Examiner Testing Own Student
Could someone help out with a reference that prevents or oermits an examiner testing there own student for the issue of an EASA PPL(A)?
Student has done training for a conversion from an ICAO licence for a PPL with an Instructor who is also an examiner and then subsequently done the skill test with them. Permissable or not? |
Regulation 1178 FCL.1005
FCL.1005 Limitation of privileges in case of vested interests Examiners shall not conduct: (a) skill tests or assessments of competence of applicants for the issue of a licence, rating or certificate: (1) to whom they have provided flight instruction for the licence, rating or certificate for which the skill test or assessment of competence is being taken; or (2) when they have been responsible for the recommendation for the skill test, in accordance with FCL.030(b); (b) skill tests, proficiency checks or assessments of competence whenever they feel that their objectivity may be affected. |
Thanks whoppity. Just what i was after.
|
Hi guys , can't provide a quote ...but have I heard that it's changing and examiners can do up to 25% of candidates training ?
rgds quoteless condor . |
Many moons ago you could train and examine not sure when it changed cause I'm not an examiner but certainly in the late 90's it was ok
|
I think you can get an exemption though can't you, for circumstance? When I was doing my IMC rating (as it was) after my PPL, the only instructor qualified to teach it was also the only examiner. I believe he was also the only (known) examiner in the region aside from those employed by airlines who weren't interested in doing it. Therefore he did both my training and exam, which the CAA took no issue with.
|
I think you can get an exemption though can't you IMC is a National rating and is not subject to EU Law, there is nothing to prohibit an Examiner training and testing an IMC candidate apart from "good practice". |
I stand corrected. The fact that as a national rating it wasn't subject to the EU law had completely escaped me!
|
This is one of the latest EASA proposals for amending the Aircrew Regulation:
Examiners shall not conduct: (a) skill tests or assessments of competence of applicants for the issue of a licence, rating or certificate: (1) to whom they have provided more than 25% of the required flight instruction for the licence, rating or certificate for which the skill test or assessment of competence is being taken
|
Looks familiar!
|
If this is voted in, will it then apply to national licences and ratings like the NPPL and IMC?
MJ:ok: |
No, because they are outwith the EASA regulation.
|
IMC is a National rating and is not subject to EU Law, there is nothing to prohibit an Examiner training and testing an IMC candidate apart from "good practice". It is the UK CAA that authorises Examiners and Examiners have to abide by the limits of that authorisation. In September 2012 the UK CAA aligned the requirements for the testing for National Licences/Ratings to match those of EASA. Standards Document 21v2 August 2013 Section 1.2 Page 6 "Examiners are certified by the CAA ........... The privileges and requirements of Examiners are set out in EASA Part-FCL Subpart K" = No Testing of own students. Flight Examiners Handbook July 2014 Supplement 2 - National Licences and Ratings Section 6.1 "Except for Microlights Examiners shall not test applicants to whom they have given instruction" |
The privileges and requirements of Examiners are set out in EASA Part-FCL Subpart K" = No Testing of own students. Both Standards Doc 21 and the FEH are guidance documents and have no status in law. |
Both Standards Doc 21 and the FEH are guidance documents and have no status in law. ifitaint... |
Whopity, Ifitaint.
Yep. That's my understanding of the present situation as well. MJ:ok: |
ifitaintboeing, indeed you are entirely correct.
When we created the NPPL, it was a specific requirement that the pre-JAR UK situation regarding examiners would apply. In other words, although 'best practice' should mean that normally an examiner wouldn't test an applicant with whom he/she had done a lot of flying, there was no such legal restriction. When I saw the error, I informed the relevant person at the CAA. However, he elected to include this CAA gold plating in the FEH.....:rolleyes: |
When I saw the error, I informed the relevant person at the CAA. However, he elected to include this CAA gold plating in the FEH..... Why do you say it is it 'gold plating' if it is only a suggestion or a recommendation and not a requirement? Both Standards Doc 21 and the FEH are guidance documents and have no status in law "Examiners are certified by the CAA ........... The privileges and requirements of Examiners are set out in EASA Part-FCL Subpart K" This would be a nonsense with different requirements being applied to an IR student/test candidate (for example) depending on whether they held only a UK National Licence or only a Part-FCL Licence. |
Both Standards Doc 21 and the FEH are guidance documents and have no status in law. Unsurprisingly no one has, because it is not possible. In fact the law confirms the requirements: CAP393 ANO 2014 PART 7 FLIGHT CREW LICENSING – GRANT OF LICENCE AND MAINTENANCE OF PRIVILEGES Grant, renewal and privileges of United Kingdom flight crew licences (NPPL, UK PPL, etc) 64 (9) The CAA may grant a licence subject to such conditions as it thinks fit. Which would include who might conduct an initial test Ratings and qualifications (IMC, etc) 65 (6) The CAA may grant a rating or qualification subject to such conditions as it thinks fit. Which would include who might conduct an initial test SCHEDULE 7 Articles 64 to 71 and 78 Flight crew of aircraft – licences, ratings, qualifications and maintenance of licence Privileges Certificate of test 2 A certificate of test required by article 66(2), 68(1) or 69(2) must be signed by a person authorised by the CAA to sign certificates of this kind and certify the following: An Examiner is authorised by the CAA to sign certificates and to conduct Skill Tests PART 31 POWERS AND PENALTIES Certificates, authorisations, approvals and permissions 245 Wherever in this Order there is provision for the issue or grant of a certificate, authorisation, approval or permission by the CAA, unless otherwise provided, such a certificate, authorisation, approval or permission: (b) may be issued or granted subject to such conditions as the CAA thinks fit So: The CAA is perfectly entitled to impose conditions on Examiners for National Licences or Ratings All UK Examiner certificates are linked to Part-FCL, either directly or via the ANO. Which also means that if Part-FCL changes (as per condor17 Post 4) then any relaxation will instantly apply for National testing as well. I look forward to having it explained to me why CAP393 does not apply to National Licences or Ratings; or how I have misunderstood it..............:rolleyes: |
Which would include who might conduct an initial test Which also means that if Part-FCL changes (as per condor17 Post 4) then any relaxation will instantly apply for National testing as well. It has always been the case that the CAA shall issue licences and ratings as it thinks fit; This refers largely to administrative procedures and experience requirements. The CAA are not entitled to make or change laws; they may assist government in the process. To limit an Examiner's privileges requires more than a note in a variety of guidance or information documents. To change the status quo they will need to conduct a regulatory impact assessment, provide a safety case and make appropriate recomendations to government, none of which has been done because it is an expensive and lengthy process with no safety case to justify it. Note also in CAP 393 Air Navigation: The Order and the Regulations Published for the use of those concerned with air navigation, but not to be treated as authoritative (see Foreword) CAP 393 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:23. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.