UK CAA IR 7 year fiasco
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done guys!
Just a note of thanks to Fart Master and the many others who have helped to find a solution to this ridiculous situation. Your efforts are very much appreciated.
Cheers
Cheers
That's typical of the nonesense the Campaign Against Aviation are dishing out. They don't understand it, so they just refer you to the manuals which are no help. They are only forced to make a decision when a pilot applies and more often than not, they will give you bad news - just as in the 7 years fiasco.
They need to make a policy decision soon, or they will continue to lose pilots to other authorities and consequently revenue.
They need to make a policy decision soon, or they will continue to lose pilots to other authorities and consequently revenue.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: WORLD
Age: 53
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had exactly the same answer for a different question !
I am trying to find out if you can maintain your UK EASA license flying a type you have on it but for a non EASA airline (non EASA TRE and sims).
This case was covered in Lasors, couldn't find anything on CAP804.
Anybody ?
Cheers
I am trying to find out if you can maintain your UK EASA license flying a type you have on it but for a non EASA airline (non EASA TRE and sims).
This case was covered in Lasors, couldn't find anything on CAP804.
Anybody ?
Cheers
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about a new petition for the need of a simple sim check if current on type in an other IcAO state but not in your EASA licence...i am dreading the ATO cash thirsty machine 
''The UK CAA has been issuing EASA licences since 17th September 2012. CAP 804 is the replacement of LASORS (JAR) and details the new licensing requirements. The requirements to transfer a type rating from an ICAO licence can be found in CAP 804, Section 4, Part Q, ‘Acceptance of Class and Type Ratings.’ Please be aware of the validity of your UK IR. If a UK IR expires by more than 7 years an applicant will be required to complete the seven IR examinations and a further IR skills test. For further information please refer to CAP 804, Section 4, Part G, subpart 1 ‘FCL.625 IR (A).''
This is similar to a reply I received regarding the inclusion of non EASA ratings on an EASA licence. It didn't answer my question as I was pointing out that EASA PART FCL Section 4 Part Q Subpart 1 states:
(4) Aeroplane or helicopter type ratings may be issued to holders of Part-FCL licences that comply with the requirements for the issue of those ratings established by a third country. Such ratings will be restricted to aircraft registered in that third country. This restriction may be removed when the pilot complies with the requirements in paragraph C.1 of Annex III to Part-FCL.
The waffle I suspect was alluding to the fact that they weren't going to do it - and especially if a JAA IR hadn't been renewed in 7 years. Now they have no reason to refuse to include thrid country ratings. I am in the process of compsing another letter asking how they intend to honour this.
it may take a while, but in the meantime, the IAA are happy to issue these - so I suspect again, the CAA will realise there is some urgency as more UK licenced pilots chose another EASA Aviation Authority.
This is similar to a reply I received regarding the inclusion of non EASA ratings on an EASA licence. It didn't answer my question as I was pointing out that EASA PART FCL Section 4 Part Q Subpart 1 states:
(4) Aeroplane or helicopter type ratings may be issued to holders of Part-FCL licences that comply with the requirements for the issue of those ratings established by a third country. Such ratings will be restricted to aircraft registered in that third country. This restriction may be removed when the pilot complies with the requirements in paragraph C.1 of Annex III to Part-FCL.
The waffle I suspect was alluding to the fact that they weren't going to do it - and especially if a JAA IR hadn't been renewed in 7 years. Now they have no reason to refuse to include thrid country ratings. I am in the process of compsing another letter asking how they intend to honour this.
it may take a while, but in the meantime, the IAA are happy to issue these - so I suspect again, the CAA will realise there is some urgency as more UK licenced pilots chose another EASA Aviation Authority.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The final result from the CAA
Hi,
For those of you not signed up to the petition this is what I emailed everyone 3 days ago;
Greetings,
It seems to have been a long but interesting road dealing with this case. I would like to have made a dramatic announcement just to add to the suspense, but quite simply, due to everybody's efforts we've won! As I read things the CAA have adopted our proposals 100%
As I've mentioned before the CAA have been keeping me abreast of developments and said that they were waiting for Brussels to rubber stamp the derogation (Read partial exemption) as EASA had already approved it. I received 2 e-mails from licencing managers last night confirming the law will be integrated. I've been in possession of this derogation for a while but for obvious reasons didn't release it. Now I can, it's attached to the bottom of the e-mail. The exemption will be published in the 'Official Record series 4' on the CAA website very soon.
