CAA Military Accreditation
An instructor and student can do whatever they want in a suitable aircraft as long as the student is willing to pay.
It is perhaps for such a reason that EASA has chosen to tighten up on ad hoc aerobatic instruction conducted by those who have never been formally required to demonstrate their competence in the discipline. So those who are properly qualified are shortly to be inconvenienced thanks to industry cowboys....
Anyway, this thread is about military accreditation, not about how some people think that they have discovered loopholes.....
Last edited by BEagle; 15th Aug 2012 at 18:51.
Well a highly qualified ex Harrier pillot did ask the question...
It is a fairly gaping loophole, but then the entire EASA regulation is so filled with them that is not worth arguing about. But no harm in letting SammySu know that there is nothing to stop him taking students who are worried about "recovery from unusual attitudes" for multiple repeat lessons:-)
It is a fairly gaping loophole, but then the entire EASA regulation is so filled with them that is not worth arguing about. But no harm in letting SammySu know that there is nothing to stop him taking students who are worried about "recovery from unusual attitudes" for multiple repeat lessons:-)
Last edited by Trim Stab; 15th Aug 2012 at 19:10.
And it's for just that reason that EASA has now defined 'aerobatic maneouvres' and the requirements for those who may instruct in such disciplines. Clever-bugger industry cowboy barrack-room lawyers and ego-trippers will no longer be able to conduct training for 'aerobatics' (by EASA's definition) except as stated in the Aircrew Regulation.
You are inciting SammySu to operate outside the (highly regrettable) limitations of his instructor rating, TrimStab, so I suggest you stop doing so and spend time instead studying the Aircrew Regulation..... Carefully.
You are inciting SammySu to operate outside the (highly regrettable) limitations of his instructor rating, TrimStab, so I suggest you stop doing so and spend time instead studying the Aircrew Regulation..... Carefully.
Last edited by BEagle; 15th Aug 2012 at 19:11.
Beagle - I am not "inciting" him to do anything. I suspect that he is well capable of making his own judgement.
I am just pointing out (again) the shortcomings of the EASA instructor rating qualification regulations whereby valuable experience is deemed irrelevant and the only pre-requisite to de-restrict an FI(A) qualification is that a budding advanced-level instructor has paid an FTO for yet another "qualification", often taught by "instructors" with less experience than the "student".
Some other administrations around the world (eg Canada, NZ) have a structure whereby once a pilot has proved that he is a competent instructor(by passing an approved FI(A) course and exam) he is then able to teach more advanced skills by demonstrating experience in that skill.
If EASA were to adopt the same pragmatism, it would be much easier for ex-military pilots to pass on their skills to the broader aviation communiity.
I am just pointing out (again) the shortcomings of the EASA instructor rating qualification regulations whereby valuable experience is deemed irrelevant and the only pre-requisite to de-restrict an FI(A) qualification is that a budding advanced-level instructor has paid an FTO for yet another "qualification", often taught by "instructors" with less experience than the "student".
Some other administrations around the world (eg Canada, NZ) have a structure whereby once a pilot has proved that he is a competent instructor(by passing an approved FI(A) course and exam) he is then able to teach more advanced skills by demonstrating experience in that skill.
If EASA were to adopt the same pragmatism, it would be much easier for ex-military pilots to pass on their skills to the broader aviation communiity.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, it's not completely irrelevant. I know you've been discussing EASA and Aerobatics on another forum, but there really is a military accreditation issue here.
Although I've only scanned the new version of CAP804, it appears that from next month, only those holding an Aerobatics Rating will be permited to perform aerobatics in the civilian world. Moreover, only those FIs with the "no aerobatics" restriction lifted and who hold an Aerobatics Rating will be permitted to teach aerobatics.
I'm not sure if there is going to be a period of grace on that rule, because at the moment, nobody holds an Aerobatics Rating - it doesn't exist. From what I understand, current holders of an AOPA Aerobatics Certificate, and FIs who have had the "no aerobatics" restriction lifted, will be automatically issued an Aerobatics Rating when it comes into force. Everyone else will have to pay to be checked out and rated.
