PPL Revalidation time Running out

[ATIS31]

Hi
Can someone tell me under EASA what all you have to do to Revalidate your PPL if you don't do the 12 hours in time ? I have 4 hours currently and do to other commitments I don't think I will have the Required 12 hours before time runs out in the next 2 months. Do I have to do a full PPL Skills Test again or is it just some parts ? Is there a Nav Exercise and Diversion ? Is it better to wait to it expires or can I do it before the due date which would mean I am valid for another 24 months ?

Thanks in advance

[BEagle]

Did you bother to read your Air Law & Op. Procs books? Or was it simply a 'learn/dump' process, in your case?

You can either revalidate your Class Rating by experience or by proficiency check with an Examiner. If you elect to fly a proficiency check within the final 3 months of your Class Rating validity period, your Class Rating will be revalidated for 2 years from the date of expiry - otherwise it will be 2 years from the date of the proficiency check.

If you let your Rating (not licence) expire, you will need to renew your Class Rating by flying a proficiency check with an Examiner.

The proficiency check is simpler than than the PPL Skill Test, but it will include a navigation element.

[RTN11]

This stuff isn't exactly a secret, you should sort of know it.

A proficiency check would certainly be cheaper an easier than flying 8 hours, at least one of which would have to be with an instructor anyway.

Flying the 8 hours would be more fun though

[OhNoCB]

If you elect to fly a proficiency check within the final 3 months of your Class Rating validity period, your Class Rating will be revalidated for 2 years from the date of expiry - otherwise it will be 2 years from the date of the proficiency check.

Being pedantic and to further my own understanding, is it not now the case thanks to EASA that the rating would be valid for 2 years from the end of the month?

Please do correct me if I have it wrong.

[flybymike]

Did you bother to read your Air Law & Op. Procs books? Or was it simply a 'learn/dump' process, in your case?

That's a bit unfair Beagle. Those who qualified over thirty years ago long before JAA never mind EASA, and who have always been "current" would never have learned this stuff in any exam and would have no need to know the renewal requirements unless and until required.
Asking on here seems quite reasonable.

[BillieBob]

I would suggest that as it has never been necessary to re-take any part of the skill test in order to maintain (or regain) the currency of a PPL, that argument does not hold water. It is a source of continuing amazement to me that people are prepared to pay tens of thousands of pounds to gain a pilot licence yet do not think it important to know the first thing about its privileges or how to maintain it.

[Whopity]

but it will include a navigation element.

Not according to EASA: AMC FCL Appendix 9 Section B

CONTENT OF THE TRAINING/SKILL TEST/PROFICIENCY CHECK
Section 3A shall be completed to revalidate a type or multi-engine class rating, VFR only, where the required experience of 10 route sectors within the previous 12 months has not been completed. Section 3A is not required if section 3B is completed.

Being pedantic and to further my own understanding, is it not now the case thanks to EASA that the rating would be valid for 2 years from the end of the month?

The new one will be, the old one expires on the annotated expiry date.

[wb9999]

BillieBob, the CAA refer to it as "Skill Test Licensing Proficiency Check (LPC)" on form SRG1119A, so it's harsh to criticise somebody for calling it a skills test. I've heard instructors and an examiner refer to it as such.

[BillieBob]

I am not criticising anyone for calling it a skills test, my point is that it has never been necessary to re-fly any part of the PPL skill test in order to 'revalidate' a PPL. Try reading the OP again.

SRG1119A simply shows how inept and slapdash the CAA is becoming - there should be a comma between 'Skill Test' and 'Licensing Proficiency Check', which are two entirely different things. In any case, there is no longer any such thing as a Licensing Proficiency Check but, then, who would expect the CAA to understand that? They're too busy moving the deck chairs around.

[Pittsextra]

Typical pprune... someone asks a question (and probably didn't think to cross every t with the wording), probably expecting a quick answer and gets gashed off initially before things fire off over the minutiae of wording...

If anyone needed further incentive to do the required hours - thus avoiding the need to open up and asking questions this thread is it. FFS.

[wb9999]

BillieBob, the OP asked "Can someone tell me under EASA what all you have to do to Revalidate your PPL if you don't do the 12 hours in time". A proficiency check is necessary if a pilot is unable to revalidate by experience for whatever reason.

