PPRuNe Forums

Go Back   PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Middle East
Forgotten your Username/Password?

Middle East Many expats still flying in Knoteetingham. Regional issues can be discussed here.


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 3rd Oct 2012, 11:49   #121 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 30
What is even more frustrating about this whole ridiculous situation is that the CAA appeared to have had no idea what effect the implementation of EASA rules would mean. Having personally renewed my JAA licence last year on the back of an A330 IRT which was 5 years old, I was advised I had 2 years to complete another one on the 330 or put the A380(with a skills test) on my licence as I had more than 500 hrs P1 time.

It now appears even that the goalposts have moved on that as CAP 804 states there is a time limit ( 6 months I think) between completion of the approved course and the skills test.

I wish someone in authority with some commonsense would sort this out !!!!

.
SANDBLASTER is offline   Reply
Old 3rd Oct 2012, 12:22   #122 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Crow Crag
Posts: 7
As mentioned, Cap 804 states the following regarding the exams -

Quote:
(d) If the IR(A) has not been revalidated or renewed within the preceding 7 years,
the holder will be required to pass again the IR theoretical knowledge
examination and skill test.
Until now, those airline pilots who did not want to fly single pilot IFR in their spare time just let their multi IR(A) lapse (almost all of us). However, this part of CAP804 implies that only a valid IR(A) within the preceding 7 years will keep the exam passes valid - there is no mention of a valid type rating achieving the same thing - is that just an oversight, or is that somewhere else in a document??

You will return to Europe one day with NOTHING on your licence and you will not even be able to do a type rating because you do not have a valid IR(A) and to get one you will have to do the full course. (How much?!)

Also, the fact that the validity period of the exams is 7 years from the date of the last check, while for the IR (A) it is 7 years from the date of expiry is just laughable!!!! Way to make things clear - who writes this $***? Written / proof read by chimps......

This whole thing is such an abuse of power by incompetent people.
MontyWithnail is offline   Reply
Old 4th Oct 2012, 09:54   #123 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 300
Well said Monty. I have followed, albeit a bit loosely, this thread & congrats to those who have got organized. You must sign up, as a body & get this jointly sorted. Press your home MP's & get questions asked in the House. I mentioned somewhere else that in the early 70's the CAA messed up again. Having completed a fully sponsored CPL/IR at an approved school (Oxford) & blissfully enjoying life as a RHS jet Jock outa LHR, the CAA blindly announced that the qualifyer for the ATPL would be an additional 5 hrs twin time. We all went mad, shouting & screaming but few did anything. BALPA did nothing. I wrote to the Head of the Board of Trade (that is what it was) and a Lord Boyd Carpenter wrote back & expressed that although it was frustrating, the Aviation Authority was obliged to set the professional standards very high. Yeah, too high Dad for a struggling jet jockey with two kids, huge mortgage & ageing Citroen Ami 8 ! 5 hrs in a twin com at 50 per hour (yes, it really was only 50 in those glory days but still beyond me). I threatened, amongst other things, to set fire to myself & my CPL outside the B.O.T. Offices & engaged a hit man from the Mafia. They quietly & reluctantly climbed down & stated the blindingly obvious " for those who have attended an "Approved" course of Training, the additional 5hrs will be waived.

I am not saying that I did it. Well, OK, I am. I did continue to look over my shoulder for the rest of my career. BUT, guys, get organized and fight these crass twerps for really messing up very straightforward joint rulings.
Landflap is offline   Reply
Old 4th Oct 2012, 15:30   #124 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwixt and between
Posts: 575
Quote:
Until now, those airline pilots who did not want to fly single pilot IFR in their spare time just let their multi IR(A) lapse (almost all of us). However, this part of CAP804 implies that only a valid IR(A) within the preceding 7 years will keep the exam passes valid - there is no mention of a valid type rating achieving the same thing - is that just an oversight, or is that somewhere else in a document??
It is more than possible that I don't fully understand these rules anymore. I always understood, under LASORS/JAA, your exams expired with more than seven years expiry of any IR or TR.

Regardless, I would have thought for anybody with a type rating, your old ME/IR is irrelevant. Surely the 737 300-900 series IR I have on my license which is required to hold a 300-900 type rating is thee relevant IR in this case. The 737 IR is re-validated/renewed every time I complete a 737 LPC so it has the same expiry.
Sciolistes is offline   Reply
Old 8th Oct 2012, 12:21   #125 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 172
Have BALPA made any progress regarding legal challenges or any flying abroad who have grouped together made any progress ....

Further to the other comments on here regarding instrument ratings, exams and flight training schools taking advantage. Eventually the UK airlines wont find experienced rated crews in the long distant future with time on type, if those abroad cannot come home ....
turbine100 is offline   Reply
Old 8th Oct 2012, 17:28   #126 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Desert
Posts: 19
CAP 804

My understanding is all JAA licences become automatically an EASA licence.
What about adding a type rating onto our EASA licence if you are currently flying the machine. Gotta be a way to add the rating to the licence than going through a full conversion course.
Before EASA was implemented 500 hours PIC was enough with a LPC ,and whoop it was in your licence.
All this EASA......what are they trying to achieve.
Doesn't make sense at all........
Sky Hooker is offline   Reply
Old 8th Oct 2012, 22:23   #127 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: by the fire
Posts: 108
Depends on whether you see these things as cock-up or conspiracy.

