Brexit

[m32k]

That's a good question too.

I guess it would be possible, in the same way as EASA licensed pilot I hold two more ATPLs from "Third Country" Countries not in European continent (Middle East/Africa), registered under the EASA umbrella.
The same should apply to UK too since UK requested to be an EASA "Third Country".

Originally Posted by Evil Twin

Pardon the naïveté but surely you can apply and hold both an English and also a European licence, in much the same way that you can hold OZ, NZ, FAA etc.? Or is that a far too simplistic view given the unwieldy bureaucracy of the UK and the European Union(sic).

[Same again]

Evil Twin,

Well now that we have left the EU my UK ATPL(H) is now not an EASA licence and has reverted to a UK CAA licence. It is, I suppose, possible to apply for an EASA licence directly to one of the EASA states but if the message on the Irish CAA licensing website is any indicator then it might be problematic:

"Holders of UK issued Part-FCL licences may not change their Competent Authority to Ireland since 23:00 Irish Time on 31 December 2020"

[lowfat]

You needed to change states before the uk left. Currently they no longer recognise the uk licence . So you would need to apply from the beginning.

[berlioz]

Originally Posted by ApolloHeli

Ovc000 may be more informed than me, but from my understanding that is perfectly acceptable. The UK CAA have told me they will begin issuing UK Part FCL licences starting in April 2021. Why they are waiting till April, when the rules changed in January I have no idea. Maybe that would be too efficient. But from my understanding an EASA licence holder need only request a UK Part FCL licence and then in the usual CAA turnaround time of far too long, they will receive a UK licence (in addition to holding their EASA licence).

I would be happy to be corrected, or given more information.

Wont you need for that also to get a medical class1 in the country (CAA) the issues the licence?

[Same again]

I have a few ICAO licences and the issuing country will generally give credit for your licence, log book hours and type ratings. To issue the licence the new country requires a medical examination, an air law exam and a flight test. I doubt it will be quite that simple in EASA land for a 'third country' licence.

I anticipate that the requirements will be similar to a 10,000 hour Australian CASA ATPL(H) CIR holder applying for a UK licence - all 14 ground examinations, a medical, a flight test, type rating examination and a sizeable bank loan.

[Medevac999]

Originally Posted by Northernstar

I have read the same advert. Absolute HR nonsense given several of their pilots including management recently moved licences to EASA states. Indeed another North Sea operator encourage pilots to move to Sweden for their entire U.K. AOC operation and a third did the same for some of their U.K. training department.

The FOM has actually posted the advert on LinkedIn and states that they are only taking UK FCL because of their ATO and lack of flexibility by some EASA countries.

[Variable Load]

Originally Posted by Northernstar

I have read the same advert. Absolute HR nonsense given several of their pilots including management recently moved licences to EASA states. Indeed another North Sea operator encourage pilots to move to Sweden for their entire U.K. AOC operation and a third did the same for some of their U.K. training department.

Not nonsense, but a pragmatic approach until EASA enable some sort of reciprocity.

First problem is finding a UK based AME to conduct an EASA medical. As far as I know there is one in London that is approved ONLY by Austrocontrol , but EASA are insisting that the AMEs have to apply to each NAA to obtain individual approvals. The NAAs are not making things easy, e.g. I believe the Swedes are insisting that the AME speaks Swedish.

Second problem is that a UK licensed TRE is now not allowed to conduct a licence PC or Skills Test on an EASA licence holder.

Third problem is that a UK ATO can not conduct any ATO activity on an EASA licence holder e.g. initial Type Rating or Type Rating/IR renewal.

Perhaps Northernstar can explain how he would overcome these issues?

[ApolloHeli]

Originally Posted by Variable Load

First problem is finding a UK based AME to conduct an EASA medical. As far as I know there is one in London that is approved ONLY by Austrocontrol , but EASA are insisting that the AMEs have to apply to each NAA to obtain individual approvals.

That's not true. I've spoken with that particular London-based AME, as well as with my own NAA's aeromedical section and they confirmed that despite the AME being approved by Austrocontrol (not my NAA), they are able to revalidate my EASA Class 1 medical in the UK. Yes it's a pain to travel from Aberdeen down to London, but I don't see why the medical would be a factor in Babcock's strange recruiting limitation.

[Aucky]

Originally Posted by Variable Load

Second problem is that a UK licensed TRE is now not allowed to conduct a licence PC or Skills Test on an EASA licence holder.

