As someone who became an examiner towards the end of last year, I have had the pleasure getting used to all the CAA paperwork and also checking licences etc when it comes to revalidations and renewals for ratings. I have recently asked myself - what is achieved with having a limited validity period for your licence?
Rating revalidation and renewals are quite rightly of limited life for safety reasons. However with a licence (which is useless unless you have a rating) does an expiry date on that contribute to safety? I can't see how it does and it only increases the red tape for us and slows down the folks at PLD with 'unnecessary' administration tasks with renewing licences.
Maybe the CAA are trying to bring the licensing system in line with our continental colleagues since I am unaware of how long a French or German licence is valid for - maybe someone may be able to clarify? Is the CAA using JAR as a scapegoat to suddenly stamp an expiry date in licences? Perhaps I am just a cynic but I can't see past this as simply being a money spinning exercise for the Authority.
Why is there an uneven playing field since JAR licences are valid for 5 years whereas a UK CPL for Balloons is valid for 10 years and a UK NPPL is valid for life? It would make life a lot easier if all ICAO licences for a start, had the same rules for validity!
Hopefully this might provoke a discussion amongst some of you. Would be interested to hear your comments as well. Is it just me who feel that the CAA is taking us for a ride?
