RTF to ATO
This is an unholy mess.
I have yet to meet anyone who supports the idea of PPL/LAPL training outside an RF / non-complex ATO.
In 1995 PPL(A) issues were 3451 compared to 1657 in 2013 a reduction of over 50%! So you could say we have already destroyed half the industry.
Whopity wrote:
Not really. As you and your erstwhile Gatwickian employers well knew, there were a lot of shady goings-on in those days....
It worked perfectly well up to 1999 and I have not noticed any improvement since then!
...I have yet to meet anyone who supports the idea of PPL/LAPL training outside an RF / non-complex ATO.
I think that any qualified Instructor, with access to a suitable aeroplane should be able to give instruction without any further formality, and I know many other sensible people who think the same.
The rest is all just unnecessary baggage that will slowly, but inevitably, increase in weight until it drags the industry to a standstill.
MJ
Last edited by Mach Jump; 17th Sep 2014 at 09:52. Reason: Spelling
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So now that the requirement to become an ATO has been delayed until April 2018 I have one question. Do we still have to get ATO approval to teach LAPL? I'm guessing that the answer is yes.
Delay to flight training school transition deadline announced | CAA Newsroom | About the CAA
Delay to flight training school transition deadline announced | CAA Newsroom | About the CAA
The original letter from the GAU stated clearly that, in the event of a positive vote, RFs would be able to instruct for the LAPL during the extended derogation. This will, of course, please those ex-RFs that have paid in excess of Ł1,000 each for an utterly worthless approval.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Age: 65
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BGA are saying on their website that the requirement to have a EASA LAPL or PPL has also been deferred until April 2018...
Don't think thats correct, the CAA website says nothing regarding any changes to Part FCL deadline of April 2015, just the deferment regarding the RTF to ATO...
http://old.gliding.co.uk/bgainfo/news.htm
Don't think thats correct, the CAA website says nothing regarding any changes to Part FCL deadline of April 2015, just the deferment regarding the RTF to ATO...
http://old.gliding.co.uk/bgainfo/news.htm
IN 2013/206 confirms that the requirement to have an EASA licence for all aircraft is deferred to 8 April 2015.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IN 2013/206 confirms that the requirement to have an EASA licence for all aircraft is deferred to 8 April 2015.
ifitaint...
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hotel this week, hotel next week, home whenever...
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That will now be deferred until 08th April 2018. UK national licence holders, including NPPLs, will be able to continue to fly EASA aircraft within LAPL privileges until 08th April 2018.
Any idea if/when there will be 'official' publication of this? (if it hasn't been issued already!)
Ta
DD
I believe that the date of effect is on the 20th day following publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. However, the recent vote has yet to result in anything being published in the OJ.
Also, there was a proposal in the draft amendment to extend the derogation for 3rd country licence holders' conversion until Apr 2016 - but I don't know whether that was actually tabled at the Committee meeting.
Also, there was a proposal in the draft amendment to extend the derogation for 3rd country licence holders' conversion until Apr 2016 - but I don't know whether that was actually tabled at the Committee meeting.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: hayling island
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its on CAA's own website under frequently asked questions
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) requirement for all Registered Training Facilities (RTF) providing private pilot training, to become Approved Training Organisations (ATO), will be postponed, the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has confirmed. The Aircrew Regulation requires all pilot training leading to an EASA flight crew licence, to take place from an ATO. Implementation of the requirement for RTFs will now be deferred to April 2018, following a decision made on 9 October 2014 by the European regulator.
Under the original timeframe, RTFs had to become ATOs by April 2015, as part of a package of Europe-wide changes to the flight crew training industry. Following representations from many in the general aviation community, the CAA has worked with EASA to extend the transition deadline in order to permit work to be carried out to produce a more proportionate alternative set of European rules for private pilot training.
This decision, which acknowledges the difficulties some training schools have faced in meeting the original deadline, will enable schools to continue instructing students for the award of EASA private pilot licences until April 2018, while a more proportionate system is developed and put in place. The CAA will continue to work with EASA and members of the UK and European GA communities to develop alternative options, with the ultimate aim of providing a high quality pilot training structure.
