CAA refuse AFI rating on a JAA licence
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAA refuse AFI rating on a JAA licence
Hi all,
Well, I've been speechless for a few hours about this, but now I'm about to get going!
Had a call from the CAA today to say that my new AFI can't get his instructor rating on his JAA light aircraft licence because it is a microlight instructor's rating.
Yes, his Euro licence allows him to fly microlights, allowed him to build 60 hours on microlights, sit his pre-entry microlight instructor course test, do his course and sit his instructor test.
But it doesn't allow him to be a microlight instructor, they now say (but it did, they said, two weeks ago!)
What he has to do now is sit a microlight GFT (yes, look at Shed 8 of the regs and NPPL micro is a GFT while SSEA and SLMG are GST!!) and an oral test on pilot maintenance etc and hand the authorities another 136 quid for a NPPL.
Then they'll give him an instructor rating.
Of course, he prepared for his course by asking these questions first, and so revalidated his JAA licence with a Cert of Test and renewed his Class 2 medical since that allowed him to keep his light aircraft licence - although the cheaper option would have been a microlight GFT and a micro medical.
So now, after a JAA cert of test, a pre-course flight test and an AFI flight test he has to to a basic GFT?
How does that make him a better instructor, except having to work harder to pay the cash (and wait longer for all the paperwork).
I can't even see anything in the ANO that backs up the CAA.
Thoughts, anyone?
And who regulates the CAA. Is there an ombudsman?
If I have to pay this chap to sit around for another month, he'll earn his keep writing to Scottish MPs, Westminster ones, Euro ones etc.
ps. Landing fees at Strathaven are now #10,000 pounds for anyone who works at the CAA.
They are now £240 pounds for other three-axis microlights owned of operated by British flying clubs. This will allow "flying instructors" to have their passengers pay half the direct costs of the flight.
Private pilots will still pay a fiver.
It may mean that the flying school, Sportflight Scotland Ltd, be making a loss. But my mum, part owner of the airfield, should now see a return on her investment!!!!!!
Well, I've been speechless for a few hours about this, but now I'm about to get going!
Had a call from the CAA today to say that my new AFI can't get his instructor rating on his JAA light aircraft licence because it is a microlight instructor's rating.
Yes, his Euro licence allows him to fly microlights, allowed him to build 60 hours on microlights, sit his pre-entry microlight instructor course test, do his course and sit his instructor test.
But it doesn't allow him to be a microlight instructor, they now say (but it did, they said, two weeks ago!)
What he has to do now is sit a microlight GFT (yes, look at Shed 8 of the regs and NPPL micro is a GFT while SSEA and SLMG are GST!!) and an oral test on pilot maintenance etc and hand the authorities another 136 quid for a NPPL.
Then they'll give him an instructor rating.
Of course, he prepared for his course by asking these questions first, and so revalidated his JAA licence with a Cert of Test and renewed his Class 2 medical since that allowed him to keep his light aircraft licence - although the cheaper option would have been a microlight GFT and a micro medical.
So now, after a JAA cert of test, a pre-course flight test and an AFI flight test he has to to a basic GFT?
How does that make him a better instructor, except having to work harder to pay the cash (and wait longer for all the paperwork).
I can't even see anything in the ANO that backs up the CAA.
Thoughts, anyone?
And who regulates the CAA. Is there an ombudsman?
If I have to pay this chap to sit around for another month, he'll earn his keep writing to Scottish MPs, Westminster ones, Euro ones etc.
ps. Landing fees at Strathaven are now #10,000 pounds for anyone who works at the CAA.
They are now £240 pounds for other three-axis microlights owned of operated by British flying clubs. This will allow "flying instructors" to have their passengers pay half the direct costs of the flight.
Private pilots will still pay a fiver.
It may mean that the flying school, Sportflight Scotland Ltd, be making a loss. But my mum, part owner of the airfield, should now see a return on her investment!!!!!!
After a similar query, the CAA recently confirmed that:
The holder of a UK-issued JAR-FCL licence with SEP Class Rating who has been exercising these privilges on microlight aeroplanes does NOT need any other 'Microlight' Rating to meet the LASORS H7.1a pre-requisite. Nor is there any need for any form of 'Microlight Rating', no need for any GST (the term GFT was dropped at NPPL level some time ago now) and no need to pay another £136 for a NPPL.
LASORS 2006:
H7.1
To qualify for the grant of an AFI Rating (Aeroplanes)
(a) At least a valid UK issued PPL with a current
has now been corrected in LASORS2007 to read:
But if the JAR-FCL licence is NOT UK-issued, you would need to speak to the state of issue - or, indeed, obtain a NPPL.
