why europe?

[southern25]

I would like to ask why someone choose a flight academy in Europe for training.The cost is high everywhere in Europe and the quality of training in countries like Canada or US is as good as here and is offered in more reasonable prices.So is there any good reason for someone not to go to an other country like Canada for example?

[Ally Minium]

It depends on what kind of licence you want. If you want a JAA licence, then the best bet is probably to do it in Europe or at a school that has a partnership with a European finishing school.

If you want FAA, go to the states.

etc. etc.

[minus273]

Hey there,

I think that the question that is being asked is why would you want to pay 65K for a JAA licence in Europe that you could get by going to the US or Canada and get through a JAA approved school for probably 30K.

As I can see it there is no reason except personnel, i.e. the person has decided that they would rather stay in Europe.

Each to their own, but hey I became a pilot to travel so why not use it as an oppurtunity to do just that.

There are plenty of good schools abroad that offer JAA training and then send you back to do the IR. There are also plenty of good schools in the Europe.

Myself personally I liked that I went to the US and Canada, I now have 4 licences, as well as the experience of flying in a few different environments.

To me that makes me a better pilot.

-273

[JABI]

I see no reason why you would not do all of your licenses abroad followed by conversions back in Europe.
Even if you can't do a straight conversion, some additional training time plus a skill-test will still save you a tremendous amount of money.
Spend some time finding a couple of good schools in the US/Canada, do all your ratings up to FI, work for a year and go back to Europe with a 1000+hrs ATPL exams and conversions and now you're a 1000 hr pilot looking for a job competing with 300 hr pilots.

[PPRuNe Towers]

Jabi,

Just to keep things absolutely clear, especially for those new to the forum, would you run through that again please??

Rob Lloyd

[southern25]

Personally i believe that training here is very expensive for what you get .Is there any obvious reason why not going abroad?As far as i know from reading various threads in PPRUNE airlines do not care from where you obtain your ratings as long as they are legal.Besides even and BA used to have an agreement with an American university if i remember well.

[minus273]

Hi there again,

For people who are more interested in the cost of their training than which renowned school they go to in Europe, I would recommend doing their training at a good school in the US or Canada.

Now this would be a little run down of going about it:

Find the area that you would like to go to, maybe Florida maybe somewhere else. Myself personally I went to Moncton in Canada and then to a school in the US.

You will have to read between the lines and also I would recommend talking to former international students to see what you will need to do with visas and actual costs. If the school is any good they will be able to put you in touch with people from your country so that you can see what they had to do.

Make sure that you have about 30% more funds than quoted as it is always embaressing running out of money during training.

Get the correct visa and make sure that the school offers it. For the US you will want a J-1 visa, the work options on an M-1 are limited to none. Canada you will need a student visa and then the company will attempt to sponsor you afterwards, this is not guarenteed so I would recommned the US as the J-1 will allow you to look for work at another flight school if the one where you did your training has no room for you at the time.

Make sure that you do some pre-reading on what you will be doing, if you can get the books start reading them before you go.

Moncton for example sent me their text book 2 months before I went. I read it twice before I arrived and felt that I had a head start. You can then always underline the stuff you dont know and when in ground school ask what it is.

If you are looking to build hours the best bet would be to go to the USA. Get all your ratings and your CFI/CFII/MEI then try to get all the hours for the ATPL take the ATPL and then come back to Europe.

By having a full ATPL you will be exempt from formal ground school and will be able to sign up for a distance learning course and then take the exams when you feel free. On the flying side you will be able to get an hour reduction from the head of training so that you will not have to do the 25hrs for the Commercial skills test and you will also be allowed to do 15hrs for the IR (10hrs in an Fnpt2 and 5hrs aircraft) it may take longer than this.

You could also if you are clever go to a school in the US or Canada that does JAA and do the 2 systems at the same time and then return to do the VFR portion of your flying, once you have completed your exams. If you are not interested in building hours then just go to Moncton in Canada get your Canadian and JAA commercials and return to Europe to get the IR.

