ATPL(H) upgrade info, AGAIN!!!!!

[helimutt]

Well, I only thought it would be a matter of time. It looks as though my offshore flying career may well be over before it has really got going. Seems the CAA now want all of the ATPL exams doing AGAIN before ATPL upgrade. As I previously mentioned, I'm not about to do any more exams having done 13CPL(H) exams, 1 resit and then the 7 IR(H) exams in the last few years.
Oh well, I have until next year to work off my bond but then i'll be off doing other things. If anyone wants an onshore S76A+,C rated pilot from next october, with about 2000TT, approx 800 on type, IR(H), 355 rating, please let me know. :O
To all newbies, make sure you're doing exactly the right thing as I have spent approx £110k to get where I am now, with the only option for future progression to a command offshore, to do the ATPL exams in full. Hows that for one F888ED UP system.
CAA??? No comment.

[manfromuncle]

By your previous post I thought the CAA said you satisfied the theory requirements for the issue of a ATPL(H)?

I'm curious - Why do you want to go offshore anyway? Surely onshore IR S76 is far more interesting flying?

Maybe appeal to the CAA? They might waive the exams for individual cases?

[chcoffshore]

Could be the money! Offshore captain pay. CAA are a nightmare:eek: But what is their reason now?

[helimutt]

no idea. I got an email saying I didnt need to do exams about two weeks ago. today I get another saying I need to do exams for upgrade. You tell me.!!!

[Whirlygig]

It's coming up to Christmas and the party kitty is a tad depleted?

I thought that if you did your exams before amendment 3 came out, then you had some sort of "grandfather" rights.

Cheers

Whirls

[manfromuncle]

Helimutt - if I were you I would demand a meeting with the CAA, face to face. Try contacting Martin Marsh - who is head of FCL Policy I believe.

[chcoffshore]

That's a good idea!

[Martin1234]

JAR–FCL 2.050 Crediting of flight time and
theoretical knowledge

b) Crediting of theoretical knowledge
(..)
(9) An applicant having passed the
theoretical knowledge examination for a
CPL(H) under previous amendments of JARFCL
2 up to and including Amendment 3 is
credited with the theoretical knowledge
requirements for ATPL(H).

(10) The holder of a CPL(H) gained
under previous amendments of JAR-FCL 2 up
to and including Amendment 3 is credited with
the theoretical knowledge requirements for
ATPL(H).

(11) The holder of a CPL(H) and IR(H)
gained under previous amendments of JARFCL
2 up to and including Amendment 3 is
credited with the theoretical knowledge
requirements for ATPL(H) and IR(H).

[Amdt.1, 01.12.00, Amdt.4, 01.08.06; Amdt.5, 01.12.06;
Amdt.6, 01.02.07]
JAR-FCL 2.050(b) (continued)

---

Did you really say you did 13 CPL(H) exams?!

I suppose that Amendment 4 was released on 1st of August 2006, so if you did gain your CPL(H) and IR(H) before that date (or possibly completed the relevant theory, depending on the interpretation), but you still gained it when JAR-FCL was in force, you do not need to pass any ATPL(H) exams. However, if you did gain your CPL(H) or IR(H) under the national system, before JAR-FCL, then you probably need to take all ATPL(H) exams.


I got an email saying I didnt need to do exams about two weeks ago.

Well, it's possible that you under national UK law can force the authority to keep to what they have stated. The reason for asking the authority of an interpretation is that you should be able to rely on it.

Another way is to convert your certificate to a Swedish JAR, and then apply for an ATPL(H), as Sweden is still using an old amendment to JAR-FCL2.

[helimutt]

Yes I did 5 technical exams and 8 nav exams for the CPL(H). Then had to do the 7 IR(H) exams due to me going past 36months before completing IRT.
Had one resit.
All exams completed after 2002 I think.
To be honest, what hope do we have when the CAA don't even seem to know? Same email and two different people respond with two different answers.
Oh well, I guess an onshore position can't be too bad with the right outfit.
Have sent another mail to CAA for clarification. Watch this space.:oh:

[Bravo73]

Don't worry, helimutt. You've got it right. You passed your exams under the previous amendment so your 'CPL + IR theory' still effectively equals 'ATPL theory'.

It's not for the first time that a drone at the CAA has got it wrong. They are applying the Amendment 6 rules to you when they shouldn't. I wouldn't be surprised if the person who sent you the second mail isn't even aware of the differences between the different amendments.

