PDA

View Full Version : EASA Licencing


Mikejohn
15th Nov 2011, 12:35
Has anyone here deciphered the new EASA licencing rules and how this will impact those of us who fly in the UK in a G or N reg plane VFR?

jollyrog
15th Nov 2011, 13:18
Mike,

I'm surprised that this hasn't been discussed in depth on here already or on other forums, considering that the forthcoming changes affect us all.

Nothing is finalised yet, but current indications from EASA are somewhat draconian. It seems likely that we're all going to step down one licence level on an interim basis, with a requirement for re-test under EASA regulations to recover the equivalent of original licence held. So, a PPL holder will become an NPPL, a CPL becomes a PPL, etc. When you take the test, you get your old licence back.

The medical changes are equally fierce. The Class 2 & NPPL medicals are to be abandoned, with all pilots moving to Class 1 testing. This will affect a lot of people, I'm sure.

What I find particularly irritating is the EASA flight plan requirement. All private flights will require two hours notice and an AFPEX submitted flight plan. Best apply for an account now, there seems to be an ever increasing backlog of account applications and it's taking three months or more to get on the system.

I'm sure there's more to come. There's some really heavy maintenance stuff, which I'm sure a maintenance expert will be along shortly to explain.

BackPacker
15th Nov 2011, 13:30
Also the GAR form will go, all aircraft will have to have a mode T transponder (which is mode S + additional BS) and the lower limit class C airspace will become 1000' AGL.

There's one major exception to all of these draconian measures though. Pigs will be allowed to fly without medical, license, maintenance/equipment requirements or flight plans.

24Carrot
15th Nov 2011, 13:42
Some threads on pprune should be marked with a health warning!:eek:

BackPacker
15th Nov 2011, 13:56
Some threads on PPRuNe should be marked with a health warning!

Well, everybody on here is supposed to have a Class 1 medical by now (see above) so your heart should be able to cope with some minor shocks, not?

IO540
15th Nov 2011, 14:38
Has anyone here deciphered the new EASA licencing rules and how this will impact those of us who fly in the UK in a G or N reg plane VFR?

You are not going to get a one-liner answer to such a one-liner Q :)

What exactly do you need to know?

fattony
15th Nov 2011, 14:52
I thought EASA was going to outlaw VFR flight meaning everyone would need IMC as a minimum...unless there is a cloud within 10km, in which case you need the full IR.

Pigs will be allowed to fly without medical, license, maintenance/equipment requirements or flight plans.

Except during the Olympics when all farm animals will need transponders.

BackPacker
15th Nov 2011, 14:53
Not all farm animals. Some are more equal than others.

Mikejohn
15th Nov 2011, 14:58
Thanks for this, i wish i had not asked now! if we are all to have a class 1 medical how does that impact NPPL? - this will surely put a whole raft of pilots firmly on the ground for good - on the cost of the medical alone.

I cannot believe, as you say, there has not been much chatting re this as its nearly upon us and will affect all FAA certificated pilots in the UK.

BackPacker
15th Nov 2011, 15:36
Mikejohn, I guess the irony was lost on you. I'll put you out of your misery.

There's a 400+ post thread on the consequences of EASA on the IMC rating alone: http://www.pprune.org/private-flying/464269-easa-imcr-news.html

With just a bit more digging you should also be able to find the huge thread on the impact of EASA proposals on FAA licensed, EU resident pilots flying N-reg aircraft as well. IO540 is one of the top contributers there.

And there are similar threads on various other subjects, although other subjects don't seem to be as "hot" as these two. But just looking through the first five pages of the index should reveal several of them. Heck, the search function fortunately accepts four-letter acronyms like "EASA" so why not give that a try. (Sadly, in a world full of three-letter acronyms PPRuNe does not allow searches based on three letters alone. In that respect, EASA replacing JAA is a good thing.)

But ignore everything that was said on this thread. We were just playing with you. I had hoped the "pigs would fly" pun would make that clear.:ok:

Mikejohn
15th Nov 2011, 21:25
Hahah - great sense of humour thank you for that - i was thinking at the time class 1 medical for all that wont work! many thanks for this will look at what you suggested.

