EASA Night Rating
 

Can the night rating training be done alongside the PPL training so that the rating can be applied for at the same time as the PPL?

Thanks for any help.

Yes

But, in my opinion, in general unless student is ready for Test at 35-38 hours not worth doing until after the Skills Test has been passed; which does mean min 50 hours (45 PPL then 5 Night). Will save the Night Rating application fee though.

Reason: I think last few hours of any student's training should be geared towards the test they are about to undergo.

Thanks Level Attitude

The answer is now "No" - it was discussed at a recent EASA meeting and the conclusion was that Night Rating training may not be included in the basic PPL course.

Which seems rather daft to me.

Beagle, thanks!

Beagle,
What does included in the basic course mean?

For PPL it is 25hours Dual and 10hours Solo - the other 10 hours experience required could include the Night Rating requirements could they not?

So does that mean a student cannot fly solo at night even under the supervision of an FI?

As you say Beagle seems a bit daft.

I can understand that it would not be part of the PPL training but surely the night training can be additional prior to licence application?

I think it just means that you can't include it in the 45 hours minimum. ie. You can't count the same flight time towards both a PPL and a Night Rating.

It was always the case before EASA that you could only count flight time towards one qualifiacation at a time.


MJ:ok:

I see the confusion - my bad!

When I said "alongside" I meant the training would be in addition to the PPL training/hours.

It's been a long day.

PPL & Night
 

Yes, just done it this month with someone.
But as has been said, can't use the hours twice, training hours for night rating needs to be in addition to those for PPL.
Also, it doesn't save the applicant the fee, even if a combined application is submitted, the CAA charge both fees.

Level Attitude asked: No, they may not. Night Rating training may not be included in the 'other 10', so we were told.

The latest NPA has the night rating syllabus in it and might answer the questions posed. CRD closes this March for a q3 publication I believe.

Not so:
LASORS 2010 Section C1
Training for a Night Qualification (Aeroplanes) may be completed and included within the 45 hours total flight time required for the JAR-FCL PPL(A), providing the minimum requirements at (a) and (b) have been met

a. 25 hours Dual Instruction on aeroplanes
b. 10 hours Supervised solo flight time on aeroplanes

Neither what has been discussed in a darkened room, nor what is written in an NPA counts. Current Regulations are written, unfortunately not always unambiguously, and neither Part-FCL nor CAP804 state that training for the Night Rating cannot be included in a PPL course - therefore it can, particularly as it always was.

That rather surprised me so I rechecked the Scheme of Charges and although it says no charge for an IR applied for at the same time as a Licence it doesn't mention the Night Rating.

Having read through FCL.210.A PPL(A) — Experience requirements and crediting and FCL.810 Night rating, it is quite clear that the Night Rating Course is a specific course at an ATO of at least 5 hours duration. The PPL experience requirement refers only to: No mention of a 45 hour Course. Apart from the specified 25/10 hours there is nothing to prohibit the 5 hours night being included in the remaining 10 hours.

It matters not what the CAA or EASA or committees might think, an ATO is simply required to comply with the Regulation as it is written, nobody can make the requirement more stringent.

WHAT'S HAPPENING ???
 

Whopity and I seem to be agreeing on something :O

Oops. I should have said 'before JAA'


MJ:ok:

It matters not what Whopity might think.

His former employers are adamant that training for the night rating may not be included in the PPL course.

The 45 hours of training may only be PPL training, i.e. for the course of training for the PPL. The night rating is not part of this course of training, hence may not be included.

I tried to argue against this, but the CAA were adamant.

They are adamant about a number of things these days that often result in a back track.......

bose-x, I fear that there's little chance of that, given that all the other NAAs at the meeting agreed with this frankly ridiculous decision.

If they refuse you go for a Regulation 6 Appeal and then you have the option of a Judicial Review which should see compliance with the regulation no matter how adamant they are.