The end of JAA PPL's in the U.S. A ??? [Archive]

englishal

19th Mar 2002, 20:49

Here you go, found the info on the JAA Website, <a href="http://www.jaa.nl/jar/jar/355000/355312/355312.pdf...sorry" target="_blank">http://www.jaa.nl/jar/jar/355000/355312/355312.pdf...sorry</a> the text is a bit messed up, had to copy and paste from .pdf.. .. .Cheers. .EA. .. .SECTION 1 JAR-FCL 1 Subpart H. .[Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 1.300. .Requirements for a specific authorisation for instructors not holding a JAR-FCL licence to. .instruct in a FTO or TRTO outside JAA Member States. .(See JAR-FCL 1.30O(a)(2)(iii)). .1 (a) Instructors seeking to instruct for a JAR-FCL licence including class and instrument ratings shall:. .hold at least a CPL and ratings issued in accordance with ICAO Annex I required by the. .respective non JAA State for the instruction to be given on aircraft registered in that State;. .have completed at least 500 hours of flight time as a pilot of aeroplanes of which at least. .200 hours shall be as a flight instructor relevant to the intended training to be given and meet the. .experience requirements of JAR-FCL 1.330(a), (b), (c), (d) andor (e);. .(iii) have completed in accordance with JAR-FCL the approved relevant course(s) of theoretical. .instruction and flight training. The course may be modified, as approved by the Authority, taking into. .account the previous training and the experience of the applicant, but shall comprise at least 30 hours. .of ground instruction and 15 hours of dual flight instruction performed by a flight instructor holding a. .JAR-FCL licence and rating in accordance with JAR-FCL 1.33O(f);. .(i). .(ii). .(iv) have passed the skill test set out in JAR-FCL 1.345;. .(v) validity period of the authorisation is at the discretion of the Authority but not exceeding. .3 years;. .(vi) revalidation or renewal of any authorisation issued in accordance with para (i) - (iv) above. .The authorisation will be restricted as follows:. .(i) no instruction for the issue of any instructor ratings;. .(ii) no instruction within a JAA Member State;. .(iii) instruction to students only who have sufficient knowledge of the language in which the. .(iv) to those parts of the ATP integrated course where the instructor can demonstrate the. .(v) no instruction for MCC.. .Instructors seeking to instruct for a JAR-FCL type rating shall:. .shall be in accordance with JAR-FCL 1.355.. .(b). .instruction is given;. .experience relevant to the intended training according to l(a)(ii);. .2 (a). .(i) hold at least the licence and ratings issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 1 required by. .the respective non JAA Member State for the instruction to be given on aircraft registered in that State;. .(ii) comply with the experience requirements of JAR-FCL 1.365(a)(2) and (3) in order to act as. .TRI (A) or with JAR-FCL 1.4 1 O(a)(3) and (7) in order to act as SFI(A).. .(iii) have completed as a type rating instructor (TRI(A) or equivalent) at least 100 hours of. .flight or simulator instruction time;. .(iv) validity period of the authorisation is at the discretion of the Authority but not exceeding. .3 years;. .(v) have complied with the revalidation requirements of JAR-FCL 1.370 acting as TRI(A) or. .JAR-FCL 1.4 15 acting as SFI(A).. .(b) The authorisation will be restricted as follows:. .(i). .(ii). .(iii) no instruction for MCC.]. .no instruction for the issue of any instructor ratings;. .instruction to students only who have sufficient knowledge of the language in which the. .instruction is given

Wee Weasley Welshman

20th Mar 2002, 03:27

I was forecasting this 18 months ago. All thats going to happen is that the financial penalty for being able to teach JAA PPL in the USA will mean instructors will have to be paid about 3 times more than normal. . .. .This will add something like £700 to the price of a US JAA PPL. . .. .Not a crippling amount but enough to make the savings negligble.. .. .WWW

GoneWest

20th Mar 2002, 08:19

Wee...not a particularly stunning "forecast" - the JAR rules have been on the cards for way more than 18 months.. .. .Capt. Emerald.....do you "really" think it is a bad thing that the JAA want you to be qualified to teach the subject??. .. .Do the FAA allow any ICAO instructor, from any other Country, to teach FAA pilot license applicants without being an FAA CFI??. .. .Teaching somebody how to operate an aircraft is - I agree - probably the same in most Countries ... pull stick back, cows get smaller ... pull stick back further, cows get bigger again.. .. .Then comes the question of air law. How many FAA instructors have knowledge of JAA air law (quadrantal rule, distance to fly to qualify as a cross country flight, non IFR flights in Class A airspace, altitude limits below airways, Rule 5, no night VFR, etc.). .. .Meterology....freezing levels, mountain fog, carburettor icing, airframe icing, - I'm thinking of the Floridians here...I may give you Thunderstorms (but I have seen a PA28 DEPARTING on a dual training flight, in the midst of a thunderstorm, so maybe I won't).. .. .R/T .... although you disagree with the European procedures and phraseology (even though the FAA and AOPA don't) ... the client that pays your mortgage is still hoping to learn it through you.. .. .Navigation .... not done here the way they want to TEST it for European operations during the clients "check ride". Don't care if "it works here" ...it's not what the client really needs.. .. .Performance, Airframes and Human Factors....well, I'm sure any decent instructor could do those...and the JAA may be quite happy for you to teach it - rather than tell the student to go home with Trevor Thom Book "X" and teach himself. This, however, is not like the FAA - they want you to have a ground instructor qualification...based on the FAA syllabus.. .. .Whilst I am 100% for ICAO instructors teaching ICAO flying to ICAO students in ICAO aircraft in ICAO airspace - all the JAA are asking you to do is to STANDARDIZE with the syllabus that you are meant to be teaching....and I don't find that to be at all questionable.. .. .I know that I, with over 3,000 hours of "dual given" would not be allowed to teach a JAA student in FAA airspace without a full FAA CFI rating (which entails full commercial and instrument rating first). This is way more than the 30 hours of ground school and 15 hours of flight training that the JAA is asking you to do.. .. .Nobody is questioning (at least, not at this point) your ability to teach a student to fly an aircraft. They are simply asking you to partially standardize with the instructors that are fully rated to teach the relevant subject - which YOU, apparently, are not.. .. .I don't think this is unfair.

Wee Weasley Welshman

20th Mar 2002, 12:58

GoneWest - I know it was hardly Mystic Meg stuff but although the they said they might do this it was highly debateable whether they ever would for some time.. .. .I am glad that they have as it levels the playing field somewhat. Unfortunate that it increases the costs in the short term.. .. .A couple of thousand extra PPL courses being conducted in the UK will do wonders for UK FI's, schools and GA. . .. .WWW

clear prop!!!

20th Mar 2002, 14:02

Gone West. .. .Some very valid and well put points.. .. .Having said that I firmly believe that there will still be a place for JAA training in the USA, provided,the syllabus is being properly taught.. .. .What on earth is wrong with US intructors having to be qualified in onder to teach the JAA syllabus. As an instructor here, I can't jump into an N reg plane and teach the FAA sylabus any more than an FAA instructor should be allowed to teach JAA.. .. .That said my FIRST HAND experience of USA training is that it is first class in the main. However, if the customer goes out there to train for flying over here it is only right that their instructor is fully conversant with JAA practice.. .. .The problem will still be that there are elements of the JAA syllabus and RT that you can't use in US airspace.. .. .WWW where on earth do you get your £700 (nearly 20%!) extra on the price of a PPL from???. .. .I have no doubt that our US instructor cousins will do what we instructors over here do...stump up the cash for additional ratings in order to remain employable in a difficult market. Will they be paid any more? well what do you think!?. .. .Wouldn't it be nice if us underworked underpaid UK instructors could take advantage of the situation and teach JAA over there? Sadly not on unless you add a FAA CPL,IR and FI to your already overpriced list of credentials!.. even if you only teach JAA PPL.. .. .Works both ways!. . . . [ 20 March 2002, 10:10: Message edited by: clear prop!!! ]

Wee Weasley Welshman

20th Mar 2002, 14:41

In the same way as IMC rated instructors charge a premium so will JAA approved FI's in the States. There will be a significant cost and effort involved in getting JAA Approved and they will rightly seek compensation for this. . .. .Will they have to maintain the JAA approval with checkrides/seminars I wonder?. .. .If they charged about £15hr premium like IMC instructors do then that would world out at about £700 on a 45hr course.. .. .Maybe. Depends a bit on supply and demand of course.. .. .As I have said many many times. If you can - train PPL CPL and IR at the same school in the same aircraft with the same instructors. It makes that IRT a whole lot easier and THAT is the hurdle you should be focussed on from day one.. .. .WWW

englishal

20th Mar 2002, 14:58

Just like to point out that the JAA has been around...ooh, a few years, and the FAA has been around for donkeys years. . .. .I think it is fair enough that FAA pilots become fully clued up on the JARs etc through a ground course, but is it really nescessary having to do 30 hrs flying and the FI rating? Its Boll@cks, another way for the JAA to keep jobs for the boys (and girls). After all, flying is flying, whether it be in the US, UK or Mongolia. Oh, and 'freezing levels' are the same regardless, you don't have to be a super-JAA-Instructor to realise this. Actually, most FAA CFIs are probably better qualified to teach PPL flying, after all, most of them already have a IR as well as a CPL before getting the CFI rating (and often they get the CFII pretty soon too). I've flown with numerous instructors in the UK who posses just a CPL FI(R)and IMC rating...know which I'd rather be flying with in marginal weather (and its important for students to experience marginal weather).. .. .Ok, rant over. Now for the positive points. 1) The JAA PPL will probably not be around for too long, before the CAA takes control again, and I forecast that they will be more likely to allow ICAO FIs to train for the UK PPL. 2) In the mean time, it opens up the possibilities of issuing the H1 (specialist) visa to JAA FIs to teach in the US, as there will be insufficient FAA CFIs with the JAA FI rating to train JAA students..... .. .Cheers. .EA

rolling circle

20th Mar 2002, 17:22

englishal - having taken the trouble to cut and paste the appropriate requirements, it's a pity you didn't read them. The requirement is not for 30 hrs flight training, only 15.. .. .Whilst your forecast of the JAA's life expectancy may or may not be true, it is already clear that it will not be the UK CAA that takes control of its licensing but the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). As an EU Agency, EASA will be able to enshrine the JAA requirements into EU law, removing what little flexibility the UK CAA now claims. It is likely that most licensing functions will be transferred to EASA HQ, probably in Belgium or the Netherlands, leaving the UK FCL as no more than a regional office, somewhat akin to a FAA FSDO. It is a little understood fact that plans are well advanced for this bureaucratic nightmare, which is due to take over responsibility for all EU states' flight crew licensing within a few years.. .. .As to the requirements for non-JAA instructors teaching for the JAA PPL in non-JAA countries, let's consider level playing fields.. .. .When JAR-FCL 1 was first published, the US government immediately recognised the protectionist nature of the requirements concerning principle place of business (JAR-FCL 1.055) and the restriction of overseas training to all or part of the ATP integrated course (App 1b to JAR-FCL 1.055). In an effort to cut the ground from under the feet of the JAA at an upcoming GATT meeting, FARs were hurriedly amended to allow training for FAA licences to take place outside the US. However, were a non-FAA FI to wish to instruct for the FAA PPL outside the US, the FAA required said instructor to hold, as a minimum, a FAA Commercial, IR and CFI and to instruct under the auspices of a FAA approved training organisation.. .. .Since everything about the FAA is so perfect, we should obviously follow their example and require non-JAA instructors to hold, as a minimum, a JAA PPL, pass the CPL knowledge exams and hold a JAA FI(R) before being permitted to teach for the JAA PPL.