So where does this leave us? We are all now in the position of being able to keep our EASA ATPL's as we can now add/renew/revalidate a multi crew type on our licences, which had not been possible before without an IR. However under EASA regulations people may have to go to an ATO for an assessment if they want to put a new type on their licence.....But that's another issue.
If there are any more developments I'll let you know. Good luck with your CAA dealings! My thanks to all of you who phoned/wrote/harassed the CAA and especially to others who kept things moving along as well. You know who you are...
Cheers,
Chris.
DEROGATION PROPOSAL.
Proposed Article 14(6) derogation in respect of Annex I to Regulation (EU) 1178/2011 - Part-FCL - Part-FCL.625IR(c) and (d), for pilots who hold instrument ratings in accordance with the requirements of third countries.
1. Context:
The requirements for the renewal of an Instrument Rating (IR) are set out in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 1178/2011, ‘Part-FCL’ as follows:
“FCL.625 IR — Validity, revalidation and renewal
(c) Renewal. If an IR has expired, in order to renew their privileges applicants shall:
(1) go through refresher training at an ATO to reach the level of proficiency needed to pass the instrument element of the skill test in accordance with Appendix 9 to this Part; and
(2) complete a proficiency check in accordance with Appendix 9 to this Part, in the relevant aircraft category.
(d) If the IR has not been revalidated or renewed within the preceding 7 years, the holder will be required to pass again the IR theoretical knowledge examination and skill test”.
These requirements are similar (but not identical to) the previous requirements of JAR-FCL. The UK CAA believes that the requirements of FCL.625 IR(d) were created for the case where a licence holder ceases to fly under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) for 7 years. The rule does not take into account the possibility that the licence holder may have been flying under IFR using an Instrument Rating (IR) held on a 3rd country licence during the 7 year period which has been renewed during that period and which is therefore valid.
2. The issue:
The UK CAA is aware that a number of pilots with licences issued by EU States have been flying with 3rd country airlines using licences issued by the States where those airlines are based. These pilots have allowed their European Instrument Ratings to lapse, in the expectation that for the subsequent renewal of their European IRs the assessment of their recency of use of the rating would be based on the status of their 3rd country IRs.
It has been the past practice of the UK CAA to accept that if a pilot holds, or has recently held, an equivalent Instrument Rating on another ICAO Annex I compliant licence, that the requirements for revalidation of the UK-issued IR would be based upon the validity/expiry of the 3rd country ICAO Annex I compliant IR. The UK CAA understands that France, Ireland, Denmark, Belgium and the Netherlands have allowed similar arrangements for the holders of JAR-FCL licences.
The UK CAA has received a number of applications for the renewal of IRs from the holders of UK-issued licences who have allowed their IRs to lapse by more than 7 years. These applicants state that they either hold a current and equivalent 3rd country IR or that their 3rd country IR has lapsed by less than 7 years. Accordingly, they argue that they should not be required to re-take the Instrument Rating theoretical knowledge examinations or to undertake training at an ATO. They are objecting strongly to Part-FCL.625 IR requiring them to re-train and to re-take examinations, especially as many of them are currently acting as pilots for Commercial Air Transport flights into airports within the Community for 3rd country airlines using their 3rd country licences with Instrument Ratings.
The requirements of FCL.625 IR(c) and (d) appear to be intended to apply additional training and testing requirements depending upon the period of time since the pilot last used the privileges of the Instrument Rating. The UK CAA believes that it is incorrect and disproportionate to require a pilot who has a current, or recently lapsed, ICAO Annex I compliant IR from another country, to re-take the theoretical knowledge examinations to renew a European IR that has lapsed by more than 7 years; i.e. it is not appropriate to apply the same requirements to a pilot with recent IFR experience as would be applied to a pilot who has not flown under IFR for more than 7 years. It is difficult to see how doing this will affect safety when these pilots are flying or have been flying recently using their third country issued IRs.
Similarly, the UK CAA considers that if the European IR has lapsed by less than 7 years, but the pilot holds a current (non-expired) ICAO Annex I compliant IR on another licence, then the requirement to undertake training at an ATO before taking the renewal Proficiency Check should not apply.
