Free CPL(H) to DHFS Students...

[wahwah64]

Anyone shed some light on the current rumours surrounding the award of licences?
Apparently students will graduate with PPL(H), and subsequently awarded CPL(H) on reaching 750 hours, and then a frozen ATPL on becoming an A2 QHI...

Is this the replacement for bridging which was expected to be regenerated with a lower hours threshhold...???

Possibly still need to sit the air law and ops exams........

[airborne_artist]

And your reference for this is?

[Torque Tonight]

Hmmm. I investigated this sort of thing a few years ago. To get the PPL(H) with appropriate type rating you needed 500 hrs on type. Obviously at DHFS you dont get that on the Squirrel or Griffin and my frontline type wasn't on the civil register so I came up against a bit of a wall. I'd be surprised if the RAF made any significant effort to help with civil licence issue as it's not exactly an aid to retention.

If the rules have changed I'd be very interested to know if they apply retrospectively. Can you back up your rumours with any facts?

[PPRuNeUser0211]

I heard on the grapevine that from now new courses at shawbs will get a ppl(H) after finishing on the squirrel. Didn't hear anything about a cpl though, cool beans to them if they have.

AFAIK the cse had to be tweaked slightly to comply with the caa requirements and also the studes will have to do the air law and RT exams ala studes blagging a ppl on the back of EFT.

[airborne_artist]

It wouldn't be too hard to tweak the course, I'd have thought. Successful completion of DEFTS plus Air Law plus a qualifying XC gets a PPL(A) AFAIK.

[mtp_rich]

i just heard from an oppo currently at shawbs that his course will be the first to be able to get a PPL(H) after completing the course provided they take a couple of extra civvy exams afterwards (no details). similar to what currently exists at DEFTs afaik...

[Gnd]

500hrs fo a PPL(H)??? right that would please the CAA. Speak to your training branch - many a truth in rumour.

[5 Forward 6 Back]

While I know very little about licensing in general, don't many FW people doing courses with the likes of OATS end up with a CPL/fATPL with less than 500hrs TT? Why couldn't the same amount of time be appropriate in the rotary world?

[MINself]

How dysfunctional is a system that only rewards months of hard work and over a hundred hours flown on turbine aircraft with a PPL? No disrespect to our PPL brethren but a JAR PPL(H) after DHFS, whilst a start, is in no way a reflection of the ability required to graduate DHFS.
A JAR PPL(H) is NOT a comparable qualification someone obviously has a sense of humour
I appreciate that military pilots have to be rewarded and retained, but, IMHO those that graduate DHFS should be awarded accordingly and the award of a PPL does not even come close to recognising the standard of pilot that graduates DHFS.
The thought that the award of the PPL recognises the hard work to graduate the DHFS flying training program only insults and undermines DHFS's standing when its graduates are compared to PPL licence holders
A solution would be to simply adapt the ground school package and award DHFS graduates with a JAR CPL(H), frozen ATPL(H).
What next? Will graduates from Valley be awarded a PPL(A)!?!....

[SinkingMallard]

I think the course has been tweaked so that at the end of 705 Sqn they have done sufficient for a PPL(H); however, the students still have to go arrange and pay for themselves to do the actual exam.

As for CPL(H) and ATPL(H) - I'd be very surprised. Check LASORS for the hoops you have to jump through.

[MINself]

Lasors only reflects the current credits from military service and training. These credits were decided between the CAA and the MOD, the MOD is serving it's own interests by making it as difficult as it reasonably can for it's pilot to gain a civilian licence. The required military experience for a military pilot to gain a civilian licence does not reflect the difficulty of military flying training nor the type of flying he/she has done, it only reflects the desire of the MOD to make life as difficult for it's pilots to leave. If the MOD recognised it's most important resource, it's personnel, then maybe more of it's pilots wouldn't need to devise there own exit strategy?
I applaud the steps by the MOD to reward military pilots after their training, but IMHO this is long over due. The MOD should have recognised the comparison between military flying training and civilian flying training years ago by way of the issue of a civilian licence comparable with the level of difficulty required to pass military flying training and not some notional total hours flown P1 at night in IMC in the Eastern hemisphere ONLY figure!!!
If this turns out to be true the idea that a PPL awarded after DHFS is a reflection of where the MOD sees it's pilots compared to their civilian counter parts is laughable! Just an insult

[Bing]

The MOD should have recognised the comparison between military flying training and civilian flying training years ago by way of the issue of a civilian licence comparable with the level of difficulty required to pass military flying training and not some notional total hours flown P1 at night in IMC in the Eastern hemisphere ONLY figure!!!

I would have thought the MoD can't actually issue civilian licences, that's up to the CAA. So if the CAA say you have to have x hours P1, x hours night and a solo cross country of 150 miles then unless MoD can convince them otherwise the best you can hope for is the nearest equivalent civilian licence measured in their terms, i.e. hours flown.

[Megawart]

Qualifications...?

I've always found it absolutely astounding that the most highly trained and skilled individuals in the military (pilots of course!) leave with not a single recognisable civilian qualification.

This goes counter to the fundamental military claim used in every recruitment campaign for decades, that you will 'learn a trade' which will equip you well for civilian life.

The argument that it is 'not in the military's interest' to give you civilian qualifications because you might leave would certainly not stand the test of EU employment law.

Has anyone ever sought redress for this dire state of affairs?

