The big problem here is the FTOs in the UK want to keep NDB approaches. Why would a hotel want a guest to leave after 15 days if they can trap them for 50 days?
It’s an embarrassment to the CAA that they haven’t banned a technology that couldn’t be certified today.
The fact that everybody flies NP approaches with a GPS is a different matter…
You mean there is another way to fly them???
My favourite:
ATO fees as agreed by you; CAA fees, including examiner fees, as published on the CAA website.
The most important bit from the CAA perspective.
The biggest single reason why Europe is so screwed up is the emphasis on organisational approvals rather than US-style individual approvals.
An individual might charge you €200/day (perfectly reasonable) but the same individual working for a company has to be charged out at a good €800/day. Plus VAT of course because the company will be way above the registration threshold. That is completely normal and correct and the £800+ CAA IRT fee is totally reasonable. In my business I would not charge less. It is the whole underlying logic which is screwed up and warped, but the gravy train just keeps going and those riding it will never voluntarily jump off. Look at the Manston thread… how can an airport go bust while employing 150 people? And before somebody points this out, I am sure Thutmosis and Cicero could have written this, too.
I wonder to what extent a State can impose stricter demands than those laid out by EASA/EU. I would not be surprised if it turns out that the ADF requirement is eventually overruled by EASA/EU. And while the UK CAA Q&A sheet states that you can use your own aircraft (in the UK), that is not (currently) acceptable in Denmark, unless the aircraft is maintained as a commercial aircraft, along with other requirements not listed by EASA/EU regs. Any Skill Test (and even night rating, which does not require a Skill Test) requires commercial maintainance here. One should think that such gold plating ought to go away when part-NCO etc. comes into force.
The biggest single reason why Europe is so screwed up is the emphasis on organisational approvals rather than US-style individual approvals.
In the past, my MEP was renewed by self-employed examiners. The required flight was conducted and log book signed. Cost was reasonable.
Now, the local ATO’s immediate reaction to my enquiry was that I will obviously need some training before the flight with an examiner. When I told them that I haven’t flown many MEP hours in recent years, their eyes lit up at the thought of all the extra training they could force on me. At least 2 hours training was needed, I was told (without them even asking what experience I had).
Naturally, the thought of spending £x,000’s with an ATO for renewal of something I am hardly using means the MEP rating remains un-renewed.
It’s the same on the EASA IR.
If you revalidate (definition: the license or rating has not yet lapsed) that can be done with a freelancer. It is the lapsed papers which drag you back into the ATO/FTO system.
I guess it will be the same with the EIR. One day past the magic date and you are over a barrel again.
I don’t think I know anybody today who maintains an MEP unless they own a ME plane.
I think some of the criticsm of ATOs (FTOs don’t exist any more) is rather unfair. They have been subject to the same Euro nonsenses as the rest of us and to offer any form of customer service, they have got to fork out more and more fees for approvals that may not even generate any custom. They are as much the victim of EASA as the rest of us. If an ATO quotes lots of extra training is required, go elswhere, competition should be fierce however ME training unlees professional has been a lost cause since 1 Jan 2000. ATOs have no desire to prolong use of the NDB, they offer training based upon the standards required by the UK CAA for test.
Isn’t the requirement of us still having to use NDB a failure of the UK system of failing to adapt allow GPS approaches.Which is a perfect case gokdplsting
All this a to approval should be scrapped. As whopity says one only has to look at at its effect on mep training when it was introduved . yet we persist with it and then roll it out for all forms of flight training.
I would love to see easa adopt approval of the individual rather than the organisation (for maintenance as well as flight training) and they is no icao requirwnt for any of this a to nonsense.
Can’t ever see it happening due loss of revenue.
Peter you ms
Peter you say the caa it test fee is reasonable. It simply is not. In Spain for instance its a 200 euro payment to the examiner. You also don’t have to go through flight test bookings which is a preverbale pain in the arse.