The holder of a UK-issued JAR-FCL licence with SEP Class Rating who has been exercising these privilges on microlight aeroplanes does NOT need any other 'Microlight' Rating to meet the LASORS H7.1a pre-requisite. Nor is there any need for any form of 'Microlight Rating', no need for any GST (the term GFT was dropped at NPPL level some time ago now) and no need to pay another £136 for a NPPL.
LASORS 2006:
H7.1
Pre-requisite Requirements
To qualify for the grant of an AFI Rating (Aeroplanes)
Microlight the applicant will be required to produce
satisfactory evidence before starting his Assistant
Flying Instructors Course of having:
satisfactory evidence before starting his Assistant
Flying Instructors Course of having:
(a) At least a valid UK issued PPL with a current
aircraft rating for microlight aeroplanes (without
operational limitations if the licence is rated for
microlights only) in a minimum period of 8 months
before starting the AFI course.
operational limitations if the licence is rated for
microlights only) in a minimum period of 8 months
before starting the AFI course.
has now been corrected in LASORS2007 to read:
H7.1
Pre-requisite Requirements
Pre-requisite Requirements
To qualify for the grant of an AFI Rating (Aeroplanes)
Microlight the applicant will be required to produce
satisfactory evidence before starting his Assistant
Flying Instructors Course of having:
Microlight the applicant will be required to produce
satisfactory evidence before starting his Assistant
Flying Instructors Course of having:
a. At least a valid UK issued PPL with a current
aircraft rating for microlight aeroplanes (without
operational limitations if the licence is rated for
microlights only) in a minimum period of 8 monthsaircraft rating for microlight aeroplanes (without
operational limitations if the licence is rated for
before starting the AFI course, or be the holder of
a valid UK issued licence with SEP rating whohas been exercising the privileges of their licence
on microlight aeroplanes.
on microlight aeroplanes.
But if the JAR-FCL licence is NOT UK-issued, you would need to speak to the state of issue - or, indeed, obtain a NPPL.
Is the 'Euro licence' to which you refer a UK-issued JAR-FCL PPL(A) with SEP Class Rating? If so, tell the Belgranist to read the latest version of LASORS.
Last edited by BEagle; 30th May 2007 at 22:29.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Poor old Glen.... I would have thought his licence is UK issued, well Scottish anyway!
A case of one hand not knowing what the other is doing perhaps?
Colin, surely you wouldn't make me pay all that money to land at Strathaven?!
A case of one hand not knowing what the other is doing perhaps?
Colin, surely you wouldn't make me pay all that money to land at Strathaven?!
I will be meeting a top chap at the CAA today and will ask him to set his minions straight on this.
But please confirm that the applicant in question holds a UK-issued JAR-FCL aeroplane licence with a SEP Class Rating and has been flying microlight class aeroplanes within the Rating privileges.
But please confirm that the applicant in question holds a UK-issued JAR-FCL aeroplane licence with a SEP Class Rating and has been flying microlight class aeroplanes within the Rating privileges.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi BEagle,
To confirm, Glenn has a UK-issued JAR-FCL PPL(A) with SEP Class Rating - he did all his training at Cumbernauld Airport.
(He does also have a Canadian licence, issued on the strength of his JAR one
It was this licence that was revalidated with a C of T a few months ago.
I am very grateful for your help.
The BMAA's attitude, I am ashamed to say, was just: The CAA change their mind daily and it is easiest just to do what they say.
Personally, I think the BMAA should have been more active in representing their members (me and Glenn, at least).
I am glad to see that pprune is an effective community. Thanks.
Colin
To confirm, Glenn has a UK-issued JAR-FCL PPL(A) with SEP Class Rating - he did all his training at Cumbernauld Airport.
(He does also have a Canadian licence, issued on the strength of his JAR one
It was this licence that was revalidated with a C of T a few months ago.
I am very grateful for your help.
The BMAA's attitude, I am ashamed to say, was just: The CAA change their mind daily and it is easiest just to do what they say.
Personally, I think the BMAA should have been more active in representing their members (me and Glenn, at least).
I am glad to see that pprune is an effective community. Thanks.
Colin
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ps BEagle.
The GFT is alive and well in Lasors!
Search the thing and there are still 12 references, ie:
The GFT is alive and well in Lasors!
Search the thing and there are still 12 references, ie:
NPPL Microlight
Where the holder of a NPPL(Microlight) licence or
rating has not flown as pilot-in-command of an aircraft
for up to a period of 5 years, he/she will be required to
complete the following:-
a. Pass the NPPL(Microlight) GFT as appropriate;
Strangely, all the references are to microlight tests, and not SSEA or SLMG!
Heck, I still call SSEAs SEPs Group As.
