Military Licence Exemptions beyond April 2012

[Alex Whittingham]

I have just returned from a meeting with the CAA discussing, amongst other things, the status of the UK military licence exemptions beyond April 2012, the latest date by which the CAA must conform to EASA regulations.

As far as military exemptions go, they have made it clear that the current exemptions will not continue beyond that date.

There is an option which allows the CAA to make a case for military exemptions under EASA rules but the CAA will not staff this, saying that it is the responsibility of the MOD to produce the case and, if they do so, the CAA will submit it. Similarly they will not submit a case based on the current exemptions, their argument being that the military training system has changed since these were drawn up.

So, if any PPRuNers have influence in whichever part of MOD currently deals with this, please do your best to keep the process moving, 2012 is closer than it looks.

Some background info here (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/620/srg_l&ts_EuropeanLegislation_ExpectedEffectOnUKPilots_Sept2010.pdf ), military exemptions are referred to on page 4.

[VinRouge]

A quick question (Beags might be able to help here)

Would this be beyond current front liners to staff in their spare time? Or will it require dedicated funding, of the sort that we could get a whip round to pay for?

Personally, I am doing all 14 exams anyway, it would be a shame to lose this ability for experienced (but exam lazy) chaps who have the hours to use their time towards doing less work for their licenses?

[BEagle]

Alex - that's most interesting. When you and I were at an EASA briefing at Gatwick some years ago, you may recall that I asked EASA's Michaela Verissimo that very question. She assured us that responsibility would remain with the CAA (in the case of the UK) and the CAA's Ben Alcott nodded his agreement.

The CAA has become increasingly aware that many ME military pilots are given such little PIC time in training these days that they don't even qualify for a CPL after a co-pilot tour on a TriStar, for example...:rolleyes: So they have to burn holes in the sky in a PA28 to meet the 70 hr minimum PIC requirement. Perhaps this has influenced their thinking?

What evidence does the CAA have to allege that the military training system has changed since the current agreement was drawn up?

It was due to government policy in respect of qualifications gained in military service that the current arrangement was developed, as well as being a JAR-FCL obligation. Were your discussions with Cliff Whittaker? If so, maybe I should tell him that I will draw the attention of my local MP (David Cameron) to this CAA volte face and ask DC to direct the relevant department to investigate the situation further?

If the RAF system is still adequate enough to produce TriStar 'first officers', it must be good enough to meet the existing exemption arrangments!

[clunckdriver]

No lets see, military training may not be credited, but a Multi Crew Lic will be? Now I know the World is mad and run by the bean counters. How can such a move even be considered? {And for those who didnt make the cut in the military, please dont bother with the "Military training is too far removed from civilian flying"} nonsense! Flying skills are flying skills, my generation had no problems limiting bank angles when we started flying SLF.From the DC4 to the 767 and Airbus we had no problems adapting. If the CAA dont make the case to the rest of the World then they need to be removed from their cushy jobs.{Now let me tell you how I really feel!}

[BEagle]

VinRouge, the last time it was indeed a 'front liner' who started the ball rolling after having read JAR-FCL 1. Some sniffy sod of a Wg Cdr at Learning Command tried to give me a hard time about drawing the attention of a 4* to this as as potential recruiting and retention incentive ('proper staffing chains'....:rolleyes:), but when Bliar announced that qualifications gained in military service were to be recognised in civilian life, I put the case to the Stn Cdr. Word filtered onwards and upwards and it was ultimately the Scottish Officer who kicked sufficient arse at Binnsworth to get some staff officers working on it.

If there is anyone left at whatever passes for Learning Command these days, then you need a staff officer to be tasked to sort the matter out NOW. Otherwise the Services will lose a valuable recruiting and retention incentive.

[LateArmLive]

These days we don't really want a valuable recruiting and retention incentive
:{

[VinRouge]

So is this in line with EU OPS (Or whatever they are calling it these days) coming in?

When is EU-OPS superceding JAR OPS?

[Alex Whittingham]

Hi Beags, it was indeed Cliff Whittaker, and the entire FCL heirarchy. Reading between the lines the CAA are saying that, whereas responsibility for submitting the case rests with the CAA, they don't have the capacity to draw it up and have therefore shuffled the job off to the MOD. I think there may have been one or two meetings on the subject already. I have offered our resources to help if required, the CAA have said that they will put the offer to MOD.

Evidence? No.

Clunkdriver, you'll always get the hours credited, this is about easing the licensing system for those leaving the services. The default case is that you do all the exams and flight tests as if you were, for instance, an FAA ATPL holder on conversion, the best outcome is that it is in the CAA's power, if the case is made and EASA agree, to credit nearly everything as is currently done for experienced ME crews.

[clunckdriver]

Alex, Yes, Im aware of this, having owned five flight schools and helped many ex military to ease their way into civvy street. Many years ago I had to obtain a Brit ATPL along with a few others to fulfill certain contracts, I got a chuckle out of one guy studying with me, he had to take time of from class as he was flying the GG on a country wide tour in the C5 VIP aircraft {The piston C5 , not the new one} He still had to write those exams like the rest of us, what a joke. By the way a certain Comonwealth country didnt want to credit any of my time claiming that a 37,500lb twin jet aircraft was not relevent! Turned out the guy behind this was a failed RNZAF pilot, go figure.

[vecvechookattack]

It is interesting that with the predicted shortage of Airline pilots, the CAA are making it more difficult to become one.

[MrBernoulli]

"As far as military exemptions go, they [the CAA] have made it clear that the current exemptions will not continue beyond that date [beyond April 2012]." Thanks for bringing that to everyone's attention, Alex! So, to all you guys and gals that currently have the benefit of these dispensations - start your work for the license now! Do not count on the MoD doing anything to save those dispensations between now and April 2012. The MoD is up to it's arse in alligators dealing with the fallout of the spending review, and the CAA is obviously sloping it's shoulders. The dispensations, for those who meet the requirements, are a valuable saving in further effort and expense - don't waste them! Start now, because it could easily take all the time between now and April 2012 to get all the ticks for your ATPL. And Alex's Bristol Groundschool is a superb way of getting yourself through the academic hurdles! I would have had a very much harder time had I not attended some crammers and used Alex's training material back when we still had to do all the CAA exams. Alex and his team are expert in getting you through the exams. (No, I have no connection with Alex's outfit, but I have absolutely no hesitation in recommending it.) Get cracking folks! [For some reason I am unable to format any of my post - paragraphs, italics, etc!?!?]

[BEagle]

Well, Just This Once... , if RAF flying training really has atrophied to the extent you indicate, then there would seem $od all point in attempting to seek any EASA accreditation...:ugh:

What a huge shame.

I must admit that I spotted the rot setting in when a new co-pilot arrived on the squadron who hadn't even flown solo at night during his so-called RAF flying training :mad:

[clunckdriver]

So Just This Once, What does the RAF wings training consist of these days? {And I dont mean what the Royals do} How many hours and what training does the average Joe pilot wind up with when he steps forward on his/her wings parade? Its many years since I trained and really have lost track of the changes apart from playing a small part helping with the Tutor introduction in Canada.

[Uncle Ginsters]

So, assuming that the MoD is to busy to facilitate its pilots' licensing, when do they need to start the process to get in prior to the 2012 deadline. Do the licenses need to be signed off by then or just commenced?

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

you need a staff officer to be tasked


Sorry, we don't have many of these. Certainly, none could be spared to work on a task which might actually make a big difference to a lot of the people who are now facing the axe.

Alex,

Many thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention. Forgive my ignorance, but will this affect RW folks aspiring to CPL(H)/ATPL(H) in the same way?

[Farfrompuken]

Surely the minimum requirements for the Bridging Package/Fully exempted ATPL dictate that there will not be any applicant going for their licences with insufficient experience??

2500hrs of which 1500 P1 of which 1000hrs captain IIRC.

Which means that all the talk of low hours applicants is irrelevant. It WILL mean that in this day-and-age it will take at least an extra tour to gain those hours when compared to when the rules were drawn up. But the levels remain the same; a 2500hrs ex-mil pilot (in particular a ME pilot) will have BAGS of relevant experience.

And what are the rules for the other EU nations? I'm sure EASA was meant to bring us in line with those nations, some of which have lower experience requirements than the UK.

The guys/gals may arrive on unit with fewer captain/solo hours the before, but the Co-Pilots I see are, by and large, a pretty handy bunch. Within months of the OCU, they're off flying profiles that would never have been completed by the average 'yesteryear' mate in all their tours. The training system isn't letting us down as the receiving unit; it would be preferable for the individuals all to have completed up to BHT in BFJTS to allow them more 'airtime' for their own experience bank, however economics preclude this.

I think we're selling ourselves short here; flying rates are low, but not the immovable totals for ATPL accreditation.

[Oceanic815]

I started the full 14 exams whilst on a CFS tour. There was no guarantee of achieving the required 1000 hrs on a Captains tour in order to qualify for the 'FREE' Atpl.

I would say that although there are many irrelevant or outdated topics there is also a lot of good 'Gen' to be gained, much of which is just not covered in the Military FTS or even on a ME OCU. If nothing else it is all useful background knowledge.

I would definitely recommend Bristol as the place to do the course. Alex has a brain the size of a planet and the people he recruits are equally talented. If they can't get you through the exams then no one will!!!!

Also with careful use of ELCs the cost need not be huge.

For those thinking about it, bite the bullet and do the full set. You'll be a better pilot at the end!:ok:

[BEagle]

Perhaps one point which needs more emphasis is that all military aircrew are selected whereas pretty well anyone with the money who can pass a Class 1 medical can obtain a CPL....

There can be no logical reason to abandon the 2000/1500(1000) accreditation scheme of today.

[Prop-Ed]

Just read the other thread about ELCs no longer being made available for the ATPL theory course.

No Duff!? Anybody heard the definitive on this?

[Junta Leader]

Anyone know what the deal is for those who have obtained a CPL (Frozen ATPL) through the Bridging Scheme (ie 4+1 exams) but are still waiting to get the 500hrs ME Multi-crew (having all the other requirements already?

