Eddiecapt
Apart froim them relinquishing control to EASA in the first place (and I don't know what say they had in that) what has this got to do with the CAA ?
This is an EASA issue and the CAA aer encouraging the Heads of Training / CFIs to comment on the NPA, the impression I get from the letter they sent out on 05 February is that they don't want the Registered facility to die either, otherwise why write to us and ask us to comment on it specifically with guidance as to what to look for on the EASA website.
I believe the NPA you need to look at is NPA 2008-22c and that can be found here
http://hub.easa.europa.eu/crt/docs/viewnpa/id_59 , the one referred to above is about aeroplane synthetic trainers.
It seems to be just like when we whinge at the CAA with one man one voice, thats the way it is in Europe and the CAA have a small voice, the people in the industry need to comment in a balanced manner and hope that someone in Europe is listening, not just about this but about all the European NPA to do with licensing, ops,Training Organisations etc.
With regard to PPLs doing flight training, whats the problem if they meet the standard and know their stuff. However if the authority have to audit something is better to audit initial training, or the 5 hours of a type rating.
The comment made by someone else earlier in the thread with regards to a lot of the onerous requirements made in NPA2008-22c not applying to PPL ATOs is still valid.
Section 2 Additional
requirements for ATOs providing training for licences and
ratings other than the LPL, PPL, SPL and BPL.
Will it be more of a pain than just sending in a form ? Yes.
Will it perhaps get some facilities with undesirable qualities looked at more closely ?
Probably.
Will it change what really goes on when the CAA aren't looking ? Not in the slightest.
Will PPLs be stopped from carrying out flight training under EASA FCL ?
If NPA 17 goes through as proposed then
no they won't, Subpart J allows for training up to the licence you hold [FCL.915] and specifies an additional requirement that prior to entry to an FI course a PPL shall have at least 200Hrs PIC and at least 250Hrs Total Time.
I support some bits of the proposals as a whole and not some others, but its up to each of us to comment on what we don't agree with.
We all have to keep up with EASA, CAA, JAA ICAO etc it just goes with the turf, as in all walks of life some people keep abreast of the changes more than others and one of the consequences of implementing a system where PPL training is auditable may be the RFs set up by people who did their FI training and then make no effort to keep up with the current rules might have to try and keep up with the more professional ones that are out there (not directed at anyone, an industry general observation).
Off to take the little one to school back soon.