![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Icebound" wrote in message .. . snip Because I have tried to find a similar tailwheel rule in the official Canadian rules, and have been unable to do so. AFAIK there is no tailwheel endorsement required by CARs in Canada. I did all my PPL training in tailwheel but have no TW endorsement. Insurance companies can require any training they like. So, Canadians, are we supposed to log tail-wheel Touch-and-goes as landings, or NOT??? from the CARs 401.05(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Subpart, no holder of a flight crew permit, licence or rating, other than the holder of a flight engineer licence, shall exercise the privileges of the permit, licence or rating unless (a) the holder has acted as pilot-in-command or co-pilot of an aircraft within the five years preceding the flight; or (b) snip (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Subpart, no holder of a flight crew permit or licence, other than the holder of a flight engineer licence, shall exercise the privileges of the permit or licence in an aircraft unless the holder (a) has successfully completed a recurrent training program in accordance with the personnel licensing standards within the 24 months preceding the flight; and (b) where a passenger other than a flight test examiner designated by the Minister is carried on board the aircraft, has completed, within the six months preceding the flight, (i) in the case of an aircraft other than a glider or a balloon, in the same category and class of aircraft as the aircraft, or in a Level B, C or D simulator of the same category and class as the aircraft, at least (A) five night or day take-offs and five night or day landings, if the flight is conducted wholly by day, or (B) five night take-offs and five night landings, if the flight is conducted wholly or partly by night, 101.01 (1) "landing" - means (a) in respect of an aircraft other than an airship, the act of coming into contact with a supporting surface, and includes the acts immediately preceding and following the coming into contact with that surface, IMHO it could be argued (by TC) that stopping is an act that immediately follows the coming into contact with a supporting surface and that stopping is a part of a landing. Do you want to hire a lawyer to argue that a stop is not a part of a landing? Lawyers love unclear regulations, which is why they write so many of them. I cannot cite legal opinion or case law. IMHO making 5 full stop landings each 6 months is the prudent action before carrying passengers. IMHO tailwheel is not a separate class and the required 5 landings can be in a tricycle gear or TW and would apply to skis but not floats. I do not know what would be required for ampibious floats but would guess that 5 land + 5 water would be required. IMHO any of these required TO&landings can be dual (with CFI) or solo. Happy landings |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "private" wrote in message news:U2XVe.197819$Hk.65205@pd7tw1no... "Icebound" wrote in message .. . snip Because I have tried to find a similar tailwheel rule in the official Canadian rules, and have been unable to do so. AFAIK there is no tailwheel endorsement required by CARs in Canada. After the issue came up, I have been searching through the regs at length and have come to this same conclusion. ....snip CARS... IMHO it could be argued (by TC) that stopping is an act that immediately follows the coming into contact with a supporting surface and that stopping is a part of a landing. Do you want to hire a lawyer to argue that a stop is not a part of a landing? Lawyers love unclear regulations, which is why they write so many of them. I cannot cite legal opinion or case law. IMHO making 5 full stop landings each 6 months is the prudent action before carrying passengers. IMHO tailwheel is not a separate class and the required 5 landings can be in a tricycle gear or TW and would apply to skis but not floats. I do not know what would be required for ampibious floats but would guess that 5 land + 5 water would be required. IMHO any of these required TO&landings can be dual (with CFI) or solo. Having read and re-read that section, I would interpret it as per your HO *except* the part about counting dual. If the CFI is PIC, then I would interpret that you cannot. If *you* are PIC, then of course you can. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Icebound" wrote in message ... snip IMHO tailwheel is not a separate class and the required 5 landings can be in a tricycle gear or TW and would apply to skis but not floats. I do not know what would be required for ampibious floats but would guess that 5 land + 5 water would be required. IMHO any of these required TO&landings can be dual (with CFI) or solo. Having read and re-read that section, I would interpret it as per your HO *except* the part about counting dual. If the CFI is PIC, then I would interpret that you cannot. If *you* are PIC, then of course you can. Hello Icebound, I agree that 401.05(1)(a) recency does require that a pilot be PIC, but am not convinced that the PIC requirement extends to section 401.05(2) 401.05(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Subpart, no holder of a flight crew permit, licence or rating, other than the holder of a flight engineer licence, shall exercise the privileges of the permit, licence or rating unless (a) the holder has acted as pilot-in-command or co-pilot of an aircraft within the five years preceding the flight; or (b) snip 401.05(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Subpart, no holder of a flight crew permit or licence, other than the holder of a flight engineer licence, shall exercise the privileges of the permit or licence in an aircraft unless the holder (a) has successfully completed a recurrent training program in accordance with the personnel licensing standards within the 24 months preceding the flight; and On this section (2)(a) subject, the last self paced study program form was delivered in issue 4/2004 of the Safety Letter and expires Sept 29,2005. The last TC Safety Letter I received is issue 2/2005, it is the latest issued posted on the website. http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/sy...tp185/menu.htm .. The Sept 29,2005 form is also the latest self paced study program on the web http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/Sy...85/4-04/600.ht m Do you know of any changes to this program? Is it still available for use? Have you received a new form or notice regarding this program? and back to the subject of landings (b) where a passenger other than a flight test examiner designated by the Minister is carried on board the aircraft, has completed, within the six months preceding the flight, IMHO, unless the CFI is also a DFTE then they MUST be PIC, (unless pilot has other recency) as a non current pilot cannot carry a legal passenger. AFAIK there is no requirement that the required (for currency) landings be performed solo or as PIC, and there is no mention of this as a requirement in 401.05(2)(b)(i)(a or b). After a period of inactivity I have often taken a CFI for a rust removal flight and was told that these landings could be counted for currency. (i) in the case of an aircraft other than a glider or a balloon, in the same category and class of aircraft as the aircraft, or in a Level B, C or D simulator of the same category and class as the aircraft, at least (A) five night or day take-offs and five night or day landings, if the flight is conducted wholly by day, or (B) five night take-offs and five night landings, if the flight is conducted wholly or partly by night, Can you provide a cite in the CARs that requires the landings be made PIC? ISTM that section (2) deals with recurrent training, which should be conducted by a CFI. While the concept of "sole manipulator of the controls" is not used in the CARs it seems to me to be what is required by 401.05(2)(b)(i)(a or b). I note that it seems that (in Canada) there is always a "notwithstanding clause" and in this case would mean that the PIC requirement in section(1) would not apply to section (2)? The only requirement I see is to "complete" (ie perform) 5 TO&landings. Happy landings, |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|