PPL(A) with an SSEA rating

[NorthSouth]

Here's a peculiar one. Checked out a guy's documents today to find he had a UK PPL(A) with an SSEA rating issued by the CAA in 2016. The rating had been revalidated in 2018. I said to him I couldn't understand how he had a PPL(A) with an SSEA because SSEAs only apply to NPPLs and PPLs should have an SEP Rating.

I can only assume this was a CAA error in 2016 that has never been picked up. Or am I missing something?

NS

[Danny boy]

CAA Fault, Have a good weekend...

[xrayalpha]

And now you have break the news that it is revalidation by test!

(Although for which licence, I don't know: he could have a PPL(A) by mistake, instead of an NPPL. Or it could be a SSEA rating instead of an SEP!)

And he has to pay for it!

[Whopity]

What does the holder think he has?

[BEagle]

An SSEA Class Rating certainly may be included in a UK PPL - see the ANO!

This came about many years ago. The idea being that it if a PPL pilot was no longer able to hold a Class2 medical, he/she could then fly within SSEA limitations provided that he/she could make an NPPL medical declaration, without needing to apply for an NPPL. But to continue to do so after the extant SEP Class Rating expiry date, the Rating would need to be reissued as an SSEA Class Rating included in the PPL.

[Fl1ingfrog]

The SEPL is an EASA rating which is held by ATPLs, CPLs and PPLs. It does not apply to NPPLs and cannot be attached to one.

The CAA effectively demoted the UK issued PPL to that of an NPPL on the introduction of the EASA PPL, although that had not been the case previously under JAR. On obtaining the EASA PPL based on the previous held licence the option to maintain the UK PPL is granted on request. We now had an anomaly in that the EASA holder had a SEPL with full privileges but the same rating attached to the UK PPL is restricted.

It had become common amongst many PPLs to also obtain a NPPL and a Medical Declaration. This was often only as an assurance policy. Should the pilot have a hiccup with their EASA Class 2 medical, this allowed them to continue flying with the NPPL. Many PPLs now held three licences but essentially for the same purpose. To avoid the necessity to hold the third licence and for those who hadn't applied for the EASA PPL (because they flew only non EASA types) a second licence the answer was to allow UK PPL holders to attach a SSEA to the their licence and therefore fly on a medical declaration should they need or chose to.

I cannot find the CAA published information on this but this is nothing new even to CAA staff.

[BEagle]

Whatever is a 'SEPL'?

Most of your post is incorrect. Please refer to the UK ANO!

[Fl1ingfrog]

OK, please explain what is incorrect in my post.

SEPL is my way of simply expressing SEP(land) sorry if that has caused confusion.

[Whopity]

The CAA effectively demoted the UK issued PPL to that of an NPPL on the introduction of the EASA PPL, Incorrect, A UK PPL remains an ICAO licence exactly as it always has been and th CAA has no power to demote it. The NPPL is an entirely seperate licence.

[Fl1ingfrog]

I wrote the word "effectively" which is correct. I did not write it is now "the same" as the NPPL.

The UK PPL is limited to fly those aircraft not recognised (no semantics please) by EASA. The vast majority of aircraft available to the average PPL to hire have an EASA C of A and not available to the non EASA licence holders, that is my point. Because the UK PPL is no longer valid on these EASA aircraft it is limiting, in effect, to the to that of the NPPL in most if not all respects. I appreciate this is not not true for all PPL holders, those with the deepest pockets. The average PPL does not have the access to the often, large, sometimes complex types with a UK issued national C of A. There are relatively few of these aircraft which can be expensive to operate. Most will only aspire to flying small LAA permit aircraft.

I agree that the UK PPL is ICAO compliant but why then has the UK restricted these licences from being fully used in the UK? Why would a state outside of the EU recognise the UK PPL for its full purpose when the UK itself does not?.

I will interested to know of what countries still accept the UK PPL.

[Whopity]

I will interested to know of what countries still accept the UK PPL.
Any ICAO State outside EASA
but why then has the UK restricted these licences from being fully used in the UK? For exactly the same reason that all EASA states have done the same, to comply with the EU Regulation.

[Fl1ingfrog]

Ok, are you saying that the holder of a UK national PPL (not EASA) is able to obtain a piggy-back FAA airman's certificate? The EASA PPL certainly can.

[Whopity]

There is no reason why not. The same in Australia Canada and New Zealand.

[Fl1ingfrog]

The FAA, in regard to the airman certificate for foreign licenses, refer only to a Part-FCL licence.

The wording in the UK PPL section 1X, Validity is as follows;

"this licence is valid for aircraft registered in the United Kingdom for which the flight crew member is not required to hold a Part-FCL licence."

The licence, to my reading, clearly states the licence is valid only for non EASA aircraft registered in the UK. How can the licence be valid outside the UK unless flying a non easa UK registered aeroplane? Could it be that an EASA aircraft is so only within the EU but outside it is not an EASA aircraft?

However on the front page of the licence the following: "Issued in accordance with ICAO standards"

[NorthSouth]

Wow, I clearly started something here! Thanks Beagle in particular for directing me back to the ANO. I think I've now found the relevant items - Article 153(1)(a) allows the CAA to include any rating listed in Sch 8/Part 2/Chs 1 or 2 in a UK PPL, and Article 163 allows a UK PPL to be flown on a medical declaration.
Needless to say, the pilot in question also has a LAPL with a LAPL medical certificate, so is unlikely ever to need to fall back on his PPL(SSEA) since he doesn't fly non-EASA aircraft.
What imaginative things might we all be doing if we weren't having to fill our heads with this mind-boggling arcanity!