Wee Weasley Welshman

20th Mar 2002, 17:39

Large round of applause for Rolling Circle. The issue is far more complicated than many people realise until you've actually been a flying instructor in JAA world and watched your potential customers nip over stateside where you yourself are not allowed.. .. .WWW. . . . [ 20 March 2002, 13:43: Message edited by: Wee Weasley Welshman ]

BEagle

20th Mar 2002, 19:13

Thank you, RC, for such a very clear resume of the whole situation regarding insruction towards the JAR/FCL PPL being conducted in a non-JAA member state.. .. .The following advice was recently given by the CAA to anyone considering going to a non-JAA member state for JAR/FCL PPL training:. . . ."Information regarding PPL/A training in the USA or a non-JAA State 05 March 2002 . . . .In September 1999 the CAA was approved by the JAA to issue licences in accordance with JAR-FCL 1 requirements. Since then, there has been a great deal of communication with all overseas flight training providers, to advise on existing and forthcoming requirements. Subsequently, under Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 14, now adopted, JAR-FCL 1 has developed to require the approval of overseas PPL schools and the training of their Flight Instructors. The target date set for compliance is 31 March 2002, from which date PPL schools are required to be approved and to apply the required training to FI’s.. .. .Before committing yourself, or someone you wish to sponsor, to a course of training towards the JAA PPL(A) conducted in the USA or other non-JAA State, likely to be completed beyond the 31st March 2002, you should ascertain that: . .. .1. The Organisation offering the PPL(A) course has been approved by the UK CAA or another JAA State and . .. .2. The FI providing individual instruction meets the requirements of the UK CAA.. .. .At the commencement of, and during the PPL(A) course of training, the student or sponsor should ensure that any change of Flight Instructor complies with the requirements.. .. .It is appreciated that there may be a natural reluctance to ask these question but the cost of the PPL(A) course is a considerable investment. Please ensure that you invest wisely and ask questions.. .. .The list of approved training schools issued by the CAA covers those with an issued approval. There are numerous other schools whose approval issue is in the system awaiting final confirmation. It is therefore vital that you speak directly with the training provider.". .. . Of course you could always go to the USA for FAA training and subsequently fly day VFR over here....

englishal

20th Mar 2002, 20:43

...or get an FAA IR and fly an N reg IFR over here of course...... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="tongue.gif" /> . .. . <blockquote>quote:<hr />Whilst your forecast of the JAA's life expectancy may or may not be true, it is already clear that it will not be the UK CAA that takes control of its licensing but the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). As an EU Agency, EASA will be able to enshrine the JAA requirements into EU law, removing what little flexibility the UK CAA now claims. It is likely that most licensing functions will be transferred to EASA HQ, probably in Belgium or the Netherlands, leaving the UK FCL as no more than a regional office, somewhat akin to a FAA FSDO. It is a little understood fact that plans are well advanced for this bureaucratic nightmare, which is due to take over responsibility for all EU states' flight crew licensing within a few years. <hr /></blockquote>As BEagle points out in another thread, EASA will probably not bother themselves with a PPL, leaving it in the capable hands of the CAA.... .. .Cheers. .EA. . . . [ 20 March 2002, 17:12: Message edited by: englishal ]

Capt.Emerald

20th Mar 2002, 21:12

As a newbie to this site I would like to thank englishal for answering my questions. I have done some research myself, what I have found at the CAA web site is:. .<a href="http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/175/SRG_FCL_ApprovedFTOs.pdf" target="_blank">web page</a> Organisations conducting CAA and JAR-FCL approved courses of flight and ground training. On page 5 of this document there is a subheading: JAR-FCL 1 PRIVATE PILOT LICENCE (AEROPLANE) Approved by the UK CAA for training for JAR-FCL 1 PPL (A) outside of a JAR member state. It only lists 3 European Flight Training, Orlando Flight Training and Flight Training College of Africa (Pty) Limited. I am only sure that 1 of these schools is in the U.S. How has my school and the others in the U.S. been conducting JAA PPL training ? I have also found on the JAA web site that one of it's goals was to harmonize with the FAA. To me these new regulations seem to be the opposite. I started this thread for help with some questions, now that it has become a debate and a chance for some of you to lecture me, I would like to respond. The FAA does give credit for instruction conducted by ICAO instructors toward FAA ratings no matter what country it was conducted in and always has. As for a JAA insrtuctor comming to the states to instruct, I am not allowed to go to the U.K. and instruct or work either. I do see a need for standardazation, I belive this can be done on the ground and was at my school 1/60 rule ect. I also thought there was a checks and balance system in place, it is called a skill test. Maybe the JAA/CAA should look at their examiners more closely if they have no faith in the training being conducted in the U.S. September 11 has hurt avation world wide, now is a time to unite not devide!!!

rolling circle

20th Mar 2002, 21:41

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> As BEagle points out in another thread, EASA will probably not bother themselves with a PPL, leaving it in the capable hands of the CAA.... . <hr /></blockquote>That is not the opinion of the member of the EASA implementation team that I spoke to last week.. .. . <blockquote>quote:<hr /> How has my school and the others in the U.S. been conducting JAA PPL training ? <hr /></blockquote>Not in accordance with the provisions of JAR-FCL1, which is why the French, among others, have been able to refuse to recognise UK issued JAA licences. If you read BEagle's last post you will see that the requirement for approval takes effect on 31 March 2002. After this date the UK CAA will accept applications for PPLs from students of only those non-JAA training organisations approved in accordance with JAR-NPA14.. . . . [ 20 March 2002, 17:57: Message edited by: rolling circle ]

BEagle

20th Mar 2002, 22:46

RC - originally Ear$eA's intention was not to bother with things at PPL level, but that seems to have changed of late. And guess what - they are even becoming interested in a harmonised NPPL..... I wouldn't want to see that - we should stick to the NPPL being a simple Day VFR-in-the-UK fly-for-fun licence and the JAR/FCL PPL being a first step towards professional licensing, IMC or Night flying.. .. .There is a JAA/FAA harmonisation group, but it's a long, long way from coming up with full licence reciprocity agreements!

clear prop!!!

21st Mar 2002, 01:14

WWW, An EXTRA £15 an hour for instructors....in the real World?...I don't think so!!!!!!. .. .If that is the case I'm off on the next charter flight to see Richard!!. .. .Having re-read the posts on this thread, we've all missed something! That is that Capt Emerald has lost his job. For missing that, I for one apologise and wish you all the best mate. We have either all been there or close to it... good luck to you. I, as I'm sure we all do, hope that things work out.

DesiPilot

21st Mar 2002, 08:07

Rolling Circle,. .. .Correct me if I am wrong! Students can still go to USA, do their FAA PPL's. Since they will have less then 45 hours, take all the seven JAA PPL written exams and take the PPL skill test with JAA examiner. . .Wait for 5-6 weeks for their original FAA PPL to be issued and apply for conversion to JAA PPL. I do not see how JAA or EASA can stop the training that way!!. .Extra cost to student? One FAA written exam and one extra FAA flight test, may be $300-$350. The students walk away with two unrestricted licences.. .. .Am I wrong?

BEagle

21st Mar 2002, 11:04

Before 31 Mar 02, you would probably be correct. After that, no - the flight training would only count if conducted by a FI who meets the revised requirements at a school which also meets the revised requirements. Hence such pilots with FAA PPLs would have to fly on that licence in the UK with the associated restrictions, including finding someone to conduct a biennial flight review if they haven't achieved the conversion requirements within the 2 years from the date of FAA PPL issue.. . . . [ 21 March 2002, 07:05: Message edited by: BEagle ]

Sensible

21st Mar 2002, 12:39

BEagle, Do you or does anyone know what the "conversion requirements" for an FAA to JAA licence are?

Naples Air Center, Inc.

21st Mar 2002, 18:54

Sensible,. .. .To convert an FAA PPL into a JAA PPL you need.. .. .Pilots with an FAA PPL and less than 100TT:. .. .7 Writtens and a Skill Test. .. .Pilots with an FAA PPL and over 100TT: . .. .2 Writtens and a Skill Test . .(Air Law & HPL). .. .Hope this Helps,. .. .Capt. Richard J. Gentil, Pres.. .Naples Air Center, Inc.

BEagle

21st Mar 2002, 22:30

Thanks Richard - I didn't have time to confirm that this morning!. .. .One should perhaps add that with 100 hr TT, the JAR/FCL PPL Skill Test shouldn't present any difficulty to a FAA PPL holder, HP&L wouldn't be difficult at all, Air Law would be a bit of a bore but fairly straightforward!. .. .So perhaps the way ahead is to concentrate on FAA PPLs in the US and JAR/FCL PPLs in Euroland? Until, that is, true licensing reciprocity is achieved>

GoneWest

22nd Mar 2002, 06:56

Richard...THREE writtens...R/T written (but not, necessarily, practical).

Naples Air Center, Inc.

