8che - It doesn't to me either. It suggests to me that the rating only has to be current to exercise the right. The clincher comes to when converting from a national licence or JAR licence to an EASA one - you have to have a relevant current rating. It should be the case that someone who wants to convert and has a current rating on a foreign licence therefore can demonstrate they have the exerience and skill to hold the licence should be able to. Once you have it, you can let it lapse or keep it going on your foreign rating.
This is my (I like to think common sense) interpretation. However, you have to remember that we are dealing with the UK CAA here who don't employ common sense, have a history of making arbitary and inconsistant rulings, and as far as the new regs are concerned, don't seem to know their @rse from their elbow.
All I can do is quote CAP804 and offer my interpretation. I have asked the CAA for theirs, but haven't yet had a reply. In previous dealings and correspondence, they have just quoted the regs (usually with the addition "read LASORS, it's all in there") and pilots have had to wait to find out if they were successful with their application by return post. This time it's different, because they are going to have to follow EASA policy with little power to interpret the new FCL.
(4) Aeroplane or helicopter type ratings may be issued to holders of Part-FCL licences that comply with the requirements for the issue of those ratings established by a third country. Such ratings will be restricted to aircraft registered in that third country. This restriction may be removed when the pilot complies with the requirements in paragraph C.1 of Annex III to Part-FCL.
Thanks for signing the petition, we are up to nearly 90 signees and counting. But please keep spreading the word as obviously the more people who sign up will add weight to our cause. Even pilots not planning to return back to the UK should be encouraged to sign up as it helps the cause, plus, as we all know as expats, circumstances can change unexpectedly in the places we live and we may be coming home not of our own accord.
Last edited by Fart Master; 6th Jun 2012 at 06:13.
UK CAA 7 year rule for UK IR's. Petition and legal proceedings.
I've posted this on other forums, it may flesh out what we are proposing...
Dear fellow Aviators,
This information pertains to any pilot who has been issued a UK CAA professional licence (JAR or National) and have moved abroad to work under another ICAO licence;
If you possess a UK issued professional licence the publication to refer to is a manual called LASORS (LICENSING, ADMINISTRATION and STANDARDISATION, OPERATING REQUIREMENTS and SAFETY), this publication is valid until 1st July 2012 at which point CAP 804 will come into force as its replacement under EU-OPS. CAP 804 is the UK CAA's version of Part-FCL (Previously called JAR-FCL).These 2 documents lay out how to attain, maintain and if necessary revalidate your licence.
The matter to which I draw your attention pertains to holders of a UK CAA issued Instrument Rating (IR), more specifically, the requirements for renewing that rating. Up to and including LASORS 2008 there was a clause in Section E of the publication that took into account the utilisation of your ICAO (In this case non UK) or military IR. I quote/paraphrase directly from LASORS 2008;
"To renew an IR(A) that has expired by more than 7 years, applicants must: ...For multi-pilot aircraft pass a type rating skill test with or observed by a UK CAA Flight Operations Training Inspector. Applicants will also be required to retake the IR(A) theoretical knowledge examinations."
However, and most importantly for the affected pilots (Mostly expats);
"...where IR privileges have been exercised in another category of aircraft (i.e. UK/JAR IR(H)) or under the privileges of an ICAO licence (Aeroplanes and Helicopters) or under a UK military IR qualification (fixed-wing or rotary), the renewal requirements will be based on the expiry date of that IR."
In other words as long as you kept your other ICAO IR valid your UK IR was safe from the 7 year renewal rule and most importantly we wouldn't have to undergo the ridiculous requirement to resist the 7 theory exams, the very same exams on which our CPL/ATPL's are predicated.
Now the bad news, WITHOUT ANY PRIOR WARNING, the CAA removed the ICAO/Military caveat, in an instant rendering 100's of UK issued IR's invalid. The authority state that the rule shouldn't have been there in the first place and was therefor removed, this despite all the other JAR authorities entering into the spirit of the agreement and renewing licences/IR's that had expired by more than 7 years when the pilot produced reasonable proof that he/she had stayed current, for example, flown for an airline. The CAA took the rule at face value and applied it literally, with no thought of the consequences. They have in effect taken away our careers as a licence without an IR is basically worthless. When queried recently as to why they didn't pre warn us of the impending change, and after all they are very quick to criticise us for not referring to the CAA website for these matters, the reply was.... They didn't want to potentially upset our families in case we were deceased. So you see what we're up against... Nuff said really. Although not confirmed, it may be the case that you have to go to an approved school to do your ground studies, obviously completely unacceptable given most of our circumstances.