3. The need for derogation:
Around 30 pilots currently flying with third country operators (using third country licences with IRs issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 1) have written to the UK CAA and/or to the UK Department for Transport to complain about the requirement to re-take the theoretical knowledge examinations before their UK-issued IRs can be renewed. Three of these pilots created an on-line petition during 2012, and by August it had attracted 500 supporters. Applying FCL.625(c) and (d), without any recognition that the third country IRs may have been renewed or revalidated during the preceding 7 years, requires these pilots to undertake re-training and to re-sit the theoretical knowledge examinations in addition to passing the proficiency check; (flying skills test). This does not acknowledge that they may have been recently flying commercial air transport flights into Europe for these third country airlines. These complainants assert that to require them to do this would impose needless hardship on them – by requiring them to undertake costly and time-consuming courses and examinations. It may also cause them to lose their livelihoods if the airlines in question refuse to employ them whilst they do this. It seems likely that there will be a similar need affecting pilots from some other Member States as and when those States implement Part FCL.
4. Proposed derogation:
It is proposed that derogation be permitted under Article 14(6) of Regulation 216/2008 so that where a pilot holds or has held a 3rd country ICAO Annex I compliant Instrument Rating, the expiry date of that 3rd country IR shall be used as the date of expiry of the IR for the purposes of FCL.625IR(c) and (d):
“In accordance with Article 14(6) of Regulation (EC) 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council the United Kingdom CAA will derogate from FCL.625 IR(c) and (d) of Annex I to Regulation (EU) No. 1178/2011 so that where a pilot holds or has held an Instrument Rating issued by a third country and that rating is compliant with Annex I to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, the applicability of FCL.625 IR(c) and (d) may be based on the validity dates of the Instrument Rating of that other country. This derogation is subject to the following conditions:
(i) a pilot with a current and valid 3rd country IR shall complete the revalidation requirements of FCL.625(b) and the aircraft category specific requirements for revalidation of the Part-FCL IR; meaning that he must pass the proficiency check, but is not required to undergo training or to re-take the theoretical knowledge examinations; and
(ii) a pilot who held a 3rd country IR that is no longer valid but had been revalidated or renewed within the preceding 7 years shall comply with the renewal requirements of FCL.625 IR(c), but is not required to re-take the theoretical knowledge examinations.”
An equivalent level of safety is maintained with this derogation because the necessity to apply the requirements of FCL.625 IR (c) and (d) is determined by how recently the pilot had the privilege of flying an aircraft under the Instrument Flight Rules. The State of Issue of the Instrument Rating that is used to carry out those flights under IFR does not affect the experience and practice gained through undertaking such flights.
Clear? If not PM me and I'll try to clarify things,
Chris.
For those of you not signed up to the petition this is what I emailed everyone 3 days ago;
Greetings,
It seems to have been a long but interesting road dealing with this case. I would like to have made a dramatic announcement just to add to the suspense, but quite simply, due to everybody's efforts we've won! As I read things the CAA have adopted our proposals 100%
As I've mentioned before the CAA have been keeping me abreast of developments and said that they were waiting for Brussels to rubber stamp the derogation (Read partial exemption) as EASA had already approved it. I received 2 e-mails from licencing managers last night confirming the law will be integrated. I've been in possession of this derogation for a while but for obvious reasons didn't release it. Now I can, it's attached to the bottom of the e-mail. The exemption will be published in the 'Official Record series 4' on the CAA website very soon.
So where does this leave us? We are all now in the position of being able to keep our EASA ATPL's as we can now add/renew/revalidate a multi crew type on our licences, which had not been possible before without an IR. However under EASA regulations people may have to go to an ATO for an assessment if they want to put a new type on their licence.....But that's another issue.
If there are any more developments I'll let you know. Good luck with your CAA dealings! My thanks to all of you who phoned/wrote/harassed the CAA and especially to others who kept things moving along as well. You know who you are...
Cheers,
Chris.
DEROGATION PROPOSAL.
Proposed Article 14(6) derogation in respect of Annex I to Regulation (EU) 1178/2011 - Part-FCL - Part-FCL.625IR(c) and (d), for pilots who hold instrument ratings in accordance with the requirements of third countries.
1. Context:
The requirements for the renewal of an Instrument Rating (IR) are set out in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 1178/2011, ‘Part-FCL’ as follows:
“FCL.625 IR — Validity, revalidation and renewal
(c) Renewal. If an IR has expired, in order to renew their privileges applicants shall:
(1) go through refresher training at an ATO to reach the level of proficiency needed to pass the instrument element of the skill test in accordance with Appendix 9 to this Part; and
(2) complete a proficiency check in accordance with Appendix 9 to this Part, in the relevant aircraft category.
(d) If the IR has not been revalidated or renewed within the preceding 7 years, the holder will be required to pass again the IR theoretical knowledge examination and skill test”.
