ATPL(H) upgrade info, AGAIN!!!!!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HM,
****e
Is your employer going to assist in fighting your corner????? It's in their interest also
Failing that I'll try and keep a chair down here warm for you
Keep me posted buddy
****e
Is your employer going to assist in fighting your corner????? It's in their interest also
Failing that I'll try and keep a chair down here warm for you
Keep me posted buddy
Thanks for the support so far guys. I'm going to write a letter and also speak with my employer. I know there are a couple of other guys out there in the same position who did the same exams at the same time.
Doing what's required, taking all of the necessary exams, trying to get on, spending a sh*tload of £££££ and it comes down to possibly either remaining a co-pilot for the rest of my career or coming back to onshore flying. Not exactly what I had in mind as the onshore jobs are few and far between.
VeeAny, you do have a point. If I can upgrade my CAA CPL to a JAR one, then surely by having sat the JAR IR exams too, maybe that argument would work. Need to sit down and word this letter carefully but I think I already know the outcome.
I'll keep you posted.
Doing what's required, taking all of the necessary exams, trying to get on, spending a sh*tload of £££££ and it comes down to possibly either remaining a co-pilot for the rest of my career or coming back to onshore flying. Not exactly what I had in mind as the onshore jobs are few and far between.
VeeAny, you do have a point. If I can upgrade my CAA CPL to a JAR one, then surely by having sat the JAR IR exams too, maybe that argument would work. Need to sit down and word this letter carefully but I think I already know the outcome.
I'll keep you posted.
Best of luck.
True. But you've also just been given leads to two of the onshore S76 jobs. Haughey Air (in NI) would probably also be interested in talking to you.
So it's not all bad. Silver linings and all, eh?
So it's not all bad. Silver linings and all, eh?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Onshore is all about who you know
So cheques to the normal account in the Caymans
I reckon your fear about leaving the offshore world is the loss of your rubber suit
The gimp mask was always purely optional so I've heard 
Good luck and give 'em hell
So cheques to the normal account in the Caymans
I reckon your fear about leaving the offshore world is the loss of your rubber suit
The gimp mask was always purely optional so I've heard Good luck and give 'em hell
Well another email sent to CAA today. I'm not saying I wouldn't work onshore but having just moved my family, bought a new house, wife with new job etc, it's a pain in the ass to have to move all over again. It is all about who you know FW, but if they know me, they would never employ me!!
PS, tired after spending the last 5 hours in a rubber suit, sans gimp mask.
I just put a large red ball over the mike on the headset.
PS, tired after spending the last 5 hours in a rubber suit, sans gimp mask.
I just put a large red ball over the mike on the headset.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typical cr@p and sh!te from the CAA. I have a CAA ATPL (H) with no IR. I did my original exams back in 1991 whilst still in the military. Left over 10 years later and picked up employment in the aviation world. After a few years, with no IR under my belt, I considered forwarding my career (and hopefully expanding my bank balance) by looking to go into the corporate world that required an IR, even found someone to sponsor me then up pops the CAA to say that there is a shed load of exams to resit because of time lapsed since I last passed them. Question, if I have enough knowledge and experience to take on an (imposed) extended period of IR training followed by an IRT and pass it, what the hell does the requirement to resit the IR exams prove? Not saying that I would be a defo pass (never that confident) of the IRT but what are the CAA saying? Are they trying to protect me from my own confidence of throwing away money on training for an IRT that I couldn't possibly pass due to the length of time since I sat my exams? Studying all of the material is even harder second time around. Not because of age but because I can remember just how insignificant the stuff was from the first time around. I remember well, flight planning involved fuel calculations for a Boeing747 from Johanesberg to Heathrow, really useful in our world. I sniggered as I realised that the aircraft was burning as much fuel per hour as the MAUM of the helicopter I flew at the time. It's all about snobbery and protecting membership of 'the club'. Someone once told me. The airlines are full of kids who can memorise crap and pass exams at the drop of a hat. What they don't have is a natural skill to fly (and apparently no personality either). Sorry about the rant, feel a bit better for it now!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In my tank engine
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Helimut
I sat the national CPL(H) exams (9 nav, 5 techs) in 98, got a national CPL(H) issued in 99.
Got a JAA CPL(H) issued in 2001 (Based on my national CPL(H)
This year passed 5 of the JAA IR theory exams (2 left to sit) this was under amendment 3 of JAR FCL 2.
I plan on sitting the other 2 IR exams and getting the IR issued, this will give me an ATPL(H) theory credit. This has been confirmed in writing by the CAA.
The only difference I see is I had a JAA CPL(H) issued based on my national licence, I sat no JAA CPL or ATPL exams.
Did you get anything in writing from the CAA stating what you had to do?
1) To get the IR issued and 2) To get the ATPL theory credit.
I think its p*ss poor of the CAA if they refuse to issue you an ATPL.
Good luck.
I sat the national CPL(H) exams (9 nav, 5 techs) in 98, got a national CPL(H) issued in 99.
Got a JAA CPL(H) issued in 2001 (Based on my national CPL(H)
This year passed 5 of the JAA IR theory exams (2 left to sit) this was under amendment 3 of JAR FCL 2.
I plan on sitting the other 2 IR exams and getting the IR issued, this will give me an ATPL(H) theory credit. This has been confirmed in writing by the CAA.
The only difference I see is I had a JAA CPL(H) issued based on my national licence, I sat no JAA CPL or ATPL exams.
Did you get anything in writing from the CAA stating what you had to do?
1) To get the IR issued and 2) To get the ATPL theory credit.
I think its p*ss poor of the CAA if they refuse to issue you an ATPL.
Good luck.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TTTE, perhaps the CAA made the confirmation when an earlier amendment was in force? Earlier it didn't matter how you got the JAR CPL(H), now it does.
The authorities didn't like that someone could have been issued with an ATPL(H) only having completed the CPL(H) and IR(H) exams under a national syllabus, which might have been considerably easier than the JAA syllabus. The JAR CPL(H) and IR(H) theory is (at least was) so in-depth that ATPL(H) exams weren't deemed necessary. That's why national exams that are not at an ATPL level (lapsed ATPL exams don't count!) are not considered enough, in the same way as PPL exams aren't enough for the issue of a CPL.
Why is that? They just follow the rules they have to follow. Helimutt had the chance to gain his IR within 36 months but he didn't so the theory lapsed. I myself who did the JAR ATPL(H) exams need to gain my IR within 36 months otherwise I am in the (almost) same boat. What's the difference? Sure, helicopter pilots have better reasons to wait longer to gain an IR than their fixed-wing counterparts, probably for whom the 36 month rule was originally written, although UK licence holders would probably face difficulty having their licences accepted in other JAA states if the UK CAA just ignored for example the 36 month rule. Don't blame the JAA though, as the UK obviously had the same time limit before the implementation of JAR.
The authorities didn't like that someone could have been issued with an ATPL(H) only having completed the CPL(H) and IR(H) exams under a national syllabus, which might have been considerably easier than the JAA syllabus. The JAR CPL(H) and IR(H) theory is (at least was) so in-depth that ATPL(H) exams weren't deemed necessary. That's why national exams that are not at an ATPL level (lapsed ATPL exams don't count!) are not considered enough, in the same way as PPL exams aren't enough for the issue of a CPL.
I think its p*ss poor of the CAA if they refuse to issue you an ATPL.
anonythemouse; did your military flying include 1000hrs+ helicopters operated in a multipilot role? If it did and you are able to get a letter (from the mil) confirming such then it may be possible to convert your 'old' non IR CAA ATPL(H) to a JAA ATPL(H) (VFR).
You will need a current LPC on your CAA ATPL(H)
All you would need to do then is the full IR course and IRT. No TK exams.
(See LASORS 2007 Section A10.2 and the table on the next page.)
You will need a current LPC on your CAA ATPL(H)
All you would need to do then is the full IR course and IRT. No TK exams.
(See LASORS 2007 Section A10.2 and the table on the next page.)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for that Bertie. Have just had a read and seems straight forward. When I last spoke with someone down at the Death Star in Gatwick they told me that I would require to resit all of the IR exams as well as complete a full IR course. Got no problem with doing the course, my beef has been with having to resit exams due to time lapsed. As I said, it's not as if the theoretical stuff learned first time around has been disproved and rewritten! Maybe I should have kept calling the CAA until I got the answer I wanted and then got them to confirm it in writing.
Have just had a read and seems straight forward. When I last spoke with someone down at the Death Star in Gatwick they told me that I would require to resit all of the IR exams as well as complete a full IR course. Got no problem with doing the course, my beef has been with having to resit exams due to time lapsed. As I said, it's not as if the theoretical stuff learned first time around has been disproved and rewritten! Maybe I should have kept calling the CAA until I got the answer I wanted and then got them to confirm it in writing.
Pitchpull,
Your question probably deserves is own thread but...
As it stands, an 'Airline Transport Pilot's Licence' will require an IR at the least. Some (ie JAA) will also require some multi-crew time.
However, it would appear that there are moves afoot to introduce a JAA ATPL(VFR). This would be similar to the old CAA ATPL. paco has more details about this if you want them.
Your question probably deserves is own thread but...
As it stands, an 'Airline Transport Pilot's Licence' will require an IR at the least. Some (ie JAA) will also require some multi-crew time.
However, it would appear that there are moves afoot to introduce a JAA ATPL(VFR). This would be similar to the old CAA ATPL. paco has more details about this if you want them.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.jaat.eu/licensing/licensing_overview.html
In accordance with the abovementioned URL the JAA states that, updated about two months ago, that the UK is applying JAR-FCL 2 Amendment 3 and not the newest Amendment 6. If you look at the UK CAA homepage the newest JAR-FCL 2 published is Amendment 3.
This thread assumed that Amendment 6 is in force. If the UK CAA is still applying Amendment 3, you might be fine with "a converted" JAA licence as only newer amendments require the JAR licence to have been gained in a certain way.
In accordance with the abovementioned URL the JAA states that, updated about two months ago, that the UK is applying JAR-FCL 2 Amendment 3 and not the newest Amendment 6. If you look at the UK CAA homepage the newest JAR-FCL 2 published is Amendment 3.
This thread assumed that Amendment 6 is in force. If the UK CAA is still applying Amendment 3, you might be fine with "a converted" JAA licence as only newer amendments require the JAR licence to have been gained in a certain way.
Martin
I don't think the thread assumes that the whole of Amdt 6 is in force, in the UK its Amdt 3 with the adoption of a couple of sections from Amdt 6 like I've said at least twice now in another thread. Perhaps It doesn't read that, the way I write things down but thats where we are now.
Thats why its so confusing, even the UK CAA seem to be able to keep up with the status of Licensing requirements over here.
GS
I don't think the thread assumes that the whole of Amdt 6 is in force, in the UK its Amdt 3 with the adoption of a couple of sections from Amdt 6 like I've said at least twice now in another thread
. Perhaps It doesn't read that, the way I write things down but thats where we are now.Thats why its so confusing, even the UK CAA seem to be able to keep up with the status of Licensing requirements over here.
GS
Last edited by VeeAny; 10th Nov 2007 at 12:05. Reason: Clarification
Martin
Its 'explained' for want of a better word in AIC 72/2007 available on the AIS website.
If you don't have an ID for the site PM me and I'll email the AIC to you.
Gary
Its 'explained' for want of a better word in AIC 72/2007 available on the AIS website.
If you don't have an ID for the site PM me and I'll email the AIC to you.
Gary