Better get in a cockpit quickly me thinks...

JL:}

[Chris Griffin]

All of these issues point to the future requirement for RAF ME pilots to have ATPLs. If that truly is the case, rather than prohibiting the use of ELC in attaining the licence, they should be actively looking at ways of encouraging people to attaining the qualification; rather than having to meet the cost in toto as an organization, either through basic training or for those already CR.

GEMS award coming my way I reckon.

Just this once - please check your PM's.

[Trim Stab]

is that all military aircrew are selected


Selected according to what criteria? Are they necessarily the same criteria that make safe & responsible civilian pilots?

pretty well anyone with the money who can pass a Class 1 medical can obtain a CPL....


You're not doing your ex-mil colleagues many favours in the already difficult civvy employment market by making comments like that....

[Blacksheep]

As an ex-RAF Techie who once had to make the transition, I think some are missing the point. Despite the exemptions that RAF training and experience gave me, when it came to getting the civilian license, it was the employer who eventually called the shots. Licenses are the minimum legal requirement and few civilian operators operate at that level.

When we techies had to swap our CAA licenses for JAR 66 ones, in UK we had to take the exams that covered the differences. It was all in the name of "standardisation" - whatever that is. EASA certainly doesn't provide any universally accepted standard.

As regards which are best - military or civil - there's no such thing as best. The two spheres are simply equal but different.

[Rigga]

In total agreement with Blacksheep's description of EASA's level playing field - it is now almost recommended to get a european Techies Licence as they dont have to go through the UK's hoops.

At one point I witnessed a dutch airline being told that the former NLA didn't want to start a list of partly qualified engineers and would instead issue full licences.
In UK you paid huge costs, took exams and argue'd to get a full licence, while in Holland you had to argue for a partial licence to be thrown at you! (Mind that the UK-CAA is the only self-funded Governmental Authority)

Also agreed - there is no best. Just those who become most familiar with either side.

Due to the "care" of the MOD to all its troops a few years ago - in failing to do what is being asked here - Military techies dont get any real help with the conversion and even if they manage to cross the bridge they still have to log 1 year of civil registered aircraft work before they get a Licence.

For more questions go to:
service leavers advice group (http://www.serviceleaversadvicegroup.co.uk)

(MOD'S - Sorry about the advert but this fits here).

[BlindWingy]

Trim Stab

To what criteria are military pilots selected? - well, hand-eye co-ordination, decision making under pressure, multi-tasking, physical robustness and reliability just to name a few. As an Officer (or NCO in the Army)side, they are selected and trained in leadership, management, communication and for an ability to self-analyze.

Many apply, but few are chosen, and fewer still pass the rigours of training - I would suggest to you that these traits would make them very responsible and safe pilots, and a very good bet in the civilian world.

[wiggy]

Agreed 100%, believe me as ex-military FJ pilot myself, now 20 years plus flying heavy metal, if asked I'll talk up the military pilot as much as I can. However most airlines will look at the ex military guy/girl with a Class 1 and an ATPL, and the 200 hour cadet with a Class 1 medical and a fATPL, and simply ask "who can I get to work for me for the least money?"

[BlindWingy]

Yes, I expect thats true, especially in these tight times....however, what price can you put on reliability, experience and perhaps an ability to bring a bit more to the party than just an ability to fly?

I do hope there are some airlines out there that might be able to be a little more far-sighted - maybe a situation that might pick up when the general economic situation improves!

[BANANASBANANAS]

I left the RAF in '92 (yes, I know - KOS) with an ATPL gained with exemptions and was somewhat dismayed to read the back pages of Flight which contained several adverts from major carriers (including Cathay) stating that all applicants must hold an ATPL - gained without exemptions. I have no idea if that is still current practice but taking all the exams anyway if time etc permits is not a bad idea imho.

Good luck to all potential job hunters.

[Trim Stab]

Yes, I expect thats true, especially in these tight times....however, what price can you put on reliability, experience and perhaps an ability to bring a bit more to the party than just an ability to fly?


And where do you get the notion from that civilian pilots don't have those qualities and more? Amongst my acquaintances who are "just" civvy pilots are a former international rugby player, a former surgeon, and a former diplomat, as well as several who have held positions of responsibility in business. Others have come from very humble backgrounds and have made enormous personal sacrifices in order to obtain their qualifications, and then have worked their way up through GA flying many different aircraft types.

In my particular area of flying (bizjets) the CVs that usually get retained by the chief pilot are those who have extensive GA experience around Europe in something like a King Air - they are already familiar with every approach to every airfield, they know the names of most VORs and reporting points so are red-hot on the r/t, speak to a good level several languages and can deal with the idiosyncracies of controllers in many different countries, can plan their own routing and flightplans, know which are the best handling agents and can arrange handling themselves at every airfield, know which airfields have the cheapest fuel, know where to get the best met briefings from in several different languages, and know JAR/OPS inside out. Not many ex-military pilots have that sort of breadth of relevant experience, and the claim that ex-mil pilots have some sort of advantage because they are "reliable", or have superior hand-eye coordination is not likely to convince most chief pilots.

[Wrathmonk]

Makes you wonder where the FSTA reservists are going to come from. I mean, what self respecting civilian pilot wouild lower themselves to work with the military ......:mad:

[BlindWingy]

Trimstab,

I suggest you re-read my post, I outlined a few more military pilot qualities than you quoted. I also did not say that civilian pilots had no desirable qualities. Where does your animosity come from? Did you get turned down? Anyway, I should let you know that attention to detail is also a highly desirable quality.

[LFFC]

Trim Stab,

I can't argue with your Chief Pilot's viewpoint, but there is another aspect that shouldn't be forgotten:

Pilot in Hudson River Crash Flew Air Force Fighter Jets (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,480108,00.html)

http://www.foxnews.com/images/493036/1_64_pilot_320.jpg


"OMG, I am terrified of flying but I would be happy to be a passenger on one of your aircraft!!" Melanie Wills in Bristol wrote on the wall of "Fans of Sully Sullenberger." "You have saved a lot of peoples lives and are a true hero!!"

Passenger Joe Hart said Sullenberger "was phenomenal."

"He landed it — I tell you what, the impact wasn't a whole lot more than a rear-end (collision). It threw you into the seat ahead of you. Both engines cut out and he actually floated it into the river," he said.

[Blacksheep]

To what criteria are military pilots selected? - well, hand-eye co-ordination, decision making under pressure, multi-tasking, physical robustness and reliability just to name a few.Hmm, that's odd. Those are exactly the same psychometric testing criteria that were used to select ab-initio pilots at the last three airlines I worked at that actually took direct entry candidates. :rolleyes:

[BlindWingy]

No argument here! Of course civilian pilots are selected, but unlike a military pilot, their selection process didn't last for 9-12 months before they even touched an aeroplane.

[Trim Stab]

Blindwingy


I suggest you re-read my post, I outlined a few more military pilot qualities than you quoted. I also did not say that civilian pilots had no desirable qualities. Where does your animosity come from? Did you get turned down? Anyway, I should let you know that attention to detail is also a highly desirable quality


Military pilots don't have any monopoly on the other qualities that you mentioned either.

If you don't want to believe me, then at your next interview just tell the chief pilot that because were in the RAF you have "proven superior hand-eye coordination", can "multi-task", can "communicate" and "self-analyse". I am sure he will be amazed that a potential copilot can do all that and fly a plane, and will instantly give you the job.

I have no animosity at all to the vast majority of ex-mil pilots who are realistic about their abilities/experience and the abilities/experience of their civilian colleagues. But those with the attitude that civilian pilots are just rich kids who only push buttons are better off staying in the RAF.

[Wrathmonk]

are better off staying in the RAF

And likewise all those civilian pilots who think flying RAF Air Transport / AAR is exactly the same as flying in the civilian world would be best staying out of the RAF (including the Reserves) :E

[cornish-stormrider]

I'll have two plates of nacho's, one family tub of popcorn and 2x seats, (aisle LHS row 9) for preferance to for me and this missus to watch this spectacle.

:D

[Easy Street]

Qantas A380 superjumbo full of holes | Herald Sun (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/qantas-a380-superjumbo-full-of-holes/story-e6frf7jo-1225952336279)

Richard Woodward, vice-president of the International Air Pilots' Federation, told the Herald Sun yesterday that the lesson from the near disaster was the value of an experienced flight crew.
"There was a wealth of experience in the cockpit, even the lowest ranked officer on board had thousands of hours of experience in his former role as a military flying instructor," said Capt Woodward, himself an A380 pilot on leave from Qantas.
As another senior pilot said: "It is bad enough for an engine to explode in mid-air let alone lose so many secondary systems".


There's no point arguing about the relative merits of civilian-trained and military-trained pilots as we will go round and round forever. Surely the point is this: it makes sense to give some credit to military pilots for their accumulated flying experience. Therefore I hope that the accreditation scheme survives in some form.

[Sloppy Link]

ELC's stopping towards ATPL for the RAF? AAC have not heard this, anything from the FAA?

SL

[Prop-Ed]

SL,

ELCs have already been stopped for ATPLs. Currently re engaging to rectify the situation. The Bristol Ground School thread has more details on the saga.

Cheers.

[jayteeto]

I did all the exams in the late 1990s. I now have an ATPL A+H. In the RAF I managed to command CFSH Sqn for 2 years as a last tour. Believe me, even as a CFS 'geek' I learned a ton of information while studying for those exams. The military taught me to be a military pilot and the training was first class, thank you your majesty.
It really is quite different out here. I have had to learn many new skills to stay out of the dwang, not many of them were hands on flying related. Obeyance and knowledge of rules and regulations are what companies survive on. The military would go bust in a week if they were in the cut-throat business of civil aviation. I don't have a metman to brief me, an ops clerk to plot notams/do bookings and engineers to service and refuel the aircraft. I do the associated paperwork as well.
In other words, the mindset is different, not bad or impossible, just different. If 2 ex military pilots of equal ability and suitability asked me to put a word in with the company and one had done all the tests and exams......... who do you think would have the advantage????? Any extra qualifications will help. :ok:

[LFFC]

Looks like EASA are going to have a wide-ranging impact on licencing in Europe.

