Is the JAA PPL Dead?

[englishal]

The CAA have recently confirmed that you can use an ICAO compliant licence to fly G- Reg aircraft in the UK and exercise the privileges of your ICAO licence at private level.

What this means is that an FAA PPL ME IR + medical holder is entitled to fly a G-Reg ME aircraft in IMC in the UK on their FAA certificate with NO conversion.

The French authorities (along with several others) have stated that whatever the CAA allow, then they will allow, and confirm that the ICAO (say FAA) PPL holder will be entitled to fly the G reg aircraft into French airspace. They also confirm that no conversion would be required to fly a F reg aircraft.

As many ICAO PPLs (ie FAA) include night flying as part of the PPL issue, this also means that the hypothetical FAA PPL ME IR holder is not restricted to day and that the FAA IR will give the same privileges as the UK IMC holder, so now the holder is no longer restricted to VFR...

So...what is the point in doing a JAA PPL any more?

Rgds
EA

[Fuji Abound]

So far as I was aware an FAA certificate holder has for many years been entitled to fly a G reg aircraft on this ticket. I understand the CAA will issue on IMC rating on the strength of an FAA IR but the rating has to be issued. I was not aware of any changes but would be happily corrected.

.. .. .. but the the question is - is the JAA PPL dead?

The training for each ticket is much the same, both can be done either here or in the States so for both the advantage of cheaper fuel State side can be secured, so surely it is horses for courses. One exception - the FAA IR certainly requires more work than our IMC, so for some the IMC rating will provide a more achievable additional rating.

Horses for courses then but the FAA ticket may well prove cheaper in the long run with the more relaxed medical standards and it being a ticket for life with no renewal fees.

[PhilD]

The FAA IR is certainly more complex than the IMC, but surely the main point is that as well as well as giving you an IMC in the UK it will also entitle you to fly N reg aircraft IFR in any airspace you like. So, for example, you could fly IFR in Class A or in France, neither of which is allowed on an IMC.

[FlyingForFun]

Probably also worth pointing out that many people don't want to go to America for several weeks to gain a PPL. A lot of pilots view flying as a weekend activity, and that includes getting the PPL - they'd rather pop down to the local airfield every Saturday for a year or so and get a JAR PPL than go to America for a couple of weeks (possibly leaving family behind, or using up valuable holiday time from work) to get an FAA PPL, even if the privileges offered by the two were identical (which they're not).

Englishal, I've noticed that you are often quick to put down UK qualifications and promote the FAA alternatives. Not necessarilly a criticism, since the points you raise are always valid, if one-sided - but I'd be interested to know a bit more about your background, and why you are so keen to promote FAA licenses and ratings.

FFF
-------------

[Don D Cake]

There's no way I could use up all my annual leave to learn to fly in the USA and still remain married. Therefore I have to learn to fly by taking a lesson in the UK every 2-3 weeks, even that occasionally causes some friction. It may cost more and it's going to take a couple of years but that's the way it goes. I'm sure that there are many others in the same position as me.

[Rod1]

The NPPL will also weaken the JAR licence.

I doubt too many people will cry if the JAR PPL eventually vanishes and we go back to national licences governed by associations like the PFA and recognised Europe wide. This will allow the flying for fun people to concentrate on amateur aviation and the budding ATPL’s to go down the professional route with JAR or whatever replaces it, + all the associated costs that will involve.

Question is how long will it take to happen?

[englishal]

Hi FFF,

To answer your questions....

I got into flying proper in 2000, gaining my CAA or rather JAA PPL. Since then I did a lot of flying in the US and did the FAA IR and FAA ME ratings. Since doing these I have investigated the main differences between the FAA and JAA, and it just amazes me that the CAA / JAA is set up as a complete money making business, not with safety in mind but money.

A quick example.....I would like to fly ME aircraft in the UK, however it would cost approx £2-3000 per year to maintain. It now transpires that I am qualified to fly a G-reg ME aircraft on my present qualifications, which only require a BFR with an FAA instructor (in UK, US or anywhere, in a G reg, N reg or X reg plane) every couple of years. A far more affordable route for the 'private' pilot. Same goes for the IR. I would like to be able to file IR proper in the UK, but the JAA IR is unaffordable for the private pilot, and its maintenence costs are no doubt astronomical. The CAA do issue an IMC rating, which is a very good rating, but it still means I am limited to 3000' when flying to the channel islands from Bournemouth due to the overlying class A.