Martin1234 has got it right with his quote from JAR-FCL2.

As suggested, if in doubt, take it up with Martin Marsh. A very considered, POLITE (;)) letter will go a long way to clearing up the confusion.


Anyway, if you do come back onshore, I'm sure that JCB will take you on with open arms!


PS IIRC, the CPL(H) exams weren't available back in 2002. Are you sure that you didn't sit the JAA 'interim' ATPL(H) exams?

[helimutt]

Bravo73, You are correct. I sat the cpl(h) exams in 2001. Just went and checked. How time flies when you're having fun!

[Bravo73]

Huh? :confused: Do you mean that you sat the ATPL(H) exams in 2001?

[helimutt]

Nope, The CPL(H) exams in 2001. :ok:

[Bravo73]

Oh. I was under the impression that Dragon were the first providers of the CPL(H) theory course. And they only started in 2003 or 2004. I guess that I was wrong...

Hang on. This from the Dragon website:

Dragon Helicopters’ JAA CPL(H) Theoretical Knowledge Distance Learning Course
This is the first JAA-approved CPL(H) TK course within the Joint Aviation Authorities group of countries and was approved by the UK Civil Aviation Authority in November 2004.


If it was back in 2001, I'm pretty sure that you would've taken the JAA (ie not CAA) ATPL theory exams. (This also tallys with you having taken 13 exams - there are only 9 CPL(H) exams.) In which case, you should be 'protected' under the grandfather rights that Martin1234 quoted above.

[Martin1234]

I did 5 technical exams and 8 nav exams for the CPL(H)
Nope, The CPL(H) exams in 2001.

I get a feeling that you didn't sit the exams for the issue of your CPL(H) under the JAR-FCL regime. Firstly, the JAR ATPL(H) exams do not contain "5 technical exams and 8 nav exams", secondly CPL(H) theory under JAR does not give you theory for IR.

As mentioned, try to use the answer from the CAA that is in your favour.

[helimutt]

As I sit here and ponder on life in general (and what the wx will be like tomorrow morning) I think I must have done the 'CAA UK' CPL(H) exams back in 2001 which didn't include Perf A but did include the Helicopter Technical paper. Although hydraulics and pressurisation weren't on it IIRC. Hence the 13 exams.
The 7 IR(H) exams must have been JAR though beause that was only two years ago.

[manfromuncle]

Surely the CAA have a record of what exams you have passed?

[Vertolot]

Anybody know what the interpetation could be for the ATPL(H) credit could be if you have done the CPL(H) licence under national legislation and then converted that to a JAR licenec + IR(H) theory under JAR-FCL 2 Ammendemnt 3????

Cheers

[manfromuncle]

The CAA really should publish some guidance. They made a real pigs ear of the whole ATPL(H)/CPL(H)+IR/Interim business and obviously lots of people are stuck not knowing what to do, or what exams they need to re-take. It's not helping the industry.

[helimutt]

Vertolot, that's what I did.

I have all of the exam result papers still so can see what I sat. You would think the CAA could just log into their database and see what I did, when and what I can do with it. If only life was that easy.

[Martin1234]

helimutt, was your first CPL(H) licence a JAR licence or not? If it was a JAR licence, you could argue that the licence itself infact was gained under JAR-FCL and therefore the theory doesn't matter, it's whether or not your first CPL(H) certificate was issued under JAR or not. Even JAR licences of today isn't completed totally under the JAR (f.e. interim arrangement and FRTOL).

Anybody know what the interpetation could be for the ATPL(H) credit could be if you have done the CPL(H) licence under national legislation and then converted that to a JAR licenec + IR(H) theory under JAR-FCL 2 Ammendemnt 3????

One "?" should be enough.

In that case no, you haven't completed your CPL(H) under JAR. Check with your CAA if they apply the latest amendment though. With earlier amendments you might be fine.

[Bravo73]

helimutt,

JAA FCL2 was implemented on Jan 1st 2000. So you sat the JAA exams, not the CAA exams.

The first CPL(H) theory course provider only started in November 2004. So the CPL(H) theory exams weren't available before this time.

(Incidentally, did you do your first set of exams with BGS?)



So, you must have taken the JAA 'interim' ATPL exams.

