VigilantPilot,

Firstly, I did not mean to suggest that British military pilots are any less able than civilian pilots, but it's sadly true that outside observers might now perceive that to be the case. I actually believe that the vast majority of military pilots bring with them a wealth of experience when they move to the civilian world.

I'm not in a position to know, but I suspect that the HQ22Gp team didn't achieve accreditation for a number of reasons. Poor resourcing probably played it's part, as did late acceptance of the task because they didn't have their finger on the pulse. However, did they have ready access to the OCU training systems (not under HQ 22 Gp control) so that they could give a complete picture to EASA? Since many of the subjects included in the civilian ATPL theory exams are taught much later in the military (when they are considered more relevant), unless the 22 Gp team were able to gather the correct information from other Gp HQs, they would fail to tell the whole story.

In the civilian world, the CAA regulate the training provided by flying training schools and operators, so it is easy for them to provide a complete picture to EASA. Arguably, only the MAA would be able to present such a complete picture to EASA on behalf of the military. So this whole debacle just screams out to me that regulation of military flying training is systemically flawed.

:ouch:

More likely the finger, or rather thumb, was occupying the traditional orifice whilst the corporate mind was in neutral?

Exactly!



Come Monday morning at Abbey Wood, with the pleasant task of re-arranging paper clips and lining up their 4 coloured dri-markers ahead of them, as they begin their traditional morning chant of "L00kout, Attitude, Instruments, what about a FOEHL check?", Little and Large are somewhat surprised when the phone rings at 0831....

"ring.....ring"

"Hello, 22 Trai.....ah, good morning, Sir!"

"You two, your hats, my office...NOW!"

........

"Right. Sort this shambles out and come back when you've fixed it. Saxa Vord and Machrihanish have now closed, so whilst you're unbuggering this chaos, I will be looking for somewhere which might need an OC GD Flt, or whatever the latest stupid name is, should you fail in your task......

Understand? Right, why am I still looking at you?"

If only.....:\

Disappointing. Long wait for nothing. Tried to digest it and in summary we are exempt from the training requirements but have to do all the same tests (except MCC for ME guys). Am I massively off the mark?

Basically no accreditation for years of experience, hard work and commitment.

Chances of being allowed to do a skills test/IR on military aircraft? Probably as high as finding a IRE or TRE qualified on type!:ugh:

Agreed, I don't mind doing the ATPL ground theory and will happily admit I will even learn a thing or two. But having do to do a skills test and IR as an IRE training captain with thousands of hours is, quite frankly, a joke.
They are basically saying that any experience I gain post 70 hours PIC is worthless. I know a few experienced people will be hitting the PVR button on Monday and heading off down the civvy multis route now:ugh:

In essence there is no military accreditation any more. This surely is contrary to the 'military covenant' in that the military has provided all of us with NO transferable skills or qualifications.

If we'd joined as squaddies rather than the highest trained members of the military at least we'd leave with an HGV licence.

What a waste of thousands of hours of flying and literally hundreds of check rides and years of study and application!

What a shameful betrayal....

The principle behind the Covenant is that the Armed Forces Community should not face disadvantage because of its military experience. In some cases, such as the sick, injured or bereaved, this means giving special consideration to enable access to public or commercial services that civilians wouldn’t receive. The Covenant covers issues from housing and education to support after Service, and in it veterans have great importance. It is crucial to the Government that it, and the nation, recognises the unique and immense sacrifices you have made for your country.

Start date for credits
 

Having waited approx one month for a reply from the CAA wrt additional theory requirements to add an IR to an existing CPL I got a reply yesterday approx 10mins before the CAA shut up shop for the weekend, which was very good of them.

The news was not welcome; if you want an IR you must sit all 7 of IR exams, or all 14 for an ATPL. They also closed the email with the following statement:

"Please refer to CAP 804 for any credits towards the exams and
theoretical instruction which will be effective from 17 September 2012."

I infer from this that if I/you intend to gain an IR or ATPL before that date I/we have still got to go through an accredited trg provider which is another kick in the proverbials and a further dent in the ever-shrinking wallet. Disappointed doesn't even come close.

Anyone thinking of completing exams in August will also be pleased to hear that the deadline for exam applications was.......yesterday!!! :ugh:

The only aviators that I see benefitting from the MAS are the newbies, recently CR, green rated, that want to get out of the service as soon as they complete their return of service.

So glad I'm not out of the service in the next 2 months and that I haven't been waiting since April to find out this info :mad::mad::mad: and :mad:

Whirling Wizardry,

Did you have your CPL issued through the bridging scheme? I've just asked the CAA the same question and am awaiting an answer. The CAA wording was previously ambiguous and said that you would lose your theory credits if you hadn't had your licence issued before the deadline. I took this to infer that you would keep your theory credits as long as you had your licence issued (which I have but with no IR).