My goal is for the cheapest, best value flying as a private pilot, and once a person has gone ahead and got an FAA licence, it NEVER expires. A BFR every two years is enough to remain legal. No hidden costs......I am not putting down UK qualifications at all, and I appreciate the point that not everyone can go to the US for a few weeks to get an FAA licence (or SA for that matter), so this route would not be for everyone, however its a point worth making so people know that cheaper alternatives do exist...

Cheers
EA ;)

[StrateandLevel]

"and it just amazes me that the CAA / JAA is set up as a complete money making business, not with safety in mind but money."

This presumes a degree of colusiuon and organisation! there is no organisation that well coordinated.

-------------------------------------------------------
"A quick example.....I would like to fly ME aircraft in the UK, however it would cost approx £2-3000 per year to maintain."

If you fly 10 hours a year it will cost you the same regardless of what licence you hold. A UK revalidation will take just over an hour and cost about £250 + £65 for the examiner. If you have an IR then you have to stay current to revalidate a FAA IR!

_________________________

"but it still means I am limited to 3000' when flying to the channel islands from Bournemouth due to the overlying class A."

Holding a FAA IR will make no difference in a G- Reg aircraft. Read ANO Article 21 (40(a)(ii); " shall not act ast pilot of an aircraft in controlled airspace under IFR"

--------------------------------------------------
"It now transpires that I am qualified to fly a G-reg ME aircraft on my present qualifications, which only require a BFR with an FAA instructor (in UK, US or anywhere, in a G reg, N reg or X reg plane) every couple of years"

This has always been the case, but have you tried obtaining insurance on a ME aeroplane on the basis of one flight every two years?

---------------------------------------------------------

To answer the original question is The JAA PPL Dead? Certainly Not! It is still the basis of the UK flying training industry, without it commercial training is also in trouble.

There is little difference between a JAA PPL and anything that has gone before. The majority of costs eminate from poor government legislation in a number of areas. The aviation industry is apathetic, with no worthwhile representitive bodies. There has been no representation or lobbying of MPs who are generally totally ignorant when it comes to aviation. There has never ever been any government policy relating to flying training or recreational flying; it is still perceived as an eletist passtime of the well heeled!

The NPPL is a Red Herring. Initially a valliant attempt to rejuvenate recreational aviation, it has become a collection of Microlights, Motor Gliders and Medical Failures. Try counting the ab-initio SEP holder after one year; it will be difficult, because the satatistics will be arranged to show how successful it all is. All that was required to acheive the same thing was a second tier medical; instead we have a bungled beaurocratic mess. Even the law changes are such a mess, exemptions have already had to be issued.

I agree a FAA licence may be a useful licence to hold, in some cases things are simpler, but do get it in perspective. If you fly regularly, the cost will be generally the same, regardless of the licence you hold.

[FlyingForFun]

Englishal,

Thanks for you reply - that helps explain a lot of your posts. You said "My goal is for the cheapest, best value flying as a private pilot," and your posts definitely reflect this.

Many people have considerations other than simply finding the cheapest flying possible, and I think you're wrong to rubbish the JAA PPL and other qualifications. The benefits of FAA qualifications, and flying in the US, certainly need pointing out. Value for money is the obvious one. There are lots of others, too. But different people have different requirements. The JAA PPL is still very much alive for people with different priorities to you.

I also want to point out that the time I spent in the US was probably some of the most enjoyable flying time I've experienced so far. I'm not anti-FAA, and I don't disagree with the points you're making - I just disagree with the anti-JAA side of your posts.

Keep the good information coming!

FFF
--------------

[englishal]

Howdy chaps (and chapesses),

I'm not rubbishing the JAA PPL at all, it as a great licence to have. Sometimes it seems totally set up for Airline wanabees though, which is where the NPPL would come in to play, except it doesn't address the issue of the PPL who wants more than the basic sight seeing trip.

My point about the FAA IR and the 3000' thing was not totally relevant to this post, I just got carried away ;)......the IMC rating does not allow one to fly in class A airspace, nor does the FAA IR on a G reg plane, but I believe that a true 'private' instrument qualification should exist under JAR which allows the holder to exercise true IR priviliges without having to encounter exorbitant costs. The FAA IR allows the holder to remain current by experience, so shooting 6 approaches, navigating by navaids, and holding in you logbook for the preceeding 6 months means that nothing else is needed to remain current. In my view this is the way the IMC rating should be treated.

