Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Using your own aircraft for training

For only an NVFR (~5 hrs) it’s almost certainly not worth it. It will be far less hassle just to rent a school aircraft to do this. The IR is another matter. Much better to train in the AC you plan to fly in that case.

EHRD, Netherlands

lionel wrote:

If not, they have to establish a training manual for that type, and get it approved by their national CAA; that’s both more work for them, and more delay from the CAA.

Not if it’s flown solely by the owner? I understand it’s heavy paperwork when it’s flown by other students…
They just have to declare and insure, it’s 30min max !

For instructor & examiner, it helps if the type is already a school type…

Last Edited by Ibra at 01 Jul 09:41
Paris/Essex, France, , United Kingdom

I’d say ATO’s have just got fed up with owners.

Of course its insured – can I see a copy please. Oh it’s at home

Then after 3 weeks asking for a copy of the radio licence you find its expired.

I agree it should be 30 minutes but it very rarely is.

Snoopy wrote:

Legally the plane doesn’t need to be in a CAO/CAMO anymore. In practice, many ATOs don’t know this and prefer to do things like back in 1996 or whenever ;)

Well, go and tell that the LBA in Germany. They won’t let you enroll your aircraft for training under ATO environment if it’s not in CAMO supervision.

Germany

Well, go and tell that the LBA in Germany. They won’t let you enroll your aircraft for training under ATO environment if it’s not in CAMO supervision.

I know few people in Germany who did FAA IR to LBA CBIR in privately owned N-reg, I can’t see how they could put them in CAMO without getting FAA Certificate of Export and D-reg with LBA? In UK/France, the pilot can’t perform and sign 50h check if it’s used in ATO

Last Edited by Ibra at 01 Jul 13:12
Paris/Essex, France, , United Kingdom

The UK has / has had similar stuff. IIRC, when I was doing my JAA IR in 2011/2012, the last service on the aircraft had to be a “proper signoff”, not under pilot maintenance privileges.

To be honest, if I was an instructor or examiner, and knowing that I spend most of my flying hours in FTO aircraft which are mostly only barely airworthy (the actual words of a CAA examiner), I would like the same.

But this is easy and inexpensive.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Well, go and tell that the LBA in Germany. They won’t let you enroll your aircraft for training under ATO environment if it’s not in CAMO supervision.

Or simply use an ATO outside Germany.

always learning
LO__, Austria

Ibra wrote:

Not if it’s flown solely by the owner? I understand it’s heavy paperwork when it’s flown by other students…
They just have to declare and insure, it’s 30min max !

I was under the impression that if their training manual doesn’t cover that type, then they must extend the training manual, and this is not a declaration, but an approval by the CAA. I may be mistaken.

ELLX

sedatedokc wrote:

For the practical flying for CB-IR, at the minimum the last 10 hours need to be flown at an ATO.

It’s a different story for SET (or even more expensive stuff), but for a standard MEP-Trainer like the DA-42 it might be more effort to get it in the ATO than the cost difference between those 10 ours in your own plane and on charter. (Used to be different when the entire IR-Training had to be flown in the ATO).

Germany

This sort of decision depends heavily on whether you are

  • a renter, flying various types, mostly not suitable for “real IFR” but you are working towards an airline job
  • an owner, flying mostly or exclusively your own plane

In the former case, one can do the IR in any old heap. When I did my FAA IR, Arizona, 2006, I intentionally chose a school operating a simple type, not G1000 etc which would have wasted a few days of my allocated 2 weeks, and the plane I fly back home is not G1000.

In the latter case, you don’t just want the IR; you also want to become a better pilot, and currency on type is the biggest part of flight safety. It makes huge sense to do the IR in your own plane. It will probably halve the number of hours it takes you, especially if you are already familiar with IFR procedures (as e.g. UK IMCR holders should be).

Unfortunately European restrictive practices (mainly, the close tie-up between IR training and airline ops, and the symbolic/emotional attachment between the IR and a “professional pilot”) make the #2 route hard for most people, simply because most don’t live within an easy driving or flying range of an FTO which is willing to use their plane. This aspect has never been easy.

The CBIR optional alleviation of flying with a freelance IRI supports the owner-pilot path but is hard for most because there are very few IRIs around and you still need an FTO to take on your plane for the last bit.

It’s a bit easier in the UK for IMCR holders and their 15hr credit, but they still need the FTO… It’s a purely elitist stitch-up.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top