ATPL valid for SEP (with no SEP for 10 years?)

[xrayalpha]

Hi all,

We have an EASA ATPL (A) holder wanting to do some flying training.

The Flight Examiner has suggested that he may not need to do a GST since his ATPL is "downward compatible", so is valid as a PPL(A)

This extract from the CAA web site:
Airline Transport Pilot Licence - Aeroplane ATPL(A) | Commercial Pilots | Personal Licences and Training
seems to suggest that the holder of a current ATPL (A) can also fly an SEP, since the ATPL will keep the PPL(A) valid?
Overview

The holder of a Part-FCL ATPL(A) can fly EASA Aeroplanes registered in the EU and non-EASA Aeroplanes registered in the UK that come within the privileges of the licence and the valid ratings included in the licence.

Holders can:

- Exercise all the privileges of the holder of an LAPL(A), a PPL(A) and a CPL(A)

- Act as PIC of aeroplanes engaged in commercial air transport.



There doesn't seem to be, in EASA-land, anything to say the PPL(A) has to have a current rating attached!

I presume that, since he would then have a valid PPL(A) he would then be able to fly three-axis microlights too, without the need for a NPPL (M).

Thoughts - rather than wait up to 30 working days from CAA (chap has test booked in for next week).

Thanks.

[Curtis E Carr]

Not entirely sure what the question is but there seems to be some confusion between licenses and ratings.

From Annex 1 to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1178/2011:

FCL.505 ATPL — Privileges

(a) The privileges of the holder of an ATPL are, within the appropriate aircraft category, to:

(1) exercise all the privileges of the holder of an LAPL, a PPL and a CPL;

(2) act as PIC of aircraft engaged in commercial air transport.

And

FCL.700 Circumstances in which class or type ratings are required

(a) Except in the case of the LAPL, SPL and BPL, holders of a pilot licence shall not act in any capacity as pilots of an aircraft unless they have a valid and appropriate class or type rating, except when undergoing skill tests, or proficiency checks for renewal of class or type ratings, or receiving flight instruction.

(b) [...]

(c) [...]

Ignoring the matter of a PPL(A), are you saying that your ATPL(A) holder wishes to fly SEP aircraft? If so, surely he only needs refresher training (assuming that he held a SEP rating at some stage in the past) followed by a Class Rating proficiency check?

[LAI]

You very much do have to have a valid rating, attached to a valid licence, in order to fly any type or class.

Quoted from the CAA website: "Think of your EASA licence as a folder that contains privileges and ratings which define what, when, where and how you are able to fly, and includes the right to fly EASA aircraft defined by ratings. While your EASA licence itself will last for life, the ratings within may expire at defined intervals, and those that could expire must be kept valid or renewed if you still wish to use them."

The individual in question will have to complete a training course and proficiency check, in order to renew his SEP rating, before he can fly anything within the class. details here: Renew a SEP Aeroplane Class Rating | Private Pilots | Personal Licences and Training

Hope that helps!

[Flying Wild]

If the SEP rating hasn't been used in 10 years he'll need some training from an ATO before having the rating revalidated.
Surely a professional pilot would realise that they are somewhat out of date on type and want some training?!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Wot Curtis sed.

Licence is current and valid, class rating is not and needs revalidating with training as required and a PC.

G

[Mach Jump]

Yep, as above.

An ATPL embodies the privileges of a CPL, PPL, LAPL etc, but all those Licences require a valid Class/Type Rating to fly the aircraft in that Class/Type.

He has to revalidate his SEP Class Rating, before he can fly an SEP as PIC.


MJ

PS. His old SEP Rating will now be on the reverse of his Licence as an expired rating (assuming he requested that it be kept on his EASA Licenece when it was issued) so the Examiner can't revalidate it in the field after the Proficiency Check. It will have to be sent to the CAA to have it returned to the front of the Licence as a current Rating.

[ifitaintboeing]

Correct, except it is RENEWAL of the SEP class rating not REVALIDATION. See FCL.740 for renewal requirements (or CAP 804 Section 4, Part H, Subpart 1, page 6 where this is reproduced):

(b) Renewal. If a class or type rating has expired, the applicant shall:

(1) take refresher training at an ATO, when necessary to reach the level of proficiency necessary to safely operate the relevant class or type of aeroplane; and

(2) pass a proficiency check in accordance with Appendix 9 to Part-FCL.

See also FCL.010 Definitions for definition of Revalidation and Renewal.

ifitaint...

[xrayalpha]

Thanks folks.

Chap actually wants to fly 3-axis microlights (and has done some training as per NPPL cross-credit requirements) and has a GST booked for next week.

However, the flight examiner had suggested - contrary to my understanding - that the flight test (yes, GST, not LPC, since for the NPPL M ) might be unnecessary.

Looking at the referenced CAA page on ATPL, it was unclear what the situation was.....

And with the madness of EASA, I wouldn't have been surprised that no GST was now required. There seem to be very many odd bits!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Hmm, doesn't that change things slightly?

3-axis microlight would require differences training anyhow, but do sit within the SEP class rating. However, he can't train and be examined for the SEP class rating in a microlight.

So, either he needs to revalidate SEP on PA28 or suchlike and then do microlight differences training, or engineer some magic that gets him a separate NPPL(M) ? Or can he apply for a separate UK ATPL, on which he can then train and do the national microlight class rating? [I did that, I got a separate UK CPL to my original EASA CPL, which has a microlight rating shown on it.] If he's dont this last already, and has a GST next week, that seems to cover everything?