22nd Mar 2002, 09:01

GoneWest,. .. .Please break down all the scenarios.. .. .Thanx,. .. .Richard

Capt.Emerald

22nd Mar 2002, 19:22

After reviewing the information I gathered from this thread I became encouraged and went to my boss with the news and proposal to do FAA PPL's then convert them to JAA PPL's. He quickly burst my bubble and pointed me in the direction of the general information document #21 from the CAA web site: <a href="http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/175/srg_fcl_gid21.pdf" target="_blank">CAA web page</a> . .. .I read the document and become confused, then he explained to me what it stated. With an ICAO PPL and 100 hrs. of flight time in aeroplanes the conversion could be completed by a approved flight training organization with only the airlaw, human performance, radio telephony written exams, and a skill test. With out the 100 hrs. of flight time the applicant would have to do all the written exams, the 25 hrs. of dual instruction with an approved JAA/JAR instructor and skill test. So it looks like a U.S. JAA PPL will either be done at an approved JAR/FCL school or it will be a 100 hr JAA PPL or 65 hr PPL IE: 40 hr FAA PPL with 25 hrs. of instruction with a JAA instructor = 65 hrs. There are 2 sections in GID #21, one being credits from flight training the other credits for ground examinations. Looks like I still need to find a job on March 31st.

rolling circle

22nd Mar 2002, 20:04

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> So it looks like a U.S. JAA PPL will either be done at an approved JAR/FCL school or it will be a 100 hr JAA PPL or 65 hr PPL IE: 40 hr FAA PPL with 25 hrs. of instruction with a JAA instructor = 65 hrs. <hr /></blockquote>Yup, sure does. Of course there's always the normal 45 hour route via a Registered Facility within a JAA Member State, and with interest being shown in JAA membership by a number of South American states, South Africa and Singapore, you never know...

Sensible

22nd Mar 2002, 23:12

Thanks for that explanation Richard. So, in reality a Brit can go to the USA, get an FAA PPL and then do a small amount of hour building to 100 hours and can then come back over to the UK and convert to a JAA license taking only HPL, Air Law and the RT exam! I can't see that that is a real problem to a serious pilot. Still seems a route far more preferable and less time consuming than waiting for the weather in the UK and in any event, the extra hour building would be very beneficial to a low hours pilot. . .. .I note that Capt.Emerald assisted by Rolling Circle has introduced an additional requirement of 25 hrs. of instruction with a JAA instructor !!!????? Is this true?

Naples Air Center, Inc.

23rd Mar 2002, 02:54

There seems to be some confusion as to exactly what GID No 21 says. According to Version 05 (10/12/01):. .. .PART 2 FLYING TRAINING/EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS. .. .Credits from Flying Training . .. . <blockquote>quote:<hr /> Any previous flying experience in single engine-piston (Land) aeroplanes gained during incompleted PPL(A) courses may be counted towards the 45 hour minima required for the grant of a JAR-FCL PPL(A), however the specific requirements under JAR-FCL (25 hours dual instruction and 10 hours supervised solo-flight. .time) must be completed in the state under whose authority the training and testing are carried out. <hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr /> The holder of a current and valid PPL(A) issued by an ICAO Contracting State (not being a JAA Member State), who has flown a minimum of 100 hours as pilot of aeroplanes, is credited the flying requirements, except the PPL(A) Skill Test. <hr /></blockquote>PART 3 THEORETICAL KNOWLEDGE EXAMINATION REQUIREMENTS. .. .Credits from Ground Examinations . .. . <blockquote>quote:<hr /> The holder of a current and valid PPL(A) issued by an ICAO Contracting State (not being a JAA Member State), who has flown a minimum of 100 hours as pilot of aeroplanes, is credited the examinations in Navigation & Radio Aids, Meteorology, Aircraft (General) & Principles of Flight and Flight Performance & Planning. (If no aeroplane rating has been held in the 5 years preceding application, then all JAR theoretical knowledge exams would need to be passed. If no aeroplane rating has been held for a period exceeding 5 years preceding application, an assessment of your flying experience will be required).. .. .The holder of a current and valid PPL(A) issued by an ICAO Contracting State (not being a JAA Member State), who has flown less than the minimum of 100 hours as pilot of aeroplanes, will be required to pass all JAR theoretical knowledge examinations. <hr /></blockquote>Where people are getting confused is on the first paragraph I quoted. Please note it only applies to "incompleted PPL(A) courses". At that point you can return and have your time count, but you need to meet the requirement of "(25 hours dual instruction and 10 hours supervised solo-flight time)" as per the JAR-FCL. Furthermore the 25 Dual and 10 Solo "must be completed in the state under whose authority the training and testing are carried out.". .. .Hope that clears the issue,. .. .Capt. Richard J. Gentil, Pres.. .Naples Air Center, Inc.

BEagle

23rd Mar 2002, 03:21

Sensible - yes, 100% correct. That was confirmed to me today by the CAA! FAA PPL + 100 hrs TT + 3 exams + JAR Skill Test would get you a JAR/FCL PPL. You could also get your 100 TT in the UK on your FAA licence under Day VFR, of course.. .. .But would it be cheaper than doing the training in the UK or another JAA member state in the first place? I don't know - but your hours-building would probably be easier with an FAA licence in the US!. . . . [ 22 March 2002, 23:23: Message edited by: BEagle ]

GoneWest

23rd Mar 2002, 07:26

Richard - there are no multiple scenarios to post.. .. .All I was saying (Give Peace A Chance??....No!!)...was that candidate has to pass written exam for R/T (as well as Air Law and Human Remains) but not, necessarily, the R/T practical test.. .. .I also remember reading - on the CAA site - that an ICAO PPL with less than 100 hours can convert to JAA PPL if they pass ALL SEVEN writtens and a skill test.. .. .So brand new FAA PPL is O.K.!! However, "Temporary Airmans Certificate" is not valid for JAA licence application - it has to be the real thing (which, as an aside, is issued much quicker now than it was last year).

Sensible

23rd Mar 2002, 12:50

Thanks for the clarification BEagle. What is easy for you professional guys is often so confusing for mere mortals like myself! . .. .Richard, how does the new rules affect training at such places as Naples Air Centre? presumably students can only train for the FAA licence and hour build on either an FAA or JAA licence. . .. .Is it likely that there will be any changes in the future which will enaable pilots to train at Naples for the JAA licence?

DesiPilot

23rd Mar 2002, 20:37

Sensible,. .. .The only way a school can conduct a JAA PPL is if their instructors have undergone the required training. The problem is the high turnover of instructors. If we were to hire someone with JAA FI rating, they would be required to convert to FAA ratings before they can teach. . .The way JAA and now EASA has been changing rules I wont be surprised if the rules change again. It is a big gamble and seems like all the FTO's and registered facilities in the USA are willing to take it. . .I specifically asked the same question whilst CAA inspector was visiting us (Britannia). He also mentioned that we can train for FAA PPL, have the students take all the seven written exams and take the JAA skill test with JAA examiner. It is perfectly legal, and as mentioned earlier in my post the student will walk away with two unrestricted licenses. The main question is how feasible it is to do two licenses? Given the time period of three weeks, if students do not do pre-course studies, it will be almost impossible to do the two license in three weeks period.. .As quoted by Richard, Beagle and others if you are a holder of ICAO license, and have less then 100 hours, you will be required to take all written exams and flight test. One thing everyone seemed to miss is that CAA will not accept the Temporary Airmen Certificate for converion. So the student will have to wait until he/she receives original issuence by FAA.. .I hope this clarifies.

BEagle

23rd Mar 2002, 21:43

Another point is that the ICAO licence must be current for the 100hrs TT route to be available. So the FAA PPL holder wishing to convert to a JAR/FCL PPL by achieving 100TT and sitting 2 exams plus a RT exam would need to do so within 2 years of FAA PPL issue or find someone to conduct a Biennial Flight Review! 2 years and 1 day = invalid licence = no conversion, it would seem.

Meeb

24th Mar 2002, 05:01

The idea of students doing a FAA PPL and then undertaking the writtens and skill test to achieve a JAR PPL is a non-starter as the school would still have to be approved for the examiner to conduct the tests, so they may as well train from the start for the JAR licence. The student could of course do the exams on return to the UK, but cost wise I doubt there would be much overall saving. I believe overseas JAR training is entering a new phase, where there will be a handful of USA schools who will gain a good reputation for playing by the rules, and certain others will just fade away... hopefully!

Chuck Ellsworth

24th Mar 2002, 05:29

Meeb:. .. .You have aroused my curiosity, what exactly do you mean by "play by the rules".. .. .When comparing the training standards around the world and the rules, I doubt anyone even understands what "the rules" are. One thing I am sure of the JAR - JAR, fiasco is driving you people out of aviation.. .. .Mind you I am not suggesting you are to blame, however I wouldn't get to concerned about "the rules" if they are counter productive to aviation.. .. .Just my take on it.. .. .May I add I feel sorry for what JAA - JAR is doing to you and your Country.. .. .................. . <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" />

DesiPilot

24th Mar 2002, 10:06

Meeb,. .. .The schools could still be approved but unable to do the JAA flight training as the Flight instructor conducting the training must have completed half the FI(r) course and taken a flight test with an FIE. The sad thing is that they do not receive any rating for it, just paper work confirming that they have done the test.. .. .I am sure the schools or the instructors will spend the money towards the instructors training. One thing to note here is that the cost of flight training will go up in USA. Also the fact that no one knows how long will this rule last?. .. .I agree that not many schools in USA will not comply with this rule, may be just to keep the cost of PPL down. But do you think that the UK school's will be able to catre to all the students? and I am not talking about infrastructure, I am talking about the lovely British weather!!!

GoneWest

25th Mar 2002, 08:09

...and, Meeb, I am told that the school needs only to be approved (registered) to hold the written papers for the ground examinations.. .. .If "Bloggs" goes to local UK flight school, passes all seven written exams, goes to america, does full FAA licence, then sits skill test with any JAA Flight Examiner (at any U.S. school - approved or not) they will receive full JAA licence....as well as full FAA licence.. .. .Sounds confusing - but still slightly cheaper and still MUCH QUICKER for those who (unfortunately) think the course should be finished in three to four weeks.

