I don't really get the point of working harder than for a JAR license if it's only to get a GCAA one
Simple answer? Forward planning. It makes good business sense.
Voluntarily sculpting your syllabi to meet that of JAR ensures:
- The licencing requirements are in line with local regulations. Allot of the NAAs/ANSPs in the Middle East such as (DGCAM, BCAA, GCAA) are adopting JAA-FCL & JAR-OPS and implementing them into the local statutory books.
- Potential for JAA approval in the future. This as you know already exists around the world in countries like Australia (WAAC), Canada (MFC) etc. The regulatory processes needed for such approvals are greatly reduced when the FTO in question has voluntarily aligned it's OPS+REGS to comply with that of JAR from day one. When DAE becomes a JAA approved FTO in the future (which I know is being considered at the moment), this will open them up to the European market and they'll be competing alongside other JAA approved schools.
- Choice of licensing streams. If they do become JAA-approved, they will likely offer GCAA licences alongside JAA-issued ones.
- Ease of conversions in the interim. DAE graduates with GCAA fATPLs might wish to convert their licences to a JAA fATPLs in the future. This process will be easier when you have been trained to JAA criteria. Someone who has trained to the tune of FARs for example might find this conversion process a little more "involved".