Go back and check your results pages. I would even be willing to put money on the fact that they state 'Report of the JAR Airline Transport Pilots Licence (Aeroplanes) theory examinations...'. (But don't worry about the Aeroplane bit - that's there because of the 'interim' arrangements.)

[Martin1234]

Bravo73, many JAA states allowed students that started under the national system to finish it some time even after JAR-FCL was in force. So, under a transit period, the said authority could issue both national and JAR licences.

[Bravo73]

True. But I don't think that helimutt is one of those cases.

What say ye, hm?

[Martin1234]

Vertolot, that's what I did.
What say ye, hm?

Helimutt already told us that his case was the same as Vertolot's, e.g. he gained a national licence and then converted to JAR.

Well, if you don't get the CAA to stick to their first letter or you succeed in trying to convert the licence to f.e. a Swedish licence (you need residency or a job as a pilot here) then, all I can say is

Helimutt, good luck with the ATPL(H) exams. I've struggled with the exams myself (even retaking 9 passed ATPL exams due to the CAA). If you've done the 9 JAR IR exams the ATPL(H) exams should be much smoother. If I put half the energy that I used to complain of the exams and used it to study instead the exams would have been completed much sooner.

[Bravo73]

Helimutt already told us that his case was the same as Vertolot's, e.g. he gained a national licence and then converted to JAR.

No, he didn't. I still think that helimutt is confusing his CPLs and his ATPLs.

But anyway, hm. Good luck either way.

Just remember to take a deep breath before writing the letter to Mr Marsh - 'you catch more wasps with honey than with vinegar.' :ok:

[Martin1234]

Bravo73, Helimutt wrote "Vertolot, that's what I did.". Then look at what Vertolot wrote.

I don't know for sure what Helimutt's case is, but I do know that he stated that he first gained a national licence, stating it by saying "that's what I did" - referring to a post by Vertolot.

[Bravo73]

Ah, sorry. If that is the case (and not just hm getting confused again ;)) then I'm afraid that all bets are off.

He probably will have to sit the JAA ATPL exams.

[Lightning_Boy]

Sorry to take the thread of on a bit of a tangent. But I got a reply from the CAA today after I had put an application in to upgrade from CPL IR to ATPL. Sent them all the bits and pieces covering requirements and logbook etc. They replyed saying I had to take a ATPL (H) Licensing Skill Test.

I had no idea there was such a thing? I was under the impression that holding a JAA CPL + IR with the ATPL theory exams complete, all multi crew, X-C and night hours etc etc it was just a paper exercise.

Anyone got a heads-up

Cheers LB :ok:

[Bravo73]

Lightning_Boy,

From (surprise, surprise) LASORS 2007:

LAS SECTION G
AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT LICENCE
12 SECTION G
JAR-FCL ATPL (HELICOPTER)

G3.4 JAR-FCL ATPL (H) SKILL TEST
REQUIREMENTS
An applicant for a JAR-FCL ATPL (H) is required to:
1. Pass the ATPL (H) Skill Test with an authorised
Type Rating Examiner.
• The applicant shall demonstrate the ability to
perform as Pilot-in-Command of a helicopter
type certificated for a minimum of two pilots
under IFR, the procedures and manoeuvres
required with a degree of competency
appropriate to the privileges granted to the
holder of an ATPL (H).
• The Skill Test may serve as a skill test for the
issue of the licence and a proficiency check
for the revalidation of the type rating for the
helicopter used in the test, and may be
combined with the skill test for the issue of a
multi-pilot type rating
• The Skill Test may not be taken until all of the
flying experience requirements for the grant of
the licence have been met together with the
required theoretical knowledge.
FULL DETAILS OF THE ATPL (H) SKILL TEST ARE
DETAILED IN APPENDICES 1 & 2 TO JAR-FCL 2.240
& 2.295.


I'm guessing that you probably want to cover all of these bits during your next LPC.

[helicopter-redeye]

Oh. I was under the impression that Dragon were the first providers of the CPL(H) theory course

I think that was a JAA approval as GTS were doing a CPL H course before that which must have been some kind of CAA thing which was not JAA even if we were full members of JAA at the time it was approved :ugh::ugh:

My God, why is this stuff all so complex - thank heavens I did the ATPL exams :cool: (or did I ..... :ooh:)

[Whirlygig]

Atlantic Flight Training were/are doing a CPL(H) interim theory course before Nov 2004; however, as it was/is fixed wing based it is a different course to the one conducted by Dragon!

