U.K. National (CAA) licence to EASA
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't until April 2012.
What the CAA want you to do is to transition to the JAR-PPL in advance. That will automatically transfer to become an EASA PPL on the effective date.
If you have one already then you do nothing. If you have the UK-PPL you have to apply for the licence, indicate that you have met the RadNav part of the JAR syllabus or else do a test with an examiner and pay £176.
Or, like the rest of us, hold fire and hope the CAA see reason.
Yeh, right
What the CAA want you to do is to transition to the JAR-PPL in advance. That will automatically transfer to become an EASA PPL on the effective date.
If you have one already then you do nothing. If you have the UK-PPL you have to apply for the licence, indicate that you have met the RadNav part of the JAR syllabus or else do a test with an examiner and pay £176.
Or, like the rest of us, hold fire and hope the CAA see reason.
Yeh, right
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, a 3 year transition period, call it 660 working days. 15,000 licenses means 23 licenses per day. So, the secretary needs to be able to print out a few sheets of paper, cut them badly, and stick them in a crapy wallet, once every 20 minutes
I'd say some competitive tendering is called for.
The barstewards!!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cilboldentune, Britannia
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the presentation given by Cliff Whittaker, Head of Licensing and Training Policy, November 2010 it would appear that there will be no cost for those going from JAA to EASA; CAA to reissue licence. So, I don't understand why there should be a charge for going ICAO to EASA. After all, we were reissued an update to our licence to indicate our level of understanding English without a charge.
http://www.ukfsc.co.uk/files/Safety%...ber%202010.pdf
http://www.ukfsc.co.uk/files/Safety%...ber%202010.pdf
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having checked with Bose and others;
If you fly a permit or annex2 aircraft on a CAA PPL doing absolutely nothing appears to be the right choice. (This advice is worth what you paid for it)
Rod1
If you fly a permit or annex2 aircraft on a CAA PPL doing absolutely nothing appears to be the right choice. (This advice is worth what you paid for it)
Rod1
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: 7nm N of LARCK
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
National Licences
I'm missing something. How can you change your licence from an NPPL to the new EASA licence when we don't yet know what the medical requirements are?
This is about the old style ICAO compliant CAA PPL licences, not the NPPL. They are termed National Licences because they were issued by the National Authorities, before JAA came along.
The NPPL to LPL / LAPL / or what ever it's called this week, is yet another can of Euro-worms, not the least of which is the medical aspects.
The word from the CAA man at Saturday's LAA Coaching / CRI Seminar was the same as Bose-x and others above, get yours now and save problems later. The CAA & EASA licences can continue in parallel, which may be the way they handle ratings that are not recognised by EASA. It seems the French are out for scalps after they lost their beloved Brevet de base in the EASA dog fight. The CAA Man's view of EASA was refreshingly scathing.
Safe Flying,
Richard W.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rod1,
The issue is that if you will ultimately want/need an EASA PPL:
Currently there is no agreed transition between UK PPL and EASA PPL. Thus, you may be required to undertake currently unspecified levels of training. For example, radio navigation is a part of the JAR-FCL and EASA syllabus.
There is, however, an agreed transition between UK PPL and JAR-FCL PPL [piece of paper, a signature, and some dosh], and there is an agreed transition between JAR-FCL PPL and EASA PPL [do nothing].
Currently, there is not a 3-year transition period. JAR-FCL had this, because it was like a 'euro-club' where the UK could implement bits at it's leisure. The difference is that EASA will be implemented by law.
A condition of your continued right to exercise those privileges is that you are required to know and understand the Air Navigation Order, which I am sure will be amended in due course to reflect your amended privileges.
You "pays" your money, and you "takes" your choice!
ifitaint...
The issue is that if you will ultimately want/need an EASA PPL:
Currently there is no agreed transition between UK PPL and EASA PPL. Thus, you may be required to undertake currently unspecified levels of training. For example, radio navigation is a part of the JAR-FCL and EASA syllabus.
There is, however, an agreed transition between UK PPL and JAR-FCL PPL [piece of paper, a signature, and some dosh], and there is an agreed transition between JAR-FCL PPL and EASA PPL [do nothing].
Currently, there is not a 3-year transition period. JAR-FCL had this, because it was like a 'euro-club' where the UK could implement bits at it's leisure. The difference is that EASA will be implemented by law.
I have a CAA pre JAR licence. I have had no contact from the CAA suggesting anything. I was never told it was a condition of my licence to monitor PPRUNE.
You "pays" your money, and you "takes" your choice!
ifitaint...
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ifitaintboeing
That quote was not me!
My understanding is that an EASA PPL is about as useful to me as a chocolate teapot as I fly a permit aircraft. I believe the CAA are reintroducing the CAA PPL to cope with this. As I already have a CAA PPL and will not be flying an EASA c of a aircraft why do I need an EASA PPL?
Rod1
That quote was not me!
My understanding is that an EASA PPL is about as useful to me as a chocolate teapot as I fly a permit aircraft. I believe the CAA are reintroducing the CAA PPL to cope with this. As I already have a CAA PPL and will not be flying an EASA c of a aircraft why do I need an EASA PPL?
Rod1
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed. If you don't need an EASA PPL [because you fly, and only intend to fly, Annex II/Permit to Fly] then sit tight, as your UK PPL or NPPL will suffice, and the privileges are very likely to continue.
The CAA aren't re-introducing anything, to my knowledge.
If you do need an EASA PPL then it is worth sorting it out in advance, as there is no transition agreement direct from UK PPL to EASA PPL.
I believe the CAA are reintroducing the CAA PPL to cope with this.
If you do need an EASA PPL then it is worth sorting it out in advance, as there is no transition agreement direct from UK PPL to EASA PPL.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is patently absurd that there is a chargeable transition route from CAA to JAA with no training requirement and then a free transfer from JAA to EASA, also without training, but yet no transfer from CAA direct to EASA without additional training (if required) plus probably a substantial fee. This kind of lunacy is symptomatic of the idiocy surrounding these bureaucrats and their regs.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Hove
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The proposed route from a national, ICAO compliant PPL to an EASA PPL is laid out in annexe 2 of the draft regulation on Part FCL.
The CAA said as much in their guidance document published last September.
The CAA said as much in their guidance document published last September.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I note that when my FAA PPL licence needed replacing in January 2009 to incorporate the English proficiency requirement the total cost of that was £1.40, including postage to the UK.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I note that when my FAA PPL licence needed replacing in January 2009 to incorporate the English proficiency requirement the total cost of that was £1.40, including postage to the UK.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you suggesting the £176 fee from the CAA for a replacement licence that contributes nothing over and above what we have already is reasonable? There seems an enormous gulf between the US cost for a bit of replacement plastic and the UK cost for a bit of replacement paper.
And referring to a previous post of yours, are you suggesting the CAA would actually ground pilots because they have not converted to a bit of paper that contributes nothing over and above what we already have and cannot be replaced BY THEM in the timescale they set forth?
And referring to a previous post of yours, are you suggesting the CAA would actually ground pilots because they have not converted to a bit of paper that contributes nothing over and above what we already have and cannot be replaced BY THEM in the timescale they set forth?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Yep, the rest of the costs were kindly stumped up by the US tax payer........
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly. Whilst not defending the CAA scale of charges I can just see my constituents being happy to pay extra tax to subsidise such things ... not! Even asking the question would guarantee not being re-elected.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you suggesting the £176 fee from the CAA for a replacement licence that contributes nothing over and above what we have already is reasonable? There seems an enormous gulf between the US cost for a bit of replacement plastic and the UK cost for a bit of replacement paper.
And referring to a previous post of yours, are you suggesting the CAA would actually ground pilots because they have not converted to a bit of paper that contributes nothing over and above what we already have and cannot be replaced BY THEM in the timescale they set forth?
And referring to a previous post of yours, are you suggesting the CAA would actually ground pilots because they have not converted to a bit of paper that contributes nothing over and above what we already have and cannot be replaced BY THEM in the timescale they set forth?
To answer your second post. Yes I do believe the CAA will ground people through the lack of a 'bit of paper'. You can't fly without the paper physically in your hand. Why should they change that because people stick their heads in the sand and hang out the last minute? In order to fly in the US you must be in possession of your certificate and photo ID....
I don't suppose that tax on Avgas could be considered as part of the payment?
Last edited by S-Works; 23rd Jan 2011 at 18:21.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fareham
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am strongly of the view that the CAA scale of fees should not be taxpayer funded.
This issues does however open up simple an very narrowly focused debate about those charges and the underlying costs.
Could any commercial organisation really charge £176?
I'm no management accountant but let's look at what might be involved.
Post room staff direct mail to correct section. (1 minute)
Staff in Licence renewal section open letter with form inside. (1 minute)
Form checked for compleetness and accuracy (let's be generous, 10 minutes)
Form cross referenced with database. (2 minutes).
New Licence printed. (1 minute)
New Licence put in envelope and sent to post room. (1 minute)
Postroom activities (1 minute)
So, the total time taken is 17 minutes. Let's call it 20 for the sake of argument.
This is not exactly highly complex or technical work and should be undertaken by a junior clerk/administrator. We pay these kind of people £15-17K per year. Again for simplicity, lets call it £20K for not quite in London.
220 working days of 7.5 hours per year so wage costs £12.12 per hour. Use your fixed cost multiplier to allow for holidays, sickness, NI, fixed costs, variable costs (heat and light etc.) etc. Let's go to the absolute top of the scale multiplier anyone would ever use - times five. (we are at 2.8)
So hourly cost £60.60. Three applications per hour = £20.20 each.
Even if they are complete muppets and spend half their time on health and safety training, gender equality seminars and group hug-ins, there is just no way in the world you can run an organisation so badly that a £20 job and a 6% profit comes to £176.
Please can someone explain.
If they can't, then there is clearly a prima facie case for judicial review.
This issues does however open up simple an very narrowly focused debate about those charges and the underlying costs.
Could any commercial organisation really charge £176?
I'm no management accountant but let's look at what might be involved.
Post room staff direct mail to correct section. (1 minute)
Staff in Licence renewal section open letter with form inside. (1 minute)
Form checked for compleetness and accuracy (let's be generous, 10 minutes)
Form cross referenced with database. (2 minutes).
New Licence printed. (1 minute)
New Licence put in envelope and sent to post room. (1 minute)
Postroom activities (1 minute)
So, the total time taken is 17 minutes. Let's call it 20 for the sake of argument.
This is not exactly highly complex or technical work and should be undertaken by a junior clerk/administrator. We pay these kind of people £15-17K per year. Again for simplicity, lets call it £20K for not quite in London.
220 working days of 7.5 hours per year so wage costs £12.12 per hour. Use your fixed cost multiplier to allow for holidays, sickness, NI, fixed costs, variable costs (heat and light etc.) etc. Let's go to the absolute top of the scale multiplier anyone would ever use - times five. (we are at 2.8)
So hourly cost £60.60. Three applications per hour = £20.20 each.
Even if they are complete muppets and spend half their time on health and safety training, gender equality seminars and group hug-ins, there is just no way in the world you can run an organisation so badly that a £20 job and a 6% profit comes to £176.
Please can someone explain.
If they can't, then there is clearly a prima facie case for judicial review.