Polite discussion about EASA, the CAA, the ANO and the delights of aviation regulation.
Forum rules: Please keep it polite!
#1590644
Edward Bellamy wrote:Irv, I slightly doubt such a document exists. An email from the CAA (CAA examiner, FCL policy or GA Unit - not just a licensing officer) setting out the requirements and explanation for lack of signature is probably your best bet.

Yes, I don't think it exists either (or do I mean No, I don't think it exists either?). We had a similar problem of ' everyone MUST naturally understand a new system, unless they are REALLY stupid' when ratings were introduced into PPLs in 1999 for JAR. We've had nearly 20 years of confusion since, because the people who could have made a difference by explaining it properly in 1999 were fully conversant with ratings (being a natural part of commercial flying), and wouldn't dream that the hobby pilot just flying vfr for decades previously wouldn't guess what they were. A more recent example, English Proficiency - awarding '4's in 2008 but not telling the pilots, assuming within 4 years they would have done a flight test - great idea, if only most hobby pilots revalidated by test.... which they don't. Result, the level 4s that no hobby pilot even suspected existed in the first place expired March 2012, and only 6 months later, all those applications for EASA licences from hobby pilots were rejected with '30 day or we keep your money' threats because the hobby pilot didn't have something that they had never told him/her about!)
Re: Asking policy, etc,: One problem is of course 'time' to get any replies and then sometimes the author, not actually being at the practical end, uses 'caa-speak' and causes more confusion.
trapdoor liked this
#1590687
I can also confirm, on converting across to an LAPL(A), I had nothing explanatory included with the single bit of paper I got back.

My co-owner who fortunately (for me) is a FI, was also somewhat confused about the validity requirements, but as an owner it’s not really an issue for me as far as hire goes. My main concern is what happens if I drop out of validity (nearly happened last year due to the Pup being tech for quite a few months).
#1590696
What do they do if they fail validity? Well most would not know they failed validity but a percentage would be legal until april without realising it on their still valid nppl ssea . Do you want the fully 100% legal answer that I doubt anyone does unless renting, or the pretend it is legal answer and whistle loudly to drown out anyone who knows different, or what I think uk pilots outside formal clubs actually do, or what an FE on the easa stand at aero expo said pilots do at his airfield (sounded like benelux/France, didn't ask).?
#1590711
@Shoestring Flyer That is the answer to my penultimate option, the problem soon disappears into the previous log book pages never to be noticed. And the problem is, the "couldn't care so much about legality anymore " seems to coincide with worrying less about airmanship. (Funnily enough if I were flying illegally, I suspect my airmanship would be impeccable and I would keep much more than two miles or 200' from cas boundaries - perhaps flying illegally is the answer to infringements)
#1590724
Bathman wrote:If you need a leaflet or booklet to be included with the licence explaining how to keep it current then we have a problem

During the lapl consultation phase, 2008-ish? I took time to send easa plenty of detail in my experience of meeting and checking out pilots with nppl-ssea 2002 to 2007 and the consistent issue i found over 5 years of rental checking of pilots flying out of validity. That was the period when we accidentally had rolling validity in the uk for a live 5 year trial, and it had to be changed to an expiring rating in 2007. After all the bother to contribute, I got a short dismissal reply, "our experts believe different". Presumably experts in something, very unlikely to be anything relevant though.
#1590732
Notwithstanding the legality it does seem a very onerous task everytime a flight is planned to go back in the logbook two years and add up all the flying hours, since there is no running total of hours flown per line, only running total of hours flown at the top of each page.

Perhaps a way of simplifying it would be to add a column in our logbooks (LAPL ONLY) with running total, then all you have to do when planning a flight is to subtract "last flights running total" from the running total 24months previously. If the answer is >=13 and you have done an hour with instructor then "Good to Go"

As a supplementary question, where was my night rating recorded previously as the only record I have now (CAA took my old poo brown licence) is the logbook entry made by the QFI 14years ago !
#1590740
Lapl: Bathman and I (200 miles apart at least) have both met local pilots who have very much simplified the problem! ;-)
Night: did you claim a night rating/qualification on your 1104 application for an easa licence?
#1590795
Night: did you claim a night rating/qualification on your 1104 application for an easa licence?


Yes and I handed in my logbook showing night flying hours and my old licence too.

Its not that I use my night rating often, but it was a "just in case" option to be legal if arriving back home a few minutes after the 30 mins after sunset time.

I suppose I now have to go through some costly exercise to re-instate it :cry:
#1590808
JAFO wrote:
flybymike wrote:How does a brand new LAPL licence become valid when it does not have the benefit of 12 hours plus an instructor flight in the previous 24 months?


Hasn't he/she just "renewed" validity by test? I think it's also probable that they have the 12 hours + instructor time.

There is no renewal, there is no rating to renew, just validity checks every flight. They qualify off a course with about 6 hours p1. It is an example of how easa is unfit for purpose for GA, incapable of fixing mistakes, becsuse remember tbey don't make mistakes. After 6 years of knowing about the problem, they hope to "develop the lapl rules further" this year which may coincidentally fix the problem tbey dont admit to making :roll:
Keep whistling loudly for a bit longer