Jump to content

Phil Croucher

Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Phil Croucher

  1. Hello Cougar 69:


    I'm sorry, but as yet there is no French version! However, if there is somebody qualified to take the job on, I'm happy to talk about producing one!


    I would only recommend Culhane to someone who is converting from a foreign professional licence and who already has the knowledge or who is in a classroom situation with guided study, as only then would the numerous mistakes be picked up. Last I heard, he's still calling it Guy's Ballot's Law!



  2. Winnie - did I hear that the RVR numbers had gone up to 1600, or was that just a proposal?


    T5 - the slowing down thing was one I got on my ride, in a 206!


    Another tip if you don't have an ADF is to use a Garmin 296 on the expanded rose page - the little arrow thingy pointing to the waypoint behaves in exactly the same way



  3. Yes, ProIFR's course is also highly recommended - sorry, forgot!


    Two tips - be very familiar with the machine you do the test on so you don't look like a dork looking for the switches, and if you get an emergency on finals on the non-precision approach that slows you down (say a hydraulics failure) ask the copilot (i.e. the examiner) to recalculate the timings.



  4. Fish - that's a good point you make about the 355 not necessarily being a pool aircraft, and an especially good one about keeping up with the maintenance - I've flown them for some years and would rather fly the twin since I am happier with the hydraulics, but that is a personal choice. My comment about cowlings came directly from the engineers at my last place, and the F1 will definitely run out of puff on a hot day, even in UK. All that being said, up to 2400 kg all up weight, it will fly away OEI, and it's still a good ship in the right circumstances - did I hear that someone had finally got a 355 out on the oil patch? I certainly mentioned the idea to a few people when I was out there. I even tried to get Cougar to use theirs over there, 'cos there sure wasn't much going in in Halifax for most of the year! :)



  5. The 355 at least has a dual hydraulic system......


    More seriously, if you are going to look at a 355, the N model is the way to go - a highly underrated machine! (the F2 just has different performance charts from the F1 as far as I can see - I never really understood the difference). It depends what you want it for though - when I was with the fire guys in NB in 2003, they had just done an exercise on comparing machines and they reckoned that the B3, while being a nice machine, wasn't really cost-effective against a B2 unless you had a specific use for it, such as high altitude work.


    I have always thought that a 355N on the oil patch would make money, despite people bleating that "it doesn't lift anything". Of course it does, but you don't get a machine like that for lifting anyway. For a private/corporate machine, I reckon the F1 would be good enough for light duties. Just don't expect the other engine to take you anywhere on a hot day when you're heavy.


    The comments above about maintenance and traing apply, and watch out for the electrics! I could do better myself! The 250 engines on the F1/F2 are mounted on a single pinion and I'm sure that can't be good for them in terms of vibration - perhaps an engineer could qualify that. Also, inspect the engine cowlings - there have been many internal modifications over the years that have demanded them being replaced and they don't always fit properly if they haven't been done. Also, the heat from the engines crystallises the material - the engineers at my last place reckoned they needed replacing every 3 years or so, and we were doing 5 hours a day all year round.

  6. You're correct - the exemption is for ATPL holders as well, so they are likely to have that sort of time anyway. I had assumed that the poster had that sort of time. CPL Holders are exempt the training for the JAA CPL(H) at the discretion of the FTO, which will no doubt take into account commercial experience. Otherwise, you will have to do the full 650 hours for an ATP.


    Bristol know next to nothing about helicopters :) My understanding is that as long as you can prove that the country required your experience in that helicopter to be flown multi-pilot, then that will be OK. Similarly, in Canada, the S-92, the Puma and S-61 would apear to be the only types allowed on an ATP, but you can have one with a 212 or 76. I'm sure there will be a workaround.


    The course is trundling through the system at the moment, but should pop out of the other end around March 2007. I will be covering the ATPL(H), the CPL(H), and the new syllabuses when they come out in June, as the current CPL(H) will be changing to a ATPL(H)(VFR).


    I have a loose association with helicopter services at Wycombe Air Park near London for the flight stuff, since I am an examiner there. They do IRs as well. But any school should be able to do that if you are doing a modular course.


