EASA FCL - implementation date

[galleypower]

Dear all,

Does anyone know more details when EASA FCL will be implemented?
Rumours have it that it will not be implemented before 2015. What happened with the EASA deadline of April 2012? Does anyone have a reliable source of information confirming the delay?
Appreciate your info.

[jez d]

Hi GP

Quote from the UK CAA answering a query I put to them:

"The last day on which a UK non-JAR ATPL will be valid for flying an EASA aircraft is 7th April 2014"

By that statement I assume a two-year transition period is being put in place.

Regards, jez

[Whopity]

Even the CAA don't now all the answers yet. They are publishing their best guess here, it may change, but its their latest estimate of when the dogs breakfast will affect us all.

[proudprivate]

Pfankuchen mit Spek und Eier aus Köln...

The dogs breakfast menu can be found here:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdo...icences_en.pdf

Implementation dates proposed specify April 2012, with a derogation until 8 April 2014 for helicopter licenses and licenses for non-commercial operation of aircraft; and with a derogation until 8 April 2015 for an number of specific ratings such as the mountain rating, towing rating etc... provided the member state notifies the Commission and E-Arse-Ah (before April 2012) of its intention to use the derogation.

The CAA seems to indicate its intentions of using the derogation possibility.

Now, for those having followed the parliamentary discussion, there is a non-negligeable chance that the Transport Committee of the European Parliament rejects the E-Arse-Ah proposal. A video of the latest discussion (25 May 2011) can be followed below (from 10:10 onward):

Committee meeting

In this, Mr Bradbourn (UK, CON) is urging the transport committee to reject the proposal. Obviously, should the transport committee decide to do this, the question of the implementation date becomes moot, as it then will no longer have a legal basis. This is the main reason of uncertainty the CAA is hinting at.

In order to increase the probability of this happening (and "this" meaning avoiding the loss of the IMC, the wipeout of the N-registry - at least those not able to afford a corporate workaround, an overall decrease in aviation safety per flown hour, etc...), it is important to write to your MEP's informing them of the disingenuities spewed by the guy dressed as a dogs dinner in seat number 154 and the overall havoc the proposal would create.

The first thing you should all ask yourselves when you get up is "Have I already written to my MEP and my Transport Minister about this ?". Then you should move your EASA into gear and do it.

[galleypower]

Ok, thanks for all your answers. I understand that there will be a transition period. But if I am not mistaken after reading through the above sources of information, from April 2012 onwards only new EASA licences will be issued.
So how would this affect for example instructor ratings, e.g. SFI, TRI, IRI, FI etc? Requirements for initial issue, revalidation, renewal etc. will probably change, but when will this all become effective? After or before the transition period? Anyone has got a clue?

[robin]

...and how does revalidation work in the transitional period? My UK PPL is due in late Nov 2012. Will it be possible to have it revalidated on an EASA aircraft?

[BEagle]

My UK PPL is due in late Nov 2012. Will it be possible to have it revalidated on an EASA aircraft?

Huh?

Do you mean that the SEP Class Rating included in your PPL is due for revalidation in late Nov 2012, or that your UK-issued JAR-FCL PPL(A) is due for re-issue then? A 'UK PPL' is a lifetime licence, as will be an EASA part-FCL PPL(A) - but a JAR-FCL PPL(A) has to be re-issued every 5 years.

[B2N2]

The first thing you should all ask yourselves when you get up is "Have I already written to my MEP and my Transport Minister about this ?". Then you should move your EASA into gear and do it.

well said.

[robin]

Sorry,I thought I'd made that clear.

I have a UK CAA lifetime PPL but I need the revalidation signed off in Nov 2012.

[Whopity]

A transition period allows the old and new to run side by side, so you should not have any problems.

[Cathar]

In this, Mr Bradbourn (UK, CON) is urging the transport committee to reject the proposal. Obviously, should the transport committee decide to do this, the question of the implementation date becomes moot, as it then will no longer have a legal basis. This is the main reason of uncertainty the CAA is hinting at.