Cheers

Whirls

[Bravo73]

Whirls,

Was the 'interim' CPL course 13 exams? Or just 9 (like the 'full' CPL(H) course)?

[Whirlygig]

9 exams; you actually sit the CPL(A) exams at Gatwick with the exception of PoF which is an (H) exam. The Dragon course actually sit different exams (on the following two days!) but both are accredited as (H).

Cheers

Whirls

[Bravo73]

Thanks.

So, the fact that helimutt took 13 exams points towards the fact that he sat the ATPL exams in the 1st place! :}

[helimutt]

Whirlygig, The interim exams were out in 2000 and 2001 bcause of the changeover period and B73, No unfortunately I didn't sit the ATPL exams in the first place. :{
FYI I did the technical exams by DL using the now defunct PPSC, then used BGS DL for the Nav subjects.

Oh well, I dug out the old paperwork to have a look.
7 IR theory exams taken June '05 and Aug '05. The title on the result notification form says:-
Report of the JAR IR THEO Examination for the GB Commercial Pilot's Licence, Aeroplanes.
These subjects were:-
Aircraft Gen Knowledge (IR), Flight perf and planning(IR), Navigation(IR), Human Perf and limit(IR), Meteorology(IR), Air Law and ATC Procedures(IR), IR Communications(IR)
So I guess they were JAR ones.
Now, the CPL(H) exams were taken March, Sept, and the resit Nov all '01.
The subjects sat were as follows:-
1st sitting.
Principles of flight (H), Engines, Electrics and Auto Flight, Airframe systems (H), Loading.
2nd sitting
Radio Aids (CPL), Navigation(CPL), Instruments(CPL), Flight Planning(CPL), Meteorology(theory), Meteorology(Practical), Human perf and limits, Signals, Air Law/Flight Rules.
The titles on the result notification forms are as follows:-
Report of the CPL, ATPL(H) Navigation Examination for the GB Airline Transport Pilots Licence, Helicopters and Gyroplanes.
Report of the Technical BCPL, CPL, ATPL Examination for the GB Commercial Pilots Licence, Helicopters and Gyroplanes.
Ok, so we have the details. I did GB CPL(H) interim exams.
I did the JAR IR theory exams.
I hold a JAR CPL(H) which I would think was only possible because they thought the theory completed was enough for this licence level issue.
My question now is ' IS THIS FAIR TO HAVE TO SIT ANY MORE EXAMS?'
IS IT :mad::mad::mad::mad:

[Martin1234]

My JAR ATPL(H) theory exams, completed under the interim arrangement, does say;

"REPORT OF THE JAR ATPL HELICOPTERS EXAMINATION FOR THE GB AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT'S LICENCE, HELICOPTERS AND GYROPLANES"

Still "GB" licence, but they did however say JAR.

Helimutt, was your first CPL(H) licence a JAR licence or not? E.g., have you converted your licence to a JAR licence or did you get a JAR licence in the first place?

[Bravo73]

Ah, in that case, helimutt, it doesn't look good for you, I'm afraid.

Your first load of exams seem to be CAA exams, not JAA ones. It would appear that in order to get a JAA ATPL, you've have to sit the JAA ATPL exams.

And in the eyes of the CAA/JAA, I don't think that 'fair' really ever comes into it. But it does seem like you are caught between a rock and a hardplace. :(

But I'm by no means an expert on this. It's just my interpretation of LASORS.

Mr Marsh at the CAA is very fair and will give you the definitive answer.



Anyway, working for JCB wouldn't be so bad, would it? :E

[Whirlygig]

Looking at the subjects which Helimutt sat, I think they appear to be quite CAA-ish, rather than JAA-ish.

Hey! There could be worse jobs than JCB :E ; at least your uniform will come from Austin Reed!

Cheers

Whirls

[VeeAny]

I've not looked at the rules and regs past and present for this so can't comment with any authority on that, but assuming that the CAA exams were passed and then the JAA IR exams, surely the letter that B73 suggests is worth a go.

You seem to be a victim of the system, you want a licence when the system is in a state of flux, you get off you ar5e and get one, Then do the same for an IR. And because the system didn't seem to accomodate people who did it when you did you are to be in my opinion almost punished.