Gliders Could Be Grounded By New Law (http://www.channel4.com/news/gliders-could-be-grounded-by-new-law)

The EASA wants to unify training and standards across all member states, but the new licence could mean specialist British safety training on how to fly close to clouds is scrapped.
.
.
But EASA told Channel 4 News that the gliding community of Britain should not panic, as the regulations are still being worked on and could include exemptions.

Only if the CAA have the time and resources to negotiate the exemptions.

I do hope that the MOD is fully engaged in the debate! :eek:

[iRaven]

I hear they are "trying to find someone in 22 (Trg) Group" to take this job on :ugh:

Great! :{

[Uncle Ginsters]

I hear they are "trying to find someone in 22 (Trg) Group" to take this job on

Bugger!

Any chopped Harrier/Nimrod/Sentinel mates fancy a holding job?

[Chicken Leg]

It is interesting that with the predicted shortage of Airline pilots, the CAA are making it more difficult to become one

Hmmm, that 'prediction' was knocking around when the Dead Sea was only critically ill! We'll see.

Beagle,
"Learning Command'? No way! There's never really such an appointment? Brilliant!

[Albert Another]

Has anyone got any idea if those current service pilots lucky enough to have a full ATPL or a CPL(A)/IR with frozen ATPL theory credit will be able to keep their license ‘current’, based on military flying post April 2012.

I believe currently LASORs Section F9.3 allows a QSP who holds a civil type/class rating to re-validate or renew their civil rating based on meeting the military annual check requirements/Green rating (confirmation or correction of this would be appreciated). A nice career development & retention scheme that allows you to keep serving, with no rush to leave on completion of your JAR license, but still be employable when you finally retire from military service.

If this no longer becomes the case, in April 2013 I would assume all those licenses become non-current & so useless if applying for a civilian flying job. A massive career ‘stay or go’ decision :sad:.

[LFFC]

AA

I'm afraid I have no idea. This seems to have all the hallmarks of another 8.33 radio/RVSM/TCAS drama in the making. :(

[Chris Griffin]

Unfortunately I believe all questions relating to the EASA implementation in Apr 2012 and QSPs will be ironed out closer to the time. Resolution of these issues relies solely on reps from the mil liaising with the CAA in order to make cases for the retention of accreditation and currency schemes. I don't, however, see any appetite or willingness from those in the know to staffing or putting the legwork in with the CAA to secure what is required. I personally think that the time is now close that every ME pilot will require a licence of some sort; either an ATPL as industry standard or a "special" mil licence in order to conduct worldwide ops.

Everyone is acutely aware, however, that as soon as airlines start recruiting non type rated pilots, the floodgates will well and truly open and as a result there is no burning desire to smooth the path anymore. If I subscribed to conspiracy theories it would appear to be rather convenient that ELC support to complete the ATPL has been (temporarily) removed.

Rather a sad state of affairs IMHO in that all the experience will go on dying fleets. No flight safety issues there then.

[LFFC]

Chris,

I agree with all that you say, especially this bit:

Everyone is acutely aware, however, that as soon as airlines start recruiting non type rated pilots, the floodgates will well and truly open and as a result there is no burning desire to smooth the path anymore. If I subscribed to conspiracy theories it would appear to be rather convenient that ELC support to complete the ATPL has been (temporarily) removed.


Sadly though, the MOD would be burying its head in the sand if it took that view. It wouldn't surprise me if the EASA decided that, unless military training was properly accredited, military pilots should not be allowed to enter European controlled airspace.

In my view, it shouldn't be left to 22(Trg) Gp to manage this; it should be the MAA because it's very much an airworthiness issue. Perhaps the CAA and MAA are already working together on it? :ooh:

[VinRouge]

I wouldnt be surprised if we got kicked out of Euro airspace bearing the large number of civvie regs we dont (or cant) pay attention to becuase we are mil...

:ugh:

[BEagle]

You have to remember that Mil accreditation was originally obtained as a recruiting and retention incentive. Join, give HM some of the best years of your life, then (if you want to) leave and join the people-tube world with minimal faff.

Whilst some might wonder why the RAF might still need such a thing, they should perhaps note that most industry observers are of the opinion that airline recruiting has at last started to pick up. If the RAF is to compete with the airlines for new pilots (and the RAF is probably more in need of a stable demography than the airlines are), this valuable incentive simply must be protected. Otherwise potential recruits might well wonder why they should ever bother with the RAF, if their service ends up being worth jack $hit towards an airline job - particularly when airline pay is based on seniority and time served, rather than on competitive standards. 'A' cat or 'C' cat, CR(S) or CR (or whatever the latest incarnation currently is) simply doesn't exist in the airline world - whoever has been in the longest gets the captaincy opportunity. So why compromise that by spending 15 years in HM's flying club if there's no ultimate reward?

I do hope that someone in Learning Command pulls their finger out sharpish - otherwise no pilot in the ME world is likely to hang around much longer, from what I hear.

[High_Expect]

That maybe the case - but at least it might free up some spaces in the ME world for all the FJ guys not getting cockpits on their next tours. I'd take sloppy seconds right now ;-)

[VinRouge]

Unfortunately, they have tried the FJ restream route on a couple of ME fleets, and unfortunately, it hasnt worked out fantastically for a fair few of them. All top chaps of course.

The RAF AT fleet is already desperately short of deep down experience, of the sort that is going to be lost in droves to the airlines in the very near future. That is going to leave us post 2015 with an air force all of a sudden supporting ops and exercises globally, to places like norway and canada, belize and the FIs and the far east, flown by captains that have never used type 4 deicing fluid and landed on an ice runway, or operated through the ITCZ.

It could (I suspect if we will lose a frame, it will be post-op) be the most dangerous phase of the high op tempo that we currently are experiencing, as those currently building egos doing the same sh8t day in day out will discover AT Ops can be a damn sight more dangerous operating in cold conditions for the first time, or through a line of CBs, or applying a massive temp correction to your plates, as opposed to your 200th Bastion/Kaf landing.

[indie cent]

[/QUOTE] That maybe the case - but at least it might free up some spaces in the ME world for all the FJ guys not getting cockpits on their next tours. I'd take sloppy seconds right now ;-)[/QUOTE]

And there you have it. The master-plan uncovered.

Chillingly perceptive there High Expect!

[Uncle Ginsters]

VinRouge - Nail, Head, squarely smashed! Have been trying to point that out for a while but the solutions seem too deep-reaching & costing to happen!

BEagle - I don't think the RAF will have to compete too hard! I saw i TV interview with some BALPA chap a couple of weeks back saying that they're forecasting a monumental shortage in the next couple of years due to the ab initio cost of an ATPL sitting right up towards the £100k mark. The RAF will always offer 'free' training...the only variables are the length of service and amount of sh!t you have to put up with along the way.

[Trim Stab]

In my view, it shouldn't be left to 22(Trg) Gp to manage this; it should be the MAA because it's very much an airworthiness issue. Perhaps the CAA and MAA are already working together on it?


It is not really a CAA decision - CAA will shortly just become an executive national arm of EASA, and will not be responsible for formulating the regulations. The MOD would probably need to negotiate directly with EASA.

If the MOD really think it important to maintain parallel civilian qualifications for aircrew, why not apply for EASA FTO status?

The EFT course is already staffed largely by civilian qualified instructors, so presumably is already not far from meeting FTO requirements.

Presumably 45Sqn already train and test to at least the standard for award of a CPL and SPA IR/ME? They would need to parallel qualify their QFIs with civilian qualifications, but this would be a CAA (rather than EASA) decision since national authorities are still responsible for issuing instructional qualifications.

The advantage of such an approach is that the MOD would be able to obtain all the relevant authorisations from the CAA, rather than expecting the CAA to go cap in hand to EASA to negotiate an exemption for the MOD.

The French Air Force anticipated this when EASA was formulated and have for the last ten years or so put all their pilots through full ATPL theory immediately after flying grading with the intention that those who stream to ME can get parallel civilian qualifications, and those that fail EFT or get streamed to FJs at least have some useful qualifications to full back on. I understand they are now indeed working on FTO status for some of their training establishments.

[BEagle]

If what you say about the FAF is true, then that's certainly something the RAF should consider.

Some years ago when there was an experiment to send 3 ME students through the Prestwick scheme, my assessment (compared to the ex-Jetstream cours students) was that in a few areas the two groups were comparable - but in most areas the ex-Prestwick students were vastly superior!

Someone reaching a ME OCU straight through the RAF training machine won't have anything like enough PIC time even for a CPL these days - solo consolidation seems to be a thing of the past.

Perhaps the other option might be for the RAF to train its future ME pilots under the MPL scheme? But higher than present levels of theoretical knowedge would probably still be required; I once had a multi-jet student who claimed that he'd never been told that 86% rpm wasn't the same thing as 86% thrust...:rolleyes:

[StopStart]

The line from the Ed Centre (Or Learning Forces Training Development etc Flt) at the Secret Wiltshire Airbase this morning is that ELCs are usable for ATPL training if you are a multi-engine pilot. It's a "grey area" for others.

Apparently several people had enquired so they had gone off and done some digging and that is the "official" line.

[Prop-Ed]

Score one for the good guys!

Thanks Stoppers, you've brightened up my otherwise sandy day.

:ok:

[High_Expect]

What?? And it's not in the service interests for a FJ or Rotary mate to have an ATPL level of knowledge of groundschool subjects. . . I call Bulls**t on that.
May I suggest the idiots making the decision learn a little about aviation before make such stupid statements.

[raytofclimb]

A Yorkshire based Learning Centre today told me they had heard of this new restriction and it was deemed to be descriminatory to FJ pilots. I was led to believe there was a rapid re-think and there is no stopper on FJ types using ELCs for ATPLs.