You could if you were really brave do the distance learning whilst working as an instructor, but I think that you would be hard pushed to do this. You could always just get the books and read through them.

You will then have to do an MCC course on completion of your JAA IR and that will be it.

So for a quick re-cap:

Find area you want to go to: US/Canada etc etc
Obtain funds 130%
Speak to former students from your country
Get correct Visa (US J-1)
Get study material
Get all licences (US CFI/CFII/MEI)
Work as hard as you can to get FAA or Canadian ATPL
Try to get as much multi time as you can
Complete JAA exams
Return to US/Canada to do VFR portion of flying
Return to Europe to do IR and MCC

Anyways I am sure that I have left something out

By doing it this method you will save yourself 50%, have 2 ATPLs at the end. Have had fun flying somewhere where they treat GA like normal people.

You will also be paid for flying, so if you are fruggal with money you will walk away with some money saved, have had more command experience than the guys and girls you are competing for jobs with back in the Europe. Have more hours by far than the guys and girls you are competing with and in general be better a pilot and be better off.

Just remember when you are in JAA land dont say well this is how we do it in the FAA/Canada, and vice versa.

I used to have students that came from JAA to the FAA and we spent the first 5hrs going round in circles, which ever country your in you fly their system. This is not such a problem for IFR, more mainly for VFR.

Anyways hope this helps somebody

-273

[Send Clowns]

It all comes down to what you want, what you think will take you along in your career. Ask the people who started training in the US and then completed in the UK, ask the people I train who have come over from Spain and Italy (where training is cheaper), or from the USA, to the UK for JAA courses. I would say the training in the UK is the best in the world, as I am involved, but I genuinely believe it (having experienced some in the US) and it is clear those people I know in the situations described above believe it too.

[JABI]

Minus 273 excellent post very little to add.
Absolutely go for a J1 visa, the only one that allows work.
Doing JAA training in the US/Canada still leaves no European experience at the end.
Therefore my recommendation to do final conversion training in your home country.
Send clowns, the only thing I do not agree with in your post is the statement about UK training being the best.
Little on the arrogant side unless I missed some tongue in cheek here, but every man entitled to his opinion....

[Send Clowns]

It was intended to have a tongue-in-cheek edge, but having trained abroad, and then helped retrain people with some considerable experience in a certain other nations, I would have to say there are not many that come close, although there are a few that may be as good. Certainly I would doubt that any beats the quality. Is there any particular country you were thinking of?

The fact that I train any foreigners in one of the most expensive countries for training, and I have known a lot going through courses here, suggests I am not alone in my judgement.

[minus273]

Hey there,

Send clowns, just out of interest which training abroad did you do?

Did you do only the PPL or all the way through?

-273

[JABI]

Well Send Clowns I think it would depend on your definition of good training.
And for which license/rating.
The US is hard to beat if you consider the amazing space at your disposal.
I've spoken to people that did 0-CPL IR ME in the US with trips to Miami/Orlando/Tampa/Memphis/Atlanta/Houston in their logbook(PIC not Dual). Know one character who came back with his CPL ME and the following break down in hrs:
275TT 125 XC( of which) 60 night 70 Instr. and 30 hrs actual IMC. Those numbers are hard to beat, and all of this in 4 months.
Very little if no chance that in Europe you can take a single engine into Paris/Hamburg/Amsterdam/Heathrow.
Sure 2000 mi XC are possible in Europe also but at what cost and the amount of hassle would be staggering.
For pure practicality the US is hard to beat. eg no additional cost for: landings, approaches, airways flying, border crossings.
Sure you can run into bogus flight schools and hopeless instructors but that is pretty universal.

[Send Clowns]

I had an FAA PPL, -273. I also did a JAA MEP rating and a bit of revision/hour building, but the RN had taught me to fly properly by then.

JABI

That is half the problem. Operations are made so simple in the US that for the operations required in Europe students who come back can't cope with the extra restrictions and requiremens of UK airspace.