I haven't got enough space to go into all the details and futile attempts we have made to get the CAA to see sense, so what a few of us are doing is taking legal advice to challenge, not the rule change itself, but the way in which the change was implemented, in effect, without any warning. We have also sent our case to an MP who has stated he will pass it onto the Minister of Transport. The CAA have admitted 'that they could have communicated the change better', the implication being that there was some communication in the first place, which was not the case.
Without even considering the fact that they are treating professional pilots like novices, consideration is also being given to legally pursuing the costs that the authority have in effect imposed on us if we have to do the 7 ground exams. Ground courses, costs of books, exam fees and other incidental costs. As we all know money is a big part of the CAA's thinking, so several hundred pilots multiplied by several thousands of pounds costs each may get them to pay attention and not hide behind their rule books?
So, what can you could do to help? An online petition has been created to add weight to our cause, the link is below, and I ask that you add your signature and a message if you wish. Equally important is that you spread the word to other affect colleagues who don't read PPRuNe. We are preparing and planning to lodge a legal complaint prior to the introduction of CAP 804 so that we have date stamped our claim based on LASORS regulations. Even pilots who don't plan to return to EASA land should be encouraged to sign up, as you never know what path your career may take.
Personal enquiries/complaints to the CAA, your MP and EASA should also be a consideration to keep the pressure up on the authority.
We are at 201 signatures and counting, however, can all of you ask other affected pilots who don't read PPRuNe to sign up as well. We only have until Sept 17th to lodge a legal complaint as LASORS will be obsolete and CAP804 will come into force at which point I presume the CAA can wash their hands of this and pass it on to EASA.
Last edited by Fart Master; 12th Jun 2012 at 20:04.
Just seen this thread and signed FM's petition. I have recently done the exams again. What a waste of money. Learning about outdated charts and plates and Boing EFIS. I fly Airbus and when I queried if it was sensible to learn incorrect information and study a different aircraft type to the one I was currently flying I got the reply that that was the sylabus and hard luck. No response on whether this was a good idea on safety grounds. Called a TRTO regarding the sim and was told that in the eyes of the CAA failing to renew the UK/JAA IR within 7 years relegates us to the position of cadets fresh out of college. Charming. Tried reading CAP804 but cannot find anything equivalent to the old LASORS reference to ICAO IRs being acceptable for up to 7 years. Now all I can find is a reference to the IR not being renewed for 7 years. Have I missed something or does this mean that an ICAO IR now counts?
As things stand we are still in talks with a law company and the government. I have a couple of small requests of everybody who is involved/affected by this ruling;
1. We have received a reply from the government. The Minister of Transport is now aware of our case. The first letter we received contained 2 interesting points. Firstly she admitted that the guidance that the CAA provided was in error. An admission of guilt? Secondly she stated that the rules had been in place for 12 years, we can only assume that she was referring to the creation of JAR? We're not exactly sure what she means. Anyway, we have written back to the MP requesting more information whilst also fleshing out our case. This includes informing them that there is a petition online. I think this will make them realise that we are serious in regards to this matter. So my request to you is to get as many to sign up as possible. Our thanks in advance.
2. As we are now approaching the point where we may be looking at taking legal action, the two of us leading the case would appreciate any other legal angles in addition to what has already been provided, that you feel may be appropriate to help us apply pressure to the CAA/Govt.
One thing is for sure if we give up now then we're guarenteed not to have a favourable outcome. If you are willing, keep writing letters/e-mails or phone to show your displeasure at what is going on.
Good to hear. I've recently sent an email to the Dept of transport with reference to this, along with to the caa with the usual refer to lasors reply. I think we have a good case, these people are human and will try and find the easy way out. Its up to us to apply the pressure to ensure that is not the case.
Absolutely, everyone needs to campaign individually as well. We need to make them understand that it is not going to go away.
More 'good' news, I read LASORS this morning and have discovered that when you turn up to put a type on your UK licence all you'll get back is a CPL without an IR. you need to have an IR to maintain an ATPL with a muli pilot type.
I have just spoken to someone who works for the government and asked what the affected pilots should do. His answer was to write to your MP, even if you don't live in the UK. If you have property include your address in your letter of protest.