421C
16th Nov 2011, 13:21
Has anyone here deciphered the new EASA licencing rules and how this will impact those of us who fly in the UK in a G or N reg plane VFR?

The CAA publish a summary of the effect on G-reg operators here:
Licensing and Training Standards | EASA | Safety Regulation (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?gid=2061)

The first link in the centre of the page is a detailed document, the second is to some FAQs.

PPL/IR have a summary for N-reg operators here: PPL/IR Europe - The Effect of EU Legislation on Foreign Registered Aircraft Operation - UPDATED & OPENED TO PUBLIC (http://www.pplir.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=506)
It hasn't been update with the FCL008 NPA, but this won't impact VFR fliers, so the substance is still right I think

kevkdg
16th Nov 2011, 14:21
Anyone got any ideas as to the dates the CAA are working towards with regards to publishing their conversion reports for licences such as the NPPL?

Cheers

David Roberts
16th Nov 2011, 22:20
It's being worked on right now. I wouldn't worry about it, from what I know.

Fuji Abound
16th Nov 2011, 22:41
I wouldn't worry about it, from what I know.


Given the similiar thread on the IMCr, that really left me with a chuckle.

Clearly one of the ones that know, or thinks they know, but arent saying.

David without wishing to be unkind you are very good at saying you know, but arent saying - its a bit playground. If you know, but cant say, please keep it to yourself. ;)

xrayalpha
17th Nov 2011, 07:04
I know nothing, so I am not worried!

(Classic excuse for the behaviour of many students!)

David Roberts
17th Nov 2011, 09:21
Fuji,

When I say what I do I have a reason. As Secretary of NPLG I am privy to the draft conversion report, but it is not for me to publish details. CAA will do that when it is finalised.

Therefore I was giving my view, within the constraints on me. Don't you trust me?

Fuji Abound
17th Nov 2011, 10:27
David - I dont know you, so I have no basis for trusting you or not. On the basis of your posts, as that is all I have to go by, I would trust you.

I am delighted that you have given your view; I would have rather you said that in your opinion we shouldnt be worried about the conversion route for NPPL holders (if that is what you mean, because your post could also be interpreted to mean we dont need to worry about the conversion report being published soon, which was the question, not should we be worried about their findings) and left it at that.

Sorry if I am making an issue but the trend today annoys me of people making out they have information on the basis of which they can give assures without being prepared to disclose that information. It smaks too much of this whole process which has throughout been plagued by half truths, leaks, retractions and the usual nonesense which results in there being very little trust left between anyone. Not a happy state of affairs.

David Roberts
17th Nov 2011, 13:41
Fuji,

My intent was 'you need not worry about the conversion report in terms of conditions, based on what I know at this stage on the draft'.

When one works - voluntarily I add in my case - in a lead role for some of the main GA representative organisations in both the UK and Europe, which I have doing for 10 years now, one gets better results by playing by the rules of engagement. Which means not always being able to disclose every twist and turn of discussions and negotiations in an evolving environment where no one knows all the answers or even some of the answers. We do not negotiate in public, but we try to keep people informed reasonably from time to time of the main developments.

Anyway you can look me up as Chairman of the RAeC, President of Europe Air Sports, immediate past Chairman of the BGA, Secretary and past Chairman of NPLG Ltd, and member of the GA Alliance. I meet regularly with top level officials at EASA and the Commission as well as the UK CAA.

And I use my real name on this forum, which is another reason for being circumspect sometimes. Further, I deal in facts and try to avoid speculation. If I thought there was something in the pipeline to be worried about I would try and say so, within the limits I describe.

BTW, I wonder how it is that a large part of the LAPL licences are very similar to the UK NPPL and other UK comparable qualifications? Co-incidence?

IO540
17th Nov 2011, 15:53
On a related issue, has there been any progress on the medical front?