The rest of the problem is that the teaching in the US is not so thorough or structured (I had few if any board briefs before PPL lessons. I was surprised when I was taught to give them for every new lesson - I had assumed that was just military) and simply uses different flying techniques, and there is a lot less theory taught. The students are flying and not understanding what they are doing. For example they are sometimes navigating following a process mechanically without really knowing what it is they are doing.

On average someone trained for a PPL in the USA would have to do 10 hours training to fly the club aircraft I can sign off, 10 hours becoming a minimum if trained at certain cheaper US schools.

[minus273]

Hey there

Thanks for posting the info. I think that part of the problem that you may see with the FAA Vs. the JAA way of doing things is that the FAA teaches a private licence and that is all it is.

It is a licence to go fly on your own or with a buddy. Usually on the weekend for some fun.

Their are a lot of pilots in the US who just want to fly for fun, they know their limits and want to be a Day VFR only pilot.

Now if you want to compare apples to apples you would have to compare FAA, Canadian etc etc to a JAA ATPL.

I could for example say that the FAA is better as it does a flight test for ATPL where as the JAA does not. And that flight test is to a higher standard than the JAA IR, but in the end all it comes down to is who is examining, if you have an easy examiner then people get through who shouldn't. I purposly sent my students with the hardest examiner that I know, that way I knew I was doing my job and they were being prepared for further down the line.

I know that it is busy in JAA land, but believe me when you take students into Dallas on IFR X-C you are a little busy as well. So it can also be where people do their training.

The knowledge requirements may not be as intensive but I have taken all 3 of the above mentioned and 95% of the stuff in the JAA I could have ignored.

The FAA and Canadian systems focus on what you need to know and more importantly how to fly it properly.

I have found from my personnel experience that the JAA system is long winded and convoluted, and does not make a better pilot, maybe a more arrogant one (in some cases, especially the FAA bashing ones that have never flown their) but not a better one.

I have enjoyed all my flight training Canadian, FAA, JAA and would be the first to pick holes in the different systems.

I would from my limited experience of the different systems say that the Canadian system is the best one that I have been through.

The theory is half way between the FAA and JAA and the flying is as good as the FAA. I found the JAA CPL far to easy.

Then again it is always easy to look back once you have an ATPL or two and say ooo it was easy. That is because you have done all hard flying before.

Also in Canada nothing beats getting to pre-flight your plane in -35c and -45c wind chill. You really learn to respect weather in general when flying the Maritimes in Canada. From the CBs in the summer to the freezing weather in the winter.

These things can never be learnt from a book and must be experienced. This would be my main criticsm of the JAA that it is too reliant on book learnt material.

So anyways I think that to say that the JAA is the best system without really having experienced anything else is a bit excessive.

Also to let you know when I was instructing FAA I always gave briefings to my lessons unless we had already covered the material before. My briefing book is a folder that stands 15cm high.

If you want a structured flying system in the US then you goto a 141 school, which is where I taught, equivalent to OATs etc etc.

If not you go to 61, more of flying for fun school.

It is always difficult to compare the different systems as they are set up for different things.

I know some pilots in the US who just fly around in uncontrolled airspace they just love flying for fun. (not the poster on here :) )

So why should they be burdened with having to learn all the other rubbish that an ATPL needs to know.

I know this was a bit of the topic of the original post, but I just thought I would straighten out that every country has its good and bad.

If the US and the rest of the world really produced such bad pilots then why would be allowed to fly into JAA airspace?

Anyways we have both said we have had bad students from both systems, I have also had good students from the JAA. Just like my Ab Initio students in the FAA were both good and bad.

I think that some of the problem is that some of the guys just come to the US to get a cheap and chearful PPL and then return to JAA land to continue their training. Thinking that it will be a breeze, this is never the case with anything in flying.

Anyways back to what I was doing,

Happy and safe flying to one and all no matter where your flying.