FCL is certainly irrelevant to microlights per-ce, except where it permits him to get an SEP class rating on his ATPL, to then do microlight differences training on, if he goes that way?

Not sure there's an easy route there?

G

[Mach Jump]

Thank you, Ifitaint.

...that the flight test (yes, GST, not LPC, since for the NPPL M ) might be unnecessary.

If he had a current SEP Class Rating, he could be issued with an NPPL(M) without any training or Test.

As his Microlight privileges (included in his SEP) have expired by more than 5 years he must do training as required and a GST including an Oral Theroretical Knowlege Examination

Ref:
NPPL cross crediting requirements at CAP804, Pt.II, Appendix 1, Section 4.2 b)

Or, renew his SEP Class rating as already discussed above, (SEP includes Microlight Privileges) and any Differences Training required if swapping control systems. IAW ANO Article 62 (6) and Schedule 7 Part B Section 2


MJ

[Genghis the Engineer]

(SEP includes microlight privileges)

Subject, I believe, to differences training. No different to doing tailwheel for example, but still required.

G

[S-Works]

If he does not have a current SEP rating then its pointless doing a ML GST unless he is planning on applying for an NPPL(M). A ML GST won't renew and SEP and you can't include a ML rating an an EASA licence.

[xrayalpha]

Hi all,

The chap has done about 4 hours in our C42 and is up to test standard according to his instructor.

He had looked at getting his SEP up and running again, but felt that - in Scotland - a traditional Spam Can was going to be an expensive way ahead.

The route of an NPPL (M) appealed since we charge 140 per hour and no landing fees and a tight circuit, compared to SEP rates elsewhere in Scotland.

Whichever route - SEP or NPPL - there is aircraft hire and examiner fees.

Then there is C42 lessons - cheaper than SEP lessons in Scotland.

Then we have no landing fees - Cumbernauld is £15 for the 1st and 7.50 for touch and goes.

But there is an NPPL M initial issue fee to pay.

But then he could add SSEA to his NPPL, if he decides to fly/own an LAA aircraft.

Basically, hiring or operating an Annexe 1 aircraft is just getting very expensive. And if he wants to fly in bad weather or at night, he can get paid for it in his 757!

(and my wife doesn't want any CofA aircraft based here since she thinks visiting Cessnas are too noisy, and there are few other hangarage options in central Scotland!)

If he could have avoided an NPPL application and a NPPL GST examiner fee and the aircraft hire for the test because of the way his examiner had read the ATPL references on the CAA web site, it might have saved him a few hundred quid.

(would rather he spent the money with us than the CAA and the examiner!)

So, thanks all for confirming what I thought. Good to know we were right and the examiner wrong!!

[Mach Jump]

Subject, I believe, to differences training. No different to doing tailwheel for example, but still required.

If I remember the tangle of EASA, CAA,and NPPL requirements correctly, the Differences Training is required if you have an NPPL, or an old CAA PPL, but not if you have an SEP on an EASA Licence.


MJ

[ifitaintboeing]

ANO Article 62(6):

(6) A Part-FCL licence with single-engine piston aeroplane privileges is not deemed to be rendered valid for a microlight aeroplane unless the holder of the licence has undergone differences training in accordance with Section 2 of Part B of Schedule 7 , appropriate for a microlight aeroplane class rating.

ifitaint...

[Genghis the Engineer]

It's obviously just plain sensible to get training on microlights before flying them, legalities aside.

Once upon a time, before the concept of differences training was with us, the UK used to see 1-2 perfectly serviceable microlights per year written off (sometimes fatally, sometimes not) by experienced light (or not so light) aeroplane pilots who thought that because they could fly, there was no need to get any extra training on these simple little aeroplanes.

That for most people, with most licences, that training is now mandatory is only legislating for (not) common (enough) sense.


Presumably for the fellow we're talking about, either initial issue of an NPPL(M), or getting a UK ATPL issued and then adding a microlight national rating are both perfectly valid solutions, and apart from paperwork (and having the option going forward to fly on an NPPL medical) there's not much real difference.

G

[Mach Jump]

ANO Article 62(6):

That's what you get when you rely on your memory! I'm sure that one of those combinations (could be an old CAA Licence with an SEP) doesn't require Differences Training though. I'll have to look it up.

We seem to have missed the point with the Differences Training though. It should be between Weight Shift and Three Axis controls, not between 'Group A' and Microlight.


MJ

[ifitaintboeing]

We seem to have missed the point with the Differences Training though. It should be between Weight Shift and Three Axis controls, not between 'Group A' and Microlight.

It is. Not surprisingly, it's the section to which ANO Article 62(6) refers.

ANO Schedule 7 Part B Section 2:

If the aeroplane has:

(aa) three axis controls and the holder's previous training and experience has only been in an aeroplane with fl exwing/weightshift controls;

(bb) flexwing/weightshift controls and the holder's previous training and experience has only been in an aeroplane with three axis controls; or

(cc) more than one engine,

before exercising the privileges of the rating the holder must complete appropriate differences training.

ifitaint...

[Mach Jump]

So, The SEP Class Rating does include Microlight Privileges, and Differences Training is only required when swapping contol systems. (Ignoring the Multi-Engine part)


MJ

[Genghis the Engineer]

And if you try to fly a Thruster TST without training, you'll still break it.

G