It's going to be interesting to see how that works out because I suspect that there are lots of ex-military fast-jet pilots out there who have never bothered with the AOPA certificate and aren't instructors. Without accreditation of their military experience, it looks like they are going to have to put their hand in their pocket to get a new rating if they want to turn themselves upside down.
Although I've only scanned the new version of CAP804, it appears that from next month, only those holding an Aerobatics Rating will be permited to perform aerobatics in the civilian world. Moreover, only those FIs with the "no aerobatics" restriction lifted and who hold an Aerobatics Rating will be permitted to teach aerobatics.
I'm not sure if there is going to be a period of grace on that rule, because at the moment, nobody holds an Aerobatics Rating - it doesn't exist. From what I understand, current holders of an AOPA Aerobatics Certificate, and FIs who have had the "no aerobatics" restriction lifted, will be automatically issued an Aerobatics Rating when it comes into force. Everyone else will have to pay to be checked out and rated.
It's going to be interesting to see how that works out because I suspect that there are lots of ex-military fast-jet pilots out there who have never bothered with the AOPA certificate and aren't instructors. Without accreditation of their military experience, it looks like they are going to have to put their hand in their pocket to get a new rating if they want to turn themselves upside down.
Last edited by LFFC; 15th Aug 2012 at 21:52.
Update from 22Gp today:
MILITARY ACCREDITATION SCHEME UPDATE – ISSUE 1 AUGUST 2012
*
Publication of the Military Accreditation Scheme (MAS)
*
1.The MAS was published by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) on the 27 Jul 12. *The scheme can be found in CAP 804 Part 1 Section 4 Part O which is available on the CAA website. *Electronic copies of CAP 804 are available from 22(Trg) Gp on request.
*
2.Seeking opportunities to improve the MAS, within the constraints of EASA regulation, remains a high priority for 22(Trg) Gp and negotiations are ongoing with the CAA in a number of areas. *Policy adjustments have already been made as a result of these negotiations. *The following paragraphs summarise the latest position (as at 15 Aug 12) and contain information of importance for those military pilots considering their Flight Crew Licence (FCL) requirements.
*
Preservation of ATPL Theory Credits
*
4.This has been the subject of considerable scrutiny by 22(Trg) Gp and the CAA. *The policy in this area has been subject to development and I am now pleased to report that:
*
a.Qualified Service Pilots –Aeroplanes (QSP(A)) who, under the terms of the former QSP Scheme, obtained a JAR-FCL CPL(A) within 36 months of gaining the required pass in the ATPL(A) theoretical knowledge examinations will have those theory credits preserved, for the purpose of adding an Instrument Rating (IR) to their licence, for a period of 3 years from the date of his/her last flight piloting a military aeroplane OR 3 years from 8 Apr 12 whichever occurs first.
*
b.Qualified Service Pilots – Helicopters (QSP(H)) who, under the terms of the former QSP Scheme, obtained a JAR-FCL CPL(H) within 36 months of gaining the required pass in the ATPL(H) theoretical knowledge examinations will have those theory credits preserved, for the purpose of adding an Instrument Rating (IR) to their licence, for a period of 3 years from the date of his/her last flight piloting a military helicopter OR 3 years from 8 Apr 12 whichever occurs first.
*
5.This policy announcement represents a significant concession to military pilots caught in the transition to EASA regulation. *Early indications are that it will benefit a significant number of individuals.
*
6.For military pilots completing ATPL theoretical knowledge exams after 8 Apr 12 the validity criteria as set out in FCL.025(C) apply. *In other words: ‘The successful completion of the theoretical knowledge examinations will be valid for the issue of a commercial pilot licence or instrument rating for a period of 36 months.’