-273

P.S. Not meaning to have a go at any system but kind of gets my back up when someone says my system is better than yours. Even it is a little tongue in cheek. Everyone has something to learn in flying, if you dont think that you shouldn't be anywhere near a plane.

[BillieBob]

I could for example say that the FAA is better as it does a flight test for ATPL where as the JAA does not. And that flight test is to a higher standard than the JAA IR Wrong, I'm afraid.

There is an ATPL Skill Test under JAR and it is to a higher standard than the IR. Try reading JAR-FCL 1.295.

[Send Clowns]

-273

Well I have taught people who have FAA ATPL, and Canadian ATPL. Some are fine and excellent pilots. Not always been impressed though, and certainly they do not have the background knowledge of a CAA/JAA-trained pilot.

I teach at Bournemouth, an international airport. While it is not as big as some US airports that can be used by students, it is as complicated and involved to work with as Orlando International (flew in there in a C150 once). I think anyone I trained would be at home in class B airspace flying to 36L, MCO, as I had to.

The FAA PPL may be for a different purpose, but frankly I think it makes poor grounding for later commercial training. In the UK we have a separate, national licence for flying purely day-VMC for fun. Flying is about building on basic skills, and if early lessons were rather haphazard, and taught less effective flying techniques, then it makes the CPL and IR more difficult to approach. This forum is about professional training, and if people want a smooth path to a career in aviation they really need to be taught to fly well and correctly fromt he beginning, not from 200 hours in starting a CPL.

I'm not really sure an ATPL flight test is really needed. The requirement for 500 hours multi-crew is far more important, given the experience of some people I know with FAA ATPLs. The knowledge requirement may be a rather too broad for JAA ATPL, but FAA ATPL holders don't necessarily know some of the essentials in my experience.

[minus273]

Hi there again

Totally agree that PPL students should have the best grounding that they can get. I would also be happy to send any of my students into Class B airspace.

The US approach does not really have an option for intergrated training, this allows you to go to the level you want to. So some people that get a PPL only ever want to go that far.

For the serious person who wants to make a career out of it then, the vast majority of them will go to a bigger school and do that.

I also think that the FAA knowledge is a little weak, but in my groundschool classes for IFR ratings I made sure that we went over all the things that they would need to know. This was usually way above what they required for the FAA exam.

I also like the FAA and Canadian oral system, I think that it is a good method of making sure someone has not just wrote learnt the writeen exam info and then forgotten it.

I think that maybe you have seen the results of too many poor instructors there are some out there which is unfortunate.

There is one thing that I must disagree with though. The usual FAA and Canadian full ATPL. Will have 1500hrs and will have either been an instructor or Air Taxi for 1200hrs of that.

To me that is time that will be invaluable when they actually come to command. The descion making process can only be taught so much, most of it has to be learnt.

Billie Bob:

From my understanding their is no Flight test for JAA ATPL. I am not talking about what you call an fATPL as all that is a Commercial with IR and MCC and the ATPL writtens.

I am also not talking about type ratings as we still have to do those here as well after the ATPL flight test.

In the FAA their is a completely different test once you reach 1500hrs and want to hold an ATP here.

Send clowns I am sure will be able to correct me if I am wrong, but last time I did my training in JAA-land their was no ATPL flight test.

Safe flying one and all

-273

[2FLYEU]

Hi All,

Very interesting comments...and I agree that JAA-ATPL theory is very complex and more difficult than the FAA-ATPL.
Just a comment:
I think aviation in The US is massive and a pilot follows a very productive progression ( CPL, CFI,MEI, AIR TAXI, TRAFFIC WATCH,
TURBOPROP.....ATPL, REGIONAL JET, MAJOR AIRLINE IF YOU HAVE A COLLEGE DEGREE)
a very consistent level is attained combined with good flying experience when you become ATPL.

In Europe Excellent theory wise, perfect flight training, but
zero experience on type,.... 300 hrs and ..F/O for a MAJOR, CHARTER etc...Very young but willing to learn and great flying skills.