    Sounds like I ought to do a special Canadian conversion course!



  7. 9 exams at 60 pounds each, a course at about 1500 pounds, a skill test at around 600, and aircraft at 550 per hour for a 206, plus living expenses at around 75 pounds per day, for however long. To do the exams properly at 650 hours studying will take around 6 months, Monday-Friday 9-5


    Not forgetting the licence and type rating fees - around 200



  8. upwash - you will have to take 9 exams for the CPL(H) and 13 for the ATPL(H), all to a higher academic standard than the Canadian ones and more of it! Much of it is regarded as bs, although this is a slightly jaundiced view, as a lot of it useable sometime, just not necessarily at the early stages of your career.


    The exams are 60 pounds each ($120), and the skill test is around 600 ($1200) or so without hiring the aircraft. Like Canada, the ATP must have a type on it that requires 2 -crew. For most people I would recommend doing the CPL(H) unless you already have the experience mentioned above in my previous post. It means that you will have to do the exams again when you upgrade, but then at least you're not under time pressure to get the IR and MutliCrew type rating within 3 years, which is expensive, as you have to do the IR in a twin and need 55 hours from scratch - expect upwards of $60000 unless you already have an ICAO IR, inwhich case you only need 15 hours of training.


    Otherwise, the expense is really in the cost of living and hiring aircraft.


    On another note, I hear that TC and the FAA have agreed to exchange licences, with a differences exam, although it appears to be only for fixed wing - does anyone know any different?



  9. Moncton Flight School have a JAA program, but that is fixed wing.


    I will have an approved JAA ATPL(H) modular course available in around Feb/March, although the course notes are currently available as a book (www.electrocution.com/aviation/#CPLH).


    Modular means home study - it will not be an integrated course (yet) like wot HA have.


    In simple terms, if you have 1000 hours, and over 500 hours on the type you propose to use for your skill test, you do not need to prove any study time at all and can just take the exams (there is a tick box for exemptions on the application form).


    Any questions, just ask.



  10. I would guess that many of those cases revolved to some extent around the definition of "reasonable"! If I had to help subdue an unruly person in the air, prisoner or not, I would rely on the power of a Captain under the various conventions. I believe, under Annex 2 of the Chicago Convention, your word (in flight) is law until overturned later (I forget within which time period - 3 months?) by a person with a judicial interest. You then would have a competition between the Criminal Code and CARs, assuming that the ICAO rules were properly adopted into Canadian law.


    The Tokyo Convention 1963 also applies, which states that the PIC has final authority as to the disposition of the aircraft while in command, which is between doors closed and doors open in the airline world.


    If a person commits, or is about to commit, an unlawful act on an aircraft, the commander may impose reasonable measures, including restraint, to:


    protect the safety of the aircraft, persons and property on board


    maintain good order and discipline


    enable handover to the authorities by removal or refusal to allow the people on board


    Other crewmembers and passengers may be dragged in to assist as necessary.


    I think the reasoning behind preferring military pilots is that they are trained to a known standard, as their flying course will involve a lot of operational training, including the practical application of night flying, such as landing a Beaver between crossed headlights. Nothing to do with being submissive, as many sergeant-majors I used to work under will tell you!


    One thing about military training, especiallyas, say, an MP, or a military pilot, is that you learn how to tactfully handle people with ranks considerably higher than yours, which is something else that civilian pilots miss out on.



  11. Upwash - this was posted on here some time ago:


    Torque and Airspeed Combinations


    Normal Departure = Same as for hover. Airspeed = Accelerating

    Normal Climb = 80% Airspeed = 60 knots

    Normal Pattern = 50% Airspeed = 70 knots

    Initial Approach = 30% Airspeed = 60 knots

    Cruise = 80%, with whatever airspeed you get, usually 115 KIAS.



    And one of my own - if you want to stretch the fuel in the cruise, beep the rotor RPM down to the bottom of the top red line (i.e at the very top of the green band, not quite on the red line). It's not much, but on a long navex with few power changes it can make a difference.



  • Create New...