Another point is the ME revalidation. Yes, if one flies 10 hrs per year in a ME aircraft, then the revalidation costs are not so different. However under the FARs one does not need to do the "10 route sectors" or whatever every year, but needs a BFR every second year. This does reduce the pressure to remain current and in my experience an insurance company is normally only interested in ME and total time. In my case I haven't flown a multi for a while, but on a recent trip to the US I went up and did a BFR with an instructor. This cost me 2 hrs rental and the instructor, but it now means my qualification won't lapse for a couple of years. Next time I go back to the US, I'll probably do another hour with the instructor to get 'safe' and then I can go jollying off around the skies. Incidentally regarding 'current' and 'safe'........ I won't fly if I am 'current' but don't feel 'safe', however when I am 'safe' its nice to know I am 'current' if you know what I mean....

Cheers
EA:)

[RotorHorn]

Has anyone ever tried comparing £ for $ what each licence (JAR and FAA PPL, IR rating etc) would cost to gain and then maintain for say five years?

Always wondered if it was more cost effective getting FAA qualifications rather than JAR equivalents....

[distaff_beancounter]

englishal To keep a JAR MEP, one does not actually have to do the "10 hours per year" that you mention, or even 10 sectors a year.

You can fly nil hour & nil sectors, then just ask the examininer to test you over a flight sector, as part of the annual MEP test. As far as I recall "a flight sector" can just be, leaving the circuit, 15 mins in the cruise & then back to the circuit. So you would normally do a "flight sector" during an MEP, in any case.

I agree with you that the JAR is every year, instead of the FAA biannually, but if you actually want to fly an MEP single-pilot, then that seems a sensible safety requirement to me. :)

[rustle]

Good point, D_B.

It's also more efficient to sync your IR renewal and your ME renewal as both can be flown in the same flight.

[Irv]

EnglishAl: Sorry if this has been said earlier, couldn't spot it on first pass:

Your original statement is not quite true.
>>"What this means is that an FAA PPL ME IR + medical holder is entitled to fly a G-Reg ME aircraft in IMC in the UK on their FAA certificate with NO conversion. "

FAA licence, FAA/IR, g-reg aircraft, UK airspace combinations means you can fly IFR (and also in IMC) in Class F and G airspace only. You couldn't do approaches into any Class D or E airfields in IMC, which of course is where most of the instrument approaches are! So to that original statement you have to add 'providing you stay in Class F or G airspace'

[FaPoGai]

Cher englishal

YES, OUI, JA, etc.
Good thing too.

[englishal]

Hi Irv,

The IMC rating allows a holder to fly as PIC in class D airspace under IFR.....so then a quote from the SRG website:-

Holders of a valid Instrument Rating on their ICAO licence, will allow the holder to exercise the same privileges as the UK IMC rating (ANO Schedule 8 refers)

[later stated that the holder does not need an IMC rating to be issued to exercise this privilege]

Now to me this looks like the CAA are either contradicting themselves (ANO 2000, Part4, Article 21, Paragraph 4) by preventing an ICAO licence holder from flying under IFR in controlled airspace, or else the interpretation should be that the ICAO PPL holder is not allowed to fly under IFR in controlled airspace UNLESS they hold an IR, in which case the IMC rating privileges apply (ANO Schedule 8)...So complicated !

Just for interest the following is an extract from a communication from the DISTRICT AERONAUTIQUE ILE DE FRANCE, the French CAA regarding flying a G reg aircraft into France on a ICAO licence:-

Question : a british citizen with a an ICAO private licence
wants to fly from England to France on a British registred aircraft.

Answer : As long as the British Civil Aviation recognize the ICAO private licence and allows the pilot to fly over UK, the pilot can fly to France on a British aircraft (but not on a french one) regarded to the British autorisation.

This also looks to me like the IMC privileges gained by virtue of an FAA IR would allow the holder to fly in IMC in France in Class D / E airspace...

Cheers
EA:)

[Irv]

EnglishAl: "a quote from the SRG website"

Name that quote! if you are refering to the FAQ on the CAA website:
CAA FAQ on ICAO privileges (http://www.caa.co.uk/srg/licensing/faq.asp?faqid=208)

That ORIGINALLY said that a ICAO PPL and I/R gave the SAME privileges as an IMC, and as you'll see this was subsequently amended and that bit withdrawn when it was pointed out that they didn't (the difference being the IMC is valid in Class D and E for approaches in IMC, and the foreign combination isn't). If you have spotted it somewhere else on the CAA website other than this link above, they will no doubt correct that too!

[englishal]

Hi Irv,

Thanks for the info. Yep, I was looking at an old copy, and so you are quite correct. Pretty useless being able to fly IFR in non controlled airspace ...

Oh well, too late, I have already written to the CAA asking them to confirm that a foreign IR holder can fly in CAS without an IMC. Funny if they confirmed it though...