*
7.It should also be noted that in all cases ATPL theory credit for the grant of an ATPL will be as stated in FCL.025(c)(2). *In other words: *‘The completion of the airline transport pilot licence (ATPL) theoretical knowledge examinations will remain valid for the issue of an ATPL for a period of 7 years from the last validity date of an IR entered in the licence or, in the case of helicopters, a helicopter’s type rating entered in that licence.’
*
Multi-Pilot Accreditation
*
6.The Voyager and Sea King Mk 6 have been recognised as a multi-pilot aeroplane and multi-pilot helicopter respectively. *CAP 804 will be amended accordingly. *Further consultation will be taking place with our colleagues from the Army Air Corps in Sep 12 with a view to presenting a case to the CAA to achieve multi-pilot status for the Apache AH64. *I shall issue further updates on this matter in due course.
*
Multi-Engine Accreditation
*
7.Although the AH64 is not an EASA helicopter type the CAA do recognise it as a multi-engine helicopter and therefore multi-engine hours accrued on it will count when determining the extent of training required for the purpose of achieving a type rating on a multi-engine helicopter at an ATO.
*
Direct Route to the ATPL
*
8.CAP 804 Section 4 Part F subparts 1 and 2 covers the applicability, privileges and requirements in respect of the EASA Airline Transport Pilot Licence for Aeroplanes and Helicopters. *It will be noted that applicants for an ATPL(A or H) shall hold a CPL(A or H). *HOWEVER the CAA has confirmed that if a QMP is following the requirements for the initial grant of an ATPL (in accordance with CAP 804 Part 1 Section 4 Part O para 3.5 for ATPL(A) or para 3.14 for ATPL(H)) there is no requirement for a CPL to be issued first.
*
CPL(H) Testing
*
9.The CAA has confirmed that the CPL(H) Skills Test may be undertaken in a multi engine helicopter. *Furthermore a CPL skill test is also considered as a type rating skill test in that ‘it counts as the demonstration of CPL level competence and competence to fly the type in which the test is taken.’
*
*
Summary
*
9.The implementation of EASA regulation in respect of FCL in the UK has precipitated significant changes to military accreditation. *Nevertheless 22(Trg) Gp and the CAA remain committed to securing additional credit where possible against a demanding regulatory backdrop; this will be an ongoing process and I would expect to make further announcements in due course.
MILITARY ACCREDITATION SCHEME UPDATE – ISSUE 1 AUGUST 2012
*
Publication of the Military Accreditation Scheme (MAS)
*
1.The MAS was published by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) on the 27 Jul 12. *The scheme can be found in CAP 804 Part 1 Section 4 Part O which is available on the CAA website. *Electronic copies of CAP 804 are available from 22(Trg) Gp on request.
*
2.Seeking opportunities to improve the MAS, within the constraints of EASA regulation, remains a high priority for 22(Trg) Gp and negotiations are ongoing with the CAA in a number of areas. *Policy adjustments have already been made as a result of these negotiations. *The following paragraphs summarise the latest position (as at 15 Aug 12) and contain information of importance for those military pilots considering their Flight Crew Licence (FCL) requirements.
*
Preservation of ATPL Theory Credits
*
4.This has been the subject of considerable scrutiny by 22(Trg) Gp and the CAA. *The policy in this area has been subject to development and I am now pleased to report that:
*
a.Qualified Service Pilots –Aeroplanes (QSP(A)) who, under the terms of the former QSP Scheme, obtained a JAR-FCL CPL(A) within 36 months of gaining the required pass in the ATPL(A) theoretical knowledge examinations will have those theory credits preserved, for the purpose of adding an Instrument Rating (IR) to their licence, for a period of 3 years from the date of his/her last flight piloting a military aeroplane OR 3 years from 8 Apr 12 whichever occurs first.
*
b.Qualified Service Pilots – Helicopters (QSP(H)) who, under the terms of the former QSP Scheme, obtained a JAR-FCL CPL(H) within 36 months of gaining the required pass in the ATPL(H) theoretical knowledge examinations will have those theory credits preserved, for the purpose of adding an Instrument Rating (IR) to their licence, for a period of 3 years from the date of his/her last flight piloting a military helicopter OR 3 years from 8 Apr 12 whichever occurs first.
