I am thinking to have my Inspire-1 certified as airworthy.  Clearly, if one inspire-1 passes the tests, all of the Inspire-1's should pass the test.
Is there some of type-certification for the inspire-1 available?  Can somebody share his FAA/EuroUSC certificate and/or the forms with a request thereof with us?

Thanks

I don't whether you can or is indeed necessary.  On the CAA website it just says under 7kg. No specific model listed.

This is a can of worms, as the CAA moved its position on UAV's after EuroUSC created their course. In theory, you should be able to use anything within the CAA weight category if you pass the tests. But EuroUSC charge you every time you want to change crafts because all their documentation is down to the serial number. They will also want you to take a new flight test for each different type of craft (possibly not unreasonable). They are clearly protecting their investment and business model. I'm not sure how you deal directly with the CAA, its seems they want you to deal through their list of approved trainers from what I can see. I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has dealt directly with the CAA.

No that isn't what happens.

I had one flight test and exam with an Inspire which got replaced under warranty and EuroUSC made me take a second flight test of r the replacement aircraft.  Even though this is not required by the CAA as aircraft are categorised in weight under 7kg.

EuroUSC flight test all aircraft under their BNUC-S certification system, which means all aircraft you intend to use must be flight tested.

GB44 Posted at 2015-5-6 00:03
No that isn't what happens.

I had one flight test and exam with an Inspire which got replaced under ...

That is ridiculous!

Thats how EuroUSC work.  

They are trying to set standards above the legal requirement as in their opinion the law will change in the future.  I challenged them on the basis that you can't enforce a law that hasn't been passed therefore doesn't exist.  I also wrote to the CAA complaining about this practice as it is above and beyond the statutory requirement that the CAA require and is attempting to create a different standard of certification compared to other training providers.  The response from the CAA was that if you have been flight tested on one aircraft it doesn't matter how many aircraft you have provided they are within the same class of aircraft e.g.. under 7kg if it is an Inspire.  So even though you may replace an inspire with a new one under warranty or even purchase a new one the only difference being the serial number, to keep your BNUC-S certification you have to get the additional aircraft tested.  However this is not a legal requirement and the CAA are aware of this.

So if for example you had a Phantom and an Inspire, but then sold the inspire, Euro USC would remove the Inspire aircraft from your BNUC-S certification, leaving the Phantom on your BNUC-S license.  If you then got a new Inspire BNUC-S certification would not allow you to fly that aircraft until  such time as you had it flight tested to prove airworthiness, return to home etc..  Legally however, provided you had a BNUC-S certification for one aircraft in that class, it complies with current regulations and the CAA so you don't need to have a further aircraft tested.

Provided you had certification for a Phantom, the CAA would not be bothered and this would not affect your commercial operators license.  It would just mean that your BNUC-S certification would only have a Phantom on it.

My concerns are if this is then is reflected in any way on Public Liability insurance premiums, but the CAA informed me that if an insurance provider demanded flight tests for additional aircraft to refer them to the CAA as this is not a statutory requirement.

I really feel that EuroUSC are trying to maintain a grip on the commercial market, but with other training providers popping up now who don't enforce flight tests of all aircraft, I guess this hopefully will change that stance.  That said EuroUSC are trying to get more involved in Europe and overseas within Hong Kong etc. so are driving their policies in this regard hoping that aviation bodies and governments will enforce the flight testing of all aircraft and adopt their way of thinking.

After all its a fee generator for them so why wouldn't they try to enforce it and market it.

Why the opposition to the comment?

+1 from me.  GB44 you are right and thank you for making your point known. We need more people like you to make themselves heard. The CAA just like to take the money and are not constructively proactive. They only to willing for other companies lead the way, allowing groups like those mentioned line there own pockets.
Yes we need rules and regulations but we need common sense and less bureaucratic bull.

