On the one hand side they have started with a campaign to dismantle all the goldplating
Sorry, but what exactly does this “goldplating” mean? (I think I have some idea, but not sure)
The devil in the detail is that a CBIR TK exam credit prevents pilots from flying SP HPA. Consequently, when a pilot is issued with an IR having followed the CBIR route there will be a restriction on their licence.
But surely since the CBIR theory course isn’t available yet, any skill test candidates will have taken the full IR or ATPL theory exams. So that can’t be a reason for the delay. The issuing of an IR based on the CBIR route shouldn’t be any different,, it would be any following on professional qualifications that would need to be checked.
What is gold plating
It means extra hurdles and more demanding tests than required from the original basic rules, such as more questions in the test papers, extensive NDB holding procedures in the UK IR skill test, very long forms requiring duplicate information, unnecessary and irrelevant questions for course approvals etc. These all add unnecessary bureaucratic process, cost and delay into operating flying training schools, aircraft and pilot training.
David, I completely agree. This is something I have highlighted to the CAA.
Regarding the HPA, surely if you need an HPA then you have to get the HPA (or follow an alternative route e.g. any ICAO ATPL exam pass; the FAA one used to be a good one if you held an FAA CPL, but that is now being made a lot harder).
The IR should not have a restriction on it due to this, because an IR is an IR and is nothing to do with the exams you passed. For example I have a full JAA IR (7 exams) but my 7 exams were not a subset of the 14 ATPL exams, let alone the full 14 ATPL exams, yet my IR has no restriction on it. An IR entitles you to nothing for which you don’t have a class rating or a type rating. Without one of these, you cannot even fly a kite with the IR.
If somebody with the CB IR, or with “my” 7-exam IR, then goes on to do a CPL (11 exams), and gets a CPL/IR, that CPL/IR will never be upgradeable to an ATPL because the full 14 ATPL exams were never done. But this has been the case for many years – certainly since about 2000 when the 7 IR exams ceased to be an exact subset (except for HP&L which is the full ATPL version) of the 14.
You can do the HPA at some UK FTO I believe. I vaguely recall reading somewhere that you hang out in a classroom for a few days and throw them some money. Anybody with a PPL/IR can do this, regardless of where their PPL/IR came from.
The thing with the HPA is that some topics which are in the “JAA IR” TK but not in the CB IR TK are considered essential for HPA IR by EASA. The TK for HPA consists of a VFR part and an IFR part. CB IR holders need to take both, while “JAA IR” holders only need to take the VFR part. This is spelled out in the updated AMC: AMC1 FCL.720.A(b)(2)(i).
The devil in the detail is that a CBIR TK exam credit prevents pilots from flying SP HPA.
What is their basis for suggesting this? I can see nothing to that effect in the regulation. The only relationship with the HPA was that in removing some TK from the IR via the CB route, it was agreed to add some material to the HPA TK. But that’s about the content of the training course.
I’m told that there needs to be a limitation placed on the licence. I don’t personally see what as the HPA element of the regulation already covers any transition. There certainly needs to be some form of marker for pilots who obtain CPL/MEP/IR by this route as far as progressing to atpl is concerned but that form of marker was always in place.
The reality is that there are UK ATOs (ours being one) who have CAA approval to deliver CBIR/EIR but candidates are not being accepted for flight test. ‘Lamentable’ is a word that has been used in various discussions I’ve had with the CAA. This really should have been very easy but, for whatever reason, the implementation has been a mess.
There certainly needs to be some form of marker for pilots who obtain CPL/MEP/IR by this route as far as progressing to atpl is concerned but that form of marker was always in place.
Huh? Why? What’s to stop progression to an ATPL?
If theory credits is what this is about, it is all complete tosh.
The ratings on the licence do not say if the theory exams passed were the separate CPL and IR exams, which offer no progression to multi-pilot type ratings and ATPL, or the ATPL exams. The licence simply is a CPL with an IR entered as the rating.
Why should it be any different for slightly different theory exams for the IR?
Bookworm, if you have ATPL theory passed that counts for the IR and CPL.
If you have the separate CPL and IR exams, they do NOT count for the ATPL (or type ratings for multi-pilot aircraft), so you have to do them all again.
The difference in content is – broadly – world climatology, upper troposphere, pressurisation, jet stuff, and some subjects go in more depth to cover the world (navigation).
ATPL theory also covers you for HPA.
There are no “bridging exams” for CPL/IR to ATPL upgrades, you have to do all again (with the exception of some mickey-mouse credits such as for VFR and IFR communications)