If they are making everyone do all 7 exams for the IR again then I will have to repeat exams that I have already obtained full credit for:ugh:.

SARBloke,

Got mine through the bridging scheme; to carry ATPL theory credit over (after 8 Apr 12) you needed to have had an IR issued and you must then upgrade to an ATPL within 7 years. It sounds like you are in the same position as me, i.e. 7 exams for IR or 14 for ATPL :(

The next available exams for IR are in Oct. I have been informed that you can start any necessry aircraft fg trg before completing all of the requisite theory exams but you would have to take your IRT/ATPL skills test after you have passed all of the necessary exams.

I was previously told by the CAA that any exams previously taken at ATPL level, i.e. Air Law and Ops Procedures would be credited beyond 8 Apr and you wouldn't have to sit them again (as long as you complete all exams within 18 months), however, the latest email the CAA sent me doesn't say that. I tend to get a different answer from the CAA every time I speak to them so I'd like to hear what anyone else has been told. It all adds to the frustration caused by the Campaign Against Aviation when simple answers are all that is needed so that you can simply organise what trg needs doing.

Straight from easa basic regs. (article 10) Looks as if (IMHO) this requirement hasn't been met. It mentions Service, it doesnt say anything about training output standard. 22gp have only assessed up to a point at which knowledge,experience and skill is in its infancy. Like to see some civilian operators cope with an under resourced op setup, poor met services an very short notice destinations that fall outside of the company ops manual. We use our experience to act as met men, ir procedures publishers (when was the last time a civvie airline issued toppos?) planners, dangerous goods specialist yet none of this is recognised! How many times does a civvie captain have to pick up cargo handlers and their ops setups for incorrect and often dangerous assumptions? Complete contempt by the service if you ask me.

Whirling wizardry,

The more I hear, the more I find more questions that need answering. You mention that you will need to do the ATPL exams before a skills test but I thought the CPL and ATPL skills test were the same (and therefore there is no need to do it again). Does that mean you (and I) will also need to do another skills test before an ATPL can be issued? I assume not, and if I am right, then we don't fit within the current rules and someone will have to make the decision as to what we do next.

Who makes the decisions as to what is required in these sorts of cases? The CAA clearly state in CAP804 that they have washed their hands of it. Do 22Gp have the authority to make common-sense decisions in these cases (as the CAA have done with me previously)?

I'm in the same boat as a few here with just a bone Cpl issued under mil bridging. I also asked the same question wrt converting a JAR Cpl to an EASA Cpl/IR, but am still waiting for a reply, I'll post if I hear anything different.

So essentially, unless I misread things, my cpl is absolutely worthless unless I wish to remain a cpl for the foreseeable future? If I wish to gain an IR I need to pass the 7 IR exams, a skills test and IRT and if I want an ATPL (why stay a CPL?) then I need to do all 14? So essentially the cpl, exams, hassle and expense was a massive waste of time and money?!

VR,
As a newly created civvy aviator I can say we deal with this sort of thing far more frequently than I ever did during my time as the RAF's Most Awesome C130 Pilot.

I completely agree however that the failure to credit QSPs for the hours and experience accumulated during their career in the military is a slap in the face from the CAA. It also doesn't say much for the RAF for whom a well managed accreditation system would serve more as retention and morale booster than as an exit valve. As with most things however, the RAF would rather deal with the minor leak in the boat than with the huge waterfall they are slowly drifting towards. Hey ho.

Stoppers, you are absolutely correct - and a number of other posters have made much the same point.

Before the wholly unnecessary and thoroughly unwanted leaden hand of EASA's €urocracy descended upon us all, the Military/Civil Working Group had worked together to achieve a far more reasonable system. As stated in LASORS 2010:

That must now be restored, if the MAS is to enjoy any credibility.

More confused than a big bag of confused things.
 

Help! I am now thoroughly confused about what I need to achieve in order to gain an IR.

I currently hold a JAR-FCL CPL(H) and AS350B TR gained via the Bridging system and issued in early 2008. As far as I can see this is worthless without an IR - so in order to get one I have to sit a further 7 exams (including resitting Air Law?) prior to even starting a course with an ATO?

I am a current QMP(H) with a Restricted Green rating. I currently have 3600hrs (not, it seems, that it counts for anything) - I am signing off next month so I have a year to get my house in order so I am employable. Sitting a further 7 exams will obviously delay things considerably (as well as deplete the bank account further).

I have already budgetted for the QSP IR conversion course with Bond Helicotpers and I'm currently awaiting an answer from them on any changes with the new Section O to the CAP might affect their course.

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated!

Confused...
 

Am I missing something or does this system fail in the above requirement? It recognises nothing beyond the training system (70hrs). How is that crediting experience gained in service? Have EASA signed this off?