These requirements are similar (but not identical to) the previous requirements of JAR-FCL. The UK CAA believes that the requirements of FCL.625 IR(d) were created for the case where a licence holder ceases to fly under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) for 7 years. The rule does not take into account the possibility that the licence holder may have been flying under IFR using an Instrument Rating (IR) held on a 3rd country licence during the 7 year period which has been renewed during that period and which is therefore valid.
2. The issue:
The UK CAA is aware that a number of pilots with licences issued by EU States have been flying with 3rd country airlines using licences issued by the States where those airlines are based. These pilots have allowed their European Instrument Ratings to lapse, in the expectation that for the subsequent renewal of their European IRs the assessment of their recency of use of the rating would be based on the status of their 3rd country IRs.
It has been the past practice of the UK CAA to accept that if a pilot holds, or has recently held, an equivalent Instrument Rating on another ICAO Annex I compliant licence, that the requirements for revalidation of the UK-issued IR would be based upon the validity/expiry of the 3rd country ICAO Annex I compliant IR. The UK CAA understands that France, Ireland, Denmark, Belgium and the Netherlands have allowed similar arrangements for the holders of JAR-FCL licences.
The UK CAA has received a number of applications for the renewal of IRs from the holders of UK-issued licences who have allowed their IRs to lapse by more than 7 years. These applicants state that they either hold a current and equivalent 3rd country IR or that their 3rd country IR has lapsed by less than 7 years. Accordingly, they argue that they should not be required to re-take the Instrument Rating theoretical knowledge examinations or to undertake training at an ATO. They are objecting strongly to Part-FCL.625 IR requiring them to re-train and to re-take examinations, especially as many of them are currently acting as pilots for Commercial Air Transport flights into airports within the Community for 3rd country airlines using their 3rd country licences with Instrument Ratings.
The requirements of FCL.625 IR(c) and (d) appear to be intended to apply additional training and testing requirements depending upon the period of time since the pilot last used the privileges of the Instrument Rating. The UK CAA believes that it is incorrect and disproportionate to require a pilot who has a current, or recently lapsed, ICAO Annex I compliant IR from another country, to re-take the theoretical knowledge examinations to renew a European IR that has lapsed by more than 7 years; i.e. it is not appropriate to apply the same requirements to a pilot with recent IFR experience as would be applied to a pilot who has not flown under IFR for more than 7 years. It is difficult to see how doing this will affect safety when these pilots are flying or have been flying recently using their third country issued IRs.
Similarly, the UK CAA considers that if the European IR has lapsed by less than 7 years, but the pilot holds a current (non-expired) ICAO Annex I compliant IR on another licence, then the requirement to undertake training at an ATO before taking the renewal Proficiency Check should not apply.
3. The need for derogation:
Around 30 pilots currently flying with third country operators (using third country licences with IRs issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 1) have written to the UK CAA and/or to the UK Department for Transport to complain about the requirement to re-take the theoretical knowledge examinations before their UK-issued IRs can be renewed. Three of these pilots created an on-line petition during 2012, and by August it had attracted 500 supporters. Applying FCL.625(c) and (d), without any recognition that the third country IRs may have been renewed or revalidated during the preceding 7 years, requires these pilots to undertake re-training and to re-sit the theoretical knowledge examinations in addition to passing the proficiency check; (flying skills test). This does not acknowledge that they may have been recently flying commercial air transport flights into Europe for these third country airlines. These complainants assert that to require them to do this would impose needless hardship on them – by requiring them to undertake costly and time-consuming courses and examinations. It may also cause them to lose their livelihoods if the airlines in question refuse to employ them whilst they do this. It seems likely that there will be a similar need affecting pilots from some other Member States as and when those States implement Part FCL.
4. Proposed derogation:
It is proposed that derogation be permitted under Article 14(6) of Regulation 216/2008 so that where a pilot holds or has held a 3rd country ICAO Annex I compliant Instrument Rating, the expiry date of that 3rd country IR shall be used as the date of expiry of the IR for the purposes of FCL.625IR(c) and (d):
“In accordance with Article 14(6) of Regulation (EC) 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council the United Kingdom CAA will derogate from FCL.625 IR(c) and (d) of Annex I to Regulation (EU) No. 1178/2011 so that where a pilot holds or has held an Instrument Rating issued by a third country and that rating is compliant with Annex I to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, the applicability of FCL.625 IR(c) and (d) may be based on the validity dates of the Instrument Rating of that other country. This derogation is subject to the following conditions:
(i) a pilot with a current and valid 3rd country IR shall complete the revalidation requirements of FCL.625(b) and the aircraft category specific requirements for revalidation of the Part-FCL IR; meaning that he must pass the proficiency check, but is not required to undergo training or to re-take the theoretical knowledge examinations; and
(ii) a pilot who held a 3rd country IR that is no longer valid but had been revalidated or renewed within the preceding 7 years shall comply with the renewal requirements of FCL.625 IR(c), but is not required to re-take the theoretical knowledge examinations.”
