I did all the exams in the late 1990s. I now have an ATPL A+H. In the RAF I managed to command CFSH Sqn for 2 years as a last tour. Believe me, even as a CFS 'geek' I learned a ton of information while studying for those exams. The military taught me to be a military pilot and the training was first class, thank you your majesty.
It really is quite different out here. I have had to learn many new skills to stay out of the dwang, not many of them were hands on flying related. Obeyance and knowledge of rules and regulations are what companies survive on. The military would go bust in a week if they were in the cut-throat business of civil aviation. I don't have a metman to brief me, an ops clerk to plot notams/do bookings and engineers to service and refuel the aircraft. I do the associated paperwork as well.
In other words, the mindset is different, not bad or impossible, just different. If 2 ex military pilots of equal ability and suitability asked me to put a word in with the company and one had done all the tests and exams......... who do you think would have the advantage????? Any extra qualifications will help. :ok:

Looks like EASA are going to have a wide-ranging impact on licencing in Europe.

Gliders Could Be Grounded By New Law

Only if the CAA have the time and resources to negotiate the exemptions.

I do hope that the MOD is fully engaged in the debate! :eek:

I hear they are "trying to find someone in 22 (Trg) Group" to take this job on :ugh:

Great! :{

Bugger!

Any chopped Harrier/Nimrod/Sentinel mates fancy a holding job?

Hmmm, that 'prediction' was knocking around when the Dead Sea was only critically ill! We'll see.

Beagle,
"Learning Command'? No way! There's never really such an appointment? Brilliant!

Has anyone got any idea if those current service pilots lucky enough to have a full ATPL or a CPL(A)/IR with frozen ATPL theory credit will be able to keep their license ‘current’, based on military flying post April 2012.

I believe currently LASORs Section F9.3 allows a QSP who holds a civil type/class rating to re-validate or renew their civil rating based on meeting the military annual check requirements/Green rating (confirmation or correction of this would be appreciated). A nice career development & retention scheme that allows you to keep serving, with no rush to leave on completion of your JAR license, but still be employable when you finally retire from military service.

If this no longer becomes the case, in April 2013 I would assume all those licenses become non-current & so useless if applying for a civilian flying job. A massive career ‘stay or go’ decision :sad:.

AA

I'm afraid I have no idea. This seems to have all the hallmarks of another 8.33 radio/RVSM/TCAS drama in the making. :(

Unfortunately I believe all questions relating to the EASA implementation in Apr 2012 and QSPs will be ironed out closer to the time. Resolution of these issues relies solely on reps from the mil liaising with the CAA in order to make cases for the retention of accreditation and currency schemes. I don't, however, see any appetite or willingness from those in the know to staffing or putting the legwork in with the CAA to secure what is required. I personally think that the time is now close that every ME pilot will require a licence of some sort; either an ATPL as industry standard or a "special" mil licence in order to conduct worldwide ops.

Everyone is acutely aware, however, that as soon as airlines start recruiting non type rated pilots, the floodgates will well and truly open and as a result there is no burning desire to smooth the path anymore. If I subscribed to conspiracy theories it would appear to be rather convenient that ELC support to complete the ATPL has been (temporarily) removed.

Rather a sad state of affairs IMHO in that all the experience will go on dying fleets. No flight safety issues there then.

Chris,

I agree with all that you say, especially this bit:

Sadly though, the MOD would be burying its head in the sand if it took that view. It wouldn't surprise me if the EASA decided that, unless military training was properly accredited, military pilots should not be allowed to enter European controlled airspace.

In my view, it shouldn't be left to 22(Trg) Gp to manage this; it should be the MAA because it's very much an airworthiness issue. Perhaps the CAA and MAA are already working together on it? :ooh:

I wouldnt be surprised if we got kicked out of Euro airspace bearing the large number of civvie regs we dont (or cant) pay attention to becuase we are mil...

:ugh:

You have to remember that Mil accreditation was originally obtained as a recruiting and retention incentive. Join, give HM some of the best years of your life, then (if you want to) leave and join the people-tube world with minimal faff.

Whilst some might wonder why the RAF might still need such a thing, they should perhaps note that most industry observers are of the opinion that airline recruiting has at last started to pick up. If the RAF is to compete with the airlines for new pilots (and the RAF is probably more in need of a stable demography than the airlines are), this valuable incentive simply must be protected. Otherwise potential recruits might well wonder why they should ever bother with the RAF, if their service ends up being worth jack $hit towards an airline job - particularly when airline pay is based on seniority and time served, rather than on competitive standards. 'A' cat or 'C' cat, CR(S) or CR (or whatever the latest incarnation currently is) simply doesn't exist in the airline world - whoever has been in the longest gets the captaincy opportunity. So why compromise that by spending 15 years in HM's flying club if there's no ultimate reward?