My only questions before I phone "Alex" are:
1. With 80 hours short of 2000 total, 1500 1st pilot/Captain should I wait 4 months and do the bridging package or press for the full whack? (Does it really matter if the pilot shortage chasm is about to open up)

2. Could I feasibly complete the bridging package route in time (ATPL in my hand?) assuming we will lose the exemption in 2012

I have 5 years left. There is no future in FJs and I'm going to look after myself before they pull the ELC cash and every other reason for staying (loyal)

[s61fun]

Add up your sim hours, you can use up to 100 sim hours to make up the 2000. The 1500 PIC has to be just that though. 2 years is plenty of time to get the bridging package done. In reality it is 8 to 10 months hard work. My advice would be if you have the chance then crack it before the system changes. Better the devil you know and all that.

Good Luck.:ok:

[Chris Griffin]

Raytofclimb

fully echo s61funs comments. If in your shoes I'd probably bite the bullet and crack on ASAP ie get your ELC application in by COP today for this years ELC dip. As soon as the first set are done you can then use 2011s dip for the second. Get your IR and you're laughing.

Would be a tad circumspect about attempting to get the hours - you never know something may occur which prevents you reaching the goal whereupon you're back to square one anyhow.

The knowledge you gain from the exams is fairly useful, and explicitly pointed out to me how much I didn't know but should.

Good luck and the ATPL online question database is worth its weight in gold.

Regards

[tradewind]

'Add up your sim hours, you can use up to 100 sim hours to make up the 2000'

from LASORS:

A minimum of 2000 hours flying experience*.................

* as recorded in Service logbook i.e. excluding any taxitime allowances.

The key word is 'flying'.

Sim time can be used for 1500hr min requirement for ATPL(A)

[s61fun]

Just had a look at LASORS. The Simulator time only counts for rotary mates. My mistake!!:uhoh:

[In thrust i trust]

C.Griffin, you mentioned an online ATPL database worth its weight in gold, which website do you recommend?

[Trim Stab]

C.Griffin, you mentioned an online ATPL database worth its weight in gold, which website do you recommend?


If you are serious about an aviation career, then avoid taking short cuts like rote-learning of ATPL multi-choice answers. If you are lucky, you will be caught out at interview and not get a job. If you are unlucky and succeed in bluffing your way into a job, you will get caught out later..

[In thrust i trust]

T. Stab, good advice and dont worry I wont be shortcutting my way to an atpl but every little helps.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

If you want to stand a good chance of passing your exams first time (potentially necessary if you're on a tight budget) and, subsequently, getting a job then the online database is worth its weight in gold. Whilst I agree that just learning the database is a bad footing, it is a great addition to aid in boosting your chances of success.

[Chris Griffin]

Trim stab

I don't think any aviation professional would advocate the "rote learning of multiple choice answers". The website enables a student to track their progress and identify weak areas of knowledge therefore increasing the chances of exam success.

To that end it truly is worth it's weight in gold and allows targeted allocation of time to weaker areas of knowledge.

Private study in conjunction with the crammers in conjunction with access to the online database provides an unbeatable way to gain the knowledge and technique to answer any question posed.

In thrust I trust

Bristol GS - usually advertised on these pages as the header. Best of British in your endeavours. Think everyone should be doing it before the EASA changeover.

[VinRouge]

Anyone know what is going to happen if you have completed the JAA groundschool but have yet to complete the IR post changeover date?

[PumpCockMixMags]

Everyone who has been speculating/Bulls#!tting about ELC use for ATPL -

Fresh from the resettlement clerk at a base near you -

Quote - "ELC cannot be used for ATPL regardless of FJ/RW/ME unless used during resettlement". Additionally, ELC cannot be combined with SLC either, however, IRTC can be used towards your personal contribution.

PCMM

[raytofclimb]

I wasn't speculating or bull$h1tting. I was told by my Learning Centre I could. Fact.

One of them is wrong

[LFFC]

PCMM

Your resettlement clerk is out of date; get him/her to check the newly re-issued AP3379 Leaflet 2511 (dated 15 Nov 2010). It states,

To that end, there is a clear benefit to the Service and, as such, military Pilots and WSOs may use ELCs to fund the ATPL.

[raytofclimb]

Can anyone tell me at which point I have to meet the hours requirement for the bridging course? i.e can I start learning and even do exams provided I meet the requirements before presenting my licence application to the CAA?

I'm trying to use an ELC for this financial year for the initial outlay but may not make the hours before the end of March.

Ray

[Thomas coupling]

Seeing as the SDSR has focussed everyone's attention re - future employment and seeing as there is a new directive from EASA, is this thread worth posting as a sticky, Mr Moderator?

[handyman]

Sticky please moderator

[LFFC]

Sorry if this quote has been posted before, but I just noticed the official line from the newly issued LASORS 2010:


Potential effect of European legislation on military pilots applying for civil licences.

The draft European legislation (as published in April 2010) makes provision for EASA licences to be granted on the basis of military training and experience, provided that the requirements are approved by the European Aviation Safety Agency. As of Summer 2010 the final legislation is still awaited. It is envisaged that to obtain the approval of the requirements for military pilots it will be necessary to present to EASA a documented comparison between the current UK military flying training system and EASA-FCL, including where additional training is required for a military pilot to achieve the EASA-FCL standard. There can be no guarantee that the resulting agreed requirements will be the same as those currently applied by the CAA (as set out in LASORS) or that the current periods allowed for the validity of theoretical knowledge and/or skills tests will remain. Therefore, military pilots should not rely upon the existing QSP arrangements being available after March 2012.


In other words, it's exactly as Alex said at the start of this thread.

[VinRouge]

Does anyone know what will happen if Groundschool and theory exams are complete but the candidate misses the April 2010 deadline to complete the skills test and or IR?

THis is a bit of a grey area. Will they honour the theory and grant an ATPL or tell you to start all over again?

Peeps need to NB this point IMHO.:hmm:

[Dan Winterland]

''I left the RAF in '92 (yes, I know - KOS) with an ATPL gained with exemptions and was somewhat dismayed to read the back pages of Flight which contained several adverts from major carriers (including Cathay) stating that all applicants must hold an ATPL - gained without exemptions.''


That's because many regulating authorities around the world need a full ATPL issued from the pilot's original licencing authority to validate it for the issue of their own licence. In the case of Cathay Pacific's regulating authority, the Hong Kong CAD, a pass mark for every exam is required to issue a credit for their own. Exemptions mean you have no original pass mark and will have to take their equivalnet exam. Cathay Pacific deal with this by saying "No exemptions'' as it is too difficult for them to get prospective pilots over the hurdles, so they take the easier route.

Getting exemptions is the short term easy route, but it does restrict you future employment. Something to consider as European terms and conditions seem to be going down the toilet and overseas jobs become more attractive.

[MrBernoulli]

That's because many regulating authorities around the world need a full ATPL issued from the pilot's original licencing authority to validate it for the issue of their own licence.Which is why I was quite relieved to have been one of the last to have done the old-CAA style exams i.e. all the exams. It was a long slog but it saved heartache later!

In fact, when we did our licences Dan, I think the only thing we didn't have to do as ex-military multi-engine fixed-wing pilots was a GFT! Having to rapidly learn to fly a Seneca II, just to get a class rating to open the license, was a bit of a pain too! ;)

Don't dwell on it folks - get an ATPL underway, now! And you have all heard it before - Bristol Groundschool is a damn fine institution for getting you on the way!

[JliderPilot]

Glad to have used the services of bristol.gs last year as part of my resettlement, excellent prep for the exams. If you have not done it yet you need to be getting on with it soon.:rolleyes:

[Thomas coupling]

Have to do the "sticky" manually then as the moderator hasn't responded privately to my request for a sticky.
Too many mil personnel not aware of this and its only 15 months away:uhoh:
Keep posting in the thread to keep it 'live' on page 1.

The concensus is that the CAA don't have the manpower to do the business for EASA and are looking to the MoD to do it. Guess what?

[VinRouge]

There are plenty of aircrew mates knocking around Air Command Without Portfolio.

Bearing in mind we face a potential retentions crisis on the horizon, it wouldnt be beyond the wit of man to get a suitable person to staff this surely?

[Thomas coupling]

Back to the top again!

[Trim Stab]

The concensus is that the CAA don't have the manpower to do the business for EASA and are looking to the MoD to do it.


As I pointed out on another thread, I think it unlikely that EASA will take much interest in an approach from the MOD (or even from the CAA).

EASA would only change the regulation if it was to their advantage to do so - I haven't seen any persuasive argument that this would be the case.

Indeed, there is a considerable downside for EASA, as it would involve a costly administrative overhead as they will then be expected to examine requests from the MOD of every other EASA member. Nor could EASA realistically be expected to formulate a blanket exemption for ex-military aircrew of all member states (unless all MODs put together a lobbying committee to negotiate with them - another unlikely scenario).

Finally, EASA would probably just reply that they already have clearly stipulated requirements for licence issue - it is up to MODs to meet those requirements if MODs want their aircrew to hold EASA licences.

This latter option is probably the only likely solution. The MOD would just need to acquire FTO status for their flight training schools (not that difficult). This is already happening in France, where all FAF students sit ATPL theory exams immediately after EFT.

[sycamore]

T-S, unfortunately ,there is probably no interest by MOD to do as suggested in your last para. as they are all too busy looking after their careers and pensions after reaching WG.Cdr...Has anyone ever met or know of an ex Gp Capt/Air Commode,etc, in the LHS/RHS of any airliner ? not in their interest,so unless they drag back `BEagle` as an RO to sort it,nothing much will happen,especially if the French do it...very short-sighted approach,as it could all be done thru EFT/AFT,as you suggest

[Trim Stab]

Gp Capt/Air Commode,etc, in the LHS/RHS of any airliner ? not in their interest


Actually, it could well be in the interest of the MOD to start putting in motion the suggestion that I made in my previous post to acquire FTO status for MOD training establishments.