In order to increase the probability of this happening (and "this" meaning avoiding the loss of the IMC, the wipeout of the N-registry - at least those not able to afford a corporate workaround, an overall decrease in aviation safety per flown hour, etc...), it is important to write to your MEP's informing them of the disingenuities spewed by the guy dressed as a dogs dinner in seat number 154 and the overall havoc the proposal would create.

As the Chairman of the Committee pointed out, the requirement for the pilots, including those of EU based third country aircraft, to have an EASA licence is contained in Regulation 216/2008. It is this Regulation which sets the date that the implementing rules for EASA licences must come into effect. Again, as the Chairman pointed out, the Parliament approved that Regulation three years ago. If the Parliament vetoed the draft implementing rules that would not remove the requirements of 216/2008 but it would remove the transitional periods that they provide. Therefore everyone would need an EASA licence on the whatever of April 2012 but there would be no process for obtaining one. What happens then?

[BEagle]

If the Agency is incapable of producing acceptable Implementing Rules which would enable the European Parliament to achieve their self-inflicted Apr 2012 date, then Regulation 216/2008 will need to be suspended.

Aircraft are not falling out of the sky; the only urgency is down to the nonsense of a €urocratic urge to fix something which simply isn't broken.

[proudprivate]

The executive powers of the Commission

Maybe you do not fully appreciate this, Cathar, but the reason why, in comparison to your run-of-the-mill national civil servant, you get paid quite a bit more, receive an expat allowance and get it all tax free is that we citizens of the EU have high expectations from our executive, whom we have invested with the exclusive prerogative of proposing legislation to parliament.

By generally d1cking around fighting personal vendettas, deceiving parliament and going out with Tracy from Oxford Aviation, you are damaging the very fabric of the European Institutions in the medium term and, given the extent you've been at it, probably even in the short term.

So when parliament rejects this dogs breakfast, it will be your job to rectify the mess. Actually, this is not too hard to do :

A simple legislative proposal amending implementation provisions (article 70) for Regulation 216/2008 would do the trick. I'm sure recent events will give you ample inspiration to write an honourable preamble.

Alternatively, you could amend the derogation clauses in the current proposal, making them contingent on obtaining an FCL-BASA with mutual licence recognition with the US for the FAA licenses; contingent on implementing a satisfactory alternative for the IMCR through the implementation of a PPL/IR for flights below FL195; and contingent on finding a LAPL agreement as a satisfactory alternative to the French "Brevet de Base".

All painfully obvious, really, if you come to think of it. And while you're at it, you might take a hard look at Article 58 of Regulation 216/2008 and see what measures on the ground you can take in order to enforce it.

So stop deceiving EU citizens, Pilots and MEPs alike.

As the Chairman of the Committee pointed out, the requirement for the pilots, including those of EU based third country aircraft, to have an EASA licence is contained in Regulation 216/2008.

I think you should worry about your next medical, because if you think that Brian said that in the meeting, you're going to fail your audiogram, mate.

He is obviously concerned about the whole concept of European Licenses, which you, with your regulatory aerobatics, are jeopardizing. And he is very upset about the havoc this is creating among the European Pilot community. You might remember last year he congratulated your "compatriote" with becoming almost the main topic of discussion in his mail box, only narrowly beaten by the "Save the whale"-appeals.

[Contacttower]

Noticed from the document that the deadline at the moment for validation of a foreign license required to operate an EU registered aircraft or foreign registered but with an EU resident operator aircraft for non-commercial purposes is 8th April 2014 or 8th April 2012 for commercial ones.

My understanding of this is that national authorities can require that validation earlier if they so wish but 8th April 2014 is the last time I can exercise my FAA PPL/IR privileges in an EU based N-reg aircraft.