[diginagain]

But you do "learn a trade", as you put it. The training you receive, and the experience you gain are both invaluable. There are some hoops to jump through to gain a recognised qualification, true, but this is hardly onerous.

[MINself]

Point taken, but I was suggesting that whilst I agree the MOD don't issue the licences themselves they do however decide with the CAA, the issuing authority, what requirements have to be met for the issue of said licence, so I suppose one could argue that the MOD are as much responsible for the issue of civilian licences to military or ex-military pilots under the accreditation scheme?
As for hours flown, isn't the JAR CPL(H) issued with most licence holders only having a couple of hundred hours? So where, and again if true but as this is a rumour network so please indulge me, does the MOD decide on an hour requirement of 750 for the award of a CPL to post DHFS pilots? And then ATPL for A2 QHI's!!! On what basis are other pilots, possibly more experienced less deserving of an ATPL? Or is this a tactic to encourage more QHI's applicants

[airborne_artist]

I've always found it absolutely astounding that the most highly trained and skilled individuals in the military (pilots of course!) leave with not a single recognisable civilian qualification.

The hoops are not impossible, though, and the fact that plenty of my RW mates have made it into the LHS for (amongst others) BA, Virgin and BMI despite (in most cases) no FW* hours in the RN suggests that it's not all bad news.

Edit * Not counting the 90 odd (as it was) FW hours on Flying Grading and EFT.

[MPSM]

I would be very interested to get to the bottom of this rumour. As someone who is about to spalsh out on all the required study for ATPL (H). I to have completed the DHFS course within the past 5 years and would much rather complete 2 exams as opposed to entering into the marathon which is distant learning, as I do not yet have the required hours to utilise the bridging course offered. Is this going to be done retrospectivley or are they just doing a "Starting from now" point, as I would imagine that its the DHFS syllabus that the CAA have accredited and unless the course content has changed, which I doubt very much that it has, then their should be no reason why previous graduates of DHFS can't apply also for the licence. I would quite happily leave the services with a CPL(H) and worry about ATPL(H) later on. I have heard that tagged onto the licence comes a new 8 year return of service to stop people jumping ship. However this now only brings us in line with every other Armed Service in Europe as I believe I'm right in saying that the UK is the only country not to award its Forces a civvy licence.

[BEagle]

About 10 years ago, when JAR-FCL first appeared, I noticed that National Authorities (i.e. the CAA) had an obligation to grant recognition for skills and experience gained in military service. I then kicked off a paper which eventually ended up in front of a very on-side VSO - the aim was to secure a recruiting and retention incentive. Do your time for HMtheQ and depart with thanks and a licence to help you start your new career. Apart from some ar$e Learning Command Wg Cdr, who mumbled about 'appropriate staffing processes', everyone else was very supportive. Things then went a bit quiet - until, of all people, The Scottish Officer stirred up Binnsworth to get things moving. As a result, a joint MoD/CAA Working Group formed; they delivered the Military Accreditation which you now have.

At all stages, the CAA was extremely helpful and accommodating!


See LASORS. Don't know what LASORS is and you want a civilian licence? FIND OUT!!

Stop moaning and bŁoody well say thank you! If none of us had bothered to put pen to paper and badger some Very Senior Officers, you'd have NO accreditation whatsoever.

The aim was to make youngsters realise that, if they join the Services as a pilot, they will receive sufficient credit by the time they leave, after a reasonable return of service (my estimate was roughly OCU+10 years), to begin a second career in civil aviation.

And that is what you currently have. Be grateful for once in your lives!

[MPSM]

I think your missing the point of this post! It was originally posted to hopefully shed some light on the rumours about licence's being issued upon successful completion of DHFS. I'm assuming that the paper your referring to isn't linked to this subject and if it is then maybe you could explain in a bit more depth. I have spoken to the CAA personally and they are not aware of any scheme set in place other than the norm ie: Full course and exams or Bridging. I'm not sure what joint MoD/CAA accrediataion scheme your referring to upon completion of service in the forces and a civillian licence being given, other than the "bridging" package which at present requires a minimum of 2000 hrs (which is not as easy to achieve in this day and age as it might have been 10-15 years ago!) to be held by an individual which then makes them exempt from the full course and just requires them sitting a couple of exams. However this is currently under scrutiny and is likely to be scrapped to. So if their is another scheme that your paper has arranged then please expand a bit more as everyone on this post is after some answers. And as for us being ungrateful then you couldn't be further from the truth. It would just be nice to have our years of military flying recognised in the outside world.

[MINself]

There's gratitude and then there's the desire to see a flawed system improved!
No one likes an ungrateful person, especially when it's at the expense of "some other buggers efforts" and I guess when you've been involved in making history I can see how some of these arguments to amend the current system might look.

But, the system isn't perfect and it could do with tweeking to try to make getting a civilian licence from military service a reflection of how one compares to the other, rather than an all or nothing approach as currently taken with the 2000+ hours required to be eligible for the bridging course. There will be many that won't have 2000+ hours by the end of their military service, especially when as is often the case there is no way of completing 10+ years of service post OCU - does that make these experienced pilots less worthy of being allowed to complete the bridging course because of a few hundred hours? Of course not so why isn't it sensible to alter the system.

Why not be awarded a CPL, frozen ATPL after OCU with a 5 year time bar? It wouldn't take much to insert a few more exams into the system to satisfy the CAA, or, is that all too difficult and lets be happy with the status quo!

...that said, a big thank you for those that have done so much to get where we are and to those that might take it even further!!!