Normally I'd say that these things would be down to cock-up and a lack foresight by the regulators.

In this case I'm not so sure. There was a mechanism for dealing with foreign licences and ratings in JAR-FCL which appears to have been ignored or the consultation process has been subverted by the training industry. The onus now appears to be on an ATO to assess what training you need, then it's training as required and a full set of exams. Of course they have no financial interest in what they assessing you for so everything will be fine. Either that or they've looked at the Japanese and Chinese approach to licencing foreigners and seen the way forward.

It's also probably nothing to do with any protectionist instincts in the EU. Nothing at all.
spanner the cat is offline   Reply
Old 26th Dec 2012, 07:33   #128 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 135
Any update? I'm wading through these issues belatedly, having just found the forum (as I'm in NZ not the sandpit), but in the same boat. Has anyone actually converted their license to an EASA one yet? I'm considering flagging the IR for now and just getting my SEP current and then converting to an EASA ATPL, as the cheapest option. Is this sound?
G-LOST is offline   Reply
Old 29th Jan 2013, 04:11   #129 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 282
An update from the excellent team working on this issue:

Quote:
Hi everyone,
Just a very quick update as I know its been a long time since there has been any news. However we continue to try to get a successful resolution to this case.
The reason for so little news is that after a lot of correspondance with the CAA and DoT we have had to leave all the information with them and just wait to see what they will come up with. As things stood the UK were waiting for the whole of Europe to go EASA and then see what the lie of the land was. We have just received another e-mail from them saying that they are trying, with the French, to get an 'Article 14 (6)' exemption from EASA. Now, the email I received was a little unclear and I have asked whether this exemption is good or bad for us, I await the answer. It is difficult to get much info on Article 14(6), but it seems to refer to 'an equivalent level of protection' or something similar.
On another front another collegue of mine has been dealing with the DoT and has just informed me that their call to him was not negative, I'll leave it at that for the moment until we get more information. He is under the impression that there may be some news in a couple of months, which would seem sensible as everyone goes EASA on 8th April 2013.
So, we are just waiting to see. We have raised this to a european level, so hopefully the EASA states will realise that this is a global business and not some European flying school and that they recognise that we are just as proficient and current as our european collegues.
Cheers,
Also, for those of you with a UK / JAR licence that has not yet expired:

I spoke to the CAA yesterday who advised that you can convert your existing licence to an EASA licence with just a SRG 1104 form and a certified copy of your EASA Class One Medical, plus a certified copy of your UK revalidation page.

Although an IR on type is required for initial issue of an EASA licence it is NOT required for the conversion from a current UK/JAR licence as long as it hasn't expired.

The big catch is the 7-year rule on the IR test... To avoid having to re-sit all the Instr Nav ATPL exams you will have to definitely take an IR test on a type with an EASA-approved training organisation before the expiry. It is up to the training schools to decide how much training you need before proficiency, so even if you are current on a 777 you will have to prove your proficiency BEFORE you take an IR in the sim to revalidate your rating.

This is the bit that sucks obviously - as now lots of training schools will be offering (say) a 5-day course for current 777 Captains to 'renew' their rating when it's quite obvious that they are proficient already. This will be offered at great expense as an exploitation scam similar to the MCC course requirement that came into force for new licences about 12 years ago. It stinks, but I am sure most guys desperate for an EASA licence as job-security will prostitute themselves having no other option.

We can only hope that the above email quote will have some bearing on the situation
Mr Good Cat is offline   Reply
Old 29th Jan 2013, 04:50   #130 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: U.K.
Posts: 42
Just in case this hasn't come up already. Has anyone looked into converting UK issue ATPL to another JAR/EASA state which are happy to to accept LPC's from a country outside of Europe? At the end of the day a JAR/EASA license is the same no matter who issues it.
Cancel2LateLunches is offline   Reply
Old 29th Jan 2013, 09:37   #131 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 93
I think you either have to live in the country of issue or have another suitable reason to change.
I just had 2 mornings at CAA trying to get a type on my JAR Licence. To no avail, ended up with an EASA Licence though, this was by sheer luck as fortunately there was an English Lang examiner passing through in limbo with the rest of us.
So anyone thinking of doing what I did bear in mind.

1. English Lang 6 has to be written on your licence somewhere
2. You have to have an EASA licence, while the JAR is legally an EASA Licence they do not deal with them anymore.
3. The skill test must be conducted by an examiner approved by the CAA. There is a procedure for the examiner to follow to do this as laid out by the CAA and is a one off.
5. Must have 500 hours logged as of date of skill test
Enecosse is offline   Reply
Old 29th Jan 2013, 14:53   #132 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: DXB & FL 410
Posts: 825
Quote:
I think you either have to live in the country of issue or have another suitable reason to change.
A suitable reason being that other EASA country members recognise EK ratings for EK aircraft only, thereby avoiding the CAA's 7 year IR expiry rule..!!
Craggenmore is offline   Reply
Old 29th Jan 2013, 15:01   #133 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 282
Quote:
A suitable reason being that other EASA country members recognise EK ratings for EK aircraft only, thereby avoiding the CAA's 7 year IR expiry rule..!!
Wish that were true, but I've been told by the CAA that the 7-year rule applies to ALL EASA states now...