If I remember rightly under the old national system, with the old exams once you had the hours post CPL(H) you would be awarded an ATPL(H) (perhaps with a flight test I can't remember).

Although common sense does not always seem to apply at the CAA, surely if a national ATPL(H) holder can apply for a JAA ATPL(H) what is the difference between him(or her) and helimutt other than the fact that helimutt took his exams more recently than the ATPL holder, and no I am not having a dig at people with great experience who did their exams a long tiime ago, just trying to create some supportive arguments for helimutt to use in his letter if he writes one.

I hope sense prevails in this instance.

Gary

[Flingingwings]

HM,

****e :eek::eek::eek:

Is your employer going to assist in fighting your corner????? It's in their interest also :uhoh:

Failing that I'll try and keep a chair down here warm for you :ok:

Keep me posted buddy

[helimutt]

Thanks for the support so far guys. I'm going to write a letter and also speak with my employer. I know there are a couple of other guys out there in the same position who did the same exams at the same time.
Doing what's required, taking all of the necessary exams, trying to get on, spending a sh*tload of £££££ and it comes down to possibly either remaining a co-pilot for the rest of my career or coming back to onshore flying. Not exactly what I had in mind as the onshore jobs are few and far between.
VeeAny, you do have a point. If I can upgrade my CAA CPL to a JAR one, then surely by having sat the JAR IR exams too, maybe that argument would work. Need to sit down and word this letter carefully but I think I already know the outcome.
I'll keep you posted. :(:ugh:

[Bravo73]

Best of luck.

<snip> or coming back to onshore flying. Not exactly what I had in mind as the onshore jobs are few and far between.


True. But you've also just been given leads to two of the onshore S76 jobs. Haughey Air (in NI) would probably also be interested in talking to you.

So it's not all bad. Silver linings and all, eh? :ok:

[Flingingwings]

Onshore is all about who you know :ok:

So cheques to the normal account in the Caymans :p

I reckon your fear about leaving the offshore world is the loss of your rubber suit :{ The gimp mask was always purely optional so I've heard :E

Good luck and give 'em hell

[Lightning_Boy]

B73

Thanks a lot :ok:

[helimutt]

Well another email sent to CAA today. I'm not saying I wouldn't work onshore but having just moved my family, bought a new house, wife with new job etc, it's a pain in the ass to have to move all over again. It is all about who you know FW, but if they know me, they would never employ me!!:E:E:O

PS, tired after spending the last 5 hours in a rubber suit, sans gimp mask.
I just put a large red ball over the mike on the headset. :hmm:

[anonythemouse]

Typical cr@p and sh!te from the CAA. I have a CAA ATPL (H) with no IR. I did my original exams back in 1991 whilst still in the military. Left over 10 years later and picked up employment in the aviation world. After a few years, with no IR under my belt, I considered forwarding my career (and hopefully expanding my bank balance) by looking to go into the corporate world that required an IR, even found someone to sponsor me then up pops the CAA to say that there is a shed load of exams to resit because of time lapsed since I last passed them. Question, if I have enough knowledge and experience to take on an (imposed) extended period of IR training followed by an IRT and pass it, what the hell does the requirement to resit the IR exams prove? Not saying that I would be a defo pass (never that confident) of the IRT but what are the CAA saying? Are they trying to protect me from my own confidence of throwing away money on training for an IRT that I couldn't possibly pass due to the length of time since I sat my exams? Studying all of the material is even harder second time around. Not because of age but because I can remember just how insignificant the stuff was from the first time around. I remember well, flight planning involved fuel calculations for a Boeing747 from Johanesberg to Heathrow, really useful in our world. I sniggered as I realised that the aircraft was burning as much fuel per hour as the MAUM of the helicopter I flew at the time. It's all about snobbery and protecting membership of 'the club'. Someone once told me. The airlines are full of kids who can memorise crap and pass exams at the drop of a hat. What they don't have is a natural skill to fly (and apparently no personality either). Sorry about the rant, feel a bit better for it now!

[ThomasTheTankEngine]

Hi Helimut

I sat the national CPL(H) exams (9 nav, 5 techs) in 98, got a national CPL(H) issued in 99.

Got a JAA CPL(H) issued in 2001 (Based on my national CPL(H)

This year passed 5 of the JAA IR theory exams (2 left to sit) this was under amendment 3 of JAR FCL 2.