*
5.This policy announcement represents a significant concession to military pilots caught in the transition to EASA regulation. *Early indications are that it will benefit a significant number of individuals.
*
6.For military pilots completing ATPL theoretical knowledge exams after 8 Apr 12 the validity criteria as set out in FCL.025(C) apply. *In other words: ‘The successful completion of the theoretical knowledge examinations will be valid for the issue of a commercial pilot licence or instrument rating for a period of 36 months.’
*
7.It should also be noted that in all cases ATPL theory credit for the grant of an ATPL will be as stated in FCL.025(c)(2). *In other words: *‘The completion of the airline transport pilot licence (ATPL) theoretical knowledge examinations will remain valid for the issue of an ATPL for a period of 7 years from the last validity date of an IR entered in the licence or, in the case of helicopters, a helicopter’s type rating entered in that licence.’
*
Multi-Pilot Accreditation
*
6.The Voyager and Sea King Mk 6 have been recognised as a multi-pilot aeroplane and multi-pilot helicopter respectively. *CAP 804 will be amended accordingly. *Further consultation will be taking place with our colleagues from the Army Air Corps in Sep 12 with a view to presenting a case to the CAA to achieve multi-pilot status for the Apache AH64. *I shall issue further updates on this matter in due course.
*
Multi-Engine Accreditation
*
7.Although the AH64 is not an EASA helicopter type the CAA do recognise it as a multi-engine helicopter and therefore multi-engine hours accrued on it will count when determining the extent of training required for the purpose of achieving a type rating on a multi-engine helicopter at an ATO.
*
Direct Route to the ATPL
*
8.CAP 804 Section 4 Part F subparts 1 and 2 covers the applicability, privileges and requirements in respect of the EASA Airline Transport Pilot Licence for Aeroplanes and Helicopters. *It will be noted that applicants for an ATPL(A or H) shall hold a CPL(A or H). *HOWEVER the CAA has confirmed that if a QMP is following the requirements for the initial grant of an ATPL (in accordance with CAP 804 Part 1 Section 4 Part O para 3.5 for ATPL(A) or para 3.14 for ATPL(H)) there is no requirement for a CPL to be issued first.
*
CPL(H) Testing
*
9.The CAA has confirmed that the CPL(H) Skills Test may be undertaken in a multi engine helicopter. *Furthermore a CPL skill test is also considered as a type rating skill test in that ‘it counts as the demonstration of CPL level competence and competence to fly the type in which the test is taken.’
*
*
Summary
*
9.The implementation of EASA regulation in respect of FCL in the UK has precipitated significant changes to military accreditation. *Nevertheless 22(Trg) Gp and the CAA remain committed to securing additional credit where possible against a demanding regulatory backdrop; this will be an ongoing process and I would expect to make further announcements in due course.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good to hear. And if 22 Gp wish any input from the front line, there are plenty willing to help. This can be a two way process, not least for the front line to re discover knowledge gaps in syllabus items and provide an ideal opportunity to provide equivalence with our Civilian airspace cousins.
Last edited by VinRouge; 16th Aug 2012 at 02:52.
LFFC, the Aerobatic Rating does not become mandatory until Apr 2015; even then it will only be applicable to EASA aeroplanes and not to Annex II aircraft such as the Bulldog, Chipmunk, Tiger Moth.
Existing FIs who have had the 'no aerobatics' restriction removed may continue to teach aerobatics.
All RAF pilots who have completed EFT may, if they wish, have the Aerobatic Rating included in a part-FCL licence after Sep 2012 and are credited any further training/testing requirements. See CAP 804 Section 4 Part P Page 32. If you wait to convert an existing JAR-FCL licence until after 17 Sep 2012 and request the inclusion of an Aerobatic Rating (under accreditation terms) at the same time, you will only be charged the standard licence conversion fee.
FIs without aerobatic instructional privileges will need to meet part-FCL requirements in order to do so after 17 Sep 2012.