The MOD should already be making contingency plans for the possibility that, at some time in the future, military aircrew are obliged to hold EASA licences (or an equivalent from an accepted equivalent civilian licensing authority) to fly in European airspace - especially 2 Group.

Acquiring FTO status would not necessarily be difficult or expensive, as most of the required infrastructure is in place already.

[wiggy]

Has anyone ever met or know of an ex Gp Capt/Air Commode,etc, in the LHS/RHS of any airliner

FWIW yes I have. There was an ex Gp Capt flying in the not too distant past for BA, RHS, 744. Flew with him several times, top guy, now retired ( hit 55 before the retirement age at BA was raised).

[sycamore]

Wiggy,thanks, must have been an `early-riser`,or saw the light early on....

[Thomas coupling]

Back to the top. :ugh:

[Thomas coupling]

to the top

[skaterboi]

I might know someone who is presently in a ground tour which is due to end March 2012, has a lapsed IR, and is presently doing the mil bridging package (4+1 exams).

Bearing in mind they are not going to be back into a cockpit before Apr 12, are they at risk of not being given a frozen ATPL at the end of the course?

[Thomas coupling]

Top of page

[helipilot2]

3 months to go......any news?

[BEagle]

Ask to see the Briefing Note from DFT dated 8 Nov 2011 which refers to "The Future of Flight Crew Licensing and Military Accreditation - Update & Current Issues".

The proposed revised accreditation criteria should be with the CAA by the end of Jan 2012 (so the note states) - I suspect that they will be published in CAP 804 when it is released in the spring.

The present QSP scheme and its successor will not be compatible; there will be no ‘mix and match’ between the 2 schemes and any advantages conferred by the QSP scheme must have resulted in licence issue by 7 Apr 12. Beyond that date the successor scheme only will apply, with the exception that advantages conferred by JAR licences already issued (such as ‘frozen’ ATPL credits) will remain. If a JAR licence with IR has not been obtained by 8 Apr 12, any credits for examinations will depend upon the terms of the new accreditation scheme.

[Gnd]

New doc (dated 17 Jan) on the 22 GP intranet site, not much new but might be of interest.

[5 Forward 6 Back]

Any chance you could paraphrase for those of us OOA and unable to get on the intranet?

[BEagle]

I have heard some bad news rumours that post-April all other QSP based military exemptions will cease and there will be nothing replacing it for 18-months....ie, remove anything in lasors that refers to QSP. So if you haven't got your ATPL by April, military pilots with thousands of captains hours will be no better off in civvie license terms than a self starter learning his PPL.


Bolleaux!

The successor to the current QSP scheme is still under development at 22(Trg) Gp; the creation of a new scheme involves discussion and dialogue with, and scrutiny by, the CAA, and it is likely that full details of the scheme will not be known until nearer the date for implementation of EASA regulation on 8 Apr 12.


.

[BEagle]

See the IBN released a couple of days ago!

[Gnd]

I agree, it looks good at the moment and if you have made the effort in the past, you may well reap the rewards - just as now:)

[drugsdontwork]

I also was waiting to see what would happen: until Nov 16th when I spoke to one of the RAF team working on the replacement. His thoughts then were that any package has to assume the worst case ie single pilot, single engine, no procedural rating. So (at the time) he thought that whilst all 14 exams would not be required it would still be more work than the present mil bridge. I ordered my package the next day. It was an unpleasant few weeks work but no worse than that. Fingers crossed the new package is better. Certainly it's a joke for rotary mates at present.

[wazz'n'zoom]

I asked the CAA PLD for a list of authorised CAA approved multi pilot Helicopters in the MOD. The answer was the FBH AW139 as it's the only helo with a multi pilot IFR RTS and RFM! All other mil types are "IFR- single pilot from the right hand seat with a suitably trained aircrew member in the left hand seat" as listed in the types RTS by the RTSA.

If you now take that info to 'LASORs, Sect D, App H, Pg 69, The QSP (H) flow diagram' you cannot finish the bottom line 'flow' to get the ATPL(H) in service but, you will have to find a civvy MP type to get your TR and IRT then get the ATPL(H). At the bottom of the QSP (A) Flow chart they have listed all the Mil types that are deemed multi pilot.

They still haven't furnished me with a list of civilian multi-pilot airframes to conduct the ATPL licensing skills test.
The frustrating thing is that UK civvy companies operate Single Pilot IFR helos under a Ops Inspector letter of agreement that they do it 2 Pilot (for licensing purposes)!!:ugh:

[nice castle]

Or you could jump in the mil type and fly a single pilot IRT with an oppo in the LHS and the inspr from the CAA on the JS, which has happened before.:ok:

[lynx-effect]

I'm sure that this will be done with military precision i.e half late and the other half not completed properly!

[nice castle]

What, as opposed to the totally watertight and logical way the CAA do things? :}Don't make me laugh! (Have you actually been to Gatwick?)

[wazz'n'zoom]

Or you could jump in the mil type and fly a single pilot IRT with an oppo in the LHS and the inspr from the CAA on the JS, which has happened before.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif
Even if you did this, it still wouldn't get you the ATPL(H). You then have to be current on a JAA Multi-Pilot Helo with a matching IRT and perform a Licensing Skills Test (LST) with a JAA Multi -Pilot TRE. The SRG 1156FF guidance notes relating to a QSP having 500hrs on the test type negating a LST doesn't apply either. :ugh:

[nice castle]

Hmm, well, maybe it was the smooth talking then, and a bit of bluff over the counter, but people have done it, and been awarded the ATPL(H).:confused:

AFAIK, once the CPL(H) has been awarded, add MCCC (about £50) and an IR = ATPL(H).

[wazz'n'zoom]

So I have just finished the new 'QSP ATPL(H) Cse' at Starspeed Trg at Kemble which enables the attendee to get an ATPL(H) without leaving the service or working for a North Sea/On shore VIP helo company. It has been authorised by the CAA policy dept to get all those service/ex-service personel caught in the gap the licensing process. As proved by myself, an ex QSP or QSP can gain the ATPL by flying a VFR/IFR AS355 conversion for 5 hrs and then a multi-pilot ATPL(H) skills test with a CAA MP examiner. Total cost, £12,500 if you already have a CPL with SP IR. They have ELCAS status so you can claim back some £s and there are plenty of MOD barracks within 30mins drive. (Google 'Starspeed Training' for a contact no and speak to David)
The MODs RTSA has removed all reference to 2 pilots IFR thus blocking the service helos being used for the issue of an ATPL. LASORS, sect D, Rotary QSP flow diagram, states that you must be current on a multi-pilot type and no service helo now fits the bill (the AW139 says 2 pilots IFR but will be changed very soon to come into line). A 22 Gp staff officer has told the policy Dept at CAA that all service Helos are Single pilot IFR. RTS's will now State 'Single Pilot IFR with a suitably trained aircrew member in the left hand seat'. That statement is the show stopper for the CAA as it must be 2 pilots IFR.
NB. The CAAs PLD has posted a note at the 'PLD counter' stating 'all Military (QSPs) should have applications to the dept before the 21 Mar 12 to meet the 7 Apr deadline for licence issue'.
Hope this helps.

[nice castle]

Interesting stuff. Single pilot IFR in a chinook, though? Not really how it happens in reality. Is this new line from the RTSA taken specifically to block the route to an ATPL(H) using service aircraft?:confused:

[wazz'n'zoom]

NC
It enables 'The Service' to have a 'Non-Pilot' to be in the cockpit i.e. Navigator/WSOP or Observer when IFR flight is being conducted.
However, Fly 2000 has now decreed that if you wish to do 'Instrument Flying Practice' then you shall carry a safety 'Pilot'; so where does that leave the 'Non-Pilots in their currency? Our Nav still has to do a NHP IRT.
In summary it has worked in the 'Services' interest as their pilots cannot get the ATPL because they are not flying a 2 pilot IFR aircraft. Starspeed Training have one slot left on their ATPL cse if you're interested.

I wonder what 22 Gp have secured with EASA with reference to Military Experience! Have a look at the L311 Journal: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:311:SOM:EN:HTML

[nice castle]

Interesting gen, thanks mate. Interesting how the effort is made to call all our ops single pilot, just a few years after navs were binned for SH. Still, there are still some knocking around I suppose...it just seems at odds with the reality of the situation that's all.

Ref the starspeed cse, oh to have the time! Thanks anyway.:ok:

[Torque limited]

A 22 Gp staff officer has told the policy Dept at CAA that all service Helos are Single pilot IFR. RTS's will now State 'Single Pilot IFR with a suitably trained aircrew member in the left hand seat'.

Interesting then that the latest JHC FOB has changed their wording regarding IFP/IFR flying. Where as we used to be able to use a qualified crewmember (i.e. aircrewman)as the safety pilot, it now states that the suitably trained aircrew member in the LHS must be able to take control if required (or words to that effect), therefore not an aircrewman (by the letter of the law) although many of the aircrewman I've flown with are arguably better polers than the pilots....

[culloden]

Hi,
Remember that 8 Apr is a sunday...7th saturday and the 6th is Easter Friday....a bank holiday! !
So the CAA stop work for the weekend at 1700 on the Thursday 5th Apr.
Bill

[nice castle]

and all applications need to be in by cop on the 21st March...

[wazz'n'zoom]

latest JHC FOB has changed their wording regarding IFP/IFR flying

Changed to come into line with the Fly 2000 series of MARDS, as will all FOBs. Apparently you can still go 'On Task' as a Single Pilot IFR but not for 'IF Training'.

[BEagle]

Perhaps this is just the military deciding to comply with Article 23 of the Air Navigation Order:

Simulated instrument flight

23 (1) An aircraft shall not be flown in simulated instrument flight conditions unless the conditions in paragraph (2) are met.

