M. of A. PROPOSALS ON PERMITS-TO-FLY

f N late June the P.F.A. received the following I letter from the Ministry of Aviation:

Ref.: AOS 3/01 20th June,1961.

ArnwonrHlNEss CoNrnol on' UrrRa. LIcsr Arncna,nr.

The fatal accident to an aircraft flying under the "Permit to Fly Scheme" for ultra light aircraft has raised the question of the legality of the present system under which recommendations for Permits to Fly for these aircraft have been made direct to the Ministry by the Popular Flying Association. There are it appears no legal powers to delegate authority to make such recommendations to any organisation other than the Air Registration Board. It has, therefore, been decided to alter the procedure so that recommendations to the Ministry for the issue of Permits to Fly will be made by the Board.

The revised procedure has been discussed with the Board and we believe that it can be introduced without any disruption of the system of airworthiness control of ultra light aircraft flying on a Permit to Fly. The Board will rrow, however, be officially involved to & greater degree, but the PFA will continue to play an important Part.

You will appreciate that the change has been made primarily for legal reasons and that it does not in any way reflect on the work done by the members of the PFA presently concerned with the Permit Scheme, all of whom have to our knowledge worked extremely hard to good effect, often in difficult circumstances.

Consideration has also been given to pilot qualiflcations. It is, I think, agreed that it has always been the intention that the pilot of an aircraft flying under a Permit to Fly as opposed to a C. of A. should be competent to cope with the lower standard of airworthiness such aircraft may well have. I have in mind particularly possible lower standards of controlability' therefore we feel that those who fly these aircralt should not be student pilots but should at least hold a private pilot's licence. At present this is not one of the conditions under which Permits to Fly are issued for ultra-light aircraft, but it is intended to make it so in future.

Yours sincerelY, (Signed) R. Goodison.

Under Secretary, Aviation Safety and General.

Apart from the knowledge that the Royal Aero Club had received an identical letter the previous week, this was the flrst official indication of the Ministry's intention to make the changes described.

The notiflcation given to the Royal Aero Club enabled the matter to be placed on the agenda of their Aviation Committee meeting on 21st June and this matter was also discussed at our Executive Committee meeting held on 3rd July.

The Royal Aero Club and the P.F.A. subsequently sent letters to the M. of A. pointing out that prior joint consultation had not taken place and, as a result, a meeting between the Ministry of Aviation, the Air Registration Board, and the P.F.A. was held in mid-July. P.F.A. was informed that there were no lega1 grounds for continuing the present delegation unless new legislation to cover this point was introduced and M. of A. felt unable at the present time to consider recommending such action. With respect to the restriction on the flying of ultra light aircraft by student pilots, the meeting agreed not to take this suggestion any further.

Final agreement by the P.F.A. to these proposals has been deferred pending the receipt by us of notes of the meeting and other documents requested from M. of A.

This progress report is intended to give members up-to-date information on the situation and to indicate that P.F.A. is remaining vigilant in upholding the interests of all light aviation enthusiasts.

DAVID ARMSTRONG, Chairman, P.F.A.

Popular Flling, tul!-August, 196l

-and

A. Deverell, writer of our series of articles on aircraft construction, takes time off this month to stress that owners and groups should-