EASA

[Alex Whittingham]

I had an interesting update from EASA at a meeting today. They intend to publish the NPA (Notice of Proposed Amendment) that introduces the EASA flight crew licensing rules in mid-April. There will be a three month comment and response period during which time anyone may make comments and suggestions. The rules will be revised (or not) after considering the comments and it will become part of European law in Mid April 2009.

Although broadly based on JAR FCL 1 and 2 the significant likely changes are:


All instructors who train for EASA licenses and ratings must hold the license or rating they train for. (No more FAA licensed instructors teaching for European licenses)

All the EASA (JAA) states will have to conform with the most current versions of the licensing regulations and CQB. (The interim arrangements for ATPL(H) will disappear and the UK CAA will use the NPA 25 syllabus)

National arrangements such as exemptions for military pilots will disappear.

In a wider sense all 'national discretion' will be removed. Exactly the same rules will apply in all JAA states.

For the modular route ICAO PPLs will have to be converted to EASA PPLs before a modular course of training can be started.


There is a provision for a transitional period of up to three years to be applied to some areas of licensing. As I understand it where this applies it will only apply to courses already in progress. In other words an integrated course involving training in the the US with FAA licensed instructors that starts before April 09 may be allowed to proceed but the one that starts in May 09 will have to use EASA licensed instructors. Some sources say it might have to use EASA registered aircraft as well.

We don't anticipate any problems with the ground exams. The NPA 25 syllabus is an improvement on its predecessors and the CAA are starting a consultation period with the training providers to try and iron out any problems with the latest question banks before they are tried out on an unsuspecting public. The withdrawl of the interim arrangement for ATPL(H) will lead to proper helicopter courses being provided, although probably from only a few brave providers. Military pilots will undoubtably be worse off and integrated providers operating in the US and elsewhere will, at the least, be massively inconvenienced.

I understand the NPA draft rules are 700 pages long. More will become clear once we get the NPA, work through it, and digest the implications.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

I like the sound of most of it EXCEPT the loss of a reasonable bridge from Mil to Civ flying which exists now after a great deal of effort and common sense was deployed.

WWW

[Alex Whittingham]

Yes. The problem is that all rules have to be equally applied across all EASA states. There is no agreement on possible military credits, some states do it, some don't.

[acuba 290]

so there is no changes with possibility to make JAA flight training in USA? It will be farther possible to do JAA ME and CPL training and skill test in british schools in USA?

[Alex Whittingham]

Possibly, if the schools follow the modular route. You will still be able to do hours building in the US with FAA instructors because it doesn't count as 'training'. The problem is that integrated training will require EASA licensed instructors. You may still be able to do CPL skills test training in the US provided the instructors hold EASA licenses. This is not yet completely clear.

[SkyCamMK]

Hi Alex

All very well but as in tailoring a one size fits all garment is rarely attractive. As an IMC instructor I am quite disappointed. I would prefer the military to have a better route than is proposed. I suppose it is probably a fait accompli? We can write, moan and get some threads going that will at least be read by some of the movers and shakers? Why can we not agree a set syllabus for ppl cpl and atpl ir me across the world? We all fly the same aircraft more or less? I hate bureaucracy. Is this progress or are we just trying to hold back the FAA standards and dipose of our own?

[BEagle]

The problem with military accreditation is that military pilots are not trained to a common standard throughout €uroland, so there cannot be universal accreditation.

The well-proven UK accreditation agreements were reached after much work - it would be a huge slap in the face for all concerned to have this overturned by faceless €urocracy. It was introduced as a recruitng and retention measure - join the Services, achieve 2000 hrs and a licence conversion is very simple.

I suppose that there's always the possibility of the military training its pilots to CPL/IR level at BFTS/AFTS.....??

[Alex Whittingham]

There is an international syllabus, SkyCam, ICAO Annex 1 sets it out. It doesn't go into much detail, though, and it is in the detail where the individual states differ. The demise of the military bridging system appears to be a certainty, I'm afraid.

[2close]

Are the French going to play? :rolleyes:

Then again, it appears they may have got their way with their safety conscious Brevet de Base so I'm sure everything else will be "to their liking".