(2) The conditions referred to in paragraph (1) are as follows:

(a) the aircraft is fitted with dual controls which are functioning properly;

(b) an additional pilot (in this rule called a 'safety pilot') is carried in a second control seat of the aircraft for the purpose of providing assistance to the pilot flying the aircraft; and

(c) if the safety pilot's field of vision is not adequate, both forwards and to each side of the aircraft, a third person, who is a competent observer, occupies a position in the aircraft from which his field of vision makes good the deficiencies in that of the safety pilot, and from which he can readily communicate with the safety pilot.

However, the actual definition of 'simulated instrument flight' in the ANO is:

'simulated instrument flight conditions' means a flight during which mechanical or optical devices are used in order to reduce the field of vision or the range of visibility from the cockpit of the aircraft.

If the pilot is merely practising instrument approaches without vision-limiting devices, the requirements are somewhat different:

Practice instrument approaches

24 (1) An aircraft shall not carry out an instrument approach practice within the United Kingdom if it is flying in Visual Meteorological Conditions unless the conditions in paragraph (2) are met.

(2) The conditions referred to in paragraph (1) are as follows:

(a) the appropriate air traffic control unit has previously been informed that the flight is to be made for the purpose of instrument approach practice; and

(b) if the flight is not being carried out in simulated instrument flight conditions, a competent observer is carried in such a position in the aircraft that he has an adequate field of vision and can readily communicate with the pilot flying the aircraft.

[gashman]

Where did the 21st March come from? That's a bit of a goalpost shift. I've done my 14 exams and have a couple of weeks IR training booked starting on 12 March planning on a visit to Gatwick to present all my documents. If the CAA are now saying that they are shutting up shop on the 21st it gives me a week to get an IR done! Blimey.

At this rate I'm tempted to get a CPL issued without an IR if only to set my exam passes in stone.

Anyone else in a similar situation? Anyone know if the visit to Gatwick with docs is still a valid plan?

[Prop-Ed]

Yes, where did this 21st march cut off date come from? Link please?

Frantically trying to find confirmation on the CAA website but I don't see anything indicating this date.....:confused:

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

where did this 21st march cut off date come from?


Seems a bit fishy, seeing as there is an extra set of exams, mentioned on the CAA website, laid on specifically for people trying to meet the 8 Apr deadline...with the exams commencing on Mon 19 Mar!

Full details at http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2026/Additional%20Exam%20Dates%2017%20Feb%202012_v2.pdf

[nice castle]

Phone them up. They told me this over the phone. I also received confirmation of this date in a letter from the CAA that they bunged in the post to me when I changed the address on my CPL. Sorry to be the bearer of such news to those already on a tight timeline. At least you know now, good luck!

[R-A-F-Off]

Well here's a direct cut and paste from an e-mail PLD sent me.

EU European legislation (EASA) is due to come into force on the 8th April 2012 which is going to change the pilot licensing rules and will affect the privileges of many existing licence holders. The current UK Military Accreditation Scheme and ICAO ECAC conversions will cease on the 8th April 2012. Any UK Military or ICAO ECAC Conversion applications received after the 7th April 2012 will not be issued under the current arrangements.

So on that basis it's 7 April, or indeed the 5th as already discussed.

[SimonK]

Apologies for the fairly bone question, I am very new to this :ooh: I have recently completed the Bridging exams and should get my JAR licence (H) issued before the cutoff. Unfortunately I will not be able to get the IR done in time, nor my 'A' bridging. From the CAA doc linked above I assume that my shiny new licence will be largely worthless? The reasoning here is that apparently I will not be able to bridge across to an EASA 'A' from my JAR 'H' post Apr and will need to do all 14 exams from scratch. Joy!

I also heard from another source (apologies it is hearsay) that neither would I be able to open an IR up on my JAR 'H' licence post Apr. Hopefully I have been misinformed......anyone correct me or know more before I rapidly spin myself into a small whirl of CAA pain?:ugh:

[MPSM]

I've just been informed that the new military exemptions have been received by the CAA on Monday. I've been told from a training provider who has spoken to them on the phone that its quite a good package with a lot of responsibility being given to civilian training providers. I believe that the all important IR exemption is now "Training as Reqd" on behalf of the Training School, so it may be less than the original 15Hr course for those already holding a Rating, assuming that your good enough that is, and no where near as much the forecast 50Hr course that I had been told to expect! I have also been told that the CAA are accepting applications for Licensing early to process the paperwork, so anyone who is sitting the final exams on the 19th March will be ready for issue upon receipt of their final exam results. Anyone from 22 Gp care to comment on whether or not I'm on the right lines?? Apparently the new exemptions will be in place on April 8th although they may not be published, they will be active. So there is a light at the end of the tunnel!

[SunderlandMatt]

Bloody good news if it's true MPSM.

I'll be watching the CAA's (and PPrune) web site like a hawk. 50 hours would have been crazy!

SM.

[gashman]

I received this email today from the CAA reference their change of goalposts.


I confirm due to the high volume of applications expected due to the
military accreditation scheme ceasing on 8th April. We are recommending
that pilots submit their applications to us as soon as possible. The
21st of March allows us our sufficient time to process applications
before 7th April deadline.

It is worth you submitting paperwork to us prior to the completion of
your IR. If you expect to complete your IR and the test is to be
conducted by 7th April you can submit the IR application, annotated
pending IR Test. Please note however we are unable to issue a licence as
a same day service.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any queries.

EU European legislation (EASA) is due to come into force on the 8th
April 2012 which is going to change the pilot licensing rules and will
affect the privileges of many existing licence holders. **The current UK
Military Accreditation Scheme and ICAO ECAC conversions will cease on
the 8th April 2012. **Any UK Military or ICAO ECAC Conversion
applications received after the 7th April 2012 will not be issued under
the current arrangements.

Pilots should be aware that the UK CAA will not be issuing EASA licences
until 1st July 2012. ***

For the latest information on EASA please refer to the link below:

EASA Updates and FAQ's


Regards

Caroline Ellett
Technical Support Officer
Licensing & Training Standards
CAA
Aviation House
Gatwick Airport South
West Sussex
RH6 0YR
email [email protected]
telephone 01293 573700
fax 01293 573996

[nice castle]

Thanks chap, I knew I wasn't going mad!:ok:

[[email protected]]

So how does this maze of new regulation affect someone who already holds a CAA ATPL(H)?

Mine has lapsed and I need to renew it (class 1 medical complete) - is it worth paying for a renewal or should I go for an issue of a JAR FCL CPL (without IR) - effectively a frozen ATPL(H) and wait for an opportunity to do an IR when I need one (since my procedural IRT doesn't count in civvy street).

I know the answer is probably deep in LASORS but that document makes brain surgery seem simple to understand by comparison.

[nice castle]

The risk you run is that when you try and 'unfreeze' your new licence, they may question the validity of it, given (I assume) it was based on the military bridging package, that will, by then, no exist.

Equally, they may not notice or care...

I have a CPL(H) from mil bridging, the MCCC, but need an IR and won't get one sorted before the cut off. I asked if I really needed to do the IR by the cut off and they said yes...

If you want to be sure of the situation, if I were you, I'd get the ATPL(H) sorted as soon as you can, and then that will carry across to the new system when that stands up in April.

[SunderlandMatt]

Okay how about this situation,

Post 7 April I will complete my new EASA syllabus ATPL(A) Theoretical Knowledge but probably won't complete the IR(A). What further exams will I then need to get an ATPL(H)? PoF(H) and then anything else? It used to be that you just did PoF(H) under the Interim Arrangement but that ceases on 31 March. So what follows?

I've got the 1500 hours etc and will get a twin rating and do an IR(H) but I just can't get the answer out of LASORS without coming up with the ridiculous concept of having to do a further 8 exams?

Any advice would be brilliant as I don't fancy the idea of 22 exams just for the sake of paying the CAA £68 a pop. I've spoken with the CAA and I've had nothing back in writing for weeks. :ugh:

Regards,

SM.

[Aynayda Pizaqvick]

You wont get an answer because until the case that links RAF/RN/AAC flying training and experience with that of the civvy world is submitted to and approved by EASA nobody will know. It just a case of sit back and wait till April (or possibly beyond).
What we do know is that anything done under the current system that does not lead to the issue of a licence by April (i.e. you've done the bridging package but don't have the hours or will not complete the paper work in time) will NOT be recognised by EASA come April.
Here's hoping that the RAF RW boys get a better deal out of it than the current systems which seems to cater only for the lowest common denominator (no disrespect intended to our RN and AAC comrades who dont have the aircraft fit for an unrestricted IR).

[MPSM]

I have been told that the CAA are currently wading through a 3000 Pg document which has the new exemptions in it. It should be approved by EASA with no problems as it has been written in conjunction with the CAA. They are now re-encoding it into "Civvie" speak. However they are still insisting on the 21st deadline but are being helpful (Surprisingly!) by accepting applications in advance, for both Licence and IR issue under the old scheme. Then its a case of them being ready to give you your licence as soon as your final exam results or IRT is complete

[TheInquisitor]

Any more for any more? If the doc's been written, surely somebody could give those of us currently falling between the gaps a clue?

[VinRouge]

The great news is its up to EASA to decide how much (or how little) we need to do to qualify for EASA exemptions. I personally reckon it will be less than currently required, as the Europeans are becoming increasingly aware of resilience issues post the air france crash.

[SunderlandMatt]

Hope you're right VinRouge. Fewer and fewer pilots now achieve 2000 hours unless they're QFI/QHI's.

I'd certainly be happier with a 1500 hour QSP flying me to Eleven-erife on my hols rather than a 300 hour civvie with very little upset-recovery training or even basic hands on time.

It'll be an interesting, if not painful, few weeks running up to Easter.

SM.

[RODF3]

13 Mar 12

22(TRG) GP – BRIEFING NOTE FROM DFT

THE FUTURE OF FLIGHT CREW LICENSING AND MILITARY ACCREDITATION – UPDATE ON SUCCESSOR SCHEME

BACKGROUND

· For the past 11 months, 22(Trg) Gp has been working on a successor to the Qualified Service Pilot (QSP) scheme, which gives credit to military pilots for training, experience and theoretical knowledge (TK) gained in military service. This scheme applies to experienced military pilots who embark on training to acquire civilian pilot licences such as the PPL, CPL and ATPL, the latter two being prerequisite for employment as civilian pilots.