An equivalent level of safety is maintained with this derogation because the necessity to apply the requirements of FCL.625 IR (c) and (d) is determined by how recently the pilot had the privilege of flying an aircraft under the Instrument Flight Rules. The State of Issue of the Instrument Rating that is used to carry out those flights under IFR does not affect the experience and practice gained through undertaking such flights.
Clear? If not PM me and I'll try to clarify things,
Chris.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Terrific work FM. Top marks to you.
I take it from this it also means that by currently holding say a 777/787 rating on a EASA licence and currently flying the type in the middle east there is now no requirement to do anything other than an EASA LPC once every 3 years to keep it on......or does it stay valid due the third party activity and thus no separate EU test required ???
Thanks again
I take it from this it also means that by currently holding say a 777/787 rating on a EASA licence and currently flying the type in the middle east there is now no requirement to do anything other than an EASA LPC once every 3 years to keep it on......or does it stay valid due the third party activity and thus no separate EU test required ???
Thanks again
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
8che, Interesting point that I've chatted to a few pilots about.
2 issues. It seems the UK wants an EASA TRE to do a skills test, however the rest of Europe is still happy to accept 3rd party paperwork for type ratings and IR's, I THINK (I know one authority definitely does it for both parts). The second point is that it is acknowledged by EASA that a multi-pilot type and IR test are one and the same, you can't, for example, just put an A330 on your licence, you need to have a valid IR as well to undertake the skills test. Therefore if they acknowledge our third party IR's, then does it not follow that the same stands for our third party type ratings...?
The Licencing managers I've dealt with at Gatwick have actually done a very good job in listening to our case and then writing this derogation, so I'm going to let the dust settle a wee bit before I run the type rating issue past them. If it is taken up, then the only thing we have to do is an EASA medical and maybe send in your 6 monthly paperwork as proof of recency/currency etc.
I'll get back to you........
2 issues. It seems the UK wants an EASA TRE to do a skills test, however the rest of Europe is still happy to accept 3rd party paperwork for type ratings and IR's, I THINK (I know one authority definitely does it for both parts). The second point is that it is acknowledged by EASA that a multi-pilot type and IR test are one and the same, you can't, for example, just put an A330 on your licence, you need to have a valid IR as well to undertake the skills test. Therefore if they acknowledge our third party IR's, then does it not follow that the same stands for our third party type ratings...?
The Licencing managers I've dealt with at Gatwick have actually done a very good job in listening to our case and then writing this derogation, so I'm going to let the dust settle a wee bit before I run the type rating issue past them. If it is taken up, then the only thing we have to do is an EASA medical and maybe send in your 6 monthly paperwork as proof of recency/currency etc.
I'll get back to you........
Join Date: Jun 1996
Location: Check with Ops
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really well done, FM. Thank you for all your efforts and continued badgering to make the CAA see sense 
On a very trivial note, I did not receive an email although I did sign the petition. It's not in my junk mail and I haven't changed or deleted the email address I used, which has received news from you in the past. I mention this in case there's something amiss at your end which my prevent non Ppruners getting your good news.
Again, thank you.
On a very trivial note, I did not receive an email although I did sign the petition. It's not in my junk mail and I haven't changed or deleted the email address I used, which has received news from you in the past. I mention this in case there's something amiss at your end which my prevent non Ppruners getting your good news.
Again, thank you.
Excellent work FM.
The CAA have yet to specify how third nation type ratings will be included in the UK issued licences. I'm awaiting a reply.
Ireland will issue a type rating with the caveat "B (or whatever registration you're flying right now) registered aircraft only". They just need to see evidence that you have the type rating on your overseas licence and require you send them a copy of your renewal/IR every year. Should you wish to fly the type on an EASA register, you will need to do a EASA LST with an EASA TI/RE on a suitably approved simulator.
The CAA have yet to specify how third nation type ratings will be included in the UK issued licences. I'm awaiting a reply.
Ireland will issue a type rating with the caveat "B (or whatever registration you're flying right now) registered aircraft only". They just need to see evidence that you have the type rating on your overseas licence and require you send them a copy of your renewal/IR every year. Should you wish to fly the type on an EASA register, you will need to do a EASA LST with an EASA TI/RE on a suitably approved simulator.