BEagle

25th Mar 2002, 11:45

Perhaps. But 'Bloggs' would have to join the local flying club, attend groundschool and then pass the ground exams. Most flying clubs offer 'discounted' rates for exams conducted for their own PPL students, but a special course and exams for someone expecting to go straight to the USA after passing? It might end up being charged at a non-discounted rate, perhaps? If you get my drift, squire......... .. ."You want to join us, do all the groundschool, sit the exams and then go to the US for your flying training? Certainly Sir, that'll be £100 to join, £25 per hour for groundschool, £25 per exam........"

jmore

27th Mar 2002, 10:33

laughable only way to describe it all! ok so with my instructing experience i am not the most highly qualified guy in either faa or jaa circles but i have the commercial and an ir and a multi ir and other silly bits of paper that entitle me to fly a multitude of very nice little things with fans on the front in several configurations -the new jar regs effective march 31st are hilarious -ok i'll come back to the uk and do my fi course there that you want me to do but once i have spent that 15 hrs dual with an instructor and done the 30 hours groundschool i take your checkride only to be told that i can only teach those jaa ppl students that wish to fly in america and that i cannot in fact teach it in britain using the course i have just taken (which incidentally is identical to a british fi requirements check flight). .i thought it was raining but nope theyre pissing down yer back!

Wee Weasley Welshman

27th Mar 2002, 14:05

I think the broad strategy is clear. PPL's done Stateside are to be stamped out whilst over here the NPPL makes pleasure flying training affordable. All training for professional purposes to be conducted in JAA schools in JAA countries following a JAA syllabus.. .. .Looks good to me.. .. .WWW

Julian

27th Mar 2002, 17:57

JAA syllabus in a JAA aproved school OK, but why a JAA country WWW? Are you going to therefore advocate shutting down any UK based schools that offer FAA training? If done properly then what is the problem with training Stateside?. .. .GA in the UK is still expensive compared to abroad and I fail to see how the NPPL can claim to make flying affordable except in prehaps the initial licence issue - which we all know will take more than the minimums in the average case. It would be interesting to see if students dont convert to a full PPL and then go Stateside to hour build anyway! Or just get the NPPL, become disillusioned and jack it all in!!!!. .. .Julian.

Wee Weasley Welshman

27th Mar 2002, 19:20

There are no schools offering FAA in the UK (well there are two tiny ones).. .. .I advocate protectionism of the UK GA Flight Training market within the boundaries of JAA member states.. .. .JAA and the EU is supposedly a trading block. The USA uses tax incentives on fuel and subsidy of GA to give its flight training a competitive advantage. This costs jobs in the UK flight training industry and undermines the development and expansion of UK (or JAA) GA flight training.. .. .Its all very well saving a few quid on your PPL course by going to the States but then you shouldn't cry about their being no Flying Instructors jobs for you in this country once you have that coveted CPL.. .. .People are always saying that GA is dying in this country. To right. Because America is bleeding it dry. I am all for fair competition between member states within JAA.. .. .WWW

rolling circle

27th Mar 2002, 19:30

Don't forget that the only reason that there is any JAA training in the USA (except for integrated ATP training by OAT, Lufthansa, et al) is because the UK government has elected to ignore JARs and the fact that they are able to since JARs are Requirements and not Regulations. After much lobbying, the JAR Committee reluctantly agreed to the NPA-14 proposal to allow JAA PPL training to take place outside of JAA Member States but all other modular training is still approved only by the UK and is not recognised as valid by other Member States.. .. .The big change on the horizon is, of course, EASA which will be a horse of a quite different colour. Whereas the Joint Aviation Requirements did not automatically become enforceable in law, EASA's regulations will be. Not only that, but they will be enshrined in European law which, as has been proved so recently, now takes absolute precedence over UK national law. The UK will, therefore, lose all control over its aviation law and will be unable to exercise its liberal attitude to 'overseas' training. European law will be determined by a majority vote of EU states, who are universally opposed to such training.. .. .The implications are immense - not only is it likely to become illegal to carry out JAA training in the USA, the current UK practice of allowing UK national ATPL credits to be carried forward for JAA ATPL issue (under an arguable interpretation of EC Directive 91/670/EEC) is also under threat.. .. .In short, don't complain too much about the current requirements - these are the good times!

slim_slag

27th Mar 2002, 19:49

www . .. .I advocate protectionism of the UK GA Flight Training market within the boundaries of JAA member states. . .. .This makes no sense. Anyway, there are JAA states which can undercut the UK, do you want to stop Eastern countries joining JAA?. .. .It makes perfect sense as the EU is a trading block as is the NAFTA. Tarrifs and barriers exist between them on everything you can think of apart from PPL training. I am happy for Eastern bloc countries to join JAA and compete. Because I as a Brit JAA license holder have the right to go there and work for their successful school. A right I do not have in Florida. Spain and Italy with lower fuel taxes and better weather should be leaders in Flight training in JAA. Perhaps the Northern countries can compete with a better experience pool or infrastructure. Who knows? Let the free market decide. Many of my colleagues in Jerez had worked in the US teaching people. They were all kicked out after 2 years as their permits expired.... .. .The USA uses tax incentives on fuel and subsidy of GA to give its flight training a competitive advantage. . .. .You don't understand how the US works. They don't subsidise GA and don't look at GA flight training as something to compete with JAA on. In general the US doesn't give a damn about JAA, most people haven't even heard of it. Most Yanks don't even know we have airlines in Europe!!!!! <img border="0" title="" alt="" src="biggrin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> . .. .[b]Never said they do give a damn. They do subsidise GA with, for example, huge ex-mil airfields released to GA users at peppercorn rents. They also have lower taxation on all aspects of the business.. .. .GA in the US is a totally different kettle of fish to the UK. You should try it out.. .. .I understand that US federal taxes on avgas approximate to the cost of providing services to GA aircraft. I shall try to find a link.. .. .I may well try it out somtime thanks.. .. .Because America is bleeding it dry . .. .Bollox. The US is not bleeding GA dry, the UK goverment with it's taxation policies and the regulatory bodies are. The US provides an opportunity for wanabees to get some really good experience in a GA friendly country at a decent price. Why would you want to prevent a young impoverished kid from being able to log that?. .. .I want to stop that impoverished kid from denying himself a first job as a flying instructor in a country that will not throw him out as a foreigner after two years. The EU has higher taxes and higher public spending than the US. This is a democratic political decision. Just like I dislike economic migrants coming to this country to take advantage of the welfare state, so I dislike another country not in our polticial or economic union, undercutting our jobs. Steel industry anyone!? . .. .The only protectionism I can see here is that of established JAA airmen who will undoubtably have a more secure job if there are no wannabees coming up through the ranks because they cannot afford to train anymore.. .. .Hmm, with the schools full of students and hundreds and hundreds unemployed low time pilots in the UK alone I don't think there is a Masterplan to arrange a choke on the labour supply. I doubt the maximum £2000 saving on a US PPL will see the numbers entering the profession slump!. .. .All I hear is a US citizen trying to protect his lucrative supply of EU professiona pilot training. The NPPL will be as cheap as a US PPL for the pleasure flyer.. .. .Cheers, WWW. . . . [ 28 March 2002, 15:25: Message edited by: Wee Weasley Welshman ]

msrogerson

27th Mar 2002, 20:16

S_S I agree entirely. People seem to neglect the fact that if there are more people with licences in their hand, there are more people that can fly. . .Surely this can't be bad for GA, even if the initial training is done abroad.. . <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> . .. .The NPPL addresses the problems for those just wishing to be a pleasure flyer. Millions of pounds a year is spent in Florida rather than this country by Brits on flying training. That money would stimulate investment in schools, clubs, aircraft and personnel if it were to be redirected. Which is what I advocate.. . . . [ 28 March 2002, 15:30: Message edited by: Wee Weasley Welshman ]

theRolfe2

27th Mar 2002, 20:29

I advocate protectionism of the UK GA Flight Training market within the boundaries of JAA member states.. .. .JAA and the EU is supposedly a trading block. The USA uses tax incentives on fuel and subsidy of GA to give its flight training a competitive advantage. This costs jobs in the UK flight training industry and undermines the development and expansion of UK (JAA) GA flight training.. .. .What 'tax incentives' would those be? The US doesn't levy the same levels of taxation on hydrocarbon fuels that europe does. That's not the same as a tax incentive. . .. .What else would you call it!?. .. .Flight training in the US undountably benefits from the lack of user fees but this is a nationwide thing - if it were a conspiracy to undermine european flight training why are the feds paying to support airfields in North Dakota where there is almost no foreign flight training?. .. .[i]So thats subsidy then[/b]. .. . I could also argue that free healthcare in Europe subsidises european flight training as US residents pay $200-$300 a month in healthcare premiums.. .. .And UK citizens spend $200 - $300 a month in healthcare premiums called National Insurance. Which pays for a universal health care free at the point of use.. .. .The Uk flight training industry has no 'right' to exist any more than Scragil's miners had 'rights' to jobs. . .. .Yes it does - as a strategic asset to UK Plc. If we let the US dominate all training and then they closed their border to all pilots as per Sept11th then they could choke of the supply of pilots and ground EU aviation.. .. .It's continued existance is dependant on offering a product people want at a price they are prepared to pay. It doesn't appear to be doing this at the PPL level. . .. .Yes. Within the common trading bloc and political bloc that we are a member of i.e. JAA and EU. We are not in NAFTA.. .. .You seem to have adopted the position that it's an integral part of British society and that those awful americans are seeking to undermine it. It's not the fault of the US that british weather sucks, fuel is overpriced, the JAA is complicated and confusing and that it takes an incredibly long time to get an entry level licence in the UK.. .. .I don't blame American schools and instructors at all. They have lower costs and therefore lower prices and therefore nick our customers. If we were in NAFTA then fine. But we aren't, we are in the EU. If we have to work under EU harmonised regs and employment practices we should not be expected to compete with the US.. .. .I'm amazed that someone such as yourself who is supposed to like aviation can be so happy at the thought of JAA training being 'stamped out' overseas.. .. .It will simply return home, my local field will become busier and GA in the UK/JAA will expand.. .. .Don't think that all the people who now go to Florida will now do their training in the the UK so that another generation of Wee Weasley Welshmen can build time and get jobs as first officers. . .. .The NPPL will be cheaper so that the pleasure flyers will won't need Florida prices. The extra £1,500 it will cost a professional on the bottom rung will not be enough to exclude anyone. The JAA integrated ATPL courses are actually cheaper than the old 509 system so the extra cost is already taken care of if one take a perspective over the last decade. Personally I think it better if someone - modular or integrated - trains with the same organisation/instructor from zero to IR.. .. .Some of them will opt to train in the UK but a lot will just not bother or get FAA licences and find an N registered plane to fly. The purpose of flight training is to train people who want to fly, not employ flight instructors. You seem to forget that every now and then <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="smile.gif" /> .. .. .Fine, if they want to get FAA licenses and fly FAA planes then thats up to them. I can't teach that or fly those anyway so its no lose to me. If they wish to convert to JAA then I will do them a conversion. They get no concession so its again no loss to me. Its just more cost for them. Todays student PPL's are tomorrows Flying Instructors. I rarely forget anything - not least of all that I voluntarily taught people to fly in my spare time for no fee for many years. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="smile.gif" /> . .. .Has it ever occured to you that if Europe practised the level of protectionism that you appear to favour your employer would not have been able to afford 737's (import tariffs of those evil American Airplanes!) and would have to have gone to the sole european supplier - Airbus - for their airplanes? Airbus could charge *whatever they wanted*. Your job might not exist. Be careful what you wish for.... .. .A somewhat tangental analysis. Its not favouritism its fair trade. If you want to fly JAA licensed aircraft on a JAA license you should train within the JAA. Its a simple proposition and the PPL is an indulgence that occurred many years ago when the number were low. Its now a big business and our fellow member states are pressing us to close the loophole. The French have a strong case and they will get it stamped out.. .. .theRolfe. .. .[WWW]. . . . [ 28 March 2002, 16:00: Message edited by: Wee Weasley Welshman ]

