UK CAA IR Fiasco
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATPL's need an IR
The next piece of good news I've just discovered is that if you need to put a Multi Pilot aircraft type on your ATPL you need to have a JAR IR....therefore when I go to the CAA to put my A330 on my UK licence I presumably will be handed back a CPL without an IR...Good innit
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have just spoken to someone who works for the government and asked what the affected pilots should do. His answer was to write to your MP, even if you don't live in the UK. If you have property include your address in your letter of protest.
Also mention that the Transport Ministry has in some way admitted some degree of error, in that they admit the CAA's 'guidance was in error'
Time is short, even if it's just a couple of paragraphs it will help. The change.org page can also be copied and pasted.
FM.
Also mention that the Transport Ministry has in some way admitted some degree of error, in that they admit the CAA's 'guidance was in error'
Time is short, even if it's just a couple of paragraphs it will help. The change.org page can also be copied and pasted.
FM.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Update
Hi,
Just a quick update for those of you not in the petition, we are expecting a decision on the matter in the next few weeks. A proposal has been sent to EASA and is in the process of being presented to the European Commission.
I'll get back to you as soon as we have some news,
C.
Just a quick update for those of you not in the petition, we are expecting a decision on the matter in the next few weeks. A proposal has been sent to EASA and is in the process of being presented to the European Commission.
I'll get back to you as soon as we have some news,
C.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The final answer 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: Feb 2000
Location: Still on the beach (but this one's cold).
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's great for the chaps with civ licences operating overseas. Does not appear to help the many Mil pilots sat with ATPL or Frozen ATPL with IR that has lapsed by more than 7 years. That are a lot of us that were counting our Mil Green IR or IRE status as counting. Which I subsequently found out was not allowed.
I have raised with the CAA Head of Licensing and Training Policy the issue of military IRs in the context of the credit for ICAO licences and he has said that he will ask a member of his staff to discuss this with 22 Group. I will post any replies that I receive from him.
Well, it's good to see that a 14(6) has at last been raised for this ridiculous situation.
It would be good if the military Green IR would also be allowed. But as has been said, that relies on 22Gp...... Who seem to delight in saying 'No'.
When the wretchedly inadequate Part O first appeared in CAP 804, following outrage expressed 'on Internet bulletin boards', they actually sent round a whinge-o-gram stating that it wasn't fair for people to complain...
Well, what the **** did they expect?
It would be good if the military Green IR would also be allowed. But as has been said, that relies on 22Gp...... Who seem to delight in saying 'No'.
When the wretchedly inadequate Part O first appeared in CAP 804, following outrage expressed 'on Internet bulletin boards', they actually sent round a whinge-o-gram stating that it wasn't fair for people to complain...
Well, what the **** did they expect?
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAA exemption
Well done Fart Master. I'm in the group wanting to renew a rating expired by more than seven years as I'm working outside the EU. Do we know if the exemption to be published by the CAA will be on this page:
List of Official Record Series 4 - Miscellaneous | Publications | About the CAA
List of Official Record Series 4 - Miscellaneous | Publications | About the CAA