[Piper.Classique]

Just a moment while I poke my tin hat above the parapet........






Ok?





Safe to speak?



If the OP is still here, might I suggest that he/she go fly for an hour with an instructor anyway as a low time pilot light on hours might have a wee problem passing a test whatever it is called, without some revision. Then decide whether to fly another seven hours or book an examiner (who will most likely want paying). I suspect a decent cross country or two would be more fun, and it is not forbidden for two pilots to fly together, taking alternate legs as P1.

If it isn't for whatever reason possible to do the hours then do the test before the rating expires for a slightly less beaurocratic experience.


OK, getting back in my hole now.

[flybymike]

I would suggest that as it has never been necessary to re-take any part of the skill test in order to maintain (or regain) the currency of a PPL,

I find that remark completely incomprehensible. The only way that an instructor flight or proficiency check would not involve retaking any part of a skills test would be for the aeroplane to remain on the ground.

[Whopity]

I find that remark completely incomprehensible.

JAR introduced terminology that was misread by many. A Proficiency Check was used for Revalidation but; a Renewal required a Skill Test. The content of the two were exactly the same, consequently many incorrectly assumed that the Skill Test was the Licence Issue Skill test; two completely different tests, albeit there are some similarities!

EASA has had the good sense to redefine Proficiency Check

‘Proficiency check’ means the demonstration of skill to revalidate or renew ratings, and including such oral examination as may be required.

and Skill Test

‘Skill test’ means the demonstration of skill for a licence or rating issue, including such oral examination as may be required.

BB's point is that since the introduction of JAR 13 years ago, the license issue Skill Test has formed no part of the Revalidation or Renewal process.

[flybymike]

A rose by any other name?
Calling a shovel a spade?

[wb9999]

A rose by any other name?
Calling a shovel a spade?

+1. I see nothing wrong with what the OP asked. I understood what he/she meant by skill test, even if technically the wording should have been proficiency check. The OP did ask if they would have to undergo "any part of the skill test". Stalls, steep turns, PFL, EFATO, flapless landing, glide approach are all part of the skill test and will be part of a proficiency check.

[BillieBob]

What the OP actually asked was

Do I have to do a full PPL Skills Test again or is it just some parts ?

I repeat, it has never been necessary to re-take any part of the [PPL] skill test in order to maintain (or regain) the currency of a PPL.

The fact that nobody seems to be able to distinguish between a PPL Skill Test and a Class Rating Proficiency Check rather makes my point about the astonishing level of ignorance out there.

[wb9999]

I repeat, it has never been necessary to re-take any part of the [PPL] skill test in order to maintain (or regain) the currency of a PPL.

So you wouldn't expect a proficiency check to include stalls, steep turns, PFL, EFATO, different landing configurations/approaches? They are in a proficiency check and "part of the skill test" - so technically your statement is incorrect, if we're going to be pedantic about individual words.

You can fail a proficiency check, so it is a test in effect. Which is why I can understand why some people may call it a skills test in error - rather than castigate them for it. I think everyone here understood what was meant by the OP's question, but only some decided to provide a helpful response.

[BEagle]

Not according to EASA: AMC FCL Appendix 9 Section B
Quote:

CONTENT OF THE TRAINING/SKILL TEST/PROFICIENCY CHECK
Section 3A shall be completed to revalidate a type or multi-engine class rating, VFR only, where the required experience of 10 route sectors within the previous 12 months has not been completed. Section 3A is not required if section 3B is completed.

That means that, for type or ME class ratings, if the route sectors haven't been completed, then Section 3A is mandatory (unless Section 3B is completed).

For SEP/TMG the requirement to complete Section 3A does apply; Appendix 9 Section B 1 states:

In the case of single-pilot aeroplanes, with the exception of for single-pilot high performance complex aeroplanes, the applicant shall pass all sections of the skill test or proficiency check.

Which obviously means, inter alia, passing Section 3A.

[tunalic2]

I know you lot might be 100% correct all of the time.
Indeed it is necessary to be so to remain within the forever changing regulations.
BUT..........

You're boring the **** out of me and scaring the hell out of any future PPL holders.

Most PPL people fly for fun, try and keep it that way!
I know the original post is a year old but I just stumbled on it in a search.

Go fly
Have fun
Leave the b.....s for the bureaucrats !
T