englishal

27th Mar 2002, 20:31

Hmm, seems like some sour grapes amongst the 'established' airmen if you ask me. Just because you spent 60k on your 'frozen' ATPL, why should other, some may say brighter, people be disadvantaged in the same way?. .. .That can't be me you are talking about as my ATPL cost me £16,500. I am not talking about the past. It might have been very sensible for people to go to the US and get a PPL Night and Hour Build. Not disputing that. Its not the same thing to say that you want this unfair anomaly of international aviation regulation closed. As it will be if the French have their way. Which will be good for UK GA and for Wannabes trying to find work as a FI.. .. .Beagle, there is no need to join a flying club in the UK to do the JAR ground exams. There is a guy in Bournemouth who does them for around 300 quid for the lot in a few days. US Flying clubs offer these exams as part of the course, so will adjust their costs accordingly. Secondly, FAA Lazergrade exams will set you back about $75, and an FAA PPL skills test around $150, so at the end of the day, all people will do is go to the US, train for the FAA PPL, and the day FAA skill test is passed, do the JAA skill test with a JAA examiner (as you are given your FAA licence straight away, unlike the uk), and hey presto, two licences for little more than it would currently cost for the JAA licence.. .. .But who wants 2 licenses? Why not just save the airfare and accomodation and use the airfield down the road? Most students who are bright enough to go on to the ATPL and a career can pass the JAA PPL exams with nothing more than a second hand set of Trevor Thom books, a PPL confuser book of questions, a few questions to their FI and £10 per paper at their local school (its what mine charged).. .. .Secondly, FAA BFR is no big deal. Just need an hour with an FAA instructor, in any aircraft, in any country. I'm sure a few of those are available in the UK who will be happy to do it for the price of a few beers....in fact I know of quite a few. And if your FAA licence is 'invalid' due to lack of BFR in two years, again, all you need is a check flight with an instructor to re-validate.. .. .WWW, in fact there are FAA schools in the UK (and Europe), and in fact I did my FAA IR ground exams with one. You can do the FAA GFT, BFR, IRC, etc etc you only have to look in the back of Pilot of Flyer to see people offering FAA ratings in the UK....although you will pay UK prices for the aircraft hire. . .. .Yes I suppose there are. They must employ, ooo, all of six instructors between them.. .. .By the way, as you don't seem to have flown in the US before, maybe you should try it, you never know, you may enjoy it.. .. .I am sure I would. Lots of my friends who have done it say its a great place to fly. But thats not the discussion. The discussion is about the rather dry field that is regulation of flight training. Perhaps the best deal for everyone would be for JAA and FAA to combine and extend common rights of abode and work to all EU and US citizens. That way I could quite happily teach any one of half a billion people to fly in any one of 17 countries.. .. .WWW. . . . [ 28 March 2002, 16:12: Message edited by: Wee Weasley Welshman ]

DesiPilot

27th Mar 2002, 20:52

Well, everyone who is planning to go outside EU to do their PPL can do so. The CAA has recently issued a letter to all the FTO's and registered facilities. All the instructors who are currently instructing are awarded "grandfather rights" and all the new instructors joining after March 31, 2002 will be required to undergo a standardisation training and a skill test with an examiner ( not necessarily FIE ). Here is the part of the letter:. .. . <blockquote>quote:<hr /> ICAO FIs at overseas training locations:. . The requirements at Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 1.300 and Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 2.300 have been adopted by PLD as being the minimum requirements for FTOs conducting training for professional licences with effect from 31 March 2002. We will treat this as the start date to commence training new ICAO FIs. There is no intention for all or part of such training to be introduced for FIs who were employed on JAR-FCL Flight Instructional duties at an overseas location approved and operating on or before 31 March 2002. They will be granted “grandfather rights” and we will assume that they have been “standardized” and have done an acceptable amount of FI time on JAR courses. However, after that date, the ICAO rated FI will require the minimum training in accordance with the reference to qualify him to instruct on a JAR-FCL CPL or IR course. I need hardly remind you that approved training organisations are subject to inspection, part of which you will be aware, involves sampling both Students and Instructors (this will include Grandfather FIs), so it is incumbent on you to update your records in good time.. . . .The UK has recently engaged JAA colleagues to agree on a proposal to amend parts of Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 1.300 to allow for appropriate training and testing, as well as meeting the experience requirements of JAR-FCL 1.330. These proposals would require:. . . .For instruction for the CPL:. .· hold an ICAO CPL with FI rating. .· 500 hours total flying with 200 hours instructional experience;. .· undergo ground and flight training as appropriate; and. .· pass a skill test with an FIE(A).. . . .For instruction for the IR, in addition to the above:. .· 200 hours flight time under IFR;. .· the 5 hour course required by JAR-FCL 1.330(d)(2); and. .· pass a skill test with an FIE(A).. . . .These requirements add JAR-FCL ground and flight training considered necessary to the existing JAR-FCL 1.330 requirements for JAA instructors.. . . . For PPL instruction only, it is proposed that non-JAA instructors: . .· hold an ICAO CPL with FI rating;. .· meet the JAR-FCL 1.330(a) requirements of 15 hours flight-time on the relevant type or class of aeroplane;. .· undergo ground and flight training as determined by the Head of Training of the FTO; and. .· pass a skill test with an examiner designated by the Authority.. . . . . .The rationale is I think self evident and aimed at achieving a universal 200 hour Instructor entry level for commercial pilot training. It takes into account:. .. .· Standards of instructing, the flying syllabus and some basic exercises vary throughout the non-JAA States and the level of additional training to bring an FI up to a suitable level will depend on how great these differences are. Someone who is familiar with both systems (e.g. Head of Training) is best placed to determine what is required;. .· To ensure standardization and adequate levels of competence, the FI must demonstrate to an FIE or other other examiner designated by the Authority each level of instructing (PPL, CPL, IR and ME) before training for JAR-FCL licences;. .· There is a need for a ‘catch up’ procedure to cover those instructors who have not received any formal additional training in the past, which will require standardization flight checks by the Head of Training or approved examiner, and sampling by the Authority during visits;. .· It is probably better if a non-JAA instructor builds his 200 hours experience instructing for a JAR-FCL PPL, rather than becoming set into another, possibly different flight training system.. . . .Although initially addressing JAR-FCL 1 it is intended that the proposed changes would also be incorporated into Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 2.300.. .. .This proposal remains under discussion within the JAA but without agreement, however we are introducing the “ramping-up” solution in advance of formal agreement. The amount of training to be given to non-JAA FIs must be included in the FTO Operations/Training Manual and will be subject to agreement by the Authority as part of the approval process. Where the amount of training required is specified in JAR-FCL, these figures will represent a minimum. . . . .In conclusion, the above text is designed to keep you informed of PLD’s ongoing interaction both with the industry we regulate, and the requirements of CJAA. I hope you will find it of use in your business planning.. . <hr /></blockquote><img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

lock wire

27th Mar 2002, 20:54

People seemed to have missed the point that there are a lot of JAR PPL holders who, if they couldn't train in the USA, would not have done any flight training at all as training in the UK was outside of their budget (not to mention the weather, etc). . .. .The new NPPL with reduced costs will address this issue. A NPPL at £3000 would actually be a more affordable license than the old CAA PPL of ten years ago allowing for inflation. Can you do a US PPL + flight costs + accomodation + conversion + checkride and club joining fee back in the UK for much less than £3000?. .. .Trust me, I've trained many of them. These people go back to the UK and rent aircraft from time to time, occassionally they will pay for an IMC rating or a night rating. The point being that preventing training for JAR PPL's in the US will have a *detrimental* effect on the UK's GA industry. . .. .No it won't. Even if half the British PPL's currently training in the US don't ever train due to the extra costs the UK GA scene will benefit from millions and millions of extra revenue every year. Less pilots yes. More money for UK airfields yes.. .. . WWW, yes it will. I've read your response 3 times and it makes no sense. Please qualify the above. To me, and I hope to most, it is unequivocally clear that if JAA PPL training in the US was to effectively be closed down, the UK GA scene would without doubt suffer economically for the reasons I mention above, and many other considerations that I hope are obvious. . .. .In any case, if there really was a concern that flight training in the UK was excessively expensive, hence a salient reason for people to go state-side, why then, have they not taken off the VAT? 17.5% would make quite a difference on the bottom line and would encourage more people to train, and VAT reciepts would increase.. .Whilst the CAA's intention is 'Standardisation', what they are doing is creating a huge amount of uncertainty for the businesses effected and these are already losing income as potential customers as well as instructors are asking questions; staff moral is low and potential customers are canceling. So even at this stage there is a very strong case for litigation against the CAA and they will likely lose.. .. .The CAA, JAA or British Government have a total right to change, modify or speculate upon their system of flight training regulation. If that disrupts US companies then thats hard Cheddar for them. Just how one would bring 'litigation' I dare not dream!. .. . Indeed, but I'm talking about *how* it is being introduced. I can tell you first hand that I know of 2 schools in the US have taken legal advice over this so far (both in the UK and the US) so don't be suprised if you see something about this in Flyer magazine, et al, in a few months. I'd dearly love to elaborate, but under the circumstances that may be inappropriate on a public forum. . .. .I forgot to mention, I used to be an executive director for a public company and have a great deal of experience of such matters--and instructors who are told that they need to spend 5 grand to keep their miserly income with only 3 weeks notice should email me if they want legal recourse. Personally, I shall be persuing it ruthlessly.. .. .Hmmm.. .. .WWW. .. . Hmmm, what? I take it that's a derisory grunt? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" /> If it pleases you I shall purtain to being an 18 year-old would-be airline pilot so that you can condescend and belittle me without fear of embarassing yourself <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="smile.gif" /> . . . . [ 29 March 2002, 02:44: Message edited by: lock wire ]

