MEP test beyond 6 month training window

[Okavango]

Hi. Due the unfortunate demise of a poorly managed school I'm under threat of my eventual MEP test being beyond the 6 month from start of MEP training. In that circumstance I'd appreciate your advice on what the CAA's stance is? From my understanding, some are taking the MEIR without ever even completing the MEP test (just the 6 hours flight training) and many lapse MEP and revalidate every other year (ie due IR reval in the sim every other year). It therefore seems there must be a flexible "training as required" and most probably with parallel MEIR training yet to complete, the MEP test within 6 months of starting training becomes irrelevant? I'm not aware of any similar window on the MEIR (in fact the CBmIR suggests there is no window). It seems a very odd requirement and I can understand the intent in ensuring skills don't go rusty though isn't that the same for any rating and what the test is all about assessing? Any advice appreciated.

If I struggle to find an alternative MEIR with availability I may initially continue with a IR(R) to keep current (similar SEIR flight training costs to a ME sim) then complete via the CBmIR once there is availability. This may not be particularly efficient though I'd prefer to do something proactive and not to sit and wait. Any advice on this intention similarly appreciated.

[rudestuff]

Are you ever going to rent an MEP just for fun?

[Okavango]

Are you ever going to rent an MEP just for fun?

No, or in all likelihood get a job MEP with less than 700hrs TT or even then a MEP job that pays the bills. I understand where you're coming from but pretty much all schools insist on MEP test before MEIR test. Either way, if/when MEP training becomes obsolete outside the 6 month CAA window is the question as that'll define when things need to be resolved.

[Duchess_Driver]

FCL.725 (c) states take the test within 6 months of starting the course. Under normal circumstances we train MEC and MEIR almost immediately after one and other (on separate training course manuals) and argue that training for the ME/IR especially as OEI approaches are being covered counts as 'continuation' training once the 6 month window for the MEC has elapsed. Never had one thrown back (yet!). Mostly not the CAA but we have had a couple through the CAA go uncommented on. Exam is 'two' flights but one test event for the MEC and ME-IR-SP(A).

Silly rule.

As stated, if you don't need the MEP rating then just revalidate the IR (CAN'T RENEW) in the sim. If you have to renew, then you may as well renew the MEP as well. Typically, when I am assessing someone for 'training as required' for renewal, IR is 'trained' in the Sim and x flights in the aircraft to cover MEP (with appropriate OEI approaches). Again - not had any comeback (yet!)

HTH

DD

[Whopity]

I'd appreciate your advice on what the CAA's stance is? The Examiner is responsible for ensuring that the candidate is qualified in all respects for licence or rating issue, so unless its done within the 6 months they should not conduct the test. If they do, then the CAA will probably throw it out.
From my understanding, ... many lapse MEP and revalidate every other year In which case it would be a Renewal not a Revalidation and require a Course Completion Certificate from an ATO before taking the Prof Check

[Okavango]

The Examiner is responsible for ensuring that the candidate is qualified in all respects for licence or rating issue, so unless its done within the 6 months they should not conduct the test. If they do, then the CAA will probably throw it out.
In which case it would be a Renewal not a Revalidation and require a Course Completion Certificate from an ATO before taking the Prof Check

Thanks - but what is the full answer? Are you saying that the CAA would seriously expect a candidate to repeat the whole MEP training if they were a day over the 6 month window?

[Okavango]

FCL.725 (c) states take the test within 6 months of starting the course. Under normal circumstances we train MEC and MEIR almost immediately after one and other (on separate training course manuals) and argue that training for the ME/IR especially as OEI approaches are being covered counts as 'continuation' training once the 6 month window for the MEC has elapsed. Never had one thrown back (yet!). Mostly not the CAA but we have had a couple through the CAA go uncommented on. Exam is 'two' flights but one test event for the MEC and ME-IR-SP(A).

Silly rule.

As stated, if you don't need the MEP rating then just revalidate the IR (CAN'T RENEW) in the sim. If you have to renew, then you may as well renew the MEP as well. Typically, when I am assessing someone for 'training as required' for renewal, IR is 'trained' in the Sim and x flights in the aircraft to cover MEP (with appropriate OEI approaches). Again - not had any comeback (yet!)

HTH

DD

Thanks DD - sounds more like common sense. Minor point - up above when you state 'MEC' - is that just a typo and did you intend to type MEP?

[Whopity]

Are you saying that the CAA would seriously expect a candidate to repeat the whole MEP training if they were a day over the 6 month window? I think a little common sense might prevail in that you could count any traing within 6 months of the test date however; EC rules are generally lacking in any sort of reason or sense and the NAAs are required to implement them with no discretion.

[slr737]

In JAR, we used to be able to perform a refresher training to extend those 6 months. Would that be still possible under EASA.

i do not think so but not sure. I guess the best way is to ask the authority.

[Whopity]

I guess the best way is to ask the authority. The Authority is not there to make or interpret the rules any more, for one thing, they no longer have any expertise. They can issue an ALT AMC at best. Responsibility now rests with the ATO to ensure they follow the regulation, however it is written. The days of ringing up the CAA for an answer are long gone. Would you go to a Police Station with a legal question?

[Duchess_Driver]

MEC meant MEP - multi engine class can/is used as there are no METurbines as such as they are type ratings. As I said, the ATO HT should be able to generate the paperwork in such a way that the regulations are covered.

[S-Works]

They will reject the application and will not grant an extension. I have just been through this with a student. He had to make up the hours to ensure they were all with the validity.

[Duchess_Driver]

They being?

The UK CAA? If so, must have got a jobsworth looking at the paperwork.

[S-Works]

They being?

The UK CAA? If so, must have got a jobsworth looking at the paperwork.

Yes, UK CAA. Wrote to the student and told them the first 2 hours of the course would not be acceptable as it exceeded the 6 months. Insisted they repeat them. I argued that as they had passed an LST based on the training received what would it achieve.... Still refused to accept it.