[Cathar]

Maybe you do not fully appreciate this, Cathar, but the reason why, in comparison to your run-of-the-mill national civil servant, you get paid quite a bit more, receive an expat allowance and get it all tax free is that we citizens of the EU have high expectations from our executive, whom we have invested with the exclusive prerogative of proposing legislation to parliament.

? I don't work for the Commission and never have, and I have certainly never suggested that I do.

You are of course right that Article 70 can be amended. However, such an amendment would have to be made by a Regulation of the Council and the Parliament and would have to go through the full co-decision procedure, which is not normally a quick procedure.

Quote:
As the Chairman of the Committee pointed out, the requirement for the pilots, including those of EU based third country aircraft, to have an EASA licence is contained in Regulation 216/2008.

I think you should worry about your next medical, because if you think that Brian said that in the meeting, you're going to fail your audiogram, mate.

I'll take you word for that, I'm not going to watch it all again. Nevertheless it is indisputable that the requirement for the pilots of EU based third country aircraft to have an EASA licence is contained in Regulation 216/2008 and that the European Parliament voted in favour of that requirement.

My understanding of this is that national authorities can require that validation earlier if they so wish but 8th April 2014 is the last time I can exercise my FAA PPL/IR privileges in an EU based N-reg aircraft.

That is my understanding too. The power to derogate from the requirement is given to the Member States and is limited to two years. It will be interesting to see how this works eg: will the derogations be restricted to the Member states's airspace.

[BEagle]

.....which is not normally a quick procedure.....

Nothing which is crapped out from that €urocratic Tower of €uro-babble in Köln is ever a 'quick procedure'! Which is why the whole nonsense of EASA needs to be put on hold until they've sorted it all out - they won't achieve an Opinion for FCL.008 by 2012 and I very much doubt if they will achieve an Opinion for FCL.002 by 2014.

If I was Brian and knew that the rulemaking wasn't going to be completed by 2012, I'd throw the whole thing back at the Commission and tell them not to come back until they'd achieved a scomplete set of regulatory proposals....which probably wouldn't be until 2015 at the earliest.

[proudprivate]

Cathar not working for the Commission...

...or its agencies ??? Ha ! LOL here...

You are of course right that Article 70 can be amended. However, such an amendment would have to be made by a Regulation of the Council and the Parliament and would have to go through the full co-decision procedure, which is not normally a quick procedure.

The circumstances we are talking about here are these:

1. The transport committee of the EP is about to realise the full extent of what you have been up to lately

2. The CAA of your country is not overjoyed with happiness about the 7/8 december Comitology meeting

3. There is a large number of players in both the policital and the aviation community who want to do the right thing.

Assuming that you continue to drag your heels, potentially getting burnt forever in the civil service and assuming that the TC of the EP rejects the dogs breakfast;

Then some transport ministers' heads of cabinet would be on the phone with Kallas' cabinet telling them that they would appreciate the 3 page amendment (2 pages of preamble and 1 page for the article) to article 70 in double quick time.

Trust me, this one will not need 3 readings to pass codecision...

It will be interesting to see how this works eg: will the derogations be restricted to the Member states's airspace.

Some more FUD tactics by the heretic. Do you seriously think that some individual member states will not ask for derogation under the circumstances ? You really live in Cloud Cookoo land ! But it is also typical for bad civil servants like yourselves to fantasize about total chaos when they don't succeed is pushing a twisted agenda. You truly have become Humpfrey Appleby incarnate !

Nevertheless it is indisputable that the requirement for the pilots of EU based third country aircraft to have an EASA licence is contained in Regulation 216/2008 and that the European Parliament voted in favour of that requirement.

This is another typical comment for you lot :

It is becoming more and more indisputable that parliament was grossly misinformed about the issue at hand, which is why Philip Bradbourn, Peter Van Dalen, Gesine Meissner and others are pleading now not to fix something that isn't broken.