· Pan-European legislation under the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) supersedes national regulation on 8 Apr 12, and the current QSP scheme will cease to exist.

· Until 8 Apr 12, the extant QSP regulations, as published by the CAA in LASORS 2010, will apply; anyone wishing to take advantage of the existing QSP scheme is advised to acquaint themselves with this publication, which is available online at www.caa.co.uk/ under Safety Regulation / Personnel Licensing.

UPDATE

· The CAA is now in receipt of the 22(Trg) Gp credit report, which compares military pilot training and experience with the forthcoming EASA Flight Crew Licensing requirements for aeroplane and helicopter PPL, CPL, IR and ATPL licences; the credit report for Flight Instructor licences will follow shortly.

· The report submitted by 22(Trg) Gp is currently being subjected to independent scrutiny and staffing by the Flight Crew Licensing Department of the CAA. Early indications suggest that the successor to the QSP scheme is unlikely to be published with the initial issue of the Flight Crew Licensing Regulation, CAP 804. The preferred strategy is likely to result in the successor to the QSP scheme being published as an amendment to the CAP in due course. The timeline for the publication of the successor scheme amendment has not been precisely determined; it is possible that there may be a transition period of 2 – 3 months between the publication of CAP 804 and the successor scheme to allow the full staffing process to be completed. In that event, for the period of transition, military accreditation under current arrangements is likely to be suspended pending publication of the new scheme.


· It is appreciated that some individuals, particularly those who are in receipt of offers of employment, may be adversely affected by any such transition period; the CAA and 22(Trg) Gp will endeavour to assist these individuals wherever possible.

· Although 22(Trg) Gp has met its obligation to provide the CAA with a comprehensive credit report, representing the interests of all military aircrew, considerable liaison activity continues to ensure the successful implementation of the new scheme. Essential questions or queries only, therefore, should be addressed to:

[Mach the Knife]

Having done both, I think the ATPL Theory and A2 groundschool are pretty close!

[Mach the Knife]

Come to think of it the IRE training and procedural Master Green IRET in the back seat of a Tornado was far harder than any single pilot IRT in a Duchess. In fact nothing about the ATPL is difficult, it's just Very expensive!

[SunderlandMatt]

Thanks for the update RODF3. It's a shame the document won't be published at the same the as the QSP allowances cease. Then again, better later than never. I can't imagine many of the really old and bold will fancy doing 14 exams!

I can imagine that a Staff Officer somewhere will have tried to make the point that QSP allowances are bad for retention and he'd be right. However, taking away the recognition of a QSP simply to trap people in the Forces, isn't how we should go about things. Retention should be about incentives not barriers to escape. I sincerely hope the document which 22Gp have submitted hasn't been swayed by that idea. (Thread drift mini rant. Apologies)

Any news on what the cross over between ATPL(H) and (A) will be? Or vice versa. Perhaps the 8 type specific exams?

[nice castle]

It's funny that the original 'escape tunnels' currently being referred to, were designed precisely with retention in mind! If it's going to be as difficult to leave whether you're 30, or 38, if you decide you'd rather split, which age would you rather start your new airline career? I'd go for 30, myself.

If, by, shall we say, 38, the process of achieving licences was much easier, guys might be swayed into staying if not dead set on leaving at 30.

Actually, make that 40, new pension and all that.

[BEagle]

nice castle, that was indeed the case.

Back when the present system was first suggested, it would have targetted someone who had probably given 10 years productive service since his/her OCU. So, for ME pilots, that would have been a co-pilot tour, captain tour, QFI tour, further captain tour. Age early to mid-30s with easily 2000 hr TT, of which 1500 P1 (incl. 500 P1 as co-pilot).

Part of the deal was to substitute theoretical knowledge exams with practical experience, leaving only Air Law as the single exam.

But with progressive training cut-backs and general dumbing down (often driven by impatient Stn Cdrs who couldn't be arsed to do the groundschool course.....:\ ), how relevant are the original assumptions nowadays? World-wide experience might have been common in the 80s and 90s; indeed, I recall 'JR' producing a globe from behind the lectern on our first morning of VC10 groundschool and announcing "Gentlemen, this is a VC10 local area map!". But how much experience can you gather from Groundhog Day trips to 3 destinations? I've met TriStar captains who've never flown a NAT track - unbelievable!

If you compare even the 'CEB' PFB exams we had to pass as UAS students in the 1970s with the 'Janet and John Go Flying' rubbish of the 1990s, you'll see the effect which 20 years of progressive training cuts had. I had to know more as a UAS student in 1972 than many a B1 UAS QFI of 1992 did - as the CFI confirmed!

I was told that some RAF pilots went to do the Gulfstream G V course prior to the Sentinel - and the course instructors were astonished at the lack of knowledge the pilots exhibited. It was just the same when some RAF trainees were sent to Prestwick to fly the Seneca as an experiment. Lots of airmanship and stick-and-rudder skills, but sod all theoretical knowledge.

:uhoh:

[Just This Once...]

Gulfstream G V course prior to the Sentinel

I guess the Sentinel guys were even more astonished with the lack of type knowledge when they arrived on squadron!

[BEagle]

Ooops! Sorry, of course I should have said the Bombardier Global Express, not the GV!

Same sentiment though.

[SunderlandMatt]

Hope everyone got their applications in before the '8 Apr' deadline which was in fact yesterday (5 Apr).

Now to wait and see what the new QSP allowances are. Place your bets as to when they might be published and what they might entail.

SM.

[H Peacock]

I was told that some RAF pilots went to do the Global Express (Gulfstream G V) course prior to the Sentinel - and the course instructors were astonished at the lack of knowledge the pilots exhibited. It was just the same when some RAF trainees were sent to Prestwick to fly the Seneca as an experiment. Lots of airmanship and stick-and-rudder skills, but sod all theoretical knowledge.

Not so, they were and have always been very impressed by the knowledge of all of the RAF's Sentinel pilots, ab-initios included. Indeed, on any given Recurrent you will very rarely find a civie giving an answer - let alone a correct one - during the ground tech lectures. Then you get the stories from the sim instructors about what some of the civies are like at flying!!!

NAT track

Is that a bit like a PIN number, or the FLAC course?? :D

[nice castle]

I guess people do that to add context, otherwise if he'd have said NATs, people might have thought he meant donut-eaters.
PIN, ie something that you stuff into your eyes when using the DLP Portal, as opposed to DLP, which may mean deck landing practice, or dust landing practice. Hence PIN number to add the context.
FLAC? What, FLACk jacket? Oh....you mean the FLAC course.
adds context and clarity, despite not being technically in the spirit of what a TLA is meant to achieve.

Our langauge is so over-complicated. :rolleyes: No wonder the spams can't handle it. For example, they dumb down words like over-complicated, and use 'complex' which has 2 syllables instead of 6. Lazy CNTs.:cool:

[wazz'n'zoom]

Seems as though Mr FedEx has been busy delivering JAA and CAA licences this last fortnight.
Anybody disappointed or still waiting?

Best of luck to those still waiting with bated breath.

[[email protected]]

I think a vote of thanks should go to the boys and girls in the FCL office who were even working on Saturday to process the enormous quantity of mil licence applications to get them done before the deadline.:ok:

[Tourist]

H Peacock

"Then you get the stories from the sim instructors about what some of the civies are like at flying!!!"


You might want to be a little careful throwing stones there, what with glass houses and all......

[H Peacock]

Hey Tourist. Not having a go at anyone, but simply highlighting that the CAE instructors are generally quite impressed with the standards from the military guys in the Global sim.

[R-A-F-Off]

I'm not sure how many QSP Licence applications the CAA received in the last couple of weeks. Mine for one is still being "processed" after 7th April.

[[email protected]]

Well my application was faxed to the CAA on Thursday last week and my ATPLH renewal arrived in the post today!

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

my application was faxed to the CAA on Thursday last week and my ATPLH renewal arrived in the post today!


Leaving it a bit late, mon brave? Or did you only just reach the hours threshold last week?;)

[[email protected]]

TOTD - nice try but the 'renewal' was a clue ;) first issued in 1991:)

Despite many emails to CAA and poring over LASORS, it wasn't clear if I could use the mil exemptions to renew my licence since I am not current on the 2 types in it - the answer was eventually yes.

[faarn]

Has anyone applied for the MCC under the old regs? If so do you get a certificate through? I sent off the relevant forms and the cost of the certificate has been taken from my account but I have not heard a thing from the CAA.

Would they take the money if they decided not to give me the MCC?

[BEagle]

I'm not sure how many QSP Licence applications the CAA received in the last couple of weeks.

In excess of 200.

[Ed Winchester]

faarn,

Certificate is a bit of a stretch of the imagination - but you should receive a piece of paper in a plastic folder for your £53.

[faarn]

Ed,

Thanks for the reply. The piece of paper arrived today (potentially £2000 saved :O). It definitely says certificate on it but I get your point!

[Ed Winchester]

So it does! I agree though - it was a relatively painless process to potentially save a wedge of cash.

[TheInquisitor]

So - any further news (or rumour!) on this? It's all gone quiet, on all fronts...

[Rote_8]

CAP 804 released today here:

CAP 804: Flight Crew Licensing: Mandatory Requirements, Policy and Guidance | Publications | About the CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/CAP804)

Comes into force 01 Jul 12

[BEagle]

22 Gp didn't get the report to the CAA in time.

CAP 804 will be amended as soon as the report has been reviewed and accepted - you shouldn't need to wait for a year.