Well done Sir    

Agree, though I went through Resource Group to get my PFAW for both the I1 and P2, if I sold the P2 and got a P3 would that need to be another test? More £££, yes make the CAA/insurance aware of the serial numbers but also let's have some common sense. There's far too many flyers making money without a PFAW and the ones that spend ££££ and a great deal of time and effort to obtain a PFAW shouldn't be penalised to keep having tests, when genuine pilots will be testing RTH etc anyway because it's their duty of care and a business/income.

I'm glad the CAA have adopted a sensible approach, long may it continue. Just my thoughts, Cheers Mark

In my opinion, the key issue is with the enforcing body e.g. the CAA who appear to be sitting on the fence.  

In one way the CAA are giving approvals for businesses to operate as Qualified Entities, approved training providers, but allowing them to set their own rules in my opinion is above and beyond the legal requirement.  I was of the opinion that it is unlawful to contract out of a statutory requirement.  In this instance, I see the statutory requirement to provide the training as agreed with the CAA.  That is the ultimate remit with the CAA when they are granted the license as training providers.  Training providers shouldn't then be allowed to introduce new contracts and requirements and impose fees for additional services outside of what is required by the CAA and the Law.  By introducing their own contracts for training services with demands for additional flight tests is as I see it, simply contracting out of their statutory requirement to provide the basic training to comply with the legal requirements set by the CAA and Government.  However this is just my interpretation and I may stand to be corrected on this so welcome any other comments or opinions.

In my humble opinion the CAA should therefore get off the fence and ensure parity across the board for all appropriately trained and qualified UAV Pilots regardless of who the Training Provider is.  Should the law change in the future well that is fine, but that will be addressed as and when changes become law and not just at the discretion of a business seeking additional fees.  In addition, we should not be looking to individual training providers to determine and force new laws.  The CAA should sit down globally with other Aviation Authorities from other countries and agree a global standard, similar to the international protocol under ICAO then as qualified UAV Pilots, we could operate anywhere in the world and not just in the UK.  If its good enough for commercial aircraft pilots then why can't it be adopted for us UAV pilots. At present we just need the CAA to enforce standardisation and impartiality across all training providers and thats not a huge task.

I agree with the other comments above that once qualified as a commercial operator there is a duty of care on the operator and Pilots to ensure the aircraft used complies with safety standards, the return to home etc. is checked, and that it operates in accordance with the Ops Manual submitted to the CAA , so why do we need to have flight tests by a third party who only sees the aircraft operating for 10 to 20 minutes especially when the CAA are not interested in additional flight tests.

I too am glad that the CAA have adopted the approach of classification of aircraft, and have a common sense approach to these aircraft.  I just wish they would stand up to EuroUSC to ensure equality across the board for everyone regardless of who you decide to chose as your training provider.

On another point of interest, EuroUSC also request serial numbers for aircraft to be flight tested, but as far as I understand, the serial numbers are never actually physically checked.  You could therefore take a completely different aircraft for the flight test (Same model type) and have it approved.  I am also aware of others who have created their own serial number in case they change their aircraft in the future, so they can just use the same serial number, thus circumventing the need for a new flight test and additional fee.

At  the end of the day its up to individuals who they select for their training needs.  I simply got fed up with the whole politics of the BNUC-S and trying to seek common sense that I just got on with the process in order to get to the final hurdle and achieve the CAA Operators approval.  

The CAA also informed me that once approved commercially by CAA you don't have to go back to the same or original training provider in the future when renewing your commercial license.  Obviously I haven't been in that position yet so unsure how that process works however, if BNUC-S qualified, to maintain the certification, I believe you have to submit your flight logs for the past year to keep your certification valid.  So a little unsure as to what the CAA are referring to when they informed me you don't have to use the same training provider.

On a final note, please understand I am not trying to persuade anyone to use any specific training provider or seek to endorse any training provider in the UK, thats a decision only the individual can make.  I simply wish to give people information for them to make an informed decision, which I believe was the crux of the original post.  So good luck to all starting on this process.

I just learned, the dutch rules may change later of this year (October or January). I may no longer need a certified bird to do flights within the new height/distance limitations for the Netherlands.

