EASA proposals (NPA) pilot licencing

[David Roberts]

See:

http://www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/r/r_npa.php

Just been published. Happy reading. No doubt the thread will be a long and interesting one.

[wsmempson]

David,

Thank you for posting this; I started at the "explanatory Notes", read two pages and then realised that I was on page 2 out of 85. And that was just the preliminary notes, not the meat of the document.

I fly as a hobby and I come on to Pprune to be informed, swap views with likeminded (and occasionally very un-likeminded) folk, and to gnerally kill a bit of time in interesting company; however, to plough my way through all of this thoroughly, I suspect that I'd need to give up work.

Are there specific bits of this that require urgent reading? Any updates on the current hot potatoes, such as the IMC (or much discussed IR lite), Part M-lite, Brevet de Bas (to be implemented in the UK?), european NPPL etc?

Sorry if this appears a lazy approach - but you seem to be a font of knowledge on matters european....

BR

S
:uhoh:

[flybymike]

Dave loves nothing better than to post long and interminably boring publications.....:) I am not even going to click on it until someone has sorted the wheat from the chaff :).

[David Roberts]

I know, it's difficult. Maybe look at the index and focus on the parts that affect you for the type of licence you have / want in the future. a lot of it it re ATPL. It is also subdivided between aeroplanes, helicopters, gliders and balloons. It is not easy to provide a synopsis with so much material. Easier for those of us who have lived through the development and drafting.

Sometime during this consultation period I suspect we (who?) will organise a briefing session, as we did for Part M last September. Though hopefully more will turn out for that than the 30 or so for Part M.

flybymike - I trust it is your humour coming through. The last thing I wanted to be diverted from - actually flying - is all this stuff. I don't 'love it' but because I got involved back in 2002 I feel that at least I should try and keep people informed of what will affect them in the future. Because only in that way will people make the effort to respond to consultation and thereby maybe influence the process to get some things changed which are not satisfactory at the stage.

[flybymike]

Dave, definitely my pathetic attempt at humour ( hence the smilies) Your good work is very much appreciated, even if the results are not always what some of us would consider appropriate (eg new 6 year examiner test requirement) However, I am not shooting the messenger here, honest....

[flybymike]

And while I am having a grump. the new term " Leisure Pilot's Licence" is going to brand us all as a bunch of amateurs with the public at large!

[David Roberts]

As I have said on other threads here and elsewhere, we tried to get the name 'Light Aircraft Pilot's Licence' (LAPL) for the sub ICAO licences last year when the change to the Basic Regulation (from 1592/2002 to 216/2008) was going through the Brusssels process. EASA supported this, but during the Council / Commission / Parliament debates our (Europe Air Sports) request was overlooked - I believe by genuine mistake on the part of the Commission. It started life as a RPL (Recreational Pilot's Licence). In the working groups we said we did not want that or 'Leisure Pilots Licence' for the reason you mention, and also becuase of the image it might conjure up in ATC. Hence the preferred LAPL.

To get that changed now will unfortunately mean a change to the Basic Regulation (primary EU law), not the Implementing Rules which are now been consulted on through the NPA. The Basic Regulation lead time for changes can be up to three years. However, I have it on my list of issues to take up in Brussels this year, and maybe, just maybe, we can piggyback a correction from LPL to LAPL on the back of the next change to the BR for ATM in less than much less than 3 years.

[TheOddOne]

XX621,

My understanding is here in David's post

the name 'Light Aircraft Pilot's Licence' (LAPL) for the sub ICAO licences (my bold)

...your ICAO Private Pilot's Licence will still be called just that. It's the new licence tailored for recreational use and hopefully easier to obtain and retain that is going to be called a 'Leisure' licence.

Maybe I'm wrong, I've downloaded the documents but haven't started wading through them yet, but the above makes sense to me at the moment.

TOO

[XX621]

XX621,

My understanding is here in David's post
(my bold)

...your ICAO Private Pilot's Licence will still be called just that. It's the new licence tailored for recreational use and hopefully easier to obtain and retain that is going to be called a 'Leisure' licence.
TOO

Yes, I think you must be right....I'll climb down off my rant box....:O

I should probably delete my post to avoid any further confusion!
(have now deleted)

[TheOddOne]

XX621,

My understanding is here in David's post

the name 'Light Aircraft Pilot's Licence' (LAPL) for the sub ICAO licences (my bold)

...your ICAO Private Pilot's Licence will still be called just that. It's the new licence tailored for recreational use and hopefully easier to obtain and retain that is going to be called a 'Leisure' licence.

Maybe I'm wrong, I've downloaded the documents but haven't started wading through them yet, but the above makes sense to me at the moment.

TOO

[hoodie]

I hope the mods don't object to the link, but there's some useful early analysis going on in the relevant Flyer Forum thread (http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=44785).

[David Roberts]

Flybymike wrote:

"However, I am not shooting the messenger here, honest.... ".

Thanks, I have enough armour plating to take part in a joust....hardened by years of bows and arrows from all directions.

We have tried to construct a modular system whereby a particular licence can be an end in itself for the applicant, and not, as the JAA system seemed to design, as a first step of a PPL assuming all PPLs wanted to realise ATPL ambition. Though the JAA IR transported to EASA still has to be sorted. The LPL (two varieties - Basic to satisfy the powerful French lobby outwith and within EASA, and 'Full' LPL) are designed for air sports and the lighter end, in line with several NPPLs in Europe. The core ICAO compliant PPL - necessary for member states to satisfy ICAO requirement - is the equivalent, but with some lighter touches, of the JAR PPL (A) and JAR PPL (H) with the addition of parallel licences specific to gliders. Not that we need ICAO licences in gliding (generally) and balloons / airships, for which a JAR licence did not exist.

[DFC]

There is going to be so much bull floating about for the next x months!!

We already have those that should know better complaining about the Basic LPL!!

Oh no - we are going to have infringements galore!!

Perhaps one day they will wake up to the fact that the UK microlight restricted licence has siilar privileges and can be obtained wothout any navigation training.

Has there been hordes of restricted microlight pilots infringing zones in the UK? - No!

------------

The most interesting bit is going to be people with vested intrests making their pitch!

I like the idea of everyone having to have an IR before flying IFR. The CAA's legal department are going to have to re-word their night time VMC flight requirements very carefully.

Regards,

DFC

[DBisDogOne]

As concerns PPL renewal, am I correct in reading that we'll need to re-take a GFT every six years? It seems to state this on the LPL(A) section but isn't repeated in the PPL(A) section but I assume this is the same requirement carried forward.

As I read it, renewals are as now but once in every three, 'A proficiency check must be completed with an examiner'.

Feel free to correct me on this as I'd like to know one way or the other.