Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By marioair
#1742251
Are there any changes afoot to negate the need to go via an ATO to do the CPL TK?? Read do I have have to pay an ATO or can I just self-study and sign up to CAA for exams
User avatar
By WelshRichy
#1742282
If you wish to obtain a CPL then a full ATO course is still required. However, if you wish to add an FI to your PPL then self study and exams will suffice. No logic in this as far as I am concerned but they are the (new) rules.

(28) point FCL.915.FI is amended as follows:
(a) point (b)(2)(i) is replaced by the following:
‘(i) except for an FI(A) providing training for the LAPL(A) only, passed the CPL theoretical knowledge
examination, which may be taken without completing a CPL theoretical knowledge training course and
which shall not be valid for the issue of a CPL; and’;


Found in the link below.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32019R1747&qid=1571739274350&from=EN.
Last edited by WelshRichy on Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
JonnyS liked this
User avatar
By PaulB
#1742296
marioair wrote:I’ll have to read the whole thing - wanting to teach and be remunerated for PPL.


What is stated above is correct.

CPL TK not required for teaching LAPL only.

CPL TK *is* required to teach PPL (because ICAO require CPL level knowledge to reach for an ICAO compliant licence)

The change is that you can just do the CPL exams (not involving an ATO) and will be deemed to have CPL TK sufficient for teaching PPL, but not sufficient (even if you get 100% in all exams, still not sufficient) for gaining a CPL.
User avatar
By Lockhaven
#1742297
WelshRichy wrote:It is for those instructors who wish to teach for the PPL. CPL exams are not required for instructors teaching LAPL only.


So the whole ridiculous system is gradually turning full circle after all these years were a PPL/FI can earn money again for teaching the PPL syllabus without having to have a CPL.
User avatar
By WelshRichy
#1742305
Lockhaven wrote:So the whole ridiculous system is gradually turning full circle after all these years were a PPL/FI can earn money again for teaching the PPL syllabus without having to have a CPL.


It does seem that way, little steps in the right direction... :D
Lockhaven liked this
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
#1742309
PaulB wrote:The change is that you can just do the CPL exams (not involving an ATO) and will be deemed to have CPL TK sufficient for teaching PPL, but not sufficient (even if you get 100% in all exams, still not sufficient) for gaining a CPL.


So a sort of basic CPL. Maybe we could have an official one. Call it a BCPL.

Round, like a circle in a spiral, like a wheel within a wheel....
WelshRichy, MichaelP, kanga liked this
User avatar
By marioair
#1742318
It’s still a farce. It’s removed the financial hurdle which is good but not the time investment of learning unnecessary stuff. I’d rather pay the ATO but do a reduced course.
User avatar
By WelshRichy
#1742320
marioair wrote:How long is CPL TK valid for if you want to do the CPL(A) at a latter date?


Three years from the date of the final exam pass.
User avatar
By PaulB
#1742322
marioair wrote:It’s still a farce. It’s removed the financial hurdle which is good but not the time investment of learning unnecessary stuff. I’d rather pay the ATO but do a reduced course.


The whole thing is a farce, but how would doing a "reduced course" comply with the requirement to having CPL level TK?

Does the FAA do things differently? (I think it does.... not that this helps Marioair)
User avatar
By WelshRichy
#1742325
marioair wrote:You got my hopes up I could just rock up take the exams to teach the PPL. :-(


You can! Once you have also done and passed the FIC of course. :D