For example there is the present distinction between the Initial medical and the Renewal medical. In general terms, the UK and every other Euro CAA has allowed Demonstrated Ability (DA) on the latter but not the former. This is a corruption of the "safety system" because when you go on the BA 747 to Orlando, the two pilots up front have been flying on Renewal medicals for many years, so they have been allowed essentially unlimited uncorrected vision defects, unlimited uncorrected hearing loss, etc. Whereas any "Euro" IR has never been accessible to any initial applicant who fails the JAA audiogram in just one ear (except via a very complicated roundabout route which takes years to do, and may not even be available today) and I believe this remains the case for the FCL008 IR.

In 2008 I spoke face to face with Eric Sivel who said EASA will end this distinction, and will allow DA on initial medicals too - which is more or less what the FAA does.

David Roberts
17th Nov 2011, 16:06
Don't know the answer to that one.

Part Med, being Annex III of forthcoming Air Crew Regulation (i.e. Part FCL), is be published in the OJ towards the end of this month, and the AMCs are due in December. The Implementing Rules (Annex III) are believed to be the same as in the EASA Opinion 2010-07 at:
EASA - Opinions (http://easa.europa.eu/agency-measures/opinions.php)

BEagle
17th Nov 2011, 16:20
NPLG Ltd is purely a licence recommendation company only. It does not agree NPPL policy, that is the responsibility of the NPPL Policy and Steering Committee.

The Chairman of the NPPL P&SC has yet to see the draft conversion report; nevertheless, he is grateful to David for letting him know that it does actually exist and will be asking the CAA for a copy soonest!

Mind you, as David has said, there probably won’t be anything to worry about!

In 2008 I spoke face to face with Eric Sivel....

But to which one? ;) (Sorry - cheap shot!).

IO540
17th Nov 2011, 19:23
May be a cheap shot but I know exactly what you mean.

But hey you were sitting to my right Beagle so there are two of us who can identify the individual :)

tismee
19th Nov 2011, 11:08
While on the subject of EASA licensing , does anyone know how these changes will affect someone holding a non JAA license , namely an Australian CASA PPL license .
I had planned to convert to CAA at some stage in the not too distant future .
How does the conversion to EASA go?
Am i best to wait and convert directly to EASA and avoid the CAA ? Is this possible? Cheers .

B4aeros
19th Nov 2011, 11:52
tismee,

Either way you will need to pass a skills test.

The JAR licence you get from the CAA will expire after 5 years & will need another cheque to turn into an EASA licence.

Direct to EASA will also involve written exams in air law & human performance & a minimum of 100 hours flight time.

C1.2 of Lasors (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=175&pagetype=90&pageid=4458)
Penultimate page of EASA draft regulation (http://www.easa.eu.int/agency-measures/docs/opinions/2010/04/Draft%20Commission%20Regulation%20on%20personnel%20licensing %20%28LW%29.pdf)

tismee
20th Nov 2011, 03:02
Thanks B4a , id say ill go directly for the EASA ticket.
Does these changes mean that the examining officers will be working for EASA and not the CAA . Will the current CAA examiners testing privildges carry over to EASA. Will EASA handle all the paperwork / applications ect ?

22/04
20th Nov 2011, 07:05
I think the CAA will become a competent authority it's a well set up procedure under European Law.


So they will be doing the testing in the UK at least, but they won't be making the rules any more.

IanPZ
4th Dec 2011, 17:19
So, just out of interest as there seem to be NPPL experienced people on this thread, what do you think will happen with NPPL(M) route. If you have a microlight license, and then you convert it at some point in the near future to an NPPL(SSEA), then will you be able to get an LAPL on that basis, or not? All very confusing to me!

BillieBob
4th Dec 2011, 20:12
I think the CAA will become a competent authority it's a well set up procedure under European Law.It'll take more than EU law to make the UK CAA competent :}what do you think will happen with NPPL(M) routeNothing - microlights are not EASA aeroplanes. You may get some credit towards a LAPL, subject to a flight assessment, but that's it.

IanPZ
4th Dec 2011, 21:36
BillieBob, I don't think I explained myself clearly. I wasn't asking about NPPL(M) conversion to LAPL, but rather NPPL(M) -> NPPL(SSEA) -> LAPL.