Julian

27th Mar 2002, 22:22

Desipilot / Lockwire,. .. .Very good news, I agree that banning training outside JAR states will have a detrimental effect on GA in the UK, as it is repeat business which brings in the money, rather than a PPL course.. .. .Eh? 1500 PPLs a year by Brits in the US being about £600,000 of business lost to British/JAA schools/FI's. Initial courses are more expensive than 6 hours a year aircraft hire surely? . .. .WWW, as usual you seem to be sounding off about an area of flight training where from your continual resistance to answering the question of how much flight time you have in US airspace, . .. .Oooo is this outing the Big Secret that I have never flown in a N reg aircraft and have never set foot in America? Guilty as charged. What towering insights would I gain if I had visited Hank and Al's Aviation Emporium? What don't I know about flight training exactly????. .. .you obviously have no idea what your're talking about. Reading through other forums on this BB, other people are also picking up on the fact and it may pay you to either go and do some flying in the US or sit back.. .. .No thanks. Are you a JAA CPL IR Approved Flying Instructor? Have you worked in flight training for 7 years? Have you trained ex-US PPL's for all levels of license? I have. I know a lot about flight training and the fact that I haven't been on North American soil makes not one jot of difference to the argument here. I am sure flying and GA in the US is brilliant. Shame the EU is not so good. Lets set about changing this. Lets harmoise rules like the FAA. Lets stop sending our people to line the pockets of FAA school owners.. .. .Julian. .. .[WWW]. . . . [ 28 March 2002, 16:30: Message edited by: Wee Weasley Welshman ]

Wee Weasley Welshman

28th Mar 2002, 00:57

I look forward to replying but I am off out for dinner now.. .. .Later,. .. .WWW

rolling circle

28th Mar 2002, 02:00

Thanks Desi for proving my point, the UK CAA has a much more benign attitude to overseas training than the rest of Europe. <blockquote>quote:<hr /> This proposal remains under discussion within the JAA but without agreement, however we are introducing the “ramping-up” solution in advance of formal agreement. <hr /></blockquote>The fact remains that, once EASA takes over, this flexibility will be lost and the EU will make the rules. In the meantime, expect the French DGAC to refuse to recognise UK issued JAA PPLs, as they already do with the CPL and Type Ratings

DesiPilot

28th Mar 2002, 02:19

RC,. .. .I am not complaining about anything. But who knows what EASA will bring. The JAA didnt do too well. Germany already walked out of it and most of the States seems doubtful. Do you really think there could be harmonisation within all these EU States?. .. .[Yes there should, then we will be big enough to take on the FAA. Germany has not walked out. EASA will arrive and the French will insist that we stop letting people train in the US for JAA licenses. If everyone then starts doing FAA and converting they will dream up a new requirement that makes it no longer cost effective.[/b]. .. .I personally think that the whole idea sounds very appealing but it is not practical. Given the cultural and language differences it is not practical. . .. .Umm, mate we are working here on a common currency, common defence and common everything else. Regulation of flight training is small small fry!. .. .You are blaming CAA for having relaxed attitude, how about Irish IAA? They are even allowing the IR test to be done in the US airspace, as long as it is done before June 30, 2002!!!! Of course the student will be issued Irish IR, which will later be converted to JAA IR.. .. .Which is a terrible cheek. The IAA have a LOT to answer for and they will have to one day.. . . .Is that not an easy yet inexpensice way to complete ones training? Or is it an old boys network, I had to do it so everyone else must do it to??. . <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="confused.gif" /> . .. .No. . . . [ 28 March 2002, 16:35: Message edited by: Wee Weasley Welshman ]

BEagle

28th Mar 2002, 10:55

But doesn't the CAA's letter still say "There is no intention for all or part of such training to be introduced for FIs who were employed on JAR-FCL Flight Instructional duties at an overseas location approved and operating on or before 31 March 2002. They will be granted “grandfather rights” and we will assume that they have been “standardized” and have done an acceptable amount of FI time on JAR courses"? Note the word approved...... . . . [ 28 March 2002, 06:59: Message edited by: BEagle ]

Julian

28th Mar 2002, 13:02

Hmmm WWW seems to be having a long dinner....or maybe he has gone Stateside to hour build.... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" />

Wee Weasley Welshman

28th Mar 2002, 13:08

It turned into a marathon session. I am nursing a hangover for a while... .. .WWW

Sensible

28th Mar 2002, 13:08

Give WWW credit, he does know when to keep a low profile! WWW speaking on the subject of American flying would be like Clinton speaking on the virtues of celibacy! <img border="0" title="" alt="" src="biggrin.gif" /> . .. .[b]Nah its just a nice day and I am out and about enjoying it. What is so amazing about American flying? Same airplanes same air. I don't care how the Americans want the FAA to write the rules. I do care and know a bit about how the Europeans want the JAA to write the rules. Which is the point of this thread. I am not American bashing.. .. .Speaking of low profiles, Query has yet to throw in his two pennyworth!. . . . [ 28 March 2002, 16:38: Message edited by: Wee Weasley Welshman ]

theRolfe2

28th Mar 2002, 19:55

Some possible explanations for WWW's temporary withdrawal from this debate:. .. .1. He's gone to Florida to 'stamp out' foreign JAA training. He's driving around FBO's that do it and demanding that they stop in the name of the JAA, The Queen and Common Decency.. .. .1. His girlfriend had the day off and he took her off on a sunny day to the pub and they got hammered.. .. .2. His superiors at the airline he's a 1st officer for have read his comment on another thread that he 'could find fault with anybody' and decided that he needed an impromptu 10 hour sim check.. .. .2. He just passed his LPC/OPC above average thanks for asking. My out of context comment above was made to a bunch of squabbling PPL's trying to lecture each other about how things should be done. I wanted to rain on all their parades by pointing out that none of them is a perfect pilot. . .. .theRolfe. .. .[b]theRolfe - thanks for your inputs here on your single issue stance of defending US training of EU nationals. It is something that is going to be stamped out one way or another, the French alone will see to that. Its really nothing personal so don't take it that way.. . . . [ 28 March 2002, 16:43: Message edited by: Wee Weasley Welshman ]

slim_slag

28th Mar 2002, 20:19

Hi WWW, I hope your hangover wasn't too bad! Bit grumpy today are we? <img border="0" title="" alt="" src="biggrin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> . .. .I'm doing this backwards!. .. .All I hear is a US citizen trying to protect his lucrative supply of EU professiona pilot training. . .. .If that is all you hear then you are not listening. First I'm a Brit, though I work in the US a lot and even live here on and off, I have skills they need and I've had the opportunity to do a lot of flying here. . .. .One thing I will say to you is that you need to live here for years to understand the place. Most Brits have no clue whatsoever about America really works - and the other way round too. I also encourage you to come here and rent a single for two weeks and just fly. Fly the Rockies, fly the LA Basin, fly to Alaska (OK, four weeks). I know you will make a lot of mistakes, learn a hell of a lot and you will become a far better pilot. Of course little will be relevant to a 737 flight deck........ .. .You will also be able to talk about the US with some authority, which right now you cannot. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="smile.gif" /> Just friendly advice.. .. .GA in the US is more than just training EU nationals. It's a massive business, EU GA is a pimple compared to what goes on here. If EU nationals are barred from training here (and it's going to be more difficult as a result of WTC) I am sure some places will go out of business. Not many though. Obviously those places with 20 planes on the line may drop to 19, but in general it will have little impact. Certainly the impact on me will be zero.. .. .The NPPL will be as cheap as a US PPL for the pleasure flyer. . .. .Huh? How will different words on the top of your licence make it cheaper? Do you get cheaper fuel? Do you get cheaper landing charges? Do you get cheaper (less maintained) planes? Do the FI's work at a cheaper rate? I'm all ears on this one.. .. .I want to stop that impoverished kid from denying himself a first job as a flying instructor in a country that will not throw him out as a foreigner after two years . .. .This is where I have most problem with your stance. Who the hell do you think you are telling a kid what to do and what is better for him and his money. Why don't you let him make that choice? Sure there is a price to pay for the opportunity to work in the US, he has to pay for training. Very good training and cheap training too. He will have plenty of hours and superb experience when he applies to the airlines in the UK. Better experience than an equivalent houred instructor in the UK I wager, but that's another story.. .. .Let HIM make that choice. Stop being protectionist on what an individual can do with his time and his money.. .. . I doubt the maximum £2000 saving on a US PPL will see the numbers entering the profession slump! . .. .Actually, you advocated [b]no JAR training in the US for professional licences. That's more than a £2000 saving. If it was only £2000 why are you so upset about it?. .. .Never said they do give a damn. . .. . <blockquote>quote:<hr />The USA uses tax incentives on fuel and subsidy of GA to give its flight training a competitive advantage. <hr /></blockquote>You pretty much did. You implied that US taxes and GA subsidy is of a competitive nature against EU. That is total bollox. The Yanks don't care, GA is a HUGE business here. As I said, EU money is a (welcome) pimple, but they can and will do without it.. .. .They do subsidise GA with, for example, huge ex-mil airfields released to GA users at peppercorn rents. They also have lower taxation on all aspects of the business. . .. .Sure, taxes are lower. That's one of the great things about the US. Incentives to regenerate areas are a local issue. So to what tune am I subsidised when I take my little super-cub out and putz around? How much money do you think I am draining from the public purse?. .. .Even if GA is subsidised, which it's not. What's wrong with a budding professional pilot from Blackburn taking advantage of those stupid Yank taxpayers to get some superior experience on the cheap??????. .. .Cheers