You then fall back on "hey but Parliament wanted Regulation 216/2008". I'm sure that if you had done your job properly, truly balancing the facts and acting in the best interest of the Citizens, regulation 216/2008 would not have contained this.

Parliament also wanted to facilitate General Aviation in its resolution of February 2009, by recognizing the need for proportionality of regulations and the avoidance of excessive costs. Do you think that your dogs breakfast takes those concerns of parliament into consideration ? Of course it doesn't.

Because when pushing your anti-aviation agenda, you cherry pick the bits and pieces of legislation that suit you. And when people point out the flaws to you, you invent difficulties and obstructions, even when the amendments to solve the problems are trivial (such as a rewrite of article 70 of Reg 216/2008)

[Cathar]

I find the process interesting but I am not involved in it so you will have to blame someone else. I only commented because your interpretation of the meeting did not entirely agree my understanding of it.

I would point out I was not alone in my interpretation of the meeting, the report of the debate in this month's IAOPA-Europe newsletter states:
"But Brian Simpson said the European Parliament had passed the Basic Regulation with the European-licensing element included and could not now say it didn’t want it."

[proudprivate]

Strange Newsletters from IAOPA

The March 2011 IAOPA News Leaflet (inside AOPA Pilot) comments on EASA-FCL as follows :

[...] IAOPA's hard work in conjunction with the EBAA and GAMA has apparently paid off with an informal ruling that will delay the final committee approval fro the NPA until the spring of 2011 and push back the effective date from 2012 to 2014. The ultimate resolution to this important issue will be to use pending bilateral aviation safety agreements between EASA and other States to mutually recognize one another's licenses with a minimum of formality.

As this could have been written by Seebohm's minions, I would take IAOPA's comments and newsletters with a grain of salt, as it is indicative that they have either a mole in their publications department or they haven't kept their eye on the ball lately.

I am not involved in it so you will have to blame someone else

You may think you are protected by the anonymity of the PPruNe forum. Enjoy the bliss while it lasts !

"But Brian Simpson said the European Parliament had passed the Basic Regulation with the European-licensing element included and could not now say it didn’t want it."

Indeed, I think Brian and many Europeans with him want a uniform European License. The non-existence of this is actually one of the historical origins of the widespread N-register use (there are of course many others).

What Brian doesn't want is fall-out from a runaway Commission and EASA who abuse this genuine and justified wish for uniformity to settle some scores and to kill off General Aviation. Brian also doesn't want to infringe ICAO agreements. Brian is one of those down to earth MEP's who know what it's like when you're denied fair opportunities (he's from Liverpool and used to teach there) and who will do the right thing when presented with the proper information.

What we would all love to see is a uniform European Licensing system that allows for affordable training at all levels, truly promotes the freedom to travel while reducing unnecessary burdens.

Do you think we use stars and stripes as blankets ? Do you think we like being fingerprinted by the TSA ? No, we want a European General Aviation industry (training, aircraft production and maintenance, oversight) that is competitive on its own merits so that no European Citizen would hesitate to chose the European Route.

And we want the freedom to fly across Europe, visit those beautiful places like Brighton, Cambridge, Ramsgate, York; Kerry, Waterford, Galway; Ostend, Antwerp; Cognac, Reims, Marseille; Ludwigshafen, Konstanz, Augsburg, Hamburg, Peenemunde; etc; and to do that in a WE under safe guidance from ATC on an IFR flight plan.

Instead, we are witnessing a vindictive Executive and Aviation Agency with double agendas, individual conflicts of interest, intransparency, contempt for democratic principles and freeriding; This in turn decreases our productivity, possibly getting behind the curve on important items such as SatNav guidance development, ATC optimisation, environmentally enhancing initiatives etc...

But you don't care because you're just an "interested" bystander, aren't you ?

[IO540]

This CAA Q&A has come out.

The 2 year derogation (to April 2014) is in there.