QXC form 2105 withdrawn
 

The form used to certify the PPL QXC has been withdrawn. Does anyone know if this form or equivalent still needs to be submitted with a licence application?

No - it was CAA auric embellishment and never a part-FCL requirement.

The Qualifying Cross Country was part of the UK PPL that ceased to exist in 1999, when under JAR-FCL it became part of the training!

....but if you submit a licence application without the "original QXC form" there is no hope of obtaining a licence. It fails at the screening level.

I will still get them to take a form, as it gives the student a sense of achievement.
If student mucks up, how are we to know?
If the CAA don't want it, then just keep in student records.

Aviation reminds me of my first job as a draughtsman.
My boss would always come along and suggest a few alterations to my drawing, which made not the slightest difference to the functionality of the design.

Ah well we'll see what happens as we have just submitted a PPL application which includes said form. I'll let you know if the CAA have any problems, but form only posted this week.

The form was actually perpetuated by the industry even though it has not been a requirement for 16 years. On line applications have never required the form and over a year ago the CAA produced a IN announcing the removal of the form. The IN was never published, possibly because the CAA did not want to admit that it had never been an EASA or even a JAA requirement; they simply removed the form and hopefully, it is now dead and gone. I received confirmation of this a few days ago.

It was originally used because the QXC was conducted after all PPL training and Skill tests had been completed, and was the final qualifying event that was otherwise unchecked, hence a certificate.

Also note that SRG1105A, in Guidance note 2, re. "supporting docs. reqd.", asks for "Original qualifying cross country certificate". I would have thought most clubs would revert to the old forms which also included a grading of the students arrival. After all it's a reasonably objective way of checking if the student completed the exercise, for which the CFI/HoT will sign for on completion of the training.

I wonder if it was a fallout from the massive ruck that I had with them recently...... I had a load of PPL(A) applications refused from my students in Jerez because the forms were not signed. AENA Staff will not sign the forms, only stamp them. We had an exemption going back donkeys years that they did not need to be signed and then for some reason suddenly had everyone rejected.

I pointed out that it was not EASA compliant and that it was the UK gold plating as usual. To cut it short we had a big fight, it went round the houses before some "technical expert" in LTS ruled that we were quite correct and that we did not need the form signed or even need the form. Next thing the form is withdrawn. Maybe just coincidence....

Bose;
A number of us have been at them for some time. I even proof read and corrected their IN a year ago, but they were reluctant to publish it.
If schools need this form for their records, then they have a pretty appalling training record system. A student must carry on their cross country flights a copy of the authorisation for the flight, a copy should also go on the records.

I can never remember an occasion when the QXC was done after skill tests?
I suppose it could have been done, but never knew anyone doing that.
Back in the seventies the QXC was only valid for six months, mine ran out and I did it again after GHT. QXC was done after NFT in the nineties, a much better system.
I suppose we have to protect the little darlings from adverse comments written on the QXC certificate.

Whoppity, I have no doubt you were at it a long time with them. However as I said, we had rather a massive fight with them that went to the very top and literally weeks after them capitulating this happened......

Up until July 1999 there was no requirement to complete the QXC prior to the GST. In any event it could not be completed until after the NFT which was introduced in the 80s as a result of people were getting lost on the QXC.

There was a big ho-ha when the JAA required the 150nm Solo X-CTY, which replaced the QXC, to be completed prior to the Skill Test, as part of the training! Once it became part of the training it was fully documented and there was no further need for a meaningless certificate signed by an airport cleaner saying how good the candidates airmanship was!

In the 80s and 90s it was 9 months!

Well it would appear to be a requirement for the nppl still. As I have a student who didn't send it in and it got rejected earlier this week.

I was amazed NFT introduced 1987.
You know I would have said it was in the early nineties.
Time passes...

Just heard from my ex student that his PPL arrived exactly 4 weeks from submission of the paperwork so the CAA QXC form does seem to work.

Then heaven help us, if it requires a form that has had no purpose for 16 years, to make things work!

We have just had a LAPL to PPL conversion rejected because a solo cross country certificate wasn't included. I haven't been including one for the last 9 months or so all without problem.

Has anyone else had this problem? Should we infuture include one as part of every application?

No! This nonsense seems to crop up every now and again. Over 2 years ago the CAA wrote an IN to clear this up once and for all, but never actually published it. We should not perpetuate a requirement that ceased over 17 years ago. Ask them to show you where in the regulation it makes any mention of a "Qualifying" cross country?

pay the £100, walk to gatwick, get licence, walk back to scotland.... far quicker!