It is my understanding that you can obtain flight training even for a PPL in
your own experimental aircraft and pay the instructor. This would be a goo
d question to ask EAA.
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 17, 2012, at 7:38 AM, Peter Zutrauen <peterz@zutrasoft.com> wrote:
> In Canada it's my understanding that it's just an insurance question for h
ull coverage - which typically is not taken until their requisite number of h
ours is obtained.
>
> Cheers,
> Pete
> A239
> Ottawa, Canada
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Robert Borger <rlborger@mac.com> wrote:
> Svein, et. al.,
>
> Big old Catch 22 over here in FAA land. To do a proper checkout one must h
ave a CFI to do the instruction. The CFI normally will charge for their ins
truction time. But one is not allowed to earn income through the use of an e
xperimental amateur built aircraft. So try to find a qualified CFI with exp
erience in the transition aircraft who will do it for no charge.
>
> I happen to have a friend who is a CFI but is not a professional flight in
structor. He has given me and others proper checkouts in various experiment
al amateur built aircraft for not charge. Guys like that are darn few and f
ar between over here.
>
> Blue skies & tailwinds,
> Bob Borger
> Europa XS Tri, Rotax 914, Airmaster C/S Prop.
> Little Toot Sport Biplane, Lycoming Thunderbolt AEIO-320 EXP
> 3705 Lynchburg Dr.
> Corinth, TX 76208-5331
> Cel: 817-992-1117
> rlborger@mac.com
>
> On Sep 17, 2012, at 2:46 AM, Sidsel & Svein Johnsen <sidsel.svein@oslo.onl
ine.no> wrote:
>
> NTSB issued in May a very interesting report on accidents with amateur-bui
lt airplanes compared to certified airplanes, based on detailed evaluation o
f the numbers behind the summary statistics:
> http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2012/SS1201.pdf
>
> One of their findings is that many more accidents caused by loss of contro
l in the air happen with amateur-built than with certified airplanes, and th
at a high percentage is with second-hand airplanes a short time after being p
urchased. NTSB points to the fact that FAA do not follow the same practice
as many other countries do, in that FAA do not require a pre-approved test f
light program, nor approval of a report on the test flying (only a log book e
ntry that test flight has been completed), which in turn may cause the pilot
=99s operating handbook/flight manual to be lacking important airplane
characteristics.
>
> What the NTSB report do not say anything about, however, is mandatory tran
sition training and check out in the specific amateur-built airplane. Under
the joint European pilot license regime (JAR-FCL), we must receive such tra
ining and have it entered in our log book. This means that before we can fl
y the Europa we have built (unless approved by our CAA to perform the very f
irst flight) we must receive such airplane-specific rating, and also before w
e may pilot another Europa than our own, no matter how many hours we have lo
gged in our own plane and irrespective of all the similarities between two i
ndividual Europas.
>
> Therefore the following question to the American Europeans on this forum:
Before you can legally be the pilot of ANY experimental classed, amateur-bu
ilt airplane, are you not required by FAA to receive transition training/rat
ing check-out by a pre-approved CFI or other experienced, approved person, e
ven for flying a =9Csister=9D airplane of the same type and mode
l that you may already be experienced in?
>
> Regards,
> Svein
> LN-SKJ
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
|