[SunderlandMatt]

Should it not be called CAP 105? :oh:

[MrBernoulli]

22 Gp didn't get the report to the CAA in time.
Well, theres a surpise!

[Bob Viking]

For all those concerned, I'm sure they'll be delighted to know that such an important piece of staff work was given such high priority. It's not like the deadline came as a surprise.
Investors in people eh?!
BV:rolleyes:

[wazz'n'zoom]

Guess Alex at BGS will be devising another licencing package then. Shame some people didn't heed his and 22 Gps SO3 CAA Liaisons advice all those months ago. :rolleyes:

[TheInquisitor]

I don't think there will be any surprise. I was told that:

(1) All military QSP will have to complete all 14 EASA theoretical examinations irrespective of hours in logbooks.
(2) All military QSP will have to complete CPL/IR with a civvie training school who will have the flexibilty to reduce the training hours for the course at their discretion.

So no more straight-to-ATPLs... period? Best we can get is a CPL/IR?

[Sloppy Link]

Prepared to be corrected but IR is now a separate endorsement on your licence, CPL/ATPL (H) is now an hours thing therefore if you have the required hours (>1000hrs PIC) you go straight to ATPL, IR you add or don't add on later. EASA FAQ p23 refers. Having read the A section (p19), it isn't quite as clear. >1500hrs PIC but there is no mention of IR, this is only mentioned in the CPL section.
SL

[wazz'n'zoom]

22 Gp's SO3 CAA Liaison presented the MOD groundschool case (based on all AP3456 Vols) to CAA for onward transmission to EASA. This failed to survive first contact with EASA! Fact is, MOD's groundschools are not EASA/JAR compliant. Once they are, exemptions IAW EASA's legislation L311 will apply.
Other European countries military flying depts have adopted JAR fully and thus, have no problem allowing their servicemen to achieve EASA licences. This issue was known 4 yrs ago and yet here we are, seeing loyal MOD aircrew bitching that their Lords and Masters have not protected their futures post EASA.
In short, sort your 'own house out' and don't rely on the MOD to fight your corner WRT licensing.:ok:

[I'm Off!]

TheInquisitor: I believe the CPL/IR becomes full ATPL on completion of 1500hrs plus a multi-pilot rating. So, if you conducted your civvie training on a Dutchess or a King Air you would only ever get CPL because it is single pilot ops.

Not just 1500hrs and a multi-pilot rating. There is a list of requirements (of which up to 50% can be RW time) but one of the main requirements is 500hrs multi-pilot aeroplane, and without that there will be no ATPL(A). Who knows though whether this will all read across to EASA or if there is a different list of requirements...

[BlindWingy]

Has anybody got a timescale for the revision to CAP 804?

[theboywide]

Anyone know if this has changed the military exemption timeline?:

EASA pilot licence start date postponed | CAA Newsroom | About the CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=14&pagetype=65&appid=7&mode=detail&nid=2129)

The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has announced that the introduction of new EASA pilots’ licences in the UK has been delayed until 17 September 2012. The CAA said that due to the complexity of the transition to the new licence format, and changes to the associated requirements and infrastructure, the original 1 July 2012 date was not achievable.

The deadlines, by which national commercial and private licences must be converted to EASA licences which are fixed in European legislation remain as April 2014 and April 2015, respectively. The CAA estimates that over 20,000 national licences will have to be converted during the period; this is in addition to the JAR licences that will have to be replaced with EASA licences on expiry or amendment.

Ray Elgy, Head of Licensing and Training Standards at the CAA, said: “We apologise for any inconvenience caused to pilots and organisations that were making plans based on the 1 July date, but we ask them to stick with us while we get this job done properly. It is disappointing that the timetable has moved in this way. However, it is vital that this transition is done correctly.

“The UK will still be one of the very first countries to introduce the new licensing regime and the extended period of transition allows flexibility for many operators and individuals to choose when to convert.”

The implementation of new rules for pilot licensing (including medical certification) across the EU is part of a process that has already seen EASA take responsibility for other areas of aviation policy, such as flight operations and airworthiness. Most UK pilots, private and commercial, will be affected by the switchover and will have to obtain new EASA licences to continue to fly aircraft that have EASA airworthiness certificates. However, some pilots, such as those who fly microlights, ex-military and kit built aircraft, will be able to continue to use their existing licences. This is because EASA does not regulate these categories of aircraft.

The new EASA licences will be valid for the owner’s lifetime. Pilots are advised to read the detailed information on the CAA website EASA Licensing and Training Transition | EASA Transition | Personal Licences and Training (http://www.caa.co.uk/eupilotlicensing)

[BEagle]

Actually, this should work in the military's favour.

Chatting to the relevant CAA mate last Saturday, I was glad to learn that they've put a huge amount of work into formulating the military accreditation conversion reports. The delay means that they now expect to be able to include it in CAP 804 in time for the 17 Sep implementation date.

A snippet to keep you interested is that FW accreditation for RW experience will be included, I'm told.

Incidentally, anyone seeking an IMC rating should note that the criteria stated in CAP 804 are the same as those in LASORS 2010 and still apply. I had a test case last week; thanks to the CAA for looking into it they have now confirmed that previous military accreditation still applies to those applying for the IMC rating.

[theboywide]

That's good news!
So what are we expecting the pathway to be beags?

Class 1 Medical -> 14 Exams -> Military IRT -> ATPL
or do you think it will be more complicated than that?

[nice castle]

Beags, that's a great post, thanks for the gen.

Looking forward to seeing how it all pans out.

Rgds, NC.:ok:

[Whybother]

Theboywide

owever, some pilots, such as those who fly microlights, ex-military and kit built aircraft, will be able to continue to use their existing licences. This is because EASA does not regulate these categories of aircraft.

Can I read into this that ppl licenses to operate kit aircraft will also be altered!? Or purely the certificates of airworthiness.

Have only recently looked into obtaining a civilian license and stumbled into the easa problem. One month too late I think!!

Another thank you to the raf.

[moggi]

Fellow PPruners,

Returning to the original title of the thread, do we know if the military exemptions being put forward will seek to maintain the validity of a Military IR (within the last 5 years on any FW service ac) for the purposes of starting a MEP type rating (Airbus A32X, Boeing etc)?

My fear is that I will need to strap into a bloody awful Duchess again to renew my IR before joining an airline, as many other guys have done..:{

[jpboy]

Moggi,

I know this is a huge thread and there has been another on the topic of Mil IR/Civil validity so I'll try and be brief.

You cannot use a Green Rating on any fixed wing ac for the purposes of starting your first Civil MPA Type Rating, it has to be a ME Green IR. If you're not a current truckie you'll be strapping the Duchess on again.

Policy Dept CAA have stated the following;

We discussed the ME IR which is one of the pre-requisites in order to gain the first MPA Type rating. You highlighted the LASORS 2010 text of para F4.1 b) which includes the following: “A UK QSP who has held a Green IR within the preceding 5yrs is deemed to hold a ‘current and valid’ IR.” I confirmed that given the paragraph starts with ; “Hold a current and valid Multi Engine IR…….” it is reasonable to assume that all subsequent IR references would be in relation to Multi engine IRs, even though this may not be specifically stipulated. The requirement of holding a current and valid ME IR, or in the case of a QSP, a ME green IR (within the last 5yrs) has been, and is Policy.

I was arguing the case for a Hawk candidate about to join our airline who had been verbally informed at the CAA counter Gatwick that his Green Hawk IR was sufficient. That advice was deemed to be incorrect as you can read and he had to strap on a Duchess.

Good luck.

[CrabInCab]

On a slight tangent anyone know what the deal is going to be for those QSP(H)s who, under the old system have CPL(H) and now wish to jump across to fixed wing?

[Albert Another]

Sorry but another twist:

How about a QSP who got a CPL/IR on a ME SP aircraft. Would a Green rating on a ME MP aircraft keep the former IR valid?

[[email protected]]

And how about a helicopter green IR on a ME heli? Does that read across to a civ IR?

[jpboy]

[email protected]

If you mean civi IR for airlines then I don't believe so under the current rules but who knows after EASA. Soz, know nothing about Helo civi IRs.

Albert Another

Your CPL is SP but you have a Green MP ME Rating as well? If so then your Green MP ME Rating should work for starting an airline course but to renew a SP rating I believe you need to do a SP IR. Is your Green rating type on your CPL? If not then a skills test may be required with an approved examiner etc. Ultimately, ask licensing and if you get a favourable response ensure it is in writing! I have experienced different responses from the CAA dependant on who answered the phone, we're all human. One of those experiences was regarding a SP Rated Islander pilot who was told he needed a multi pilot ME rating prior to the 737 Type Rating. Some Type Rating Organisations also demand this, perhaps based on a worst case interpretation scenario from the CAA who would not endorse the Type Rating if they felt the individual hadn't met the pre-course requirement....expensive and litigious.

[TheInquisitor]

One other question realting to this - under the old QSP scheme, there was a time limit (12 months from leaving the Service) for an 'ex-QSP' to take advantage of any credits.

Has this been (or is it likely to be) preserved in the new scheme? If it is, and the scheme is unlikely to go 'switches live' until Sept, I'm royally screwed!

[SunderlandMatt]

I'm pretty unclear about this too.

Assume the new QSP allowances are publish on 01 Jul (I said assume), if EASA are not issuing licenses until 17 Sept, does this mean QSPs will be able to use the new allowances (assuming there will be some) to gain a JAA license?

Sense would say yes but I'm trying to get it in writing from the CAA.

Hens teeth! :ugh:

[lynx-effect]

I thought that it was 2 years from your last flight in a military aircraft (doesn't say being current and not with an intructor) but to open up the license with a type rating thus negating the skills check part of your license it has to be within the year.

[Dengue_Dude]

When I left the RAF in 1994, all my 20 years of experience allowed was I could sit the examinations without hindrance.

Nobody in the CAA was in the slightest bothered that I had been doing the job and flying the Tristar internationally etc etc. The help we got for all those years experience was zilch, nada, nothing.

So why should it be different now? Why on earth would they care? The military have no interest in 'helping' people leave so they'll not do it, in fact this situation is a boon to them, helps retention.

As a general rule, there is only one person you can rely on to look after you and you see them everyday when you brush your teeth.