If you look at the moment, its possibly to convert from NPPL(M) to NPPL(SSEA) relatively easily. The only next step on from that today (pre-EASA) is PPL, which wont count NPPL(M) training hours, so you have a sort of 2-class system, where you can get to the next step far easier if you did all your training on a light aircraft rather than 3Axis.

However, my understanding is that LAPL is meant to be very similar to NPPL(SSEA). As such, if you hold an NPPL(SSEA), whether via direct qualification, or via the NPPL(M) route, would it matter? All the more so as most of the light sport aircraft intended to match the LAPL qualification come from the 3Axis microlight stable, as I see it.

Does that make my question clearer? Ta. IPZ

BillieBob
5th Dec 2011, 08:14
As such, if you hold an NPPL(SSEA), whether via direct qualification, or via the NPPL(M) route, would it matter?Not in the slightest - it is only the qualification that matters, not how you achieved it.

IanPZ
5th Dec 2011, 22:52
So NPPL(SSEA) to LAPL will work different to NPPL to PPL? That's good news. Thanks. IPZ

proudprivate
15th Dec 2011, 12:32
Dear All,

This post is just to remind you all that you have until 23rd December to comment on the FCL.008 draft using EASA's crt tool (http://hub.easa.europa.eu/crt/docs).

In the link you see the current documents under discussion. You register (a two minute job), then log in and give your input on FCL.008, for example,

* on automatic conversion of the UK IMC rating into an En-Route Instrument Rating
* on the possibility to keep the UK IMC rating as a national rating in place (as was promised by Mr. Eric Sivel on several occasions)
* on automatic conversion of third party ICAO instrument ratings
* on grandfathering flight privileges
* on glider flight in IMC

Especially regarding the first two points, I think it is very useful that pilots put forward all reasoned arguments to make the case. EASA is obliged to give at the very least a reasoned response.

Good luck and happy writings...

bookworm
15th Dec 2011, 12:50
Perhaps most important is to express support for the competence-based modular IR and the enroute IR in the NPA. Without those, some of the other points are likely to prove difficult. Note that:

* automatic conversion of the UK IMC rating into an En-Route Instrument Rating
* the possibility to keep the UK IMC rating as a national rating in place

are not proposals in the NPA.

proudprivate
15th Dec 2011, 14:06
Note that:
* automatic conversion of the UK IMC rating into an En-Route Instrument Rating
* the possibility to keep the UK IMC rating as a national rating in place
are not proposals in the NPA.


That is exactly why we have an NPA process. So that proper amendments and additions can be proposed, provided of course they are well reasoned and married to the findings of the impact study or, should the impact study be incomplete or inaccurate, to amended conclusions of that impact study.

It is not a yes saying exercise. It is one of the few opportunities that organisations, flying groups or even individuals have to contribute to proposed regulation. If a quarter of the UK flying community comments to the effect that they want to adjust the NPA so as to include the above two points, it will take a significant amount of departmental thickness to ignore it completely.

bookworm
15th Dec 2011, 16:05
Agreed, but be aware of the scope. You might also want to slip in that you'd like a G-V for Christmas. Just like a request to keep the IMC rating in place as a national rating, it's likely to get a 'noted' response.

On the specific point, the explanatory note to the NPA says in para 7

Although the conversion of existing IMC ratings is not within the scope of this task, the
Agency is aware that this issue is closely linked to it. This NPA provides several options
for pilots with prior instrument experience to be credited towards the new ratings.
However, it should be mentioned at this stage that a conversion of existing IMC ratings is
already covered by the draft Commission Regulation laying down technical requirements
and administrative procedures related to civil aviation aircrew pursuant to Regulation
(EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council. This draft Regulation
clearly defines that Member States should convert existing licences and ratings into Part-
FCL licences and ratings. It is highlighted in this Regulation that Member States should
aim at allowing pilots to, as far as possible, maintain their current scope of activities and
privileges. The Agency already discussed this issue with the CAA UK and industry experts
in order to identify possible options for UK IMC holders. The most favourable solution
seems to be that a Part-FCL licence and an IR will be issued with certain conditions on
the basis of a specific conversion report in order to reflect the current privileges held.
This would allow the existing UK IMC holders to continue to exercise their IMC privileges.