Wee Weasley Welshman

28th Mar 2002, 20:53

I am sure flying the Rockies etc. would be great Slim Slag. I am sure America is a lovely place full of lovely people.. .. .However.. .. .You run your aviation industry under FAA and we do it under JAA and never the twain will meet. That applies from the top of the industry right down to the bottom. Except not the very bottom.. .. .By historical chance the Brits allow some training for their licenses to be done in the US, South Africa, Oz etc. Now that Britain is in the JAA its fellow members who do not allow such things insist they come into line. Which they will.. .. .So the whole debate here is a bit pointless.. .. .I'm glad and think its a good thing. Some of you don't - from this thread the majority are US flight school owners or instructors.. .. .Thats OK. We are allowed to have different opinions here. Its what the board is for!. .. .Cheers,. .. .WWW

englishal

28th Mar 2002, 21:03

WWW,. .. .You're missing the point...Although you paid 16k for your ATPL, I can't afford the 60k or so to go to Oxford. Also, by banning training in the US, rather than people 'returning home' to do their licences, many people will say ****** it, and the exact opposite will happen, less people will fly in the UK, less (more expensive) clubs and the like..... .. .I would like to fly more in the UK, but the $8,000 I spent in the states last year got me 80 hours, an IR and a multi rating. The UK can't compete. After all we don't all drive British cars just to support the ailing British car industry do we?. .. .Maybe we should all write to our MPs and ask the government to elliminate fuel tax on AVGAS....just like 'red diesel' for boats, which costs less than 20p litre......?. .. .Anyway, its been a good debate, don't think this has been a personnal attack, each is entitled to their views. I'll buy you a beer if we ever meet.... .. .Cheers. .EA

theRolfe2

28th Mar 2002, 21:32

the PPL is an indulgence that occurred many years ago when the number were low.. .. .What it comes down to is that you believe that PPL students exist so that career pilots such of yourself can build time. . .. .If PPL students train in a different jurisdiction then people like yourself will have a harder time finding students to use to build hours. . .. .But why should I care? I don't want a career in aviation and I don't see why I should subsidise people like yourself as you claw your way to the top. If I can get a better product by going to Florida then why shouldn't I? . .. .As a consumer my needs come before those of the vendors. . .. .It's very unlikely that there will be a 'real' shortage of ATP pilots in the UK or anywhere else for that matter in the foreseeable future. When airlines can charge fees for sending in a CV it's a sign that supply vastly exceeds demand.. .. .The Uk flight training industry has no 'right' to exist any more than Scragil's miners had 'rights' to jobs. . .. .Yes it does - as a strategic asset to UK Plc. . .. .Nothing has a 'right' to exist. Nobody's job is guaranteed. Such guarantees always come at somebody else's expense. Your JAA-ensured 'right' to exist as a flight instructor is at the expense of any private individual who wants a licence. If flight training is a strategic asset then why isn't it getting strategic support from the government? . .. .It's clear to me that your mind is closed on this subject. I wish I could go through life with your absolute self-confidence and certainty. It must be wonderful 'never forgetting anything' and being right all the time... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="smile.gif" /> . .. .theRolfe

theRolfe2

28th Mar 2002, 21:43

They do subsidise GA with, for example, huge ex-mil airfields released to GA users at peppercorn rents. They also have lower taxation on all aspects of the business.. .. .The ex-mil airfields are usually located 50 miles from anywhere and if located on the west coast will have no water rights. The location and the lack of water make them useless for housing, factories or anything else lucrative. The feds hand them over to the county they are located in. If the county can develop them they will. Hamilton (near San Francisco) is closed for good. Castle AFB (middle of nowhere) is still a GA field. . .. .My point being that vast airfields are only given to GA when there is nothing else to do with them. Stop seeing all this as anti-European subsidies...... .. .theRolfe

Sensible

28th Mar 2002, 22:08

Quote from WWW's edit:. .. .--------------------------------------------------. .What is so amazing about American flying? Same airplanes same air.. .--------------------------------------------------. .. .If you don't try it then you won't know and therefore your comments on USA flying are unqualified. . .. .I'm afraid that GA in blighty is a pretty miserable set up in comparison. Without major changes to UK aviation led by government incentives then GA will continue to decline with the resulting closure of GA airfields and increasing duty on fuel!. .. .Some of us actually fly for just fun and with better facilities and cheaper flying in the USA, I just cannot justify flying in the UK.. . . . [ 28 March 2002, 18:11: Message edited by: Sensible ]

slim_slag

28th Mar 2002, 22:28

My point being that vast airfields are only given to GA when there is nothing else to do with them. . .. .I'm sitting in Phoenix right now with my Termimal Chart open. There is a mega-airport (KPHX) and eight class D airports, one of which is ex mil - Williams Gateway, KIWA.. .. .This ex-mil airport is heavily used by GA, it's got an ILS and a two mile long, 150ft wide runway which even the blindest primary students cannot miss <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> . But it was turned over for civilian use with the aim of being a Part 121 scheduled airline reliever airport for PHX. No intent to subsidise GA here, it was an attempt to take traffic away from PHX and revitalise the local economy after the USAF left.. .. .WWW, I think you post some good stuff here for the wannabees, I think your insider posts on the job market are great. Keep up the good work. However if you state an opinion as fact you have to back it up. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="smile.gif" /> You are a lofty moderator, and you have to do better <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> . .. .Re protectionism and professoinal flying jobs. I believe it's unfortunate that both the EU and the US don't 'cross hire' for jet jobs, but the US has rules in place to allow such a thing which are far more reasonable than the EU does. . .. .If there was to ever be a shortage of pilots in the US then the laws are already in place to allow EU pilots to get work authorisation. Because of a flourishing, cheap, availiable and sensibly regulated GA industry the US has never had to do that. They hire Yanks first, as they should. The US has also attempted to allow cross recognition of JAA/FAA ATPs. It was the JAA who screwed that one up. The US will give you, on the spot, an FAA PP-ASEL temporary certificat on production of your JAA-PPL. Permanent certificate will arrive in the mail - FREE OF CHARGE. That is not the case the other way around.. .. .Personally I think an hour in the US is worth an hour in the UK and definitely not less. I can see that in the real world people will protect their jobs and industries, but it's an obsolete concept. There are instances where the UK is on the right track, you would call it an historical anomoly which you hope the French will correct. (Jesus, you speak higher of the French than the Yanks and hope they will sort out the Brits, then I look at your moniker, and it all makes sense <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> ). .. .Right now you can take your FAA ICAO ATP and 500 turbine hours in a multi crew plane and convert it to a CAA ATPL with minimum hassle. In this instance, I think it's reasonable for a country (the UK) to expect a 'foreigner' to pass the written exams and take a flight test. That's the sort of check and balance I'd expect. But for you to hope the French will say your hours in the USA don't count is nuts. Of course they count. The US is a very advanced country when it comes to aviation, it's a model for the world. Next thing the French will be saying is that hours don't count unless they are flown in an Air France seat. Will you be on the sidelines cheering?. .. .Of course even with your US passport and shiny new CAA ATPL you still have the work authorisation problem, but that is a different matter all together. Who knows, maybe the great day will come when the EU is short of pilots and has to hire these nasty Yanks with their second class FAA ATP <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="smile.gif" /> . Work authorisation is a totally different issue from mutual recognition of professional qualifications and training establishments.. .. .Cheers. . . . [ 28 March 2002, 18:31: Message edited by: slim_slag ]

rolling circle

28th Mar 2002, 22:49

Desi - You clearly misintrepreted my earlier posts. I am not 'blaming' the UK CAA for anything, it is their pragmatic attitude that caused my (non-UK) employer to choose to seek approval for its TRTO through the UK, despite being based in mainland Europe. The point is that the inception of EASA will smother that pragmatism as all that is now 'requirements' will become 'regulations', introduced by majority voting of a predominantly anti-US European Union and enforced by law.. .. .You make the point that Germany is, let us say, unenamoured of the JAA and is, at the moment, resisting the implementation of JAR-FCL. There is no way of resisting EASA, short of leaving the EU. All EU member states will be regulated by EASA and, given the overwhelming protectionist nature of the membership, we are likely to see an end to overseas training.. .. .Make no mistake, there will be harmonisation of aviation law within the EU, just as there is harmonisation of law in almost every other field. We are well down the road to a United States of Europe with all power centralised in the European Commission. Already the UK has lost control over more than half of its legislation, the loss of the Air Navigation Act will hardly be noticed.. .. .I have no axe to grind about US training, I hold a FAA ATPL, CFI, CFII and have a thousand or so hours of dual given in the US. There are pros and cons to training pilots in the US who are going to spend most of their careers in European Airspace, particularly when they are taught by inexperienced instructors who have no idea what European flying is like. However, there are good and bad in all areas of aviation and there are plenty of FIs in Europe who I would not trust to open a jar of pickles.. .. .It was a 'wait and see' attitude that let a fundamentally flawed JAR-FCL1 in, the danger is that too many people will have the same attitude to EASA - until it's too late. EASA is, potentially, all the worst parts of JAR-FCL with teeth and claws!

Capt.Emerald

29th Mar 2002, 01:01

This debate all seems intriguing. I, for one, would like to thank Desi Pilot for posting his letter from the CAA. I am also glad the CAA has relaxed it's stringent requirements and grandfathered us existing instructors into it's domain. It does make me feel better that they have shown some faith in the current FTO's and the U.S. instructors. However, I do have some further questions that someone on this thread could possibly answer. 1)This letter seems to be directed to approved FTO's, not registered FTO's, and to my knowledge there are only two in the U.S. Am I reading this correctly? 2)What is the difference between a registered and approved FTO? 3)Will I be grandfathered in and be able to instruct at an approved FTO, being that the FTO I currently instruct at is going out of business? 4)The most important question of all: Does anyone know of any approved JAA schools hiring grandfather instructors? Thank you in advance, any help will be greatly appreciated.