At that point Would be interesting to have some comments on what line captains prefer to have as F/O's...
Experienced guys or just little experience guys ?

Thanks for the comments

[Send Clowns]

No flight test for the ATPL, -273, but of course the regular checks to keep the type rating current should be perfectly adequate, and I would still say that 500 hours multi-crew (in effect much more as I believe P2 hours only count for half, so only P1(S) counts fully) would be much more important than a flight test or any number of hours flying puddle jumpers. I have known an FAA ATPL holder with a lot of hours on his own aircraft who went to command a multi-crew aircraft with little idea of what he was doing in that environment.

I have learnt a lot as an instructor, and it will make me a great First Officer. It did not give me the skills to be a good Captain of a complicated, multi-crew aircraft yet, just a good basis for then. Why should I be given the privilege of commanding a large, complicated aircraft on my licence (the only difference between an ATPL and a CPL/IR) on the strength of flying a Robin, a 152 and a Cherokee?

[minus273]

thanks Send Clowns

Didn't think that there was a test for JAA ATPL. So not sure what Billiebob is on about.

As for the FAA you get your ATPL usually to become an FO in a regional airline after working as an instructor or air taxi (Part135).

It is a stepping stone so that the company knows that they can put you in command in 2-3 years time. That is all it really is, it is another weeding out tool.

There would be the most remote chance almost to the point of impossibility that you would be Captain in charge of a Heavy. Your licence permits this, but the fact is that until you have 3000-5000 hrs TT of which 2000 -3000hrs are on Jet aircraft you aren't going to be anywhere near a company that operates that kind of equipment.

So perosnally I would rather have the FO upfront flying my plane that has the experience than the book smarts. Rather than the 250 hour pilot that has done an MCC course.

I have 1700TT, 1400hrs as an instructor I still feel I am learning, there is no way that I believe that I am ready to fly a Heavy.

Maybe as an FO on an RJ and then learn from there.

MCC is nice but from my understanding you cant really even fail the course. So it is not really stoping people. The problem with flying is peoples inexperience and at 250hrs you are still inexperienced.

The comment made about instructors being better in command was based more on the further down the line view.

In the JAA system you have a lot of guys that have 250hrs when they are done with training. Which maybe 1/2 is dual (P2). They then do an MCC and get a job working for EasyJet or RyanAir. They work as an FO for 4-5 years and then come up for command. They maybe have 100-150hrs P1 and now they are captain on a 737.

That scares the hell out of me. They may have the total time but not any command time.

Anyways maybe it is just different ways to skin a cat. I just like that you have to work to get to where you need to be in the US and Canada. You also get to fly a load of different planes getting their.

Happy and safe flying one and all

-273

[Send Clowns]

No chance of a quick job on a heavy here! Best you'd get is 737-size. The CAA reckon, and I'd have to agree, that flying FO in a medium jet is less demanding than flying single-pilot in a simpler aircraft. Hence the absolute minimum 700 hours to operate single-pilot IFR public transport, commonly raised to 1000 hours by the terms of the AOC. That is why no-one in Europe flies air taxi to build hours.

I know someone with a command of a multi-crew N-reg jet without any significant previous multi-crew time. It isn't heavy, but still I know he was way out of his depth when he started, far too reliant on his FO. The whole point of keeping people away from command until they have some time in a similar environment is to avoid the Captain being in that situation, as far as I can see. I don't think a flight test could replace that.

I have 900 hours, including 300 instructing. I have flown some complicated machines, just as difficult as some multi-crew. I have flown a jet-transport sim (the real thing, BA's 767) and as an FO, with the normal training, I could do it with no problem. I would not like to command anything of that speed or complexity (and some bizjets are as involved to fly) without some fundamentally different experience behind me.

[minus273]

Hey there Send Clowns,

Well just to burst your bubble a little.

FAA requirments to be PIC of air taxi are 750TT and not sure how much PIC for VFR operations.

