Passenger Endorsement ?????????

[anjum_jabiru]

Yes Nev. As you said, during training in an RA Aus aeroplane one is mostly flying with their instructor hence the students are already used to the passenger's weight. In fact I find it much easier to handle the ultralight with both seats occupied as it makes it more stable in windy conditions due to the added weight; makes the ride less bumpy and makes it much easier to land in a shorter distance and slow down the aeroplane quicker as compared to doing solos. A Jab LSA tends to float down the runway indefinitely until it finally runs out of air (-speed) and settles down on the grass strip /tarmac.

 

One strategy taught by my instructor is that if you do not touch down by the middle of the runway, it is best to go around. [Rather go around than make a spectacle of yourself, and there is no need to say why you decided to go around if you are really that ashamed!].

 

I think a similar strategy should apply to all take-offs as well. If you are not airborne by a pre-determined point, somewhere on the middle third of the runway, then abort take-off, especially on a hot day with full load / passenger.

 

 

[facthunter]

Good concepts. Energy management is a necessary condition to understand. Keep the weight off your nosewheel always and you won't spear off the side . Nev

 

 

[IanR]

Some pilots have personality or physical defects that are likely to make their flying high risk.For this reason, I have been known to delay or refuse to issue the endorsement.

One would have to ask why these people are actually allowed to take an aircraft out by themselves at all if there flying is high risk ?

 

 

[anjum_jabiru]

Yes, that is why we have CFI's.

 

 

[Yenn]

IanR. The answer is that they can go out and run the risks on their own. When they can demonstrate that the risks are lower, then they may get to carry a passenger.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

One would have to ask why these people are actually allowed to take an aircraft out by themselves at all if there flying is high risk ?

I'm with you Ian!

 

For those who suggest it's ok for RPC holders to go flying without a passenger, would you identify what skills are considered acceptable to a lower standard than would be acceptable to carry pax?

 

 

[anjum_jabiru]

If one suggests that someone is fit to fly alone after meeting acceptable standards that is fine. But if one suggests gaining some more air time then what is wrong with that? Thats is exactly the reason why RAAus recommends 5 hrs solo for cert. 10 hrs pic for passenger endorsement. PPL I guess requires 40 odd hours and CPL 150 hrs.

 

It is about gaining more air experience before taking responsibility for carrying passengers. In principle it all makes sense.

 

I feel this is on the understanding that a pilot with more hours solo would have flown those hours in a variety of different environmental conditions and self managed more risks as compared to someone with low hours. This in turn would make him more confident of handling any in flight emergencies, in the presence of passenger distraction.

 

 

[Nightmare]

Since I earned my RPC pax endorsement, my friends and family have been queuing up to fly with me, and none have felt the least bit scared or unsafe doing so. I think it is a reflection of the quality of training we receive and the competence and quality of the instructors who deliver it.

 

 

[facthunter]

You can have the argument about safety and standards but it's a bit TIC. Obviously when you go solo the first time you are not at the standard of a Commercial Pilot. It's one thing to kill yourself because you are a cowboy, but there has to be more scrutiny of the passenger carrying situation. The commonsense of any individual is hard to assess, though over a lengthy period of flying WITH someone particularly when the $#!T hits the fan , you get to know what people are like and capable of. I don't think there should be a rush to go solo. Certainly if you don't have a fairly solid skills base you may kill yourself if a stressful situation develops. This has happened on a few occasions, where the inexperienced pilot has been overloaded with a bad outcome.

 

Hours are stipulated as the minimum required but the situation is skill based and a certain standard must be achieved regardless of hours flown . There might be some situations where previous experience counts and the hours required are minimal and the standard is reached quickly. Flying experience counts a lot at times. When you fly solo you aren't receiving any assessment of a professional nature, pre or post flight briefings. A pilot should always be ready to self assess but it requires a lot of honesty. "did I manage the flight today in such a way as to minimise foreseeable critical situations or did I leave some things to luck?" In the early phase of flying training you don't know what there is yet to know. Nev

 

 

[anjum_jabiru]

You are spot on Nev.

 

 

[IanR]

IanR. The answer is that they can go out and run the risks on their own. When they can demonstrate that the risks are lower, then they may get to carry a passenger.

I guess my point though is that if they are assessed as high risk I certainly dont want to be sharing the airspace/circuit with them. It was not meant to be specifically about the need for a passenger endorsement for RAA or not.

 

 

[facthunter]

There are many shades of grey, IanR. Do you have any contacts at all you might not particularly want your wife and kids to fly with? Its all relative. I know of a few people who have very high hours up and never achieved solo. I have a few thoughts on that but that's another story, There's a few airlines I won't fly with too.Nev