Could it be possible that, provided the military instructors are EASA qualified SE/ME/PPL/CPL/IR instructors and that the military training organisation gains EASA approval - e.g. a blanket approval for the RAF as a FTO - then military pilots, as well as being QSPs could hold equivalent civilian licences - however, even if it is possible (and I don't know) that may be a somewhat risky approach for the military authorities to take without very strict employment contracts in place.

[2close]

And of course, don't forget the medical imposition that EASA intends to put forward in the medical NPA, that pilots of any foreign registered aircraft based in an EASA member state must hold an EASA medical certificate.

I've yet to be convinced on the feasibility of this.

Who is going to police the 'home base' of the foreign registered aircraft? It would be too easy to say that it is 'based' in the US/Canada/Bermuda and operated part of the year only in an EASA member state and the remainder of the year outside of EASA member states. Just take the aircraft to the IOM for a few weeks.

It would be impossible to require every pilot of every foreign registered aircraft OPERATED in EASA member states to hold EASA medical certificates as that would require the crew of every scheduled international flight from outside EASA to hold EASA medicals.

Wonderful, this regulation, hey???

[SkyCamMK]

Same molecoles, same air, same planes, same people but different paper! Building walls is no solution even if you prevent tunnels Jricho, Berlin and soon Israel will find that protectioism is a failed concept and a refuge for the insecure and feeble minded. I would like a bulldozer government to force some sense into some of these proposals - it will not happen and we are being sold down the river yet again! Flood the tunnel and revert to our island mentality anyone?

[2close]

Therein lies the root question.

Do we 'belong' to the EU? I contend the answer is no. We are able to be self sufficient and should be self regulating.

Do we belong in the EU? Again, 'no'. Norway is out, the IOM is out, Channel Islands, Switzerland.....Personally I see no benefits to the UK to be in the EU and am very much a Eurosceptic.

I think we should get out of the EU and EASA at the same time.

Please feel free to convince me I am wrong!

[covec]

Does anyone know what will happen to those of us with a JAR CPL(A)(R) by virute of having "UK ATPL(A) Theory Credit" AND are not likely to be able to "unfreeze" the ATPL due to HMG commitments ie signed to age 55!

In other words: in 2017 I will still have a JAR CPL(A) with UK ATPL Theory credited. For various reasons I have to stay in the Forces until 2017 - then maybe I will see who will take a 55 year old! [NB I am approaching 1000 hours but SEPL only].

[richatom]

Are the French going to play?

That's an interesting question because the loss of military privileges will hit the French military harder than it will hit UK military. The UK lasors offer a practical and well considered route from military flying to civil flying. Par contraire, French military pilots have very generous privileges when making the transition.

[wobble2plank]

Once again a fabulous kick in the teeth to the ex-military pilots. Robber Brown will see this as a good excuse to keep people in his drastically under funded and over utilised military without costing him a penny so the money can be lavished on the MP's expense accounts and gold edged pensions! :mad:

Fairly certain the French will fight it, as will the Dutch and the Danes as they, all three, have very good accreditation schemes and well trodden links from the military to the airlines. We will, probably, just roll over and take is as Milliband does for all the other cr@p.

I DO hope that the Campaign Against Aviation sees sense and forces accreditation through as the though of some of my ex colleagues having to pay out the £70,000 for a full modular course after 18 years of operational flying and constantly reducing wages and appalling operating conditions makes me somewhat sad.

[bajadj]

seventy grand for a modular course??

i don't think even oxford could justify that price!

[wobble2plank]

Depends on how far they go. A friend of mine in Germany had 3500 helicopter hours when he left the military but STILL had to fly all of the hours required by an Ab Initio pilot as none of the aircraft he had flown were on the civil register.

Don't forget that these eurocrats can be very anal! They might treat ex-military as ab-initio students. That was being banded about after the change from national to JAA. Luckily they saw sense then, I'm rather hoping that will be the case this time.

A classic on our flight the other day from Brussels was a Euro MP who had booked economy, even though they budget for club, got on the aircraft, took the number 1 aside and quietly mentioned he was an MEP and could he get upgraded to club. She replied certainly sir, take a seat in row 1. After take off she went back and informed him, in accordance with the ticketing regulations, the upgrade would cost £100 pounds. Please swipe here. Apparently his face was priceless. To$$ers.