I do hope that someone in Learning Command pulls their finger out sharpish - otherwise no pilot in the ME world is likely to hang around much longer, from what I hear.

That maybe the case - but at least it might free up some spaces in the ME world for all the FJ guys not getting cockpits on their next tours. I'd take sloppy seconds right now ;-)

Unfortunately, they have tried the FJ restream route on a couple of ME fleets, and unfortunately, it hasnt worked out fantastically for a fair few of them. All top chaps of course.

The RAF AT fleet is already desperately short of deep down experience, of the sort that is going to be lost in droves to the airlines in the very near future. That is going to leave us post 2015 with an air force all of a sudden supporting ops and exercises globally, to places like norway and canada, belize and the FIs and the far east, flown by captains that have never used type 4 deicing fluid and landed on an ice runway, or operated through the ITCZ.

It could (I suspect if we will lose a frame, it will be post-op) be the most dangerous phase of the high op tempo that we currently are experiencing, as those currently building egos doing the same sh8t day in day out will discover AT Ops can be a damn sight more dangerous operating in cold conditions for the first time, or through a line of CBs, or applying a massive temp correction to your plates, as opposed to your 200th Bastion/Kaf landing.

[/QUOTE] That maybe the case - but at least it might free up some spaces in the ME world for all the FJ guys not getting cockpits on their next tours. I'd take sloppy seconds right now ;-)[/QUOTE]

And there you have it. The master-plan uncovered.

Chillingly perceptive there High Expect!

VinRouge - Nail, Head, squarely smashed! Have been trying to point that out for a while but the solutions seem too deep-reaching & costing to happen!

BEagle - I don't think the RAF will have to compete too hard! I saw i TV interview with some BALPA chap a couple of weeks back saying that they're forecasting a monumental shortage in the next couple of years due to the ab initio cost of an ATPL sitting right up towards the £100k mark. The RAF will always offer 'free' training...the only variables are the length of service and amount of sh!t you have to put up with along the way.

It is not really a CAA decision - CAA will shortly just become an executive national arm of EASA, and will not be responsible for formulating the regulations. The MOD would probably need to negotiate directly with EASA.

If the MOD really think it important to maintain parallel civilian qualifications for aircrew, why not apply for EASA FTO status?

The EFT course is already staffed largely by civilian qualified instructors, so presumably is already not far from meeting FTO requirements.

Presumably 45Sqn already train and test to at least the standard for award of a CPL and SPA IR/ME? They would need to parallel qualify their QFIs with civilian qualifications, but this would be a CAA (rather than EASA) decision since national authorities are still responsible for issuing instructional qualifications.

The advantage of such an approach is that the MOD would be able to obtain all the relevant authorisations from the CAA, rather than expecting the CAA to go cap in hand to EASA to negotiate an exemption for the MOD.

The French Air Force anticipated this when EASA was formulated and have for the last ten years or so put all their pilots through full ATPL theory immediately after flying grading with the intention that those who stream to ME can get parallel civilian qualifications, and those that fail EFT or get streamed to FJs at least have some useful qualifications to full back on. I understand they are now indeed working on FTO status for some of their training establishments.

If what you say about the FAF is true, then that's certainly something the RAF should consider.

Some years ago when there was an experiment to send 3 ME students through the Prestwick scheme, my assessment (compared to the ex-Jetstream cours students) was that in a few areas the two groups were comparable - but in most areas the ex-Prestwick students were vastly superior!

Someone reaching a ME OCU straight through the RAF training machine won't have anything like enough PIC time even for a CPL these days - solo consolidation seems to be a thing of the past.

Perhaps the other option might be for the RAF to train its future ME pilots under the MPL scheme? But higher than present levels of theoretical knowedge would probably still be required; I once had a multi-jet student who claimed that he'd never been told that 86% rpm wasn't the same thing as 86% thrust...:rolleyes:

The line from the Ed Centre (Or Learning Forces Training Development etc Flt) at the Secret Wiltshire Airbase this morning is that ELCs are usable for ATPL training if you are a multi-engine pilot. It's a "grey area" for others.

Apparently several people had enquired so they had gone off and done some digging and that is the "official" line.

Score one for the good guys!

Thanks Stoppers, you've brightened up my otherwise sandy day.

:ok:

What?? And it's not in the service interests for a FJ or Rotary mate to have an ATPL level of knowledge of groundschool subjects. . . I call Bulls**t on that.
May I suggest the idiots making the decision learn a little about aviation before make such stupid statements.