I plan on sitting the other 2 IR exams and getting the IR issued, this will give me an ATPL(H) theory credit. This has been confirmed in writing by the CAA.

The only difference I see is I had a JAA CPL(H) issued based on my national licence, I sat no JAA CPL or ATPL exams.

Did you get anything in writing from the CAA stating what you had to do?

1) To get the IR issued and 2) To get the ATPL theory credit.

I think its p*ss poor of the CAA if they refuse to issue you an ATPL.

Good luck.

[Martin1234]

TTTE, perhaps the CAA made the confirmation when an earlier amendment was in force? Earlier it didn't matter how you got the JAR CPL(H), now it does.

The authorities didn't like that someone could have been issued with an ATPL(H) only having completed the CPL(H) and IR(H) exams under a national syllabus, which might have been considerably easier than the JAA syllabus. The JAR CPL(H) and IR(H) theory is (at least was) so in-depth that ATPL(H) exams weren't deemed necessary. That's why national exams that are not at an ATPL level (lapsed ATPL exams don't count!) are not considered enough, in the same way as PPL exams aren't enough for the issue of a CPL.

I think its p*ss poor of the CAA if they refuse to issue you an ATPL.

Why is that? They just follow the rules they have to follow. Helimutt had the chance to gain his IR within 36 months but he didn't so the theory lapsed. I myself who did the JAR ATPL(H) exams need to gain my IR within 36 months otherwise I am in the (almost) same boat. What's the difference? Sure, helicopter pilots have better reasons to wait longer to gain an IR than their fixed-wing counterparts, probably for whom the 36 month rule was originally written, although UK licence holders would probably face difficulty having their licences accepted in other JAA states if the UK CAA just ignored for example the 36 month rule. Don't blame the JAA though, as the UK obviously had the same time limit before the implementation of JAR.

[anonythemouse]

Again the question, why should exams lapse? Does all of the theory etc change after 36 months? Totally bemused and convinced its a revenue thing.

[Bertie Thruster]

anonythemouse; did your military flying include 1000hrs+ helicopters operated in a multipilot role? If it did and you are able to get a letter (from the mil) confirming such then it may be possible to convert your 'old' non IR CAA ATPL(H) to a JAA ATPL(H) (VFR).

You will need a current LPC on your CAA ATPL(H)

All you would need to do then is the full IR course and IRT. No TK exams.

(See LASORS 2007 Section A10.2 and the table on the next page.)

[anonythemouse]

Thanks for that Bertie. :ok: Have just had a read and seems straight forward. When I last spoke with someone down at the Death Star in Gatwick they told me that I would require to resit all of the IR exams as well as complete a full IR course. Got no problem with doing the course, my beef has been with having to resit exams due to time lapsed. As I said, it's not as if the theoretical stuff learned first time around has been disproved and rewritten! Maybe I should have kept calling the CAA until I got the answer I wanted and then got them to confirm it in writing.

[Pitchpull]

Where in the world is it easiest & fastest to gain ATPL(H). I have about 4,000hrs rotory, all single turbines, no NVFR or IF. Thanks for your help

[Bravo73]

Pitchpull,

Your question probably deserves is own thread but...


As it stands, an 'Airline Transport Pilot's Licence' will require an IR at the least. Some (ie JAA) will also require some multi-crew time.


However, it would appear that there are moves afoot to introduce a JAA ATPL(VFR). This would be similar to the old CAA ATPL. paco has more details about this if you want them.

[Martin1234]

http://www.jaat.eu/licensing/licensing_overview.html

In accordance with the abovementioned URL the JAA states that, updated about two months ago, that the UK is applying JAR-FCL 2 Amendment 3 and not the newest Amendment 6. If you look at the UK CAA homepage the newest JAR-FCL 2 published is Amendment 3.

This thread assumed that Amendment 6 is in force. If the UK CAA is still applying Amendment 3, you might be fine with "a converted" JAA licence as only newer amendments require the JAR licence to have been gained in a certain way.

[VeeAny]

Martin

I don't think the thread assumes that the whole of Amdt 6 is in force, in the UK its Amdt 3 with the adoption of a couple of sections from Amdt 6 like I've said at least twice now in another thread :ugh:. Perhaps It doesn't read that, the way I write things down but thats where we are now.