I would have thought that you would want the privileges of this 'conditional IR' to extend to approaches rather than 'automatic conversion ... into an En-Route Instrument Rating'.

David Roberts
15th Dec 2011, 16:40
From information I gleaned yesterday 'over the water' I understand there are a significant number of comments coming in against the proposed EIR. I suspect from some continental NAAs and ATM organisations, amongst others.

Whatever the arguments about the efficacy of the EIR (well debated in the forums), on balance it should be regarded as a positive step I believe. It is part of a package approach by EASA linked with the new IR.

Therefore as many as possible should submit supportive comments on the EASA CRT to both the IR and the EIR. This is once in a generation chance to make a significant change is this area - and long overdue. It will not come again for many years. So please switch from forum writing to CRT writing (and BTW, I suggest to draft your comments off-line, save them then copy on to the CRT online. Saves a lot of annoyance when the internet or the CRT goes down and you have to start all over again from scratch).

horizon flyer
15th Dec 2011, 17:08
Looks like a typical overpaid over complicated goverment website to put you off leaving a comment. So simple instructions on how to actual place a comment would not go a miss. But do ESASA realy want them. Research shows British airspace is 400% safer than German airspace for VFR pilots because we have the IMC rating, but ESASA does seem to want to reduce safety not increase it, as is their mission statement. Question can they be sued in the European Court of Human Rights for reducing the safety of pilots in British airspace.

proudprivate
15th Dec 2011, 21:27
Agreed, but be aware of the scope. You might also want to slip in that you'd like a G-V for Christmas. Just like a request to keep the IMC rating in place as a national rating, it's likely to get a 'noted' response.


Well you could argue an either / or solution. Either you convert the IMC into an Enroute Instrument Rating; Or you convert it into an Enroute Instrument Rating, limited to UK airspace; Or you grandfather the UK IMC privileges.

As noted above, there is a significant safety benefit in doing this, as it avoids people losing currency because not being able to fly legally anymore and then risking their lives skud running.

One should also discuss the economic impact and the need for proportionality in regulation.

To claim that all this is "out of scope", comparing it to wishing a G-V for Christmas sounds a bit off the mark to me. Especially as people on the continent seem to comment against the EIR, grandfathering of UK IMC rights would then be the most sensible solution.

Sure, the EASA drone can write 1000 times "noted" everytime she doesn't like what she's reading, but with the pressure on Kneepkens sufficiently high that he's organizing a survey about himself, I doubt that properly motivated comments would be just ignored at this time. Kneepkens would do so at his peril.

Besides, I couldn't afford a Gulfstream V jet. But some proper, honest, safety enhancing and user friendly regulation improvements would be welcome.

BEagle
16th Dec 2011, 13:54
Well, I've just spent a thrilling morning uploading 33 NPA responses from 2 different organisations to the CRT.....:\

There are now over 500 responses logged, so it'll be a pretty busy New Year for the €urocrats!

trevs99uk
17th Dec 2011, 18:27
The other question which needs a lot of response to.

On the NPA is Night flying....

and that the EIR should also be valid at NIGHT...

dublinpilot
17th Dec 2011, 18:42
What points would you suggest be made on night flight, apart from the EIR should be valid at night, or is that the only one you are suggesting?

salvapatuel
19th Dec 2011, 18:53
The 8th April 2012 confusses me a bit. i am training to get my PPL(A), I have already 35hs and 2 ground exams completed. It seems that if I complete the ground exams before 8th April 2012 my license will be converted to EASA. But do you know what happens if I finish after that date? Do I have to start again with my ground exams?

thanks

BEagle
19th Dec 2011, 19:53
So far I've seen the NPA responses from AOPA(UK), UK CAA, IAOPA (EU) and PPL/IR (EU). All propose that EIR privileges should be extended to night if the pilot also holds a valid night rating / qualification.

