No need to be an ATO or RTF !
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No need to be an ATO or RTF !
Was passed this by PPrune user GLA who has made some posts about Glasgow Airport here: http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...ly-august.html
S/He got in touch with me because their latest posts have been awaiting moderation for a week or so and not appeared on that thread.
So, it appears from the CAA that you don't need to be an ATO or RTF to carry out EASA SEP flight training!
Even though, as both s/he and I read it, ORA.GEN.205 (d) below, doesn't actually remove the need for "the necessary authorisation or approval when required".
AMC1 ORA.GEN.205 Contracted activities
RESPONSIBILITY WHEN CONTRACTING ACTIVITIES
(a) The organisation may decide to contract certain activities to external organisations.
(b) A written agreement should exist between the organisation and the contracted organisation
clearly defining the contracted activities and the applicable requirements.
(c) The contracted safety related activities relevant to the agreement should be included in the
organisation's safety management and compliance monitoring programmes.
(d) The organisation should ensure that the contracted organisation has the necessary
authorisation or approval when required, and commands the resources and competence to
undertake the task.
ps. I decided not to blank out the flying school details, and the airport name since it would be pretty obvious to anyone who the organisations were.
And the CAA have indicated they see nothing wrong with this.
My query is just to see what people think of this, and is it a neat way to have a central ATO "holding company" that could then sub-contract to individual operators and save them a load of CAA fees and paperwork. Bit like the NISA corner shop chains!
S/He got in touch with me because their latest posts have been awaiting moderation for a week or so and not appeared on that thread.
So, it appears from the CAA that you don't need to be an ATO or RTF to carry out EASA SEP flight training!
Even though, as both s/he and I read it, ORA.GEN.205 (d) below, doesn't actually remove the need for "the necessary authorisation or approval when required".
AMC1 ORA.GEN.205 Contracted activities
RESPONSIBILITY WHEN CONTRACTING ACTIVITIES
(a) The organisation may decide to contract certain activities to external organisations.
(b) A written agreement should exist between the organisation and the contracted organisation
clearly defining the contracted activities and the applicable requirements.
(c) The contracted safety related activities relevant to the agreement should be included in the
organisation's safety management and compliance monitoring programmes.
(d) The organisation should ensure that the contracted organisation has the necessary
authorisation or approval when required, and commands the resources and competence to
undertake the task.
ps. I decided not to blank out the flying school details, and the airport name since it would be pretty obvious to anyone who the organisations were.
And the CAA have indicated they see nothing wrong with this.
My query is just to see what people think of this, and is it a neat way to have a central ATO "holding company" that could then sub-contract to individual operators and save them a load of CAA fees and paperwork. Bit like the NISA corner shop chains!
So, it appears from the CAA that you don't need to be an ATO or RTF to carry out EASA SEP flight training!
(d) The organisation should ensure that the contracted organisation has the necessary authorisation or approval when required,
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dundee
Age: 56
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the point of this post?
**** stirring by an amateur airfield operator?
Clearly the CAA have no interest as everything seems to be conducted legally.
Childish post
Clearly the CAA have no interest as everything seems to be conducted legally.
Childish post
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dundee
Age: 56
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strathaven Airfield
Colin,
Why are you posting this childish nonsense? The CAA have made it clear they are satisfied with Leading Edge’s operation at EGPF. Your post title is extremely misleading to the truth which I know you would have already known.
Who actually is GLA? Is it you? I don’t believe they have been moderated for over a week. Is GLA another alias of you? Show the post evidence that this isn’t **** stirring by yourself?
Why is the manager/owner of an insignificant operation even posting this about another GA organisation, extremely disingenuous towards Leading Edge if you ask me.
Quite frankly shameful behaviour from someone who claims to be professional.
Why are you posting this childish nonsense? The CAA have made it clear they are satisfied with Leading Edge’s operation at EGPF. Your post title is extremely misleading to the truth which I know you would have already known.
Who actually is GLA? Is it you? I don’t believe they have been moderated for over a week. Is GLA another alias of you? Show the post evidence that this isn’t **** stirring by yourself?
Why is the manager/owner of an insignificant operation even posting this about another GA organisation, extremely disingenuous towards Leading Edge if you ask me.
Quite frankly shameful behaviour from someone who claims to be professional.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Colin,
Why are you posting this childish nonsense? The CAA have made it clear they are satisfied with Leading Edge’s operation at EGPF. Your post title is extremely misleading to the truth which I know you would have already known.