But I do make a conscious effort over Visual Reference Points, since I could easily see the point of that change.
Very best wishes,
rating has not flown as pilot-in-command of an aircraft
for up to a period of 5 years, he/she will be required to
complete the following:-
a. Pass the NPPL(Microlight) GFT as appropriate;
Strangely, all the references are to microlight tests, and not SSEA or SLMG!
Heck, I still call SSEAs SEPs Group As.
But I do make a conscious effort over Visual Reference Points, since I could easily see the point of that change.
Very best wishes,
I see you're having the same problem as me with LASORS cut-and-paste formatting......
As it's a UK-issued JAR/FCL aeroplane licence with a SEP Class Rating and your colleague has been flying microlight aeroplanes within the privileges, there is no need for him to have any additional microlight rating/licence of any shape or form.
Both the BMAA Chief Executive and the CAA's Head of Licensing were present at the 11th April 2007 NPPL P&SC meeting at which the CAA confirmed this information. Thus neither organisation has any excuse for giving you such incorrect information.
With the NPPL Policy and Steering Committee Chairman's compliments, please refer your CAA contact to Item 15 of the Meeting Notes of the 27th NPPL Policy and Steering Committee meeting and ask him/her to rebrief his/her staff appropriately.
As it's a UK-issued JAR/FCL aeroplane licence with a SEP Class Rating and your colleague has been flying microlight aeroplanes within the privileges, there is no need for him to have any additional microlight rating/licence of any shape or form.
Both the BMAA Chief Executive and the CAA's Head of Licensing were present at the 11th April 2007 NPPL P&SC meeting at which the CAA confirmed this information. Thus neither organisation has any excuse for giving you such incorrect information.
With the NPPL Policy and Steering Committee Chairman's compliments, please refer your CAA contact to Item 15 of the Meeting Notes of the 27th NPPL Policy and Steering Committee meeting and ask him/her to rebrief his/her staff appropriately.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle,
Many thanks for your help, as at 10am today things were moving at the CAA.
I don't know which organisation you represent - send me a private message if you'd like - but I'd like to join or make a 50 quid donation to it on behalf of Glenn, who looks to have saved 136 licence fee, GS/FT test fee and - maybe most important - can start to earn a living from flying (rather than dig the founds for a static caravan on the airfield, which is what he is doing now!)
Ooops. perhaps most important is that he will be able to teach new pilots.
Thanks again.
Many thanks for your help, as at 10am today things were moving at the CAA.
I don't know which organisation you represent - send me a private message if you'd like - but I'd like to join or make a 50 quid donation to it on behalf of Glenn, who looks to have saved 136 licence fee, GS/FT test fee and - maybe most important - can start to earn a living from flying (rather than dig the founds for a static caravan on the airfield, which is what he is doing now!)
Ooops. perhaps most important is that he will be able to teach new pilots.
Thanks again.
Glad that the CAA moved so quickly!
I called the right chap today at 0922 on my hands-free on the way to a meeting and he confirmed my comments. I said that it was very probable that the LASORS2007 clarification hadn't yet reached his front desk folk, so would he please rebrief them as soon as possible. To this he agreed.
If you wish to make a donation, which is very kind of you, perhaps to the PPRuNe fund would be best as it is used for the benefit of all.
I called the right chap today at 0922 on my hands-free on the way to a meeting and he confirmed my comments. I said that it was very probable that the LASORS2007 clarification hadn't yet reached his front desk folk, so would he please rebrief them as soon as possible. To this he agreed.
If you wish to make a donation, which is very kind of you, perhaps to the PPRuNe fund would be best as it is used for the benefit of all.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Donation done:
Dear Colin,
Thank you so much for your donation to help with the upkeep and running of PPRuNe. As a gesture of appreciation, please let me know if I can offer you a Personal Title under your Username. In the meantime, I will remove any of the begging wording that is there at the moment.
>>>
Hopefully not premature - chap from CAA who promised to get back later today didn't (but I have his number!)
Dear Colin,
Thank you so much for your donation to help with the upkeep and running of PPRuNe. As a gesture of appreciation, please let me know if I can offer you a Personal Title under your Username. In the meantime, I will remove any of the begging wording that is there at the moment.
>>>
Hopefully not premature - chap from CAA who promised to get back later today didn't (but I have his number!)
Hopefully indeed! I don't know why the CAA did not brief their telephone team properly; there is often much frustration at the contradictory advice given by different people at the Authority.
Thanks for donating to the fund.
Unfortunately, depsite so much help given freely to others, I still have to suffer insulting comments below my Username........
Thanks for donating to the fund.
Unfortunately, depsite so much help given freely to others, I still have to suffer insulting comments below my Username........