Third problem is that a UK ATO can not conduct any ATO activity on an EASA licence holder e.g. initial Type Rating or Type Rating/IR renewal.

Perhaps Northernstar can explain how he would overcome these issues?

FCL.900(c) & FCL.1000(c)

[Variable Load]

Originally Posted by ApolloHeli

That's not true. I've spoken with that particular London-based AME, as well as with my own NAA's aeromedical section and they confirmed that despite the AME being approved by Austrocontrol (not my NAA), they are able to revalidate my EASA Class 1 medical in the UK. Yes it's a pain to travel from Aberdeen down to London, but I don't see why the medical would be a factor in Babcock's strange recruiting limitation.

I'm no expert on AME approvals, but what you have written goes against what is being said by the AME based in Peterculter. No doubt things will become clearer over time, but the fact that only one AME in the UK has managed to obtain EASA approval speaks volumes that this isn't straightforward.

For a business to have to travel it's pilots to London for a medical is an unnecessary expense and complication. If it can be avoided, why not avoid it?

As mentioned earlier, the medical complication is only one consideration. There are others. If their decision doesn't suit you as an individual, it doesn't mean their decision is incorrect.

[Northernstar]

Originally Posted by Variable Load

Not nonsense, but a pragmatic approach until EASA enable some sort of reciprocity.

First problem is finding a UK based AME to conduct an EASA medical. As far as I know there is one in London that is approved ONLY by Austrocontrol , but EASA are insisting that the AMEs have to apply to each NAA to obtain individual approvals. The NAAs are not making things easy, e.g. I believe the Swedes are insisting that the AME speaks Swedish.

Second problem is that a UK licensed TRE is now not allowed to conduct a licence PC or Skills Test on an EASA licence holder.

Third problem is that a UK ATO can not conduct any ATO activity on an EASA licence holder e.g. initial Type Rating or Type Rating/IR renewal.

Perhaps Northernstar can explain how he would overcome these issues?

Well if you read my post again then you’ll see that clearly the operators themselves have found said solution to questions 2 and 3 where necessary especially if they have taken it upon themselves to encourage some to move state and even moved state for their own TRE’s. Indeed some have both U.K. and easa ATO’s, onshore U.K. ATO’s have begun the same. Medical as described can be done in U.K. and more AME’s will follow. Some EASA states are pragmatic.

My post was also calling HR nonsense as opposed to EASA or company ATO processes. But that may have been misinterpreted.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Hi All, sorry to jump in but I have recently gone through the SOLI Transfer (State Of Licence Issue). The deadline on the UK CAA website to effect a transfer was 24/12/2020. I submitted on 22/12/2020. The CAA were very proactive and supportive.

Some things I learned along the way:

1. As of 01/01/2021 UK issued EASA Licences revert to 3rd Country Licences
2. The Brexit Trade Deal signed on 24/12/2020 has a mechanism in AVSAF-01 for mutual recognition of each others "Certificates" which in the definitions to the section include Flight Crew Licences. However, the text refers to "Annexes". The only "Annex" issued at the moment covers the mutual recognition of design certificates. It not clear whether there is a future intent to issue the missing Annexes..
3. In the SOLI process the applicant must relinquish the existing EASA Licence to take up the new one.
4. UK CAA will accept applications to issue a "National" Licence from applicants who previously held UK CAA EASA Licences from April 2021. The detail of how this will work they are going to publish on SKYWISE.

In my opinion, the CAA tried there very best to get mutual recognition but have been defeated by the political process.

DB

[Variable Load]

DB is correct, the UK CAA appear to have been very pragmatic in their approach. They continue to recognise EASA certificates that were in place on 31st December for a period of up to 2 years or until it's next renewal. This applies to non-UK issued licences, TRE certificates, medicals, simulator certification, etc. They also have a blanket validation for EASA licenced pilots to continue to fly UK registered aircraft.

Has any UK licenced pilot managed to obtain an EASA State validation to fly a commercial aircraft registered to an EASA State?

To pick up on Aucky's earlier Part FCL references, does sub para (c) (2) (i) rule this option out for any training conducted within the EASA states e.g. simulators in France, Italy, Norway or Finland? Has any UK TRE managed to obtain an "EASA" TRE certificate?

[cyclic]

There is an AME in Stansted that has a Maltese approval. So that’s definitely two in the UK!

[deltahotel]

EASA class 1 medical

[Aucky]

Originally Posted by Variable Load

To pick up on Aucky's earlier Part FCL references, does sub para (c) (2) (i) rule this option out for any training conducted within the EASA states e.g. simulators in France, Italy, Norway or Finland? Has any UK TRE managed to obtain an "EASA" TRE certificate?

I believe it does, but I don’t have first hand experience of how this applies to simulators, and whether they are treated any differently to an aircraft being operated in that country. It would however allow training and testing of EASA licence holders in the U.K. subject to approval from an EASA NAA. I believe that once you have completed the process of standardisation and assessment with that NAA you have the privilege to train/examine for any other EASA NAA, subject to staying up to speed with the relevant NAA’s examiner differences document.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Originally Posted by Variable Load

Has any UK TRE managed to obtain an "EASA" TRE certificate?

Hi VL, I have been issued a TRE certificate from my new host EASA state based on the SOLI Transfer of my UK-EASA Issued ATPL(H) and TRE Certificate. It was very straight forward and facilitated by the CAA Form 155 that was issued. The 155 is the document that passes between EASA States to verify the qualifications and authorisation held in the first state. My understanding now is, as the deadline has passed, such transfers are no longer possible.
As it stand, it would appear that UK TREs are in a worst position than we were under the JAR rules where we had to complete State Briefings to certify fellow JAR State licences. As a "Third Country" we have been demoted to Pond Life. Such a shame for all the hard work and dedication those TREs have put in previously. Lorry Drivers have come off better.
Like I said, it was not the intent of the CAA. They simply wanted mutual recognition based on us continuing to follow the EASA rules. My understanding is that due to the morons in the Country and Government who cannot understanding the difference between Sovereignty and Mutual co-operation, we are left in a really poor situation. EASA was a great level playing field and now we are now not allowed to see the match let alone
kick the ball.
Maybe we can all seek solace in eating the Langoustines that are now trapped in the UK and not lavished onto the dining tables of our French Brothers.

[Variable Load]

Hi DB, I've also been through the SOLI Transfer process and plan to apply for the UK licence as soon as is possible. A agree, now that the transition period has ended, SOLI Transfer is no longer an option for UK licence holders. EASA licence holders will be able to apply for a UK licence from April, although the CAA have stated this will be much easier for those with a "UK history".

My earlier question "Has any UK TRE managed to obtain an "EASA" TRE certificate?" was badly worded. My question related to Aucky highlighting that FCL.900 (c) and 1000 (c) does provide some provision for a Third Country Instructor/Examiner (read UK licenced TRI/TRE post 31st December) to obtain an EASA TRI/TRE authorisation. I wondered if anyone had used this provision successfully. If they have, I wonder what limitations are attached. My read is that it is intended to enable flight training and checking for initial licencing purposes to take place outside of the EASA States e.g. flight schools conducting CPL training in USA, Australia, New Zealand, etc.

The situation is an unnecessary mess, as mutual alignment and recognition of licencing standards between EASA and UK is such an easy win. It just needs political will, however that will is totally lacking on both sides. To think that EASA is still pursuing FAA licence reciprocity just shows how crazy this situation is.

[jimf671]

Originally Posted by Same again

A reason that many (I am reliably informed) voted for Brexit was that whenever Brussels imposed new rules we - the law abiding UK - would always comply whereas EU states only did so when it suited them. It seems that even though we are no longer members of that illustrious partisan club we are still being shafted. Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose.

This whole business falls out of ignorance of how we are governed, at any level. Particularly regarding EU legislation, this is illustrated by the difference between a Directive and a Regulation. A regulation is law and a directive is not and allows member states to pick their own path.

A perfect example is speed limiters on trucks. A fire brigade operating a national resource that they wanted to be able to deploy anywhere in the country talked to the RAF about airlifting the vehicles because, being limited to 90km/h, the vehicle could not get anywhere fast. The Directive explicitly exempts emergency service, military and certain utility vehicles (Art.6 IIRC) yet the UK Govt enforces it in such a way that emergency service drivers transporting life-saving apparatus across large distances were forced to travel at 56mph. Successive UK Governments keen on too much law, and their compliant bureaucrats, have been the problem all along and look where we are now.

Long past the time when we should have started calling stupid by its real name.

[Milo C]

Updated EASA statement about the cooperation agreement

https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-...tion-agreement