For Air Taxi IFR:

Minimum of at least 1,200 hours of flight time as a pilot,
including 500 hours of cross country flight time, 100 hours of night flight time, and 75 hours of actual or simulated instrument time at least 50 hours of which were in actual flight.

They sometimes but not always require you to have an ATPL for insurance.

Not many VFR operations unless you do the Grand Canyon Tours.

The way you build time air taxi is by the same route as JAA I guess by being FO, getting your time up and getting command.

You usually start by being FO on a King Air or B-1900, after that you will then command a C-208B (usually single pilot cargo). Then when enough hours move back to King air or B-1900 for command and typing if required.

The regionals here are now hiring when you have about 1000TT and 100 multi. Then you would go to either a B-1900 Dash8, Saab 340 or RJ.

So I guess in that sense there is not alot of difference.

Still think that in the JAA there are too many people jumping into aircraft at 250hrs that should not be there.

I am not saying that these people should be instructors either as if someone doesn't want to do it then they should be able to do something else. Such as FO in air taxi, or pipe line or traffic reporting.

The only problem with this in the US is that it has led to Pay For Training (PFT). As people want to by-pass the hard work stage and buy their way out.

I personnally think that is prostitution and is letting down the industry as a whole. But I think that has been covered in depth elsewhere.

Anyways better get back to what I was doing

Do you know how the Single engine IFR regs are doing when I was back their in December they were still trying to get it all sorted out.

It may give people more options to get a job like here I guess.

Well have a good weekend one and all

-273

P.S You mention the one guy in command of the jet I think that would be the rare exception here. Unless it was a private company and there was some nepetism going on.

[englishal]

Well I have taught people who have FAA ATPL, and Canadian ATPL. Some are fine and excellent pilots. Not always been impressed though, and certainly they do not have the background knowledge of a CAA/JAA-trained pilot.

Works both ways though. I met a couple of fcuk wits last year in LA who were about to load up an Archer, to max weight, and head off to Big Bear which was at 30°C. They had no concept of denisty altitude (even though one was supposedly a professional pilot???)

There's always good and bad pilots, EGHH is not a big deal for a US pilot who's on the ball and who has bothered to read up on local procedures, just like LA or Orlando should be achievable to a CAA pilot who's bothered to read about the FAA procedures. As far as 10hrs for conversion, I think this is an extreme case. I learned in LA, came back and did the 1½hr BFC checkout and was let free in the 172 straight away. I did another hour to convert to the PA28 (this was before I'd flown one before).

Neither the UK is better than the USA or the USA better than the UK, though the USA is by far cheaper, and more "friendly" to GA.

EA;)

[BillieBob]

Didn't think that there was a test for JAA ATPL. So not sure what Billiebob is on about. Billiebob is 'on about' the ATPL Skill Test that must be passed before a JAA ATPL is issued.

JAR–FCL 1.295 Skill

(a) An applicant for an ATPL(A) shall have demonstrated the ability to perform, as pilot-in-command of an aeroplane type certificated for a minimum crew of two pilots under IFR (see Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 1.220 part B), the procedures and manoeuvres described in Appendices 1 and 2 to JAR–FCL 1.240 and 1.295 with a degree of competency appropriate to the privileges granted to the holder of an ATPL(A).

(b) The ATPL(A) skill test may serve at the same time as a skill test for the issue of the licence and a proficiency check for the revalidation of the type rating for the aeroplane used in the test and may be combined with the skill test for the issue of a multi-pilot type rating.

It would appear that -273 and Send Clowns have been talking through an orifice other than that beneath their respective noses.

[minus273]

Billiebob

There is no need to be rude and hostile.

As for what you posted I read it in my LASORS as well and all it seems to be talking about is the test for a type rating.

Maybe I am wrong but from all your other post it seems that all you do is quote from LASORS and add nothing productive to the thread in the progress.

You do not say that this is what you had to do so until you do I would rather stick with my experience of not having to to a flight test to get a pure ATPL single pilot only licence without any type ratings attached, which if you read Send Clowns and my own posts, was what we were discussing.