QUERY

29th Mar 2002, 02:17

This topic has produced plenty of.... from the usual people. . .. .JAA PPL courses in the U.S.A. are still being advertised, by the approved schools, so the answer to the question is, obviously, NO.. .Also, there is no evidence of higher prices.. .. .Yes, there have been some incredibly interesting (yawn) changes but, as approved schools all comply, there is no problem for students. In practice, the changes make JAA PPL training even more attractive than in UK, where schools only have to be registered facilities and are not even inspected by the CAA. . .. .O.K. it 'might' end if/when/depending on etc. but there might be life on Mars or you might win the National Lottery jackpot.. .. .I will not react to the morons and racists but, as there are genuine and intelligent people who have been confused or misled, these further points could assist:. .-There is no significant subsidy to GA in the USA and the price of AVGAS, though relatively low, is much higher than the price of autogas there. The actual cost problem is just typical 'rip-off' Britain (excessive taxes, profit margins etc.). .-Apart from lower costs, the other main factor is weather which allows better utilisation. This assists students to progress and instructors to earn well. This natural advantage is not restricted to Florida so the South of Spain is another location for 'British' training.. .-I recall that all the ICAO stuff came about because sensible countries wanted similar standards but realised that aviation would not progress if it was vulnerable to petty and protectionist measures based on 'nationality' of aircraft, crew, examiners, instruction and training. There is mutual recognition so FAA-rated Hank (the Yank) can land an American Boeing at Cardiff and, equally, JAA-rated **** (the Welshman) can land a British Airbus at Boston. . .-Also and despite the EU, NAFTA etc. GATT guarantees free trade. There are still serious trade 'wars' but I doubt that EU and USA will want one about protection for poxy PPL's !

Naples Air Center, Inc.

29th Mar 2002, 02:21

WWW,. .. .As one of the US Based Fight School owners you referenced, I thought I would add a few comments to this thread.. .. .1) Will European Flight Training continue in the U.S.? At the moment that is a Yes.. .. .2) Will the training have to change? Someday it might but right now it is business as usual.. .. .Now that the original question has been answered lets go to the tangents.. .. .Why do people train in the U.S.? Cost, Weather and Consistency.. .. .Should the J.A.A. kill all training outside of a J.A.A. member country? No.. .. .Doing so will hurt GA in the U.K., not help it. NAC is only one school;we train over 300 pilots a year. These pilots do not all stay here in Naples and just fly with us but go home to their homelands to fly at their local clubs and schools. Many of them would not have learned to fly at all if they had not come to the U.S to train. It is not all money; a good percentage do not have the time to wait on the weather. They prefer to complete in a few weeks.. .. .Although the flying may start outside of the UK, in the longrun the homeland aviation industry does benefit.. .. .Happy Flying,. .. .Capt. Richard J. Gentil, Pres.. .Naples Air Center, Inc.

DesiPilot

29th Mar 2002, 03:14

Oh Boy, all this time I thought us pilots were bunch of friendly people. All we wanted to do was pass on the flying bug to anyone and everyone who came in contact with us.. .This FAA, JAA, IAA, EASA, DGAC, SAA, DGCA whatever you call it has taken the fun out of it or they are in process of doing it.. .. .Someone please save flying be it in UK, EU or anywhere else. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" />

jmore

30th Mar 2002, 10:18

It is blatently obvious that there are some amongst us who are either so wealthy that the cost of GA at home in the Uk is of no importance to them,or,perhaps they are content flying from one grotty little hovel to another and receiving little or nothing in return for the vast sums outlayed to do so.. . Flying light aircraft in the states is truly a pleasure to be embraced by all,and certainly the FAA does everything within its power to let that happen,i have done a reasonable amount of flying at home both with the air cadets and privately but none of it matches the beauty or experience gained by punching through the marine layer on the californian coast for an ifr hop to los angeles international in a pa28 (heathrow eat your heart out) or perhaps even landing at las vegas international and having the red carpet put out for you in your lowly 172 just the same as the crew of the lears and bbj's parked next to you-the truth is for GA to regain its appeal in the UK more freedom must be given to its pilots to fly where they want not where they are told they can.However the real underlying issue is that a lot of us that just want to enjoy our flying are put off by the snobbery of those involved in the UK general aviation sector!My advice? simply get on one of those big planes come here and try it -you will undoubtly fall in love with the system.

lock wire

30th Mar 2002, 12:02

WWW: I have been mildly amused at some of your comments, re: flight training in the US, but I have a question for you:. .. .As I have been mildly amused by your efforts to justify an inequitable system. .. .This is a scenario that arises on occassion (albeit rarely). . .. .Your scenario might apply to perhaps half a dozen people a year.. .. .An individual in the UK (hard working and successful, but with relatively limited spare time available) wishes to fly the airways in IMC in his own aircraft, or a rented aircraft--he is indifferent where that aircraft is registered--but needs something physically based in the UK, so that he may fly from his home to offices and business meetings that may be on the Continent, or further afield. For arguments sake, let's assume he has a JAR-FCL SE PPL / Night with only a 150 hours. . .. .So he has very little flying experience and wants to go fly intenation IFR flights in a single to get to important meetings on business. I would advise him not to so stupid. He'll end up killing himself or someone else. Even if he doesn't he will find himself so hassled by ice, minima and slot restrictions that it will be neither a pleasure nor a convenience to fly himself around on business.. .. .His initial concern is that he needs a full IR added to his licence.. .. .The IMC rating would be a better option and forget the airways and their charges. Forget the idea of doing international airway flying in your own single for business.. .. .The guy working the desk at his local flying club, a PPL with 80 hours TT wearing a four gold bars on each shoulder and peppered with spots,. .. .Ooh funny that I never saw anyone wearing such stripes at my local school. Indeed I never wore a single stripe when I was a JAA Approved FI teaching CPL IR courses to airline cadets in Jerez. In a flight training sortie I fail to see how either of you could get confused about the chain of command therefore I always considered stripes superfluous. As do the vast majority of FI's. And I suppose nobody in the US is instructing in order to build hours? No? COME OFF IT! . .. .Under JAA there is a requirement for 150hrs of groundschool for an FI rating. There is then a bi-annual renewal requirement involving flight checks, attendance at seminar and hours flown requirement. Because airlines sponsor cadets they get to dictate to large FTO's that their instructors must be highly qualified, experienced and therefore well remunerated. There is now in place therefore a reasonable professional structure in place in JAA whereby instructors are less likely to be hours builders and more likely to be career instructors. So lets drop the childish stereotypes.. .. . tells him that it's not possible as he has a JAR-FCL PPL, yet the guy in our scenario insists that his best friend has only an ME PPL / IR and he flys his King Air (it's a 200) when he wants, and on the airways and through the clouds. For the moment let's disregard insurance requirements.. .. .Lets not disregard insurance requirements. Any wealthy individual will have significant Life Insurance. It will almost certinaly stop him from flying as you describe.. .. .Disregarding the apparent prejudice you have for foreign licences for the moment, . .. .Nothing wrong with foreign licences. Its Yanks training EU nationals for EU liceneses in FAA aircraft that I can't fly in a country where I am not allowed to work that irks me and all JAA instructors.. .. .and on the assumption that as a professional pilot you feel obliged to offer him the fairest and most impartial advice as he's a keen aviator, what would your advice to him be?. .. .As stated above. The obstacles are too great. The industry/CAA does not really want him to do what he is thinking of and therefore its made very expensive. If he wants to get to the continent on business then take a sheduled service. It will be cheaper even if he flies business class. It will be far more reliable operating a Jet capable of Cat3a/b/c. It will be infinitely safer. He won't have to worry about Eurocontrol, slot restrictions, infringing noise abatement profiles, diverting to somewhere unexpected, onerous customs requirements and inspections at each end etc. etc. If he needs the flexibility of going to local airfields then use the Charter Air Taxi operators who are professional and not amateur at doing what he seeks to do.. .. .As a further consideration, let's assume that the potential customer isn't interested in the elitist 'Yacht Club' attitude;. .. .I have no idea what you mean by this. There are some charming clubs and schools in the UK you know. I never ever attacked US flight schools for the facilities and atmosphere they offered. Why do you try to do this? Shall I show you the dozens of emails about O***** Flight Training I have received over the years? Shall I? The horror stories about shoddy aircraft, rip off advertising, diss-interested staff and a disgusting level of customer service.... .. . he's also curious to know why his friend's aircraft is not on the G register, but clearly will not be won over by an arrogant and condescending attitude. . .. .Well presumably its on an N register.. .. .Now, it's apparant that he's got some money to spend, and you're obviously wanting to promote the UK GA scene and encourage him to invest in that industry. Again, what would your well-considered advice be to him???. .. .As above.. .. .Cheers, WWW. . . . [ 30 March 2002, 11:14: Message edited by: Wee Weasley Welshman ]

jmore

30th Mar 2002, 12:26

that was a nice trip in that king wasnt it lock!

Julian

31st Mar 2002, 17:06

At last we have finally got it out of WWW after god knows how many attempts of asking that he has NEVER flown in the US....what a surprise..ho hum..!

I have even challenged him to stop making sweeping comments about US flight schools and name and shame the bad ones, he seems to at last have named....err....one!. In fact one well known US flight school bailed out students when a UK school went bust. Did any UK schools come forward with a similar offer we werent aware of?

WWW is under the impression that every person who gets into an aircraft wants to become an FI and finally sit in the right hand seat with the big boys! Errrr.....nope...wrong again WWW - some of us do it because we actually enjoy flying so moaning about the fact that their wont be any students when we are FIs because they are all in the US is b@ll@cks!

If a guy only flys 6 hours a year, as you state, then he is hardly worth bothering about in your great 'fund the FIs debate' - not to mention not current :)

Julian.

Wee Weasley Welshman

31st Mar 2002, 21:56

Julian. I would have thought anyone would have summised that I have never set foot in the US as I have never referred to having done so in 5 years here. I've stated the fact many times in fact.

You can challenge me to whatever you like. I challenge you to inform us of your qualifications regards knowledge of flight training.

I am not going to name and shame any schools as I could be sued for doing so.

I am not under the impression that everyone who flies wants to become a FI. However on the PPRUNE Wannabes forum it is fair to assume the audience are primarily interested in some form of remunerated flying career in JAA land. This being the case it is entirely legitimate to expose a view about a career rung which is stepped upon by over 40% of self funded pilots.

"Fund the FI's" is not a debate. The issue is that Pounds Sterling are being spent to pay US Dollars to US Instructors to fly FAA aircraft for JAA licenses. A discrepency which will be resolved at the will of the bulk of JAA member states. The vast majority of US PPL instructors are also building hours rather than being career instructors. To say otherwise is to lie.

Not to say that this is a bad thing. As a PPL instructor building hours I cost you £10 an hour. As a CPL IR instructor on a contract and a salary a week later I cost you £60 an hour. Same person saying mostly the same thing... Hour building subsidisies PPL courses in the final analysis.

Julian you do - once again - appear awfully agitated in your postings. Is it impossible for two people to have two differing but reasoned views on a complex issue?

Cheers,

WWW

Julian

31st Mar 2002, 23:02

WWW, You have never actually admitted it until now although a lot of users of this board have asssