military CPL requirements

[juliet]

anyone know the requirements to gain a JAA CPL if you are already an RAF pilot? been wading through the CAA site amongst others but cant seem to find anything. of course i am just a truckie so not the smartest:(

[BEagle]

Do you have 2000TT?

If so, see LASORS Section D3.

To download LASORS, see: http://www.caa.co.uk/publications/publicationdetails.asp?id=1191

I often wonder how much money my unsolicited work on this some years ago has saved the RAF pilots who've taken advantage of it.....

[airborne_artist]

Search BEagle's posts on CPL or ATPL - he's answered this Q several times.

[juliet]

thanks for the link to lasors though it leaves me a bit confused. going by D3.3 to gain a CPL you have to meet the same criteria as an ATPL, ie. the magical 1000hrs captain as part of 1500p1. am i just reading this wrong? seems that with my 1200 total / 700 p1 / 30 captain i wont be getting much more than a ppl.

[MrBernoulli]

J

You could always consider doing ALL the exams like so many Mil ME pilots have already done and are still doing. The scheme was designed so that you would have to do do nigh on a full flying career to qualify. This was to avoid people jumping ship early without having to consider a serious bit of grey-matter/financial strain.

[juliet]

im well aware of why the scheme has been set up and that many are currently taking advantage of it. i am considering doing all the exams, i was merely surprised that there is no real distinction between CPL and ATPl in terms of qualification.

[BEagle]

Juliet, the idea was that this was a recruiting and retention incentive. In other words, you have to achieve 2000TT before the scheme kicks in. It then depends upon the type of flying you've done in the RAF; pretty obviously TriStar/VC10 etc time is more relevant to ATPL equivalence than rotting around the weeds at high speed in a FJ - fun though that might be!

The last thing that was needed was some 'Minimum time, sign up and poke off' scheme which would facilitate early exit from the Service. In any case, that would have killed things stone dead. The scheme which was finally agreed between the RAF and the CAA strikes a good balance between time served, type of flying achieved, experience gained, the needs of the Service and the expectation of the individual in post-Service life.

<2000TT - you don't qualify at all.

>2000TT - you get some exceptionally good credits.

Decide which you wish to do - it's your choice... But all to do with retention incentives.

Only 30 hours PIC in 1200 TT? Is that normal these days? Of that 30 PIC, how much is on anything other than light aeroplanes?

[juliet]

beagle - captaincy time not on light singles - not much! surely you have seen this in your experience. you get very little actual captaincy time during flying training if you go straight into the multi stream. of course once you hit a sqn your total time rockets up, to the extent that the next time that you record anything in the 'captain' column you could already have well over 2000 total. as i said before though i am completely aware that the scheme is set up for retention purposes, merely surprised that the CPL is treated the same as the ATPL. anyway, thanks for the link, ill get my head into the books and study!

[JliderPilot]

This is possible after one tour multi engine as a co pilot. The 30 hours will be the jetstream and Basic. Hopefully juliet will move to the LHseat and start building up those P1 hours.

[BEagle]

Under JARs, the ATPL is a much more senior licence than a CPL. Mil accreditation for the ATPL requires 2000TT, of which 1500 must be on approved ME a/c as PI, including 1000P1C and 500PICU/S.

When you've scaled those dizzy heights, all you need is an IR observed by the CAA, a Class 1 medical and to pass ATPL Air Law. Fill out the form, pay the dosh, wait for the licence to arrive. Worth staying in for!

But only 30 - thirty - hours as captain? And that only on light aeroplanes?? Is that really all they give you these days? How on earth do you ever consolidate you airmanship as a military pilot? On the 'old' UAS/BFTS system, I had 265 TT, 92 PIC when I was awarded my wings, including 44 hrs IF. Of that 127 hrs was on the JP, of which 37 was PIC. Including night flying on the JP. Do you get any solo night flying these days - even if only on light aeroplanes?

Note that civvies require not less than 100 hrs PIC just to take the CPL Skill Test, let alone the IR Skill Test....

[juliet]

jlider - i hope juliet makes it to the left hand seat as well! heres to redundency packages, bad planning at pma, and more lhs slots!

[mbga9pgf]

Well if expensive glossy brochures from PMA are to be believed, the future of Aunty Betty's Airline training scheme is to be no more, (supposedl we are to be overjoyed at the prospect of tours on the ground????!!). As I understand, most first/second tourists can expect grouncrew tour? GREAT.... :yuk: :ugh: :yuk:

However, with Phat PVR payoffs, surely the 500 Hr p1 JAA exam "frozen" ATPL will get crews into the airlines to build hours? Or is this purely cr*p and is there more to it than a Bristol JAR Ex ml roundschool course? Crews may have to take a temporary pay cut, surely the tax free PVR payoff however will cover this? Are the CAA likely to move the goalposts to a more realistic standard?

Third question,

does anyone else see a further retention issue approximately 2 years down the road? Looking across to the figures, recruitment vs. Supply, civvie sector does not look as if they can supply half the number of required crews for expansion/replacement purposes.... or is this just rumour and speculation also? What happens when we chuck all of our most experienced Chaps?

[BEagle]

Are you sure that you don't mean RAFCAS or Link-up?

Were the hard-won accreditation scheme to be discontinued, there would be little incentive for people to stay on until they'd achieved their 2000TT, 1500 PIC and it'd be back to people working hard in their free time to obain a fATPL by the 'conventional' route - 14 exams, MEP Class Rating and IR on a PA34 etc. So you'd probably lose more people earlier in their careers...... As was happening before the accreditation system came in.

From the TGDA site (still not updated...why not?):
"To qualify for credits under the military accreditation scheme pilots must have a minimum 2000 total flying hours on military aircraft, of which 1500 hrs must be Pilot in Command (max 500 PIC under supervision/Co-pilot P1) of fixed wing aircraft. Those pilots who have completed a recognised ME OCU and who can show 1500 hrs PIC on approved ME aircraft will be considered for accreditation as experienced ME pilots. Those pilots not meeting the ME criteria in full, but who are otherwise eligible, will also be accredited but to a lesser degree."

No 2000TT & 1500PIC = No accreditation. Those ARE realistic figures; the idea was never to give a quick, early path into the airlines but to recognise the experience gained by suitably qualified military pilots. Yes, you'll have to put up with a few years of bull$hit to meet the accreditation minima - or else do your own fATPL in your own time.

[scroggs]

A CPL is of limited use to you. You will have to take the ATPL ground examinations anyway (unless you wait until you're 'accredited'). Once you have the exams, MEP CLass rating and Instrument Rating, you will be awarded a so-called 'frozen' ATPL (actually a CPL+IR). Your licence becomes a full ATPL ('unfrozen') once you have 1500 hours including the requisite number of P1 hours (see LASORS).

If you intend to get yourself an ATPL before you reach the requisite hours for military accreditation, it's going to cost you a heap of money. Having said that, recruiting for the airlines is picking up, and military pilots are held in high regard....

[StopStart]

Go on scroggs, gizza job :ok:

[Overtorque]

Get in line, StopStart. Someone's slave is ahead of you in the Virgin queue!

[StopStart]

Ok, he can go ahead of me......
I'm scared of his slavedriver. And her awesome powers of speech....

:ok:

[scroggs]

Just feed her plenty of wine, then her powers of speech mysteriously disappear! ;)

As for jobs, CVs will be accepted only when accompanied by an envelope stuffed full of used tenners... Oh, alright. A pint, then. :p

[Hong Kong Fuey]

Just a thought, but is the 2000hrs requirement before or after you add taxi time?

[BEagle]

After taxi time, but there are limits. See LASORS:

PLD has for many years recognised military flying experience and have considered military flying hours to be on a par with those gained in civilian flying, therefore when a military pilot applies for a civilian licence the CAA will accept all the flying hours recorded in their military flying logbook, and in addition it has been agreed that military pilots should also be credited for their taxi times.

The maximum taxi time credit PLD will accept is 5% of the total military airborne hours, up to a maximum of 75 hours credit against the ATPL(A) and 10 hours credit against the CPL(A). This corresponds to the average amount of taxi hours credited for civilian pilots under the chock to chock scheme. The times are an allowance to be added to each sortie as follows:-

Taxi Allowance Times:

Fixed Wing Training Aircraft: 10 mins
Fast Jets: 10 mins
Multi-Engined Transport Aircraft: 15 mins
Display Flying: 5 mins
Wheeled Helicopter - Airfield Operations: 5 mins
Wheeled Helicopter - Field Operations: Nil
Skidded Helicopters: Nil
Aircraft Carrier Operations: Nil

However, if you have the sense to keep a CAP409 and log your military hours in that in accordance with civil methods, you should be able to claim the full time from chocks-to-chocks without any 'allowances' or 'maximum credits' which apply only to hours logged in a military logbook. It's worth the effort (barely any) needed!

[Hong Kong Fuey]

Thanks for the reply, Beags.

Is the CAP 409 simply the civvy logbook? How can I put Mil flying in there as no ac I have ever flown (except perhaps the Hawk) has been civvy rated?

It does seem that there is a lot of talk about requirements for CPL/(f)ATPL in our crewroom at the moment. Not because people want to leave, more to hold an insurance policy.

Is there still a requirement to have 100hrs night, or is this bypassed by the scheme?

Sorry if this info is in the bumf, I must have missed it.

Thanks,

HKF

[BEagle]

Sorry, that should read CAP407. Yes, it's the civvy logbook.

I suggest that you tot up all your military flying to date, including the relevant taxying time up to the specified limit, then 'bring it forward' to a CAP407, certifying that is correct. (Anyone who tried to bend their time to give themselves an advantage would then be guilty of making a false declaration, of course). Then just enter your military flights from then on as stated in para 4 of part 1 of your CAP407. That's what I did - except that I couldn't be ar$ed to add the taxying time as I had plenty of hours already.

Re, night flying, yes, for an ATPL you need 100 hrs as either PIC or PIC U/S (e.g. co-pilot's night leg as Op pilot). For a CPL, you need only 5 hours or an existing PPL Night Qualification.

You can be granted a Night Qualification if you are a QSP and have met the full 5 hr Night Qualification requirements during military flying. But, astonishingly, there are some pilots who graduated with their Wings having never flown an aeroplane solo at night! They could not therefore be granted such credit....

It really is worth downloading or getting hold of a copy of LASORS for your crewroom; also it's worth downloading a copy of JAR-FCL 1. But it's very heavy reading!

[Hong Kong Fuey]

Thank you Beags, but I have another question about your reply [yes I know, there are no stupid questions, just stupid people]. Does this mean that if I put my mil flying into a CAP407, including all the (noduff) taxi time, then I bypass the 75 hour max taxi time allowance? Or do I put the Mil Flying with the 75hr taxi time limit in as 'certified correct' then any further mil flying acrues normal taxi time above the limit?

Many thanks for your forbearance.

[BEagle]

I don't think that it's ever been put to the test. If you transfer your no-duff military logbook time including up to the 75 hr of taxi time as your 'carry forward' figure, that should be OK. But any further military time which you record in your CAP407 should be as per the CAP407 instuction - i.e. chock-to-chock. Which is why it's always worth recording the exact off-chocks and on-chocks times (to nearest 5 minutes), not just lazily adding 10 min to each end of the take-off and landing time to keep Ar$ecoat Ops happy in the journey log ('Diary')!

Let's say yoou decide to start a CAP 407 from next Monday. Tot up your military flying plus allowed taxy time (not >75 hours max taxy time), enter it as the 'carried forward' figure and sign the declaration. But from Monday onwards, if you fly say 1030/40 to 1540/1550, then that would go down as 5:00 in your military logbook, but the CAA requires you to enter it as 5:20 in a CAP407..... You would only be following their requirement, after all!

I wouldn't take this as 100% guidance if you are at all close to the limit; however, if the CAA tried to quibble with hours recorded in accordance with their instructions, it wouldn't take a very expensive lawyer to make them back down!

[scroggs]

Agreed. Just a note to say that most of us now in the civvy world record flight times (chock to chock) to the minute, especially if we have the ability to print that information out from the aircraft's own systems.

I didn't bother adding taxi time to my RAF hours (I subsequently worked it out to nearly 1000 hours!) as I didn't need to. The 75 hour 'limit' is new, but only applies to corrections to military logbooks. Time logged in the CAP407 according to the CAA's pinciples should always be chock to chock. So, if your entire career had been logged in a CAP407 (or 407-compliant computer programme), all of it would be chock to chock and all that time would count!

[BEagle]

Exactly as I see it, scroggs.

Plus CAP 407s are much easier to fill out than military logbooks and don't require the infamous monthly and annual summaries!

To get hold of one, either use one of the pilot shops on-line or call round to the Covert Oxonian Aerodrome's Flying Club!

[Hong Kong Fuey]

Gentlemen, thank you. I will do as you suggest.

[abbotyobs]

Reading LASORS, it looks like if you do add the taxi time and then continue filling in a CAP 407 as suggested then this cannot be counted towards the mil accreditation scheme, ie it will not bring you any closer to the magic 2000 hours, however for licence issue purposes it will count, so therefore you could have only 1425 mil hours plus the 75 taxi time, makes enough for initial issue of the ATPL.
Therefore unless you have 2000 hours in your mil logbook excluding taxitime you will not get ATPL theory examination exemptions and must do all 14 exams.
This takes 12 months with Bristol and involves 4 weeks of groundschool plus 2 weeks for exams.
It seems that the only benefit of adding the taxitime is to increase your total flying hours, to make your hours total more attractive to employers or to reach 1500 hours for the initial issue of ATPL, unless I have missed something that is!

[BEagle]

abbotyobs - correct!

[abbotyobs]

The mil accreditation scheme set up by BEagle and others is excellent of course, but as a FJ mate it does take a long time on the frontline to build up the hours to 2000! Servicability rates etc.
I wonder how long it takes compared to our Gp 2 brethren?
The best FJ place for hours building is probably on the windy Isle!

[sarboy w****r]

I'm sure an AAC pilot I knew once got his CPL(H) in recognition of his hours a couple of years ago. The chap in question didn't have the 2000/1500 mentioned in LASORS, and wasn't interested in an ATPL - he just wanted a basic CPL(H). Believe it or not, not everyone wants to get an ATPL(H) + IR; some people just want to operate single pilot VFR only.

Has anyone else heard of something similar, and if so, what they managed to do to get it? Or am I completely mistaken? I tried speaking to the CAA recently, but just got completely fobbed off ('Look at LASORS' they said, except LASORS doesn't cover this point).

I can understand why from the RAF's point of view they don't want people to get an ATPL without having put the time in, but it seems ridiculous of the CAA to equate those with just less than 2000TT (but not necessarily much less) with those who have 200TT.

Any thoughts?

SBW

[BEagle]

Yes.

Meet the LASORS D6.3 criteria:

A minimum of 2000 hours flying experience on
military aircraft, including at least 1500 hours as
1st pilot of helicopters (can incl. max. 500 hours
under supervision, as P2 or in a flight simulator).

[MrBernoulli]

Don't forget this link folks. Always a good start point for UK military pilots thinking about licensing ..... which is probably most of them!

http://www.tgda.gov.uk/CAA_Accreditation/CAAAccreditation.htm

..... or you could just continue to use the services of BEagle! Never seems to tire of offering his depthless knowledge ..... thank goodness.