The EIR certainly has the potential to extend the privileges of VFR-only pilots to include en-route flight under circumstances which require mandatory compliance with IFR, whether in VMC or IMC. Any organisational opposition to the EIR is likely to be from the self-interest of certain NAAs or ATS providers, who need to be addressed with the old RAF aircrew opinion "No stick = no vote!". Ground pounding Untermensch are only there to provide a service to the two-winged Herrenvolk; now and again they need to be reminded of that fact!

Regarding PPL exams, the CAA assure me that you can continue to take whichever exams are current at the time; provided that you don't exceed the normal validity periods any previous passes will still be acceptable after Apr 2012. But your flying school should really be getting to grips with this!

Whopity
19th Dec 2011, 19:54
If you finish before 30 June you will get a JAA Licence that will automatically become an EASA licence however; you will have to pay to have it reissued after 5 years. If you apply after 1 July you will get an EASA licence with lifetime validity.Do I have to start again with my ground exams?Not much point there aren't any other exams; EASA has none.

The only real difference under EASA is that all exams have to be passed in 6 sittings; so some papers will have to be combined.

Maoraigh1
19th Dec 2011, 20:17
I hope there are no extra restrictions put on the 70 hours needed to convert a CAA ICAO to an EASA PPL. I've several hundred hours solo in C150/152/172 and Pa28/38, but nowhere near 70 in them in the last 5 years. I've done over 1000 in a DR1050, with 70+ in the last year. It isn't an EASA aircraft.

Slopey
19th Dec 2011, 21:17
BEagle, while you're here could you please provide a reference for your post on the "To IMC or Not To IMC" whereby you posted:


Some more clarification from the CAA regarding the IMCR:

1. Pilots may continue training for the IMCR for as long as they wish.
2. The IMCR may be included in a JAR-FCL or old-style UK PPL until 30 Jun 2012.
3. The IMCR may be included in a supplementary United Kingdom PPL after 30 Jun 2012.
4. An IMCR may be used on EASA and non-EASA aeroplanes until Apr 2015 (for private purposes).
5. An IMCR may be used on non-EASA aeroplanes indefinitely.
6. The precise method for grandfathering existing IMCR privileges onto EASA part-FCL licences is as yet unknown, as is the cut-off date for such grandfathering.
7. Grandfathered IMC privileges on EASA part-FCL licences may be used on both EASA and non-EASA aeroplanes indefintely.


I'm going to have trouble getting the IMCr scheduled in before April, but Jun will be perfectly feasible - also no 7 - indefinitely would be fantastic - but do you have a reference for the above to put my mind to rest?

Much appriciated,
S.

BEagle
19th Dec 2011, 22:00
I cannot give you a direct reference; some of those points are already in the public domain (see http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/620/e-Sept2011_v3.pdf ) and others were made in a private e-mail from a senior CAA licensing member.

AOPA intends to press for greater clarification early next year; however, you may rest assured that the CAA firmly intends to protect the future continuance of the IMCR beyond mere 'grandfathering'.

The CAA's response to NPA 2011-16 may be viewed at http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/620/20111214EASACRTNPA201116V3.pdf ; see Item #427.

Whopity
19th Dec 2011, 22:15
Have you tried looking here (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?gid=2061)?

robin
19th Dec 2011, 23:21
I've done over 1000 in a DR1050, with 70+ in the last year. It isn't an EASA aircraft.

The last I heard, the hours in the Jodel don't count towards your EASA PPL validity.

BEagle
20th Dec 2011, 08:19
The last I heard, the hours in the Jodel don't count towards your EASA PPL validity.

And what was the source of that particular piece of nonsense?

Whopity
20th Dec 2011, 09:41
The last I heard, the hours in the Jodel don't count towards your EASA PPL validity.But there are currently No EASA licences in existence! The UK will not start to issue them until 1 July 2012. Until then hours are hours, but once you have an EASA licence then hours flown on non EASA aircraft will not count towards the revalidation by experience illustrating the stupidity of the people at EASA.