As my Mum said if you cant say anything nice dont say anything at all.

-273

[BillieBob]

Rude? Hostile? Moi?

When caught out talking absolute boll@cks, the ploy of invoking one's Mummy's advice is not exactly guaranteed to enhance one's credibility.

Let's consider the idea of I would rather stick with my experience of not having to to (sic) a flight test to get a pure ATPL single pilot only licence Under JAR it is not possible to get a 'single pilot' ATPL, so what, exactly, are you talking about?

Maybe I am wrong but from all your other post (sic) it seems that all you do is quote from LASORS and add nothing productive to the thread in the progress. To be completely accurate, I quote from JAR-FCL as well as LASORS and, since these are the requirements for pilot licensing, I would contend that my posts add something far more productive to the thread than the pure conjecture that you seem to favour.

You do not say that this is what you had to do Well, as it happens, I got my ATPL long before JARs were thought of and so I didn't have to 'do' it. However, I'm now in the enviable(?) position of having to inflict the ATPL Skill Test on others.

Since you clearly have little knowledge or experience of the JAA requirements for pilot licensing, I would advise caution. Should you elect to ignore this advice, you will undoubtedly prove yourself to be a bigger pr@t than you presently appear.

[minus273]

Oh I think that I am going to cry, not.

Talking bollocks I think not, I asked if their was an ATPL skills test, to which I quite honestly did not believe that there was.

Someone from JAA-land also said that there was not.

Thank you for correcting me. I am wrong and I guess according to you and the LASORS you qouted there is an ATPL skills test, but when I was doing my JAA conversion there was no mention of one.

I asked a JAA instrutor and they also said this.

So when I can be bothered to get my JAA ATPL I will make sure that I read the LASORS again.

One thing is for certain when I need to do the test, it will not be with someone of your disposition.

So anyways back to other things for me.

Oh you asked why we were talking about single pilot ATPL, if you had read the post it was because the topic had drifted onto some of the differences between JAA and FAA.

Happy flying one and all

-273

[Send Clowns]

-273

I think you have actually answered your own point about the quality of UK training, in agreement with me. You believe there are too many 250-hour pilots FO of large aircraft. That is in your experience of the people put out by the US training system with 250 hours. Yet the safety record here is almost identical for these operations. In fact our largest traditional user of pilots starting on type-rating courses with typically only 170 hours from a UK integrated course is BA (not now, as they don't sponsor, but for the period relevant to accident statistics) which has always, and even more so in the last 18 years, had an excellent safety record. The CAA and European airlines and their insurers are far more qualified to judge the output of European schools than either you or I are. They allow these pilots to fly.

That suggests to me that the UK system trains very good pilots who make safe FOs. The training received on the job is always what makes a good Captain. You don't expect that of your training system, I do of the one of which I am part, as do the regulators and airlines. Suggests to me which is better.

As one of my students said, "I've got an Aussie CPL. That's about like a UK PPL".

Hardly really an ATPL skills test, BB, even if it is described as that at one point. If you read what you quote it is generally just the revalidation test for a multi-crew type, a regular event for the FO of such an aircraft. Hence there is no real, specific ATPL test. Not an accurate description of a test equally applicable to a CPL holder who wishes to retain privileges as FO of such an aircraft.

P.S. I can suggest a couple of good CRM instructors. You need the training.

[minus273]

Hi there Send Clowns

Think is just like I said before many ways to skin a cat. I am sure that neither country would allow people who are unsafe to fly.

I just like the system in the US and Canada with working your way up, seems to give you a broader view of aviation. Guess it is what you get used to.

Anyways safe flying one and all,

Back to the oven that is AZ.

-273

You mention the Oz guy, personally when I did my JAA CPL I found it no harder than my Canadian PPL.

I guess everybody finds different things hard, funny thing about flying it is a great leveller.

I found the Gen Nav exam hard, but alot of that was due to the restricted time.