Hello all,
In the UK, the CAA lists the requirements to obtain an EASA PPL if you have an ICAO PPL (in my case FAA). There are no requirements listed in CAP 804 Section 4, Part Q, subpart 2 for an RT license!?
However, a lot of flight school websites list an RT exam as part of their conversion process!? I’m confused. Has anyone on here converted from an ICAO PPL license to an EASA PPL license?
In the meantime, I have an email into the CAA asking for clarification!
Thank you, -Jason
If you want to use the radio you must obtain a UK FRTOL as detailed in CAP804 Part 6. The FAA do not issue a radio licence and the FCC Restricted Radiotelephone Certificate does not fulfil the requirements for conversion to a UK FRTOL.
Yes, as Tumbleweed says. It’s just a little exam, nothing very special, other than some getting used to UK phraseology (things like ‘pass your message’….).
Thanks guys. I didn’t realize there was an entire RT section in CAP804 (part 6) until last night. You’re right, my FCC license can’t be credited toward my UK FRTOL.
Thanks for the clarification!
-Jason
It’s just a little exam, nothing very special
As a RTF Examiner for many years, I’d say its a little more than that. Most candidates find it quite a shock to their system. The written paper is now very simple, but to quote the CAA Examiner who wrote the paper: they have left out items in the written, that they know will be rigourously tested in the practical test. Net result is more people are now likely to fail the practical because the basics have not been examined in the written test.
What is the point of a rigorous practical R/T test? Surely the practical flight test is the place to assess R/T work?
What is the point of a rigorous practical R/T test? Surely the practical flight test is the place to assess R/T work?
I agree. I flew for 20 years in the US without an RT test. You learned it practically as you were trained (e.g. cross-countries, flights to big airports, etc.).
Sounds like another excuse to make another £200 off the students.
-Jason
The other thing I don’t understand is why there’s such an obsession in the UK over R/T – to such an extent that certainly in the gliding world the R/T section actually has a higher pass mark than the actual flying bits! And then if you listen to London Information on a nice day we don’t even do it very well after all of that.
The US system works much better, IMHO.
The US system works much better, IMHO.
You can say that for pretty much anything to do with aviation.
I agree again.
The RT example I have from a well known RT book:
Bristol Tower, G-GGGG on the apron with information ______, request taxi.
G-GGGG, taxy for runway XX, QNH 1017
Roger, G-GGGG taxy to runway XX, QNH 1017
I know it sounds daft, but why do they bother telling you the QNH, and having you repeat QNH, if you have listened to the ATIS and the QNH was stated in the ATIS? (unless it’s changed of course) Am I missing something here?
Under the US system you would simple say you are located on the apron with information_______ready to taxy and they would reply with taxy instructions only.
Not being critical, just suggesting a significant amount of ‘radio clutter’ could be cut out by applying some common sense. There seem to be a lot of little nuisances of the UK system that could be streamlined.
-J