How will an Examiner know what paperwork your aircraft has when signing your rating? Will they even be bothered, who will check on them? It is all open to abuse because of the share stupidity of it all.

robin
20th Dec 2011, 11:31
It may well have changed but I seem to recall that the CAA had to make a decision that flight time in an EASA aircraft counted towards the UK -specific licences.

What the CAA couldn't state was that flight time in non-EASA aircraft (Annexe II/Permit) would count towards the EASA requirements. That was something for EASA to agree. Remember they only have competence(!) over the types on their list.

Someone please tell me I'm wrong cos it certainly sounds a lot of rubbish

Whopity
20th Dec 2011, 11:52
Authority to convert National licences to EASA licences is delegated to the CAA. They decide.

There is a tendency to misinterpret things and whilst training in a non EASA aircraft after a certain date may not be valid for the issue of an EASA licence, conversion of existing licences is a different issue.

Actually, there is no such thing as an EASA PPL. Each State has its own exams; conducts flying training in its own unique way, all of which generically meet the rather vague syllabus requirement, which was provided by AOPA. Finally, each State issues its own licence where the only common part is the four letters EASA.

bookworm
20th Dec 2011, 12:39
The last I heard, the hours in the Jodel don't count towards your EASA PPL validity.

Part-FCL is not clear cut on this. This is one of the miscellaneous points to be resolved in FCL.002. I'm hopeful that sense will prevail.

Slopey
20th Dec 2011, 12:48
BEagle/Whopity,

Thanks for those links/info - I was hoping there'd be something in stone about pushing the date back to the end of June, but as there doesn't seem to be any specifics as yet, I'll just have to bite the bullet and attempt to have the rating in hand by April.

Cheers,
S.

BEagle
20th Dec 2011, 19:31
Whopity, I hate to say this - but are you losing it? Sorry, mate, but I'm not the first to have opined that of late.

UK CAA has made it quite clear that SEP hours are SEP hours are SEP hours - and whether on Annex II or EASA aeroplanes will certainly count for SEP Class Rating revalidation purposes, irrespective of the licence within which the Rating is included.

David Roberts
20th Dec 2011, 20:52
I can confirm the last message from Beagle. The CAA has said / written that (once you have an EU PPL) hours flown on an aeroplane (whether an aeroplane within the scope of EASA airworthiness regulations or on a 'non EASA' - i.e. Annex II - aeroplane) can count towards maintaining the recency requirements of your EU licence.

I took up this point with both EASA and the UK CAA earlier this year. The wording in part FCL (now Aircrew Regulation) is generic on this point, using the words 'category of aircraft', which means aeroplane, or helicopter, or glider or balloon (the respective licences) without qualification as to whether the said category was an 'EASA' or 'non-EASA' aircraft.

robin
20th Dec 2011, 22:01
Thanks for that. The last bit of correspondence I had from the CAA was some time ago where they said they weren't able to give that assurance on behalf of EASA.

Thank goodness common sense has prevailed

David Roberts
21st Dec 2011, 08:24
EASA has published the AMC and GM for Part FCL (now Regulation Aircrew).

Here is the Explanatory note link:

http://easa.europa.eu/agency-measures/docs/agency-decisions/2011/2011-016-R/Explanatory%20Note%20to%20Decision%20-%20AMC%20and%20GM%20to%20Part-FCL.pdf

And here are the AMCs and GM link

http://easa.europa.eu/agency-measures/docs/agency-decisions/2011/2011-016-R/AMC%20and%20GM%20to%20Part-FCL.pdf

In the index (which unhelpfully only provides paragraph reference numbers to the main text in FCL) you can click on the index text and this will take you to the relevant part of the document.

robin
21st Dec 2011, 08:43
David

I've scanned through the link but can't see anything about revalidation conditions for the PPL(A). I can see lots about the course content and entry requirements but nothing about the on-going maintenance of the licence. Have you a reference for that?

