Licence differences CAA-JAR

[SilsoeSid]

Could someone please explain the fundemental differences between the CAA ATPL(H) and the JAR CPL(H).

OK, one is an AT the other a CP but neither need an IR nor, I believe, a multi-crew qualification.

[Jonasraf]

ATPL you can act as pilot in command on a large transport airplane, but with CPL you can only be co-pilot.

This is how I remeber it.

[ClearBlueWater]

I think you had to have 1000 hours P1 before the CAA CPL (H) could be converted to a CAA ATPL (H), presuming all the necessary CAA written exams were passed. Therefore if you have a JAA CPL(H) and 1000 hours P1 it is the same as the minimum old CAA ATPL (H). To have a JAA ATPL (H) you need an IR in addition to the required hours in their various forms.

A JAA CPL (H) includes all written exams necessary for award of a JAA ATPL (H). In other words the holder of a JAA CPL (H) does not have to take further written exams to gain an IR and subsequent conversion of his CPL (H) + IR to ATPL is dependent solely on completing the required hours.

I think that's it anyway.

[SFIM]

clear blue water,

i believe you have got it the wrong way round, a CAA ATPL(H) was granted at 1200 hours total by virtue of hours alone (subject to the minimum elements e.g. 20 hours night), to the holder of a CAA CPL(H) no further exams were required, so everyone including me did CPL level knowledge, cos that was all we needed.

JAA ATPL(H) requires 1000 hours total including 350 hours on multi pilot helicopters (which in itself requires an instrument rating) and 100 hours night etc and ATPL level knowledge, so most people as I understand it who are going for the JAA CPL(H) are doing ATPL level exams at the start to avoid the need later.

whereas a basic JAA CPL(H) requires much less than this,185 hours total time including the various elements and CPL level knowledge.

people such as me who have a CAA ATPL(H) who would like a JAA ATPL(H) require 500 hours on multi pilot helicopters and if they have less than 1000 hours multi pilot have to demonstrate to the CAA a knowledge of flight planning which is laid down in JAR FCL, crucially though they DO NOT need ATPL knowledge, as their licence would be endorsed to show that the new licence was granted on the basis of CPL level knowledge ( so if you went fixed wing you would end up doing the ATPL exams, what a drag)

phew ! do peeps agree with this ?

[ClearBlueWater]

SFIM, I agree with you. I don't think your description contradicts mine but helps to make it clearer.

[Used Ink]

Speaking as a current military pilot, shortly to be on way to the sand, (my knee twinges are coming back though!!) :)

I have just received my shiny new Jar CPL H and as far as I am aware there is little difference, apart from the mis-understanding the new licencing system has produced.

At the moment there are no CPL (H)coursework/exams so all CPL (H)'s have to be done by ATPL (A) yes (A), coursework/exams.

As Sid mentioned, the big thing is the IR part. In the CAA system, the CAA would issue an ATPL (H)without an IR. Now though, with JAR-FCL, an IR is required for the issue of ATPL (H).

So, in essence they are one and the same, assuming the hours are OK, which they would be for a mil pilot. (hello again Sid )

During a little 'crewroom chat' (rare these days, I know), it would seem to boil down to a bit of snobbery.

Hope this helps Sid, as I think the civi hours requirement doesn't affect you does it? PM me.

[EESDL]

Just received the letter from Belgrano reminding me that my 10-year lease for my ATPL(H) is almost up and that I must fork out the £194 for them to send me a new licence.

So, if you have not got the time on multi-pilot helicopters (not multi-engined), ie, aircraft certified for dual pilot only ops, then it's a CPL for you.

The flavour of the CPL varies according to what you need to do, or ratings that you already hold but, if like me, you only hold type ratings for a couple of turbines, vfr only, then the bog-standard issue is the one.

Although you may wish to state on your cv that you qualify for the ATPL(H) licence!!!
That we take into account any inferiority complexes you may have for your licence type indicating which class of aircraft you fly - and not the individual ratings themselves.

[Woolf]

As far as I am aware the ATPL is only really applicable to multi-crew operations. I am not quite sure why the old CAA ATPL was issued without the requirement for multicrew time but maybe it did serve some other purpose? (insurance maybe? any comments?) Still why would you need an ATPL for single pilot operations?

Under JAR there are two situations where an ATPL for the commander is required. Off the top of my head i think they are: IFR for helicopters with more than 9 approved seats and VFR for helicopters with more than 19 seats (JAR-OPS 3). Pilots going into those sort of jobs will not have a problem with gaining the required experience.

One problem does however arise for operators of large mutipilot helicopters (>19 seats) operating VFR only. In order to obtain an ATPL those commanders will still have to do an instrument rating even though they will never fly IFR.

This I believe is currently addressed by the JAA and there are moves underway to introduce a JAR ATPL(H)/VFR (as described by ICAO). Still multicrew but no requirement for IR.

[tall and tasty]

SilsoeSid/zxcvbn

It is all explained under crew licenses (Personnel Licensing) under safety on the caa web site



http://www.caa.co.uk/ (http://caa.co.uk)

If not you can contact them and ask for the department based at LGW

TnT :ok: