Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 11
User avatar
By GrahamB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853975
AlanC wrote:
GrahamB wrote:After AFPEx and Cellma, I just can’t wait for the full e-Licensing experience when it comes. :roll:


Not sure we can throw NAT's AFPex decisions at the CAA, but the rest has been a rocky road to say the least so far.

Indeed, but nevertheless it's an example of 'them' deciding on a solution which suited themselves but with little consideration for others expected to use it.
By Bathman
#1854064
FCL945 Instructor rang the CAA last week for advice and was told that he should submit BOTH an SRG1119E and an SRG1157 for revalidation of an SEP rating by experience.
By SteveX
#1854076
Can I check the types of license all in existence at present in UK, anything missing from below? I'm mostly of the opinion - one license, one medical for all (PPL). ICAO compliant so they can use overseas. Though perhaps merit in a lesser version but then I struggle to see why 30 hours vs 45 for eg. makes any sense even for those not wishing to progress, a kind of 'sports recreational' license that is more aligned with home built stuff and day VFR use with say just one passenger allowed. Anyway that list, is this all of them:

'old' UK PPL(A)
UK issued EASA PPL (gone but still valid)
'new' UK FCL PPL
UK issued EASA LAPL (gone but valid)
UK LAPL (aircraft)
UK LAPL (microlights)
UK NPPL (aircraft)
UK NPPL (microlights)
UK SLMG PPL

Probably errors in that but what a shambles. Suggest one PPL for all privileges and one lesser PPL for perhaps UK only microlights and 2 seaters only.
T6Harvard, rdfb liked this
User avatar
By kanga
#1854081
SteveX wrote:Can I check the types of license all in existence at present in UK, anything missing from below? ... Anyway that list, is this all of them:

'old' UK PPL(A)
UK issued EASA PPL (gone but still valid)
'new' UK FCL PPL
UK issued EASA LAPL (gone but valid)
UK LAPL (aircraft)
UK LAPL (microlights)
UK NPPL (aircraft)
UK NPPL (microlights)
UK SLMG PPL

..


Might I add my pre-CAA Board of Trade PPL, which (if I were current by Experience) would appear to need only the signature of a BoT current Examiner to Revalidate ? Now, where to find one .. :wink:
johnm, townleyc liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1854086
AIUI the baseline was set by overall agreement across EASA, so inevitably a messy compromise but with the benefit that sub-ICAO licence holders could legally fly in around 30 countries across Europe.

Post Brexit we simply incorporated all the EASA rules into UK law BUT sub-ICAO licences were no longer valid outside the UK

In the UK we had two classes of sub-ICAO licence which I believe related to whether a LAPL medical or a PMD were chosen and since the French have kindly agreed that UK permit aircraft can invade their airspace with sub-ICAO licences, it seems that having 2 levels may well still be relevant, but I can't claim to understand the detail.
User avatar
By kanga
#1854095
Paul_Sengupta wrote:..

Yet if anyone accuses them of creating work for themselves, jobs for the boys, job creation scheme, typical public sector civil service thinking, you'll get Kanga giving you a long explanation as to why that's not the case! :clown:
...


:oops: .. but requiring a response (and expecting responses thereto :wink: )

..One could equally argue that the genesis of the change from the 'old' days of FCL in BoT and 'early' CAA was the Central Government ideology which enforced wherever apparently feasible throughout the 'public sector': outsource or privatise including all technical expertise, including in in-house IT; move Regulation from Civil Servants (few, but who understood the rules and provided rapid throughput in most 'routine' cases) to 'Trading Agencies' of Government (required by Treasury to recover their running costs and make a profit on top); hire new 'clerical' staff only in minimal numbers at minimum conditions (not as 'Established' Civil Servants) to attract them (often inadequate to retain them, so large staff turnover requiring constant retraining is likely), and give them duties based on following 'rote' procedures which allowed only for 'standard' processes; and, of course, accept the lowest tender or otherwise apparent cheapest option when 'buying in' a service such as IT, under threat of discipline including dismissal, personal financial surcharge, or imprisonment, since all involved are still 'in Public Office' (so liable to Criminal charge of 'Misconduct') but not Civil Servants, whereas their outsourced suppliers are not, and can only be sued for breach of contract for failure to deliver; ..

In the particular case of CAA FCL, there seem to have been at least the following further complications with which the above enforced ideology has had to try to cope:

a. JAA, JAA, EASA (with priority given to harmonising regulations for CAT, onto which GA has been grafted as an afterthought if at all)

b. Departure of experienced staff (in FCL as well as, eg, Survey, oversight of Maintenance organisations, etc) to EASA or to (encouraged by Treasury) early retirements without replacement

c. Genuine attempt by some in GA Unit to enable GA flying by 'derogations' from EASA's 'CAT-based' approaches eg PMD, NPL, LAPL, SSEA .. which, while indeed helping some to continue flying, have led to plethora of different ways of becoming and staying 'legal', which those in FCL are not adequately trained to understand

d. leaving EASA (again, with 'legacy issues' for CAT being the priority) without concomitant (re-)recruitment of experienced and adequately rewarded so retainable administrative staff

In short, perhaps there have not been enough 'jobs for the [appropriate] boys (or girls)', not enough '[appropriate] job creation', not enough of the Civil Service ethos of (I'd say typical, prior to '80s) 'public service with flexibility, empathy, and appropriate training and delegated authority'
johnm, AlanC, ls8pilot and 3 others liked this
User avatar
By ls8pilot
#1854104
SteveX wrote:Can I check the types of license all in existence at present in UK, anything missing from below? I'm mostly of the opinion - one license, one medical for all (PPL). ICAO compliant so they can use overseas. Though perhaps merit in a lesser version but then I struggle to see why 30 hours vs 45 for eg. makes any sense even for those not wishing to progress, a kind of 'sports recreational' license that is more aligned with home built stuff and day VFR use with say just one passenger allowed. Anyway that list, is this all of them:

'old' UK PPL(A)
UK issued EASA PPL (gone but still valid)
'new' UK FCL PPL
UK issued EASA LAPL (gone but valid)
UK LAPL (aircraft)
UK LAPL (microlights)
UK NPPL (aircraft)
UK NPPL (microlights)
UK SLMG PPL

Probably errors in that but what a shambles. Suggest one PPL for all privileges and one lesser PPL for perhaps UK only microlights and 2 seaters only.


Add in the new UK FCL SPL with or without TMG rating, this replaces the UK LAPL(S)... From Dec all LAPL(S) licences are considered to be SPL s but will not be reissued until some other change is needed....

So if you want to fly a TMG you can choose between about half a dozen different licence routes each with their own qualification and validation or currency requirements..... :roll:
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1854106
kanga wrote:In short, perhaps there have not been enough 'jobs


Well yes, if they insist on people sending certified copies of everything and checking everything in person, line by line, not knowing what they're even supposed to be checking.



Not to mention the accounts department working out the charges.

Dave W liked this
By TopCat
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1854107
Paul_Sengupta wrote:
kanga wrote:In short, perhaps there have not been enough 'jobs


Well yes, if they insist on people sending certified copies of everything and checking everything in person, line by line, not knowing what they're even supposed to be checking.

I bet they don't do any such thing. I should think it's just a hoop to make people jump through - at best to scare encourage people into checking their own records before sending it in, and at worst to make it look like there's a reason for the delays.

We have a culture where box-ticking to prove the process has happened, is more important than the content of the process.
User avatar
By MichaelP
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1854117
I complimented a CAA person for spotting something I did not.
It has delayed an application I have with them at this moment. I should have referred to Document 31...

I must say that equivalent dealings I have had with Transport Canada, and with the CAAT (Thailand) have been a lot easier..
Okay, I am less familiar with UK/EASA rules and regs, they are not so easy to find and interpret as Transport Canada’s CARS.
When I went to Canada I found their system more complicated and restrictive than the CAA. That was thirty years ago, now I return to CAA land and it is much more complicated than Transport Canada.

One thing I would like to see that is done in Canada, is that the Operating Certificate (ATO Authorisation here) is prominently placed on the flying club or school operations/dispatch wall. This document tells the customer what the business is approved to do.

Some places I have been to here in England would not be authorised to carry out flight training in Canada or in Thailand because they do not comply with the regulations in those countries. They perhaps comply with CAA/EASA regulations to the limit of understanding... Perhaps missing some essential points in the confusion of the documentation and Competent Official competences.

Not all Transport Canada regulations are desirable, but at least they are spelled out more clearly to be understood by aviators, many of whom can not spell the word “hangar” correctly.

CAA want me to do a whole course to become an instructor here.
That’s okay, if they really did things that much better here!
They don’t, and it is highly frustrating to me to see how far some places have descended since I flew here in the 70’s and 80’s.
CAA approved schools are better than what I created in Canada, China, and Thailand... BS!
You want me to go through the whole process, because you say you are better, FO.

(I rarely swear, but sometimes when I realise people talk above their competence, it makes me a little angry).
By As I CFIT
#1854123
MichaelP wrote:Some places I have been to here in England would not be authorised to carry out flight training in Canada or in Thailand because they do not comply with the regulations in those countries.


A stunning and impactful revelation. UK flying schools are clearly mismanaging their resources by prioritising compliance with UK regulations.

MichaelP wrote:CAA want me to do a whole course to become an instructor here.
That’s okay, if they really did things that much better here!
They don’t, and it is highly frustrating to me to see how far some places have descended since I flew here in the 70’s and 80’s.
CAA approved schools are better than what I created in Canada, China, and Thailand... BS!
You want me to go through the whole process, because you say you are better, FO.


Your apparent bitterness and sense of entitlement is unfortunate. Either do the course or don't but you need to just accept that your familiarity with foreign regulations is of no use to you or any flying training establishment in this country.
User avatar
By MichaelP
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1854131
Your apparent bitterness and sense of entitlement is unfortunate.


I take offence at this.

I am as entitled as anyone else on here to have an opinion.
townleyc liked this
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 11