Rgds
EA:)

[Irv]

Well, getting a foreign I/R can be useful, but the bit I don't understand is why MORE pilots don't get what you specified and then go the one extra step and get a syndicated foreign reg aircraft

[distaff_beancounter]

I understand that a FAA IR holder, is automatically entitled to a UK IMC rating.

But am I correct in assuming that he would therefore have to hold a CAA or JAR licence, to which the IMC rating could be attached?

[Irv]

D-B: >>"I understand that a FAA IR holder, is automatically entitled to a UK IMC rating. But am I correct in assuming that he would therefore have to hold a CAA or JAR licence, to which the IMC rating could be attached?"

Affirm.
( But also it doesn't have to be FAA as the start point, I think anywhere in ICAO land could have an IMC in this way providing they also had a CAA or JAA PPL to house it.)

[Flyin'Dutch']

Hi Irv

I think that more and more folk will go that way. I certainly am.

FD :cool:

[Fuji Abound]

Irv – the question is why more people don’t transfer their syndicated aircraft to the N reg.

I think there are a few fundamental issues. The first is the only legal route is to place the aircraft in trust, short of having an American citizen in your syndicate who you all trust. Trusts are potentially complicated legal arrangements and whilst there are several specialist companies who deal with aircraft that does not guarantee the particular trust arrangements a given company offers will truly protect your asset should things go wrong. Secondly every member of the syndicate practically requires an FAA license –yes you can fly the aircraft on your JAR licence in the UK but most syndicated members will want to fly in Europe at some time which you cannot do. Yes an FAA license is relatively easy to come by but it is more paperwork to obtain and may make the sale of a members share less attractive because an N reg is an unknown entity. Then the FAA ticket has to be revalidated biannually which means finding an FAA examiner – not difficult, but a bit more difficult than a JAR examiner. Then a maintenance shop has to be found that is FAA certified – again not difficult , but a bit more difficult that CAA shops – and this is always supposing your aircraft will be accepted on the N register; broadly speaking if the aircraft was not manufactured in the States and there is not already one of your type on the N register a difficult if not impossible task. In short there are potentially lots of problems and some not insignificant costs to make the transfer in the first place. On the up side the ongoing costs of the trust are probably not much greater than the saving on doing away with the CAA C of A renewal fees and associated costs.

.. .. .. and all this is presupposing the CAA or FAA at some point dont legislate to prevent N reg aircraft operating in Europe, although I gather the consensus is this would be a difficult piece of legislation to pass and not politically acceptable. Who knows though folowing 9/11. What about every N reg aircraft shall make one landing and one take off in the States in each twelve mont period.

I would far rather see us all campaign for a realistically obtainable and maintainable European IR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[englishal]

which means finding an FAA examiner
or rather an FAA CFI or CFII. There are plenty of those in the UK willing to do the BFR for a few beers and a couple of hours in the air.

I think most members of an FAA sydicate will already be FAA licence holders, which is why they're looking into an N reg syndicate. Its something I've thought about long and hard and will one day do it....

A REALLY [relative term when talking about aircraft] cheap way to import an N reg is from Japan. Japan has some laws saying that after an aircraft is 10 years old, the main wing spar has to be removed and examined. This can cost upto $300,000 for a multi so is rarely worth doing. I know someone who bought a Seneca II in Japan for $15,000, and brought it back to the USA. As these aircraft are invariably built originally in the US, its not too hard to have the N reg reactivated by and FAA inspector. Cost him $25,000 to fly back, $15,000 of which were airline tickets for russian navigators and the FAA inspectors. a cheaper alternative would have been to ship the A/C back, which would have cost $1800 plus associated costs......Probably looking at $60,000 for a reasonable Seneca or similar, flying again on the N reg.

Anyway, there's ways and means....

Cheers
EA:)

[Julian]

You can revalidate your FAA IR in an approved flight training device, much cheaper therefore as have heard of £400 for Seneca I, (although I wouldnt recommend relying on this totally- you want to get in an aircraft at some point after all!) and as has already been pointed out all you need is a CFI not an examiner.

The other option these days which is becoming more attractive is to follow the FAA route and then convert to the JAA. A friend has recently done this and reckons he has saved a good few thousands of pounds- not to mention he now holds two licences rather than one.

I know of one flight school that has just started a Zero-ATPL including 250hrs RHS turbine for $42k (£28k), great if the currently weight restrictioins were not in place although they are working on a similar program which includes 250Hrs RHS of a 737 based in Europe. No prices for this one yet though.