As has already been said, how can the UK CAA comment on what EASA will allow a now ‘national UK CAA licence holder’ to do. Post 29/3 it’s up to EASA who plays with their train set - not the UK CAA. If you expect better then perhaps a better understanding of licensing issues would give you better.

After we (regrettably) leave the EU and EASA the UK can simply re-print a licence without reference to EASA and carry on, regulating British aircraft, airports, industry and of course pilots as they see fit - provided there is some mechanism in UK Law that allows that. Again, as has been pointed out and regardless of the rights and wrongs of it, EASA would look pretty stupid if they turned around one day and said we non-longer recognise a certificate that was obtained under our rules ‘just because we don’t want to”.

Ah, now I see where the issue might be!

I think you misunderstood what the document is saying. UK licences are and will be ICAO compliant - recognised and accepted among all ICAO members (ie nothing can stop you flying a G- reg aircraft to keep it in simple terms). No one is denying it and nowhere I can find a statement that refutes it; and certainly neither EASA nor the EU would be able to as it is well outside their jurisdiction!

However saying [EASA UK issued licences] “will no longer be valid” is actually correct because it means “no longer valid within the EASA regulation framework” for mutual recognition, acceptance of training and all privileges associated with membership. This is what they mean; certainly it is the way the way my workplace and I understand it.

Hence why easyJet EU based crews are getting their EASA licence transferred to Austria (flying OE- reg aircraft) and UK based crews keeping their EASA UK issued licences/maybe soon to be National licences (flying G- reg aircraft).

why? without a legal framework (call it a deal or agreement or whatever you fancy) between EASA and the UK CAA, it would be foolish and quite frankly arrogant to think mutual recognition will continue after 29th March. On what legal basis? “Just because a licence was obtained under EASA” doesn’t mean anything, especially as future regulations might diverge between the two parties. You leave a club, you also give up membership privileges.

Isn’t this what happened when transition from JAA to EASA was made? JAR licences issued by EASA members were simply converted to EASA ones, while a lot of JAR licence holders issued by countries not in the EASA club were left with a nice ICAO licence.

according to the BBC, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45501007

With regards to driving licences (in a way there are some similarities!), it could give us a flavour of could happen to us. The Cabinet was also planning to publish an aviation contingency plan this week but I gather it has been pushed back for few more days. Hopefully it will give us better insight! After all, we all want some clarity.

Valid as in: legal to operate a UK registered aircraft from the UK to a destination and back (provided the UK and the destination country have an agreement on landing rights). Invalid as in: not legal to operate an EASA registered aircraft.

The EU ultra federalist have been the first to blink over the Irish boarder problem and when they realise the damage they will do to the aviation sector they will back down........... just how are Airbus going to get an aircraft to fly if EASA decides the wings built in the UK are now no good ? The French & Germans will insist on a pragmatic resolution to this problem simply because of the money involved.

Nothing will fly from/to the UK, not in the whole EU.
The majority of maintenance technicians based in the EU are locals, not English.

In case of no deal the UK will shoot the EU in a foot while shooting itself in the head.

Do you really think Airbus (example) is going to keep the production lines in the UK in case of no-deal instead of moving them let’s say in Poland?
And, yes, the workforce in the aviation buisness is multi national, and this means anyone can be replaced if necessary.