.. because this is the reason for EASA.

EASA is a common regulatory authority for the WHOLE collection of member states. Everything that is written is in stone for ALL states.

JAR was simply an advisory body for states to pick and choose from as they liked (except the Brits of course who abided to the letter). Now we have mandates to be adhered to...

Confused? (I am) and I expect that just like the EC most other states will find a get-out clause for their nationals while the UK and probably Germany stick steadfast to someone else's ideals.

Mr Good Cat is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2013, 11:54   #134 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 569
Update

Hi,

Just a quick update for those of you not in the petition, we are expecting a decision on the matter in the next few weeks. A proposal has been sent to EASA and is in the process of being presented to the European Commission.

I'll get back to you as soon as we have some news,

C.
Fart Master is offline   Reply
Old 12th Mar 2013, 11:31   #135 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Too far from the equator
Posts: 691
Licence Verification

While on the subject of the CAA , why does Licence Verification take ' up to 10 working days ' and boy are they taking the ten , cost 44 , and equate to two weeks pay I have missed out on ? So frustrating .
kotakota is offline   Reply
Old 21st Mar 2013, 21:16   #136 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: EU
Age: 29
Posts: 22
Type Rating

Hi Everyone,

I currently hold a UK/CAA Issued JAR ATPL ( Valid till 2016), with a 320 Type Rating from my previous Airline which Expired April 2012.

I currently Work in UAE flying A320, with my GCAA Licence.

Does anybody know what to do exactly with the new EASA conversion process?

I basically would like to keep my 320 Type Rating on my New EASA Licence even if I can keep it as Restricted to flying A6 A/C only.

Thanks

Tina
Lamboo1 is offline   Reply
Old 22nd Mar 2013, 10:08   #137 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 93
Convert your JAR licence to an EASA licence. Make sure you have level 6 English done before you do this.

You have until April 2014 to renew your A320 rating. It will require some ground school to be determined by whom ever you pay to do the renewal. Obviously a UK training (not required to be based in UK) org will have to be used. If say a French TRE is used I think the UK CAA has to be notified first.

I don't think that the UK CAA will annotate your licence with only A6 a/c. The Irish will do it though, you could get an Irish ATPL.
Enecosse is offline   Reply
Old 22nd Mar 2013, 16:45   #138 (permalink)


Probationary PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: dubai
Posts: 2
I have just returned from the UK where I tried to convert my national licence to an EASA but have fallen victim to the 7 year IR ruling. In 2009 whilst on a visit to the UK I went to LGW and was verbally told by a licensing officer I would safeguard all my ATPL subjects provided I maintained proficiency on my GCAA or FAA licence which are ICAO. I am new to PPRuNe but now somewhat wished I had joined earlier as this heads up may have bought me more time. I have signed the petition and will pass this info on to quite a few boys and girls I know working abroad who now may be in for a big shock. "Lost for words"
Itchynutcracker is offline   Reply
Old 23rd Mar 2013, 14:03   #139 (permalink)


Probationary PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: dubai
Posts: 2
Does anybody have an email contact for the policy dept at LGW as the one I was told to use bounces back? Head of CAA too would be good. Just want to get my formal complaint lodged with them for what it's worth. Cheers:
Itchynutcracker is offline   Reply
Old 27th Mar 2013, 04:22   #140 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwixt and between
Posts: 575
Quote:
I think that you have four years from the date of your last sim check. So if your sim check was April 2011, then you have 3 years from date of expiry, april 2012, which would give a cut off of 2015 to get it on your easa licence wit a 320. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I am as confused by these 'changes' as anybody, but I just had a read of CAP 804. It says:
Quote:
FCL.740 Validity and renewal of class and type ratings
(a) The period of validity of class and type ratings shall be 1 year, except for single-pilot single-engine class ratings, for which the period of validity shall be 2 years,
unless otherwise determined by the operational suitability data, established in
accordance with Part-21.
May 2012
CAP 804 Part I Flight Crew Licensing: Mandatory Requirements, Policy and Guidance
Section 4 Part H, Subpart 1 Page 6
(b)Renewal. If a class or type rating has expired, the applicant shall:
(1) take refresher training at an ATO, when necessary to reach the level of
proficiency necessary to safely operate the relevant class or type of
aeroplane; and
(2) pass a proficiency check in accordance with Appendix 9 to Part-FCL.
No mention of any time limit. The UK CAA seems to have distilled the AMC into simply 'sufficient skill level need to pass the check'. Perhaps somebody can confirm or clarify?

Last edited by Sciolistes; 27th Mar 2013 at 04:25.
Sciolistes is offline   Reply
Reply
 
 
 


Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 03:08.


vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network