Who actually is GLA? Is it you? I don’t believe they have been moderated for over a week. Is GLA another alias of you? Show the post evidence that this isn’t **** stirring by yourself?
Why is the manager/owner of an insignificant operation even posting this about another GA organisation, extremely disingenuous towards Leading Edge if you ask me.
Quite frankly shameful behaviour from someone who claims to be professional.
Why are you posting this childish nonsense? The CAA have made it clear they are satisfied with Leading Edge’s operation at EGPF. Your post title is extremely misleading to the truth which I know you would have already known.
Who actually is GLA? Is it you? I don’t believe they have been moderated for over a week. Is GLA another alias of you? Show the post evidence that this isn’t **** stirring by yourself?
Why is the manager/owner of an insignificant operation even posting this about another GA organisation, extremely disingenuous towards Leading Edge if you ask me.
Quite frankly shameful behaviour from someone who claims to be professional.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skydiver666,
The complications of the move from RTF to ATO and maybe now DTO are such that I believe they are strangling leisure and recreation flying.
I think it is an interesting concept that it appears from the CAA letter that a central organisation like the LAA, for example, could set themselves up as a ATO and then save flying schools time and cash getting their own ATO registrations.
To put it frankly, I have looked at a few options for SEP training here at Strathaven and the paperwork for a small operation is too much hassle. But if I - rather than the LAA, or whoever - could spend this winter doing it all and then "spread the love" with other small operators, then it could be worthwhile.
I don't believe in "insignificant" operations. I believe "many a mickle maks a muckle".
ps. Thanks for the epithet "amateur" - I always see it as prefixed by the word "gifted"!
pps. Your only posts seem to be in response to a few of my 700-odd pprune posts. One was would I like my finances online? Well, they now are! The airfield's accounts are here: Accounts: 2015-2016 and you can see that my family gets £36,000 a year rent and there are no staff costs - ie I am an unpaid worker here and so, you are correct, I am an "amateur" ! The Sportflight Scotland Ltd flying school's accounts are not public in detail, since that would reveal the flying instructor's earnings, but that overall total profits/losses are available with a google search.
We seem so opposite on so much that I am sure we could have a great evening over a few pints putting the world to rights!
The complications of the move from RTF to ATO and maybe now DTO are such that I believe they are strangling leisure and recreation flying.
I think it is an interesting concept that it appears from the CAA letter that a central organisation like the LAA, for example, could set themselves up as a ATO and then save flying schools time and cash getting their own ATO registrations.
To put it frankly, I have looked at a few options for SEP training here at Strathaven and the paperwork for a small operation is too much hassle. But if I - rather than the LAA, or whoever - could spend this winter doing it all and then "spread the love" with other small operators, then it could be worthwhile.
I don't believe in "insignificant" operations. I believe "many a mickle maks a muckle".
ps. Thanks for the epithet "amateur" - I always see it as prefixed by the word "gifted"!
pps. Your only posts seem to be in response to a few of my 700-odd pprune posts. One was would I like my finances online? Well, they now are! The airfield's accounts are here: Accounts: 2015-2016 and you can see that my family gets £36,000 a year rent and there are no staff costs - ie I am an unpaid worker here and so, you are correct, I am an "amateur" ! The Sportflight Scotland Ltd flying school's accounts are not public in detail, since that would reveal the flying instructor's earnings, but that overall total profits/losses are available with a google search.
We seem so opposite on so much that I am sure we could have a great evening over a few pints putting the world to rights!
If the DTO concept gets the go-ahead from the European Commission this month (and I do mean IF) then the move from RTF will be almost seamless - just fill in a form, submit a training programme and start training. No manuals, no audits, no SMS, no initial inspection, just an annual management review meeting and an activity return to the CAA.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: York
Age: 53
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BillieBob that ceratinly isn't what the CAA said at a recent roadshow.
They said they would be a requirement for manuals. Allthough they would approve certain commerical training manuals. They also said that there would be inspection visits to the DTO and that there would be fee's to pay and I got the impression it would be alot more than they are currently.
Of course I hope I'm wrong.
They said they would be a requirement for manuals. Allthough they would approve certain commerical training manuals. They also said that there would be inspection visits to the DTO and that there would be fee's to pay and I got the impression it would be alot more than they are currently.
Of course I hope I'm wrong.