Also mention that the Transport Ministry has in some way admitted some degree of error, in that they admit the CAA's 'guidance was in error'
Time is short, even if it's just a couple of paragraphs it will help. The change.org page can also be copied and pasted.
I am in the same boat, friends of mine from other European countries are not having this issue their authorities simply issue a restriction to A6 aircraft only, until a JAR OPC is carried out. You simply send you local paperwork to them each OPC and you current!! Easy, it just the UK being anal.
I'm lucky to hold an Irish passport as well as my UK one, and so I asked the IAA if they would issue me a license based on my "expired" UK and current UAE. They said no problem and now I'm a current JAR license holder again, albiet with an A6 restriction.
If anyone has this option, its at least worth thinking about, however there are cost involved, but nothing like resitting the exams and sim in the UK!
I'm glad I contacted my MP he is now in the loop and in contact with the M of T regarding our cause. I urge others to kindly do the same. This is useful if you don't have your MP's contact details Search (Find Your MP) - UK Parliament
The problem is, is that we don't have IR's any more, it's not really a type rating issue, although I have just discovered that I can't even put an A330 on my UK licence on it as it is a multi-crew aircraft, and for that I need...guess what...an IR, so it goes from the sublime to the ridiculous. Presumably I have to back to the UK and put a C150/PA28 on my licence. (Now a CPL without IR, as you can't have an ATPL without an IR)
Everytime this situation is discussed we always come back to the same point, it's a paperwork exercise.
"Bureaucracy winning over reality and practicality"
And oddly enough a reply from the DoT today accepting a mistake was made in the LASORS but telling me TOUGH. Copied below - only took them 5 weeks to reply.
Thank you for your enquiry of 14 July about the requirements for maintaining instrument ratings.
I am sorry to hear about the difficulty that you are facing in maintaining an instrument rating. Unfortunately the amendment of LASORS in December 2010 was made to correct an error in the guidance and did not reflect a change of policy. The UK Air Navigation Order does not allow credit against the requirement to take the Instrument Rating (IR) exams on the basis of non-UK civil qualifications where the UK rating has lapsed for over seven years.
The UK adopted the European JAR-FCL requirements as its national standard for most pilot licences from the year 2000 onwards. At that time it was decided that, to reduce regulatory burden and complexity, the JAR-FCL requirements for revalidations, renewals and the addition of ratings would also be applied to the equivalent UK non-JAR licences. This was formalised through an amendment of the Air Navigation Order introduced the requirements for the renewal an IR on a UK licence. Therefore the requirement to retake the IR theoretical knowledge examinations has been a legal requirement since the year 2000.
I understand that the error in LASORS arose because other related JAR-FCL requirements gave National Aviation Authorities greater scope for flexibility where the expiry period was less than 7 years, and the CAA decided to give UK licence holders credit for IRs they held on licences issued in other countries. These credit arrangements were set out in the CAA’s advisory publication LASORS. However, the text of LASORS stated that the requirement to retake the lR(A) theoretical knowledge examinations for IRs that had lapsed by more than 7 years would not apply to pilots with UK military or other civilian IRs that had not lapsed by more than 7 years. Unfortunately, this was incorrect and contrary to the Air Navigation Order. When this was discovered during a review in 2010, the CAA amended LASORS to correct the wording to align with UK law.
As you may be aware, new EU flight crew licensing requirements, know as Part-FCL, have recently been adopted. Part-FCL also requires the retaking of the theoretical knowledge examinations where instrument ratings have lapsed by more than 7 years. Part-FCL is contained in directly applicable EU legislation and all EU licence holders will have to comply with its requirements.
In the last day or two, we have hard evidence that other authorities are, subject to approval on presentation of paperwork from their current employer, PPC forms etc., allowing JAR pilots affected by this ruling to renew their licences and IR's. This is a clear case of discrimination under EU law, and we will be sending this information to the CAA within a week. BALPA agree with this point of view.
BALPA are helping us, so may I suggest for £24 per year you become associate members, it's only fair given their help in this matter.
As you all know, when you correspond with the authority they ALWAYS refer you to LASORS, so, regarding the ICAO caveat in LASORS, there was absolutely no reference to the ANO or any JAR-FCL references in this regard, therefore it could be argued in court that a normal pilot would have no inclination or idea that the caveat was there in error.
Last edited by Fart Master; 15th Aug 2012 at 10:45.