Thats why its so confusing, even the UK CAA seem to be able to keep up with the status of Licensing requirements over here.

GS

[heliski22]

Bravo 73

How much multi-crew time is it now?

[Martin1234]

VeeAny, how can you tell which amendment / sections of an amendment that is actually in force, any document stating what is actually in force?

[VeeAny]

Martin

Its 'explained' for want of a better word in AIC 72/2007 (http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/aic/4W139.PDF) available on the AIS website.

If you don't have an ID for the site PM me and I'll email the AIC to you.

Gary

[Bravo73]

Bravo 73

How much multi-crew time is it now?

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/LASORS_07.pdf

[Bravo73]

Martin,

(I'm not sure why I'm getting involved in this discussion again because we always seem to end up discussing the minutiae of the regulations but...)

If I'm honest, I don't think that Amendment 3 (or 6) is going to be able to help helimutt. As far as I can tell, hm is in a very unfortunate 'halfway house'. I don't think that he ever had a CAA licence. He just sat the CAA exams on the way to gaining a JAA licence. (I hope that I'm wrong though.)

This means that he didn't pass any exams under Amendment 3. Neither did he benefit from a converted CAA licence.


So I'm guessing that in order to get a JAA ATPL, the CAA are going to insist that hm has to sit the JAA exams.

The only way that I can see it working in hm's favour is if Martin Marsh considers his case on an individual basis and rules accordingly. Fingers crossed for a positive outcome.

[Martin1234]

VeeAny, thanks.

Bravo73, you are not right.
Take a look at Amendment 3 as following.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/175/Section%201%20Subpart%20G%20-%20Amdt%203%20(JAR-FCL%202).pdf

JAR–FCL 2.285 Theoretical knowledge
(a) Course. (..) The holder of a CPL(H) and IR(H) satisfies the knowledge requirements for the issue of an ATPL(H).

You will find, as of above, that Amendment 3 only requires you to hold a JAR licence. It doesn't matter how you gained that licence. As long as it is currently issued as a JAR licence it doesn't matter what exams he took. The requirements have changed with Amendment 6, but Amendment 6 is not in force in the UK, providing that AIC 72/2007 is current.

AIC 72/2007 states the UK specific changes that have been made to Amendment 3, none of which is applicable to Helimutt. Furthermore, without knowing the UK law, I get the impression from the AIC that changes of the JAR in the UK can only take place if the changes "are considered in general to be beneficial" without changing the Air Navigation Order, e.g. changing the law. Making it harder to gain an ATPL(H) is not considered beneficial and therefore cannot be part of the UK changes made to Amendment 3.

So, Helimutt should not have any problem whatsoever with his ATPL(H) knowledge requirements providing that AIC 72/2007 is current and that the UK CAA is applying the law (JAR) correctly.

[Martin1234]

discussing the minutiae of the regulations

Sure, but keep in mind that the "minutiae of the regulations" in this case can mean if someone is to study for several months, instead of making money flying.

[Bravo73]

Bravo73, you are not right.
Take a look at Amendment 3 as following.


Aaarghh. What was it I said earlier? :ugh: I'm going to bow out at this point.


if someone is to study for several months, instead of making money flying.

But before I go, I've just got to point out that you're also wrong, Martin. ;) I managed to study for 'several months' recently and didn't lose out on 'making money flying'. That's one of the reasons behind 'distance learning'! :ok:


Adios.

[helimutt]

Have re-emailed the CAA, (some time ago now I must add) for clarification and you'll be the first to know the outcome. If it's bad news, I have to become an onshore pilot again I guess.:ok:

Martin1234 and Torquestripe, I like your way of thinking. :D

[helimutt]

Well, the results are in boys!!
Here's what i had in reply:-

I can confirm as per JAR-FCL 2.285 (amendment 3) the holder of a CPL(H) and IR(H) satisfies the knowledge requirements for the issue of an ATPL(H).
The above is also noted in JAR–FCL 2.050 Crediting of flight time and theoretical knowledge (amendment 6)
(11) The holder of a CPL(H) and IR(H) gained under previous amendments of JAR FCL 2 up to and including Amendment 3 is credited with the theoretical knowledge
requirements for ATPL(H) and IR(H).
I hope this resolves your query, however if you do have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours sincerely
So, onward and upward. :D:D:D
Don't you just love the CAA sometimes???