In which case, when can we expect AL1 - The 'Full' Military Accreditation Scheme?

JAR-FCL 1.020
 

Uncle G, you're not wrong!

This is what the previous system was based upon:

Several years ago, we were assured by the EASA presenter who came to Gatwick for a pre-EASA meeting which I attended, that the same principles would apply under EASA. Nothing would change; it would remain the National Authority's decision as to the level of such credit and the senior CAA person present nodded in agreement.

so basically the RAF have done us over like kippers then....:mad:

What would stop a couple of determined individuals getting together and putting together an evidence base for more experienced mil operators or does it HAVE to be staffed at the Group level? Lots of frontline DSAT work going on at the mo, wouldnt be to difficult surely to translate these doc sets into something that could be used for compliance with EASA training requirements surely?

I would suggest that for front line, it could provide quite a useful TNA to bridge the knowledge gap for frontline operators between us and our civilian equivalents.

I find it incredible that there is no accreditation for military experience past 70hrs.
Even if the line is drawn higher than before e.g. 3000hr TT or A1 QFI etc etc.
Surely there must come a point as a mil operator where you are credited for being an experienced ME operator?!?

As far as the CAA and 22 Gp were concerned they have honoured the recognition of experience gained through Mil trg by stating that you don't need to complete any ground theory instruction and can simply sit the exams, you also have the ability to sit an ATPL/IR skills test without undergoing any other form of trg, as long as your aircraft is compliant with EASA regs and the flight examiner is suitably qualified, i.e. your Sqn IRE would need to be an accredited CAA IRE/TRE; I'm sure that every fleet has at least one of them!! Chances of the Mob letting you have a CAA IRE/TRE onboard right now? I reckon you've got better odds on winning the Euro lottery!

I have been reading CAP804 again and note that the Status section on page one of the forward clearly states that CAP804 doesn't come into effect until 17 Sep 12, the only exception is Part O which is valid from 27 Jul 12, which should mean that we can apply for exams and/or skills tests now using the MAS. Do we still have to wait until 17 Sep 12 to get an EASA license or can we apply earlier?

We could really do with someone from the CAA with at least one finger on the pulse to give definitive answers because it seems to me even the CAA don't know what their own regs are.

I'm sorry WW, but you dont gain experience through training - you gain training through training:ok: And they also say that you can do this after 70hrs. That is training (as you yourself say), not experience.

I fear someone's been sold a pup.

The amendment was dated Jul 12 but the download page has the following note:

If LASORS are withdrawn on 17 Sep, does that mean we can use LASORS as the rulebook until then? That might just be enough time for me to get an IR.

As an aside, what do all the commercial pilots with frozen ATPLs have to do to unfreeze them? Will they have to do the ATPL exams again? If not, what is the difference between them retaining their theory credit and those of us who have CPLs issued under the bridging scheme?

Also confused
 

With a CAA ATPL(H) and civvie street looming, wtf do I have to do? It seemed straightforward, get a civvie type rating and convert to an EASA ATPL(H), worry about IR later but have I now got to sit some more exams?

SL

Even though all other part-FCL requirements were delayed from 8 Apr until 30 Jun and subsequently until 17 Sep, the CAA did not apply this to Military Accreditation.....

Why?

For the MAS to have any credibility at all, a 'tiered' system, such as the previous 'experienced QSP' system is absolutely essential. In the big picture, if restoration of an accreditation system which was wholly acceptable for 10 years under JAR-FCL cannot readily be achieved under EASA, then it is EASA which is at fault, not the accreditation system!

LASORS 2010 is valid until CAP 804 becomes effective on 17 Sep 2012 - except for Section 4 part O which became effective on 27 Jul 2012.

Uncle G

Total agree, experienced Mil aviators $h!t out in every respect. Only a complete idiot would attempt to sit all 14 exams without getting assistance/guidance from a trg provider first.....it's a loaded gun. As soon as a Mil pilot fails an exam the CAA will claim they are justified in their decision to make us sit all of the exams....I think it sucks the fat one.

As far as the theoretical ability to simply sit a skills test in a Mil aircraft goes...well, good luck to anyone who can convince the Mil that it is in the wider service interest. I suspect the overwhelming majority will have to pay for the use of a civvy aircraft, having at least the minimum number of hours on that type, as specified in the AMC and GM document.

All in all it's very disappointing to have had to wait for the MAS since April and get what seems to be a massive slap in the face for amassing thousands of hours doing the Government's dirty work in difficult, demanding, dangerous situations.

I for one feel no remorse in getting out, the Service demands everything from you but currently gives very little back in return; loyalty is a 2-way thing. How many Mil aviators feel valued by their employer right now?

VP,

When you say "frozen-ATPL" do you really mean a "CPL/IR with ATPL theory credits"? That's what most young civilian pilots start with when they join an airline - although some start with a Multi-Pilot Licence these days. All will convert their licences to ATPLs when they achieve 1500 hrs PIC/PICUS with an airline. So, ex-military pilots who gained those credentials through the MAC should be treated no differently than their civilian colleagues; after all, there are probably hundreds operating with the airlines as I write.

Although the changeover won't really impact military pilots if they already hold a valid CPL/IR with ATPL theory credits and an MCC exemption, if they have yet to achieve any of them, that it may hurt!

To have a CPL issued under the bridging scheme we have undertaken exactly the same exams as those military pilots who have been issued a CPL/IR. Why should we be treated differently? I can accept that to add an IR that we could be expected to do the IR exams but why should we have to repeat all 14 ATPL exams when the CAA have already accepted my theoretical training (else they wouldn't have issued my CPL). If they no longer accept that my theoretical training is valid then should they not withdraw my licence?

This begs another question. When mil pilots with CPL/IR try to upgrade to ATPL, they won't be able to demonstrate passes in all 14 ATPL exams. Will they have to do them again? If not, why should I have to?

It seems to me that the rules are hugely inconsistent.

Thats different to what the EASA Basic Regs stipulate we are supposed to be given credit for.... :mad: "Military Service" Does not finish at OCU output standard!

Is this a noncompliance issue and if so, who is it actionable by? 22Gp, the CAA or EASA?

SAR Bloke,

I hope you kept the covering letter that was enclosed with your new CPL; if you did, it probably said that you were the proud owner of a "CPL with ATPL theory credits". That will be on the CAA's system (in the same way that it is for all ab-initio civilian pilots joining an airline) for future reference when they achieve their 1500 hrs PICUS and qualify to upgrade to an ATPL.

If I understand your situation correctly, you haven't yet completed your initial civilian IR. That may cause the CAA a bit of difficulty as they get their heads around the new system, but I think they should see reason if you show then in black and white that you have the "ATPL theory credits" - if not, find yourself a good solicitor.

Have I got this right?
 

I bit the bullet last year and completed a CPL/IR. I also got MCC credit. My correspondence with CAA at the time indicates (as well as on my license) that I have a JAR-FCL CPL/IR with frzn ATPL theory credit. My understanding is that, in this case, my license will be automatically changed to an EASA Part-FCL license in due course. Or am I missing something?

Thanks in advance for any advice.

SFO

Taxi
 

Hi,
Have only read the document very quickly but I cant see any mention of taxi time allowances. Is this in another document or should I be logging everything in a civilian logbook?

SFO

When you next renew your licence it will indeed become an EASA document; the good bit is that you won't have to keep renewing that one.

You seem to be in the same position as a civilian cadet about to join an airline; once you have obtained a multi-pilot type rating and 1500 hrs PIC/PICUS, you can convert your licence to an ATPL.

Not sure where this requirement for '1500hrs PIC/PICUS' comes from - my reading of the regs tells me its 1500hrs TT, with 500hrs multi-pilot ops and 500hrs PICUS - unless I've read that wrong?

In other words, roughly half a Co's tour will qualify you for an ATPL, hours-wise - assuming you have the min requisite 100hrs PIC for a CPL to begin with... meaning all that is required is a multi-pilot type rating...

The ATPL prerequisites are:

My mistake - it was getting late. Sorry. :O

In summary....
 

So what is the overall corporate feeling regarding the MAS? Without wishing to direct anyone's views, would it be fair to say:

• The CPL accreditation achieved for immediate post-wings level pilots is welcomed.
• LAPL and PPL accreditation is inadequate.
• Significantly enhanced accreditation for experienced military pilots must be achieved, along the lines of the previous scheme which had been acceptable to the JAA for over 10 years.

:hmm:

Sounds fair, and covers what would appear to be the major issues that I can see. Does this mean, though, that a CPL(H) is still reasonably easy to achieve for a QSP, Beags?

CPL(H) accreditation for the recently graduated QMP(H) would appear to be similar to CPL(A) accreditation for the recently graduated QMP(A).

However, significantly enhanced accreditation for 'experienced QSP(H)' pilots has not been achieved in the current MAS scheme and needs to be reinstated.

Many thanks,
 

LFFC and TI.

I do have an e-mail from FCL confirming that in order to upgrade to a full ATPL, I need to provide evidence of 500 hrs multi-pilot following the award of the CPL (I already have 7 times that number, but as my IR and LST were not on the mil type for which I used to claim the basic 2000 hrs requirement - Nimrod - I have to effectively start again with the hours). Not an ideal position but I appreciate that I am better off than some. If only I had listened to the hairy old Spec Aircrew bods when I was younger and got my LST/IR done on the Mighty 'rod whilst it was still in service.

Hey Ho. Best of luck to all those treading the license path!