David Roberts
21st Dec 2011, 09:41
The recency requirements (to maintain the licence) are in the published Air Crew Regulation (i.e. Implementing Rules which sit above the AMCs) at:

EUR-Lex - Official Journal - 2011 - L 311 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:311:SOM:EN:HTML)

See section:
FCL.060(b) on page 13 (for pax carrying)
FCL.140A for LAPL(A) page 17

I cannot find the equivalent to the LAPL(A) in the PPL (A) requirements in terms of recency but I recall a while ago asking this question of my EASA contact - I'll try to find the answer.

On top of that, maintenance of one's medical of course.

BEagle
21st Dec 2011, 11:28
The part-FCL PPL is a lifetime licence, so does not itself have any revalidation criteria as such.

The revalidation requirements for SEP Class Ratings are described in FCL.740A sub-pararaph (b) on .pdf page 40/200:

(b) Revalidation of single-pilot single-engine class ratings.

(1) Single-engine piston aeroplane class ratings and TMG ratings. For revalidation of single-pilot single-engine piston aeroplane class ratings or TMG class ratings the applicant shall:

(i) within the 3 months preceding the expiry date of the rating, pass a proficiency check in the relevant class in accordance with Appendix 9 to this Part with an examiner; or

(ii) within the 12 months preceding the expiry date of the rating, complete 12 hours of flight time in the relevant class, including:
— 6 hours as PIC,
— 12 take-offs and 12 landings, and
— a training flight of at least 1 hour with a flight instructor (FI) or a class rating instructor (CRI). Applicants shall be exempted from this flight if they have passed a class or type rating proficiency check or skill test in any other class or type of aeroplane.

(2) When applicants hold both a single-engine piston aeroplane-land class rating and a TMG rating, they may complete the requirements of (1) in either class, and achieve revalidation of both ratings.

Out of interest, did anyone else find it impossible to download a copy of the .pdf to which David referred? The only way I was able to save a copy was to 'print' the whole thing using CutePDF Writer to create a .pdf replica.

kestrel539
21st Dec 2011, 13:10
No problem using Firefox and Foxit as the .pdf prog

David Roberts
21st Dec 2011, 13:21
Beagle, thanks for finding the reference.

I had no problem downloading. Suggest go to EASA website, news page, and click on the link there. The docs are the 2nd set from the bottom of the page.

shortstripper
24th Jan 2012, 19:59
Sorry to come back to all this yet again but I'm flippin confused :{

I have an old UK PPL A (SEP and TMG) my ratings lapsed 10 months ago but I'm now looking to get flying again. I have a medical (class 2) booked this friday and expect to do some flying and revalidate by test before the end of March. What then? I'll need an EASA licence to fly my EASA falke (once it's in the air "another story" :ugh: ) so what's the best advice?

Apply for a JAR PPL and it will automatically become an EASA PPL? (will the EASA licence then be lifetime or 5 yearly?)

Wait until July, revalidate my ratings and apply for an EASA licence? (will I have to take other tests such as writtens ect if I do?)

Give up, sell the Falke and just fly PFA types on my old licence?

Anybody any idea of the most cost effective / easiest route, or is everyone just as confused as me? I have looked at the various CAA FAQ's ect but I'm lost in the detail :{

SS

B4aeros
24th Jan 2012, 20:34
If you apply for a JAR Licence, it will expire in five years & you will have to pay to renew it, at which point you would be given an EASA licence.

Your CAA licence & ratings will convert directly to an EASA licence; the requirements for going from CAA-->EASA are identical to the CAA-->JAR requirements, so there's really no advantage to the JAR route. The CAA's handy guide (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=620&pagetype=90&pageid=11675) has the details, p19.

I think you will need to have valid ratings before applying for an EASA licence.

shortstripper
25th Jan 2012, 11:47
Thanks ... That does seem the best way, I just needed it pointed out. :ok:

BEagle
25th Jan 2012, 13:05
shortstripper, all you need to do is to revalidate your class rating(s) in the normal way, then convert your UK licence to an EASA licence at some point in time between July 2012 and Apr 2015.

There is really no need to rush.