Okay, the reality is this. You do not need a BNUC-S or equivalent qualification to get a PFAW. All the CAA want is proof of competency and safety, hence the reason why most people go the BNUC-S or RPAS routes etc because they are starting from scratch. However the CAA also accept proof of experienced flying, such as passing tests by the Model Flying Association too as evidence of flight competency.

Once you have passed BNUC-S or any of the other qualifications they cannot take that away from you. They can say that the qualification is only valid for a year, but if you have already passed their tests as proof of competency and if you can show the CAA your flight logs as proof of flight currency and a competent Operations Manual, then you do not need to keep going through EuroUSC or any of the other organisations every year.

The rules for the CAA are clear. You do not need to be flight tested on each aircraft in a category. So simply renew your PFAW by applying direct to the CAA each year instead.

The CAA also informed me that once approved commercially by CAA you don't have to go back to the same or original training provider in the future when renewing your commercial license.  Obviously I haven't been in that position yet so unsure how that process works however, if BNUC-S qualified, to maintain the certification, I believe you have to submit your flight logs for the past year to keep your certification valid.  So a little unsure as to what the CAA are referring to when they informed me you don't have to use the same training provider.

Simple. The CAA website has a form to apply for PFAW. You have passed a BNUC-S flight test, and you have to keep flight logs as proof of flight currency. Hence you do not need to go through your training provider to renew your PFAW each year. Instead just fill in the forms from the CAA website. All the BNUC-S qualification does is proove to the CAA when you first apply that you are competent and safe to fly. You could go through the Model Flying Association and pass their tests as proof of flight currency too. The CAA say explicitly that they will accept that as evidence of competence.

Agreed. Your insurance is not linked to your BNUC-S qualification, its linked to the CCA. Therefore, you should be able to fly anything within the category for commercial purposes and be covered.

My guess is though that the BNUC-S certification would be withdrawn or revoked by EuroUSC if you did not re-apply with them.  Then how do you prove you have a valid in license Pilot certification ?

The EuroUSC Pilot ID is dated and valid for one year only.  If you renew the BNUC-S pilot certification they currently charge £75 for that benefit !!  Having said that the course certification is recognised in more countries internationally.

After eventually getting to speak with somone at the CAA a few months back, they did confirm that once a you had obtained Pilot certification with EuroUSC there was no requirement to use them in the future.

I'm trying to decide which course / qualification will suit me best at present and as somebody who works across Europe regularly I wondered if anybody had actually put to test EuroUSC's claims that their qualification is recognised by more European aviation authorities than any other qualification?

My guess is though that the BNUC-S certification would be withdrawn or revoked by EuroUSC if you did not re-apply with them.  Then how do you prove you have a valid in license Pilot certification ?

Makes no odds if they revoke it or not. By passing it in the first place you have proven to the CAA that you are safe and competent in their eyes. If your BNUC-S is revoked it makes not one jot of difference to your yearly reapplication for your PFAW because you passed the BNUC-S in the first instance, and you will have flight logs to prove your currency. It's just that the qualification providers want you to renew because it's in their business model. I don't hold that against them as they have to make a living. But you won't have to keep renewing them to keep your PFAW.
You need to remember that BNUC-S and all the other qualifications are not legal requirements. They are proof that you hold certain knowledge and skills. That is all. They can never take that away from you. The PFAW is not a license. It is a permission that is granted based upon a proof that you are competent and safe.

I'm trying to decide which course / qualification will suit me best at present and as somebody who works across Europe regularly I wondered if anybody had actually put to test EuroUSC's claims that their qualification is recognised by more European aviation authorities than any other qualification?

EuroUSC is the only qualification that is recognised Europe wide. The reason is that unlike the other course providers they run courses in many of the European countries.
I hear very, very good things about Resource Group. Being ex military guys they will know their stuff and probably impart their info in a way that is designed to be retained in memory. Trouble is they are not recognised Europe wide (although they should be from what I hear since their ground school test is more rigourous and not multi-choice like EuroUSC). So I have gone the BNUC-S route.