Tony Rapson Head of the CAA’s General Aviation Unit said “This postponement is not only important in itself, but is also clear evidence of EASA starting to deliver on its commitment for ‘Simpler, Lighter, Better Rules for General Aviation.”
The CAA said it supports EASA in its development work and remains committed to making sure the transition process from RTF to ATO contains the minimum of regulatory burden.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) requirement for all Registered Training Facilities (RTF) providing private pilot training, to become Approved Training Organisations (ATO), will be postponed, the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has confirmed. The Aircrew Regulation requires all pilot training leading to an EASA flight crew licence, to take place from an ATO. Implementation of the requirement for RTFs will now be deferred to April 2018, following a decision made on 9 October 2014 by the European regulator.
Under the original timeframe, RTFs had to become ATOs by April 2015, as part of a package of Europe-wide changes to the flight crew training industry. Following representations from many in the general aviation community, the CAA has worked with EASA to extend the transition deadline in order to permit work to be carried out to produce a more proportionate alternative set of European rules for private pilot training.
This decision, which acknowledges the difficulties some training schools have faced in meeting the original deadline, will enable schools to continue instructing students for the award of EASA private pilot licences until April 2018, while a more proportionate system is developed and put in place. The CAA will continue to work with EASA and members of the UK and European GA communities to develop alternative options, with the ultimate aim of providing a high quality pilot training structure.
Tony Rapson Head of the CAA’s General Aviation Unit said “This postponement is not only important in itself, but is also clear evidence of EASA starting to deliver on its commitment for ‘Simpler, Lighter, Better Rules for General Aviation.”
The CAA said it supports EASA in its development work and remains committed to making sure the transition process from RTF to ATO contains the minimum of regulatory burden.
So, for the next three years, if you want to start a new school, you still have to become an ATO under the present rules, knowing that they will all be relaxed, or even disappear altogether in the future? Isn't it about time that this ridiculous shambles was abandoned, and PPL/ LAPL training allowed to continue using the RTF system? (Which was itself becoming far too onerous and expensive!)
MJ
MJ
Last edited by Mach Jump; 21st Oct 2014 at 23:18. Reason: Added phrase in brackets.
The CAA said it supports EASA in its development work and remains committed to making sure the transition process from RTF to ATO contains the minimum of regulatory burden.
(c) to promote cost-efficiency in the regulatory and certification
processes and to avoid duplication at national and
European level; and
(f) to provide a level playing field for all actors in the internal
aviation market.
processes and to avoid duplication at national and
European level; and
(f) to provide a level playing field for all actors in the internal
aviation market.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: France
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(f) to provide a level playing field for all actors in the internal
aviation market
aviation market
And yet if I wanted to provide training for PPL, night etc, I would have to set up an ATO, as it's not allowed to set up an RTF anymore.
What kind of level playing field is it?
Last edited by 172510; 28th Oct 2014 at 10:34.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Level playing field - ha!
We thought about being an RTF just before the deadline but - looking three years down the line - didn't think it would be much use in that period.
So we should work towards becoming an ATO......
But now we could have had three more years of RTF!
So we won't be adding Gp A training at Strathaven.
(and there is a Red Tape challenge to find out why GA is shrinking?)
We thought about being an RTF just before the deadline but - looking three years down the line - didn't think it would be much use in that period.
So we should work towards becoming an ATO......
But now we could have had three more years of RTF!
So we won't be adding Gp A training at Strathaven.
(and there is a Red Tape challenge to find out why GA is shrinking?)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking from the other side of the fence. We did it with little problem. Biggest issue for us was the SMS which I still think is pointless but nonetheless we are compliant.
At times I think it's a lot of fuss about nothing and wonder if the reluctance to change is as much a problem as red tape?
At times I think it's a lot of fuss about nothing and wonder if the reluctance to change is as much a problem as red tape?
