Use this forum to flag up examples of red tape and gold plate
Its been a great step forward in allowing examiners to sign ratings that have expired by more then 5 years rather than have to send it off to the CAA. Its also alot quicker and cheaper for the end user as well.

However if the rating is on the back on the licence then it has to go back to the CAA for them to sign it regardless of how long it has expired. It could be a matter of days.

I really can't see any hint of a safety case on this one.

So could all examiners be allowed to sign licences that have expired like we used to do pre JAR?
User avatar
By Cookie

Quoting myself(!)...from another thread in this section.

Good news that we are not now restricted provided the rating is in Section XII (and was therefore current at the point of EASA licence issue).

When application is made to the CAA to amend a Part-FCL licence (such as adding a rating), any ratings that have expired will be removed from Section XII on page 4. This is a requirement of Part-ARA.

However, we should challenge the restriction contained in Part-ARA. Expired ratings and certificates should remain in Section XII, as was the case under JAR-FCL and before. This would remove cost and complexity from the rating and certificate renewal process.