[Whopity]

"Issued in accordance with ICAO standards" Says it all. Now go to ICAO Annex 1.
Section XI is Validity and not a Restriction
"this licence is valid for aircraft registered in the United Kingdom for which the flight crew member is not required to hold a Part-FCL licence." Correct, but it does not include the word "only"

[selfin]

Fl1ingfrog, the regulator does not have the jurisdiction to state "this licence is valid for aircraft wherever they may be registered." Besides, the same words appears on a UK Part-FCL licence.

The US will issue a restricted certificate based on any foreign licence meeting ICAO Annex 1 standards. Once issued, the certificate is to be used according to US regulations, not according to the regulations governing the parent licence. Details in 14 CFR 61.75 and Chief Counsel interpretation to Andrew Krausz 2012.

It's also untrue to say UK EASA aircraft can't be flown using a UK non-Part-FCL licence. You may do so at the LAPL privilege level under general exemption E 4843 until 7 April 2020 or earlier. See ORS 4 No. 1293 issued 12 Feb 2019.

[Fl1ingfrog]

whopity

I can't find the use of the word "only" on any of my old or current licenses except in an old RT licence: "VHF only".

selfin

you write: Fl1ingfrog, the regulator does not have the jurisdiction to state "this licence is valid for aircraft wherever they may be registered." Besides, the same words appears on a UK Part-FCL licence.

Of course not on the first of your points but the wording of your second point only appears with regard to non-easa aeroplanes. It is not a requirement of EASA that the NAA includes the national privileges attached to the same licence but the UK CAA have decided to include them. Thanks for the heads up on the latest ORSA.

You have, all of you, convinced me, well almost but I will keep my powder dry. I won't drag the matter on further but oh for the halcyon days of old.

[Whopity]

FF
I can't find the use of the word "only" on any of my old or current licenses except in an old RT licence:
Quite right, but you added it in your earlier post!
The licence, to my reading, clearly states the licence is valid only for non EASA aircraft registered in the UK.
My point is that it does NOT say valid only!
Licencing was so simple until the bureaucrats got involved!

[Fl1ingfrog]

Here, here!

[much2much]

SSEA is totally acceptable on PPL A(as Beagle says see ANO, (there are multiple reference to it,s validity in other places)
I searched the ANO, ORS4,'s,AIC 'S and other documents for changes over the years.

My licences (PPL)was re issued ,by the CAA with SSEA ,after a GST on a singe, since my PPL had been lost ,my professional license expired, and i could not meet the requirements of a class 2.
They would not issue a duplicate without a current rating and appropriate medical, this option was hopefully, to at least keep expired ratings on the Back page,(not a complete success.)

In that SEP could at the time be used with a self cert , but NOT re-validated, or issued

The idea been to re-validate my F/I once recovery from heart surgery was complete(dreaded tread mill),and to enable me to remain current.
Otherwise it meant it meant SSEA test NPPL issue ,medical SEP test reissue of PPL ££££
This way i could re validate SEP along with the F/I
The LAA kindly added the SSEA., and dealt with the CAA on my behalf.after much debate with them ,and the CAA
One of the problems i have come across are with reference to some exemption,which it has not been specified in, such as it's, validity outside UK airspace even with a ICAO medical and appropriate ,experience paperwork.
And bewildered examiners.


AND can any one answer this please? Licensing is indeed complex, i know some one who only fly microlight on an EASA PPL and get it signed ,bi anually by an Examiner after a bi annual in a microlight , no GST NO LPC ,NO time on a Group A ,have they got this wrong or has it changed??

[BEagle]

i know some one who only fly microlight on an EASA PPL and get it signed ,bi anually by an Examiner after a bi annual in a microlight , no GST NO LPC ,NO time on a Group A ,have they got this wrong or has it changed??

Flight time in microlight aircraft is NOT acceptable for revalidation or renewal of SEP Class Ratings included in a Part-FCL licence - and the 'Examiner' should know this! Neither does a 'bi annual' in a microlight aircraft meet the refresher training requirement.

Your 'someone' must fly a renewal Proficiency Check in an SEP aeroplane with a Part-FCL FE in order to exercise PIC privileges legally.

It is likely that Part-FCL will soon recognise flight time in microlight aircraft for SEP Class Rating revalidation purposes, but the refresher flying with an FI will still need to be in a non-microlight SEP Class aeroplane.

[much2much]

My thought's exactly. thanks to you as always.. .
.i could only find what you have said 'i just thought i may have missed a change .
.The someone was very vague about who signed it.
Il mention it to them again.

[Whopity]

But does he still hold a UK National licence as well, if it was issued for a lifetime, he probably does? According to the CAA website:
For pilots flying on a UK national licence, including the NPPL(A), flight experience amassed in microlight aircraft with three axis flight controls can be counted towards the flying experience requirements necessary to maintain the SEP and SSEA Class Ratings.

[BEagle]

RTFM!! i know some one who only fly microlight on an EASA PPL

VVVVVVVVVV

[Whopity]

And I have come across numerous people who don't actually know what licence they hold, and many who still have one in the cupboard!