs?
No point in getting a EFIS differences training by a FI who has never flown with one himself…?!!
Snoopy wrote:
Example:
One completes PPL training using DA20 Katana and C172 G1000 and then flies the 172. Is the „SEP land EFIS“ sign off by an instructor still required even though most training was done on the C172 G1000 (and thus, familiarity with type can be assumed)?
Initial instruction in the type can be viewed as completed “differences” training. The reg aims at getting pilots to know the traits of certain features. If you learn flying with these features, you’re supposed to get along with them.
Snoopy wrote:
What are the legal ramifications because of the missing sign offs for TC, VP, RU?
Having said that, the turbo and RG leaves plenty possibilities to mishandle the aircraft so that neglect of training could be substantial contributing accidents.
Snoopy wrote:
Every FI happily agrees to fly with me and give me the sign off, however, must they themselves have the sign off in their logbook, or can they issue any diff training because they are FIs?
They need to have the signoff themselves.
Snoopy wrote:
No point in getting a EFIS differences training by a FI who has never flown with one himself…?!!
Of course not. Although this differs with the vartant at hand. For an RG, an experienced FI could self-instruct (as well as an experienced aviator). For a tailwheel, not so much.
mh wrote:
Initial instruction in the type can be viewed as completed “differences” training.
Thanks mh!
Is this written somewhere or word of mouth?
it’s in the wording:
FCL.710 Class and type ratings — variants
(a) In order to extend his/her privileges to another variant of aircraft within one class or type rating,
the pilot shall undertake differences or familiarisation training. In the case of variants within a type
rating, the differences or familiarisation training shall include the relevant elements defined in the
operational suitability data established in accordance with Part-21.
When you train for initial PPL, you get the privileges to fly the class and variants you have trained in. No need to “extend” privileges where they are initially given.
Careful with the OSD requirement. Some manufacturers now stipulate the equivalent of Type Rating training within the OSD!!!!
Thanks again!
Is a DA40 TDI or NG considered TC?
Is a SR22 considered SLPC or VP?
