Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1853266
G-BLEW wrote:
The SI amendment restricts those to whom the amendment applies to FCL.105.A(a) aeroplane limits (2000kg / 4PoB maxima), whereas the SkyWise announcement restricts them to LAPL(A) privileges e.g. VFR only.


What's the logic for any restrictions on what is an ICAO (UK) PPL

Ian

Completely lost on me.

I have UK issued ICAO CPL with a full IR and embedded IMCR privileges, but apparently it is in reality only a LAPL.

Yet I can enjoy the full privileges on my Irish issued CPL.

Barking, absolutely barking.

G
User avatar
By Dave W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853271
All these announcements that inevitably end up restricting long-established light GA privileges have begun to remind me of this from Bond:

Ian Fleming wrote:Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action


Is this paranoia, or is it a reasonable reaction to repeated real World events when coupled with recent proclamations about being "The best place in the World for GA"?

As my old dad used to say about life in general: "Don't listen to what they say. Watch what they do."
Charles Hunt liked this
User avatar
By Irv Lee
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853276
G-BLEW wrote:
The SI amendment restricts those to whom the amendment applies to FCL.105.A(a) aeroplane limits (2000kg / 4PoB maxima), whereas the SkyWise announcement restricts them to LAPL(A) privileges e.g. VFR only.


What's the logic for any restrictions on what is an ICAO (UK) PPL

Ian

The only LOGIC that I can detect in restricting the ICAO PPL is purely political expediency. Don't take this as meaning I like the restriction, BUT the fact that they did not do anything for Jan 1st 2021 makes me suspect there are one or two people in the sign off process who were determined not to deviate from EASA rules. I suppose there are people too looking to deviate back to at least 16/09/2012, the last day of JAR. So if you think how would they 'right the wrong' on national licences at all, it is hard to argue against the idea that we left the EU at end of January 2020, but were hit by EASA rules banning national licences in EASA aircraft, which came in weeks later, despite not having a say or vote. So the concept of slipping licensing rules back to Jan 31st 2020 is a compromise that I suspect had to be floated as having a chance of getting through the (suspected) resistance.
So given
a) Slip licence privileges back to pre-EASA-like use
b) slip licence privileges back to final day of UK's EASA memerbership
c) don't slip, do nothing on this
I would want (a), but if I simply cannot have (a) in any reasonable time , then what choice but (b) over (c)?
#1853279
Reading the actual legal document I am chuckling at this...

in point (a), for “a competent authority” substitute “the CAA”


Not unrelated, I can't actually find the alleged LAPL privileges restriction in the legislation, only on Skywise. Am I missing it,or is the Skywise content writer wrong?

G
#1853282
Genghis the Engineer wrote:Not unrelated, I can't actually find the alleged LAPL privileges restriction in the legislation, only on Skywise. Am I missing it,or is the Skywise content writer wrong?


The added point 4) in article 3 refers to FCL.105.A (a)
Code: Select all(a)
Privileges
The privileges of the holder of an LAPL for aeroplanes are to act as PIC on single-engine piston
aeroplanes-land (SEP(land)), single-engine piston aeroplanes-sea (SEP(sea)) or TMG with a
maximum certificated take-off mass of 2000 kg or less, carrying a maximum of 3 passengers,
such that there are always a maximum of 4 persons on board of the aircraft.
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853287
Genghis the Engineer wrote:Reading the actual legal document I am chuckling at this...

in point (a), for “a competent authority” substitute “the CAA”


:D

Genghis the Engineer wrote:Not unrelated, I can't actually find the alleged LAPL privileges restriction in the legislation, only on Skywise. Am I missing it,or is the Skywise content writer wrong?


It isn't in the SI, as Nick points out above, and he's brought it up with the CAA. Apparently there is a mention of 2000kg though, which we could do without. (though hardly likely to affect me!)
#1853416
What if the National licence has a type rating on it? My UK ATPL has a DC3 rating, a bit heavier than 2000 kg. This whole UK licensing fiasco is shameful, I can’t instruct on a club Cessna with my National licence with a current FI rating but I can do so using my Maltese licence. C’mon CAA, get a grip.
#1853422
Aeronco wrote:What if the National licence has a type rating on it? My UK ATPL has a DC3 rating, a bit heavier than 2000 kg. This whole UK licensing fiasco is shameful, I can’t instruct on a club Cessna with my National licence with a current FI rating but I can do so using my Maltese licence. C’mon CAA, get a grip.


Another issue, for me at-least, but I'll bet a fair number of other people, is that I lost my IR(R) when I SOLI'd my EASA licence to Ireland, but my UK national CPL has embedded IMCR privileges, handy if I ever let my IR lapse. But, can I fly an approach in my part 21 PA28 using my national CPL: whether the IR is current or not? Right now, I really don't know!

G
Aeronco liked this
#1853479
A very nice chap at the CAA (brown envelope to the usual place, mate!) has now confirmed that national UK licence holders with SEP Class Ratings using the SI amendment are only restricted to LAPL-level aeroplane limits - i.e. 2000 kg MTOM / 4 PoB max. No other LAPL privilege restrictions apply to them.

'Similar' in the SkyWise announcement wasn't intended to mean 'the same'; however, I've asked that in order to prevent confusion and false accusations of gold plating, the SkyWise announcement should be amended for clarification.
#1853481
nickwilcock wrote:A very nice chap at the CAA (brown envelope to the usual place, mate!) has now confirmed that national UK licence holders with SEP Class Ratings using the SI amendment are only restricted to LAPL-level aeroplane limits - i.e. 2000 kg MTOM / 4 PoB max. No other LAPL privilege restrictions apply to them.

'Similar' in the SkyWise announcement wasn't intended to mean 'the same'; however, I've asked that in order to prevent confusion and false accusations of gold plating, the SkyWise announcement should be amended for clarification.


Thanks Nick, much appreciated. Do you have any insight on the reason/motivation for the limitation?

Thanks

Ian
#1853483
No - you would need to ask the DfT! They, not the CAA, made the regulation:

' The ratings SSEA, SLMG and TMG have the meanings given in Schedule 1 to the Air Navigation Order 2016, and the rating SEP refers to a single-engine piston aeroplane of the kind described in Annex 1, Subpart B, point FCL.105.A(a) to this Regulation.'