How about putting up an English Heritage blue plaque on the wall of a Sqn at an airfield somewhere in Cotswoldshire. I can just see it now:

BEagle
1822 - Forever
For services to military aviators hankering for a civvy license.
Hurrah!

:ok:

[FFP]

<2000TT - you don't qualify at all

Not strictly true Beags.

From LASORS 2006 G2.3

A QSP(A) who does not meet the eligibility criteria of
either accreditation scheme, will be required to
demonstrate the appropriate level of theoretical
knowledge by passing ALL of the theoretical
knowledge examinations at ATPL level. However,
credit will be given against the requirement to complete
an approved course of theoretical knowledge
instruction prior to attempting the examinations.
Applicants will be required to undertake theoretical
knowledge instruction as determined by the Head of
Training of an approved training provider.

And, more importantly,

Important Note: In order to qualify for a JAR-FCL
ATPL(A), a QSP(A) is required to show a minimum of
500 hours flying experience on ONE type of military
multi-pilot aeroplane (MPA), and pass an IR(A) skill test
on that same type. The following types in current
military service are considered to be multi-pilot
aeroplanes for this purpose:
Andover BAC 1-11
BAe 125 BAe 146
Jetstream T3 Hercules (C1/C3 and C4/C5
variants)
Sentry Nimrod
VC10 Tristar

So pass all the exams (no need to do the full course, or at least it's at the mercy of the Head of Training) get 500 multi time on a approved MPA, pass the IR and that's it.

You do get something for less than 2000 hrs.

[BEagle]

No, with <2000TT you do not qualify for the LASORS D3.3 accreditation for 'experienced QSPs'.

The 500 hrs on Multi-Pilot Aeroplanes (MPA) you quote is merely one of the requirements you require for an ATPL - you must still have 1500 TT (this can include military taxying time up to the stated limit). See LASORS G1.2. Less than 1500TT and you are limited to a CPL.

Basically, less than 2000 military TT and you have to go by the same route (including all the exams) as anyone else applying for a civil licence. Having 500 TT MPA merely means that, as soon as you reach 1500TT, you will be able to 'unfreeze' your CPL/IR and extend your licence privileges to include those of the JAR-FCL ATPL(A). Which is hardly worth the effort unless you really think you will get a CAT command with only 1500 hrs TT!

[FFP]

I agree with all that.

But that does mean you don't need the 1000 hrs captaincy under the accredited experienced QSP, which is proving hard for guys to crack, esp in 1 tour on aircraft such as the VC10.

I would say 90% of guys getting the ATPL is through doing the exams, IR on the jet.

Few can afford to hope that they hit the 2000 hrs before the 38 point. And 2 guys I know of have fallen foul of that (posted to Ascot with 1 year to go and short of the time required)

[BEagle]

What? Are you really teling me that people aren't reaching 2000TT before 38 in the multi-engine world? The original estimate was that most pilots would qualify at around 34. Which meant, for example, a co-pilot's tour, a captain's tour, CFS and a UAS tour, then back for a second captain's tour. However, with the virtual demise of the UAS world and more overseas adventurism by Trust-me-Tone, I would have thought that most people would reach the 2000/1500/1000 requirements sooner these days?

The scheme was intended as a recruting and retention incentive - not a quick route to a 'free' ATPL after only a few years of service. It was to encourage people to stay in long enough to meet the requirements, not to help them leave early.

But the contemporary atmosphere is such that people seemingly can't wait to leave and are still using the 'old' route (14 exams etc) to CPL/IR.

Hardly surprising, given the plethora of embuggerances and crippling overstretch one reads about these days....

[FFP]

I'm sure (in fact know) that some people are getting the hours, but with some people getting a ground tour when they just need a couple of hundred hours to make it, the rest of us are not taking the chance.

Many would rather do the exams and the IR on a jet that they are familiar with than have to do the exams in the last year of service when you've been stiffed with a ground tour and then have to go to Exeter and pay £5,000 to get the IR on a Seneca.

Just not worth waiting till your last tour to see if you get a flying one or not to make the hours.