Polite discussion about EASA, the CAA, the ANO and the delights of aviation regulation.
Forum rules: Please keep it polite!
#1760397
I can only translate for @Robin500 what 1376 for non easa licences says now! I personally assume non easa rules/dates will all develop further over time, for example, I suspect that 1376 only goes out to expiries of 31st July because the CAA realise they are somewhat infinitely more fleet footed than Easa and can move everything on as we move forward, as required, whereas Easa are hindered by their well known self made swamp. We should congratulate all though on one aspect at least, if your sep, tmg, ssea, microlight etc expired March 31st, you are still included on both schemes.
flybymike, kanga liked this
User avatar
By MattL
#1760413
@Irv Lee The content doesn’t make any sense as the main bit talks about flight and briefing after restrictions, but the explanatory notes talk about remote briefing and sign up. It seems a mish mash of various drafts :?
#1760435
Well I didn't have much problem to be honest, 3176 for non EASA licences and ratings is just saying there are 2 separate parts to total compliance, you can have the brief even when flying is banned, remotely if you want, and you need THAT signing up one way or another, and then separately, once we get flying again, you need a training flight and then, an examiner or the 945 who did the training flight, puts the two distinct things together and you get a rating extension to Nov 22nd.
Last edited by Irv Lee on Sat Apr 11, 2020 7:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#1760436
MattL wrote:@Irv Lee The content doesn’t make any sense as the main bit talks about flight and briefing after restrictions, but the explanatory notes talk about remote briefing and sign up. It seems a mish mash of various drafts :?


Exactly this.

Only the CAA could come up with such an half **** response. If as you say, the first flight after the lockdown ends has to be dual with an instructor, ( if your rating has expired) what is the point of the briefing. It is in my opinion unnecessary.
flybymike liked this
#1760440
Irv Lee wrote: once we get flying again, you need a training flight and then, an examiner or the 945 who did the training flight, puts the two distinct things together and you get a rating extension to Nov 22nd.


But why only until Nov 22nd? Surely if you did an instructor hour flight prior to 22nd Nov, your 2 year revalidation from the date of that flight would recommence from whatever date the instructor flight was undertaken ?
flybymike liked this
#1760445
But I'm only saying I understand what they want, others can't get that far. I wouldn't know what discussions led to what they want hence why they want it! I don't know why anyone would want 12 hours spread across one year out of two years to revalidate an SEP and how that has any relevance to safe flying in the GA community who, if infringement graphs are to be believed, mostly fly in a 6 month period - but I understand WHAT they want there too.
Anyone can go with a prof check if they want, the exemption is not compulsory.
#1760502
Irv, I can understand what they want but I don’t think anyone can understand why they want it.
As written, far from being an amelioration, 1374 makes things more stringent by adding a requirement for a remote briefing to the existing normal instructor flight, with the additional implied suggestion that having completed that flight, the new revalidation will then only apply until November and not for its usual two year period.
#1760517
flybymike wrote:Irv, I can understand what they want but I don’t think anyone can understand why they want it.
As written, far from being an amelioration, 1374 makes things more stringent by adding a requirement for a remote briefing to the existing normal instructor flight, with the additional implied suggestion that having completed that flight, the new revalidation will then only apply until November and not for its usual two year period.


Exactly, it makes no sense whatsoever. Surely it has to be a misprint or similar.
#1760520
flybymike wrote:Irv, I can understand what they want but I don’t think anyone can understand why they want it.
As written, far from being an amelioration, 1374 makes things more stringent by adding a requirement for a remote briefing to the existing normal instructor flight, with the additional implied suggestion that having completed that flight, the new revalidation will then only apply until November and not for its usual two year period.


As I read it, 1374 makes no such additional requirement. 1374 is not granting you a short term revalidation, but merely extending the existing validity, giving you more time to meet the requirements to revalidate anew.

If you meet, or will meet, the requirements anyway, there is no need to use it - just do what you would have done and maintain your existing validity cycle.
JAFO liked this
User avatar
By Irv Lee
#1760567
GrahamB wrote:.......
As written, far from being an amelioration, 1374 makes things more stringent by adding a requirement for a remote briefing to the existing normal instructor flight,....

.......
1374 makes no such additional requirement.

Korrrrrrekt!! 1374 - no instructor flight to extend, just briefing and admin. Whereas 1376 - briefing, admin, instructor flight, admin
#1760677
I was going to suggest leaving on the ORS you rode in on.

Irv Lee wrote:Korrrrrrekt!! 1374 - no instructor flight to extend, just briefing and admin. Whereas 1376 - briefing, admin, instructor flight, admin


Similar thing with LAA aeroplanes, they need a test flight, where C of A aeroplanes don't...
kanga, Irv Lee liked this