Existing FIs who have had the 'no aerobatics' restriction removed may continue to teach aerobatics.
All RAF pilots who have completed EFT may, if they wish, have the Aerobatic Rating included in a part-FCL licence after Sep 2012 and are credited any further training/testing requirements. See CAP 804 Section 4 Part P Page 32. If you wait to convert an existing JAR-FCL licence until after 17 Sep 2012 and request the inclusion of an Aerobatic Rating (under accreditation terms) at the same time, you will only be charged the standard licence conversion fee.
FIs without aerobatic instructional privileges will need to meet part-FCL requirements in order to do so after 17 Sep 2012.
Last edited by BEagle; 16th Aug 2012 at 06:58.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Lyneham
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, so I'm now trying to understand what I need to do both training and documentation wise to get an ATPL issued and I'm a little confused!!
Perhaps one of you kind people can help?
1) I have the MAS Credits Form SRG 2133 - Do I need to send this to CAA separately or do I send one of these with every form I send to the CAA (e.g. exam apps, skills test etc)?
2) I have started prep for the 14 exams. I have the numbers I need for the Class 1 medical. That I understand.
3) On completion of the 14 exams I will be doing an A400M type rating with Airbus in Seville, which (according to the Airbus blurb) follows the JAR-FCL rules. The A400M will be an on the EASA civilian register on completion of EASA Civilian Type rating as I understand it.
Can this TRC be used for the Skills Test and IR portion of initial ATPL issue?
How would I do this?
4) Looking at the forms for ATPL issue - what is an ECAC assessment? Which form do I fill out on completion of all exams, skills test and IRT?
5) Do I need to do a Radio Telephony Exam - I can't find any details of this in the military exemption?
Also, what do I need to do to get an English Proficiency Assessment? Do I need this?
6) Later in the year I will be doing a TRI with Airbus - how do I go about getting this endorsed on the licence?
We need someone to do a flow chart!!!
Thanks in advance for your help!
A very confused Wides
Perhaps one of you kind people can help?
1) I have the MAS Credits Form SRG 2133 - Do I need to send this to CAA separately or do I send one of these with every form I send to the CAA (e.g. exam apps, skills test etc)?
2) I have started prep for the 14 exams. I have the numbers I need for the Class 1 medical. That I understand.
3) On completion of the 14 exams I will be doing an A400M type rating with Airbus in Seville, which (according to the Airbus blurb) follows the JAR-FCL rules. The A400M will be an on the EASA civilian register on completion of EASA Civilian Type rating as I understand it.
Can this TRC be used for the Skills Test and IR portion of initial ATPL issue?
How would I do this?
4) Looking at the forms for ATPL issue - what is an ECAC assessment? Which form do I fill out on completion of all exams, skills test and IRT?
5) Do I need to do a Radio Telephony Exam - I can't find any details of this in the military exemption?
Also, what do I need to do to get an English Proficiency Assessment? Do I need this?
6) Later in the year I will be doing a TRI with Airbus - how do I go about getting this endorsed on the licence?
We need someone to do a flow chart!!!
Thanks in advance for your help!
A very confused Wides
Last edited by theboywide; 16th Aug 2012 at 17:58.
theboywide, you are in a very complicated position.
Not only are you going to need a Type Rating which doesn't yet exist, but you are also going to have to think about the State of Licence issue.
Perhaps it would be best (cheapest) to open an ATPL / IR on something else first, then add the Atlas TR? Although the exact requirements are far from clear, I'm sorry to say.
You will need an ICAO English Language Level 6 endorsement; I have already flagged up the lack of FRTOL accreditation for military pilots, so hopefully at least that is being sorted out.
If Airbus Military wish you to be a TRI on the Atlas, they should be able to sort that out and obtain approval from the UK CAA to conduct the TRI test. You can see the TRI requirements in CAP 804 Section 4 Part J, Subpart 2 (.pdf pp 237-243 / 794).
Wouldn't it be so much easier if RAF ME pilots held equivalent civil licences in the first place!
Of course in more sensible pre-EASA days, you could simply have used the old 'experienced QSP' route, then added the Atlas TR....
Not only are you going to need a Type Rating which doesn't yet exist, but you are also going to have to think about the State of Licence issue.
Perhaps it would be best (cheapest) to open an ATPL / IR on something else first, then add the Atlas TR? Although the exact requirements are far from clear, I'm sorry to say.
You will need an ICAO English Language Level 6 endorsement; I have already flagged up the lack of FRTOL accreditation for military pilots, so hopefully at least that is being sorted out.
If Airbus Military wish you to be a TRI on the Atlas, they should be able to sort that out and obtain approval from the UK CAA to conduct the TRI test. You can see the TRI requirements in CAP 804 Section 4 Part J, Subpart 2 (.pdf pp 237-243 / 794).
Wouldn't it be so much easier if RAF ME pilots held equivalent civil licences in the first place!
Of course in more sensible pre-EASA days, you could simply have used the old 'experienced QSP' route, then added the Atlas TR....
Last edited by BEagle; 16th Aug 2012 at 20:28.
Good Morning BEagle:
Thanks, that's me sorted then.
But what about ex Mil with loads more aerobatic experience than me?
Goodbye
Existing FIs who have had the 'no aerobatics' restriction removed may continue to teach aerobatics
But what about ex Mil with loads more aerobatic experience than me?
Goodbye
But what about ex Mil with loads more aerobatic experience than me?
Between now and 17 Sep there is something of an interregnum, so any military pilot who has added an FI certificate under the niggardly MAS would be best advised to wait until then before applying.
Last edited by BEagle; 16th Aug 2012 at 21:11.
Beagle, could you just answer one question, please?
I am an ex-A2 QFI. I hold a valid professional aeroplane licence and a current display authorisation but no FI rating. Can you point me at the specific piece of legislation that prevents me from offering my services as an aerobatic instructor to other licence holders, with or without remuneration?
I am an ex-A2 QFI. I hold a valid professional aeroplane licence and a current display authorisation but no FI rating. Can you point me at the specific piece of legislation that prevents me from offering my services as an aerobatic instructor to other licence holders, with or without remuneration?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At CatAmongstThePigeons
You're all good. I am in the same boat. Update from 22 group dated 01 Aug 12
b. Qualified Service Pilots – Helicopters(QSP(H)) who, under the terms of the former QSP Scheme, obtained a JAR-FCLCPL(H) within 36 months of gaining the required pass in the ATPL(H) theoreticalknowledge examinations will have those theory credits preserved, for thepurpose of adding an Instrument Rating (IR) to their licence, for a period of 3years from the date of his/her last flight piloting a military helicopter OR 3years from 8 Apr 12 whichever occurs first.
b. Qualified Service Pilots – Helicopters(QSP(H)) who, under the terms of the former QSP Scheme, obtained a JAR-FCLCPL(H) within 36 months of gaining the required pass in the ATPL(H) theoreticalknowledge examinations will have those theory credits preserved, for thepurpose of adding an Instrument Rating (IR) to their licence, for a period of 3years from the date of his/her last flight piloting a military helicopter OR 3years from 8 Apr 12 whichever occurs first.
Last edited by lynx-effect; 17th Aug 2012 at 18:41. Reason: point at CatAmongstThePigeons
I am an ex-A2 QFI. I hold a valid professional aeroplane licence and a current display authorisation but no FI rating.
How can you possibly think that you can offer your services as an 'aerobatic instructor' when you hold no civil instructional privileges whatsoever?
Under part-FCL, as a minimum, you would need to hold a CRI certificate and a (legacy) Aerobatic Rating and to have demonstrated your ability to a suitably qualified FIC instructor.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Frozen South
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is outrageous! How can QFIs instruct military pilots when they are deemed incompetent to instruct civilians? How dare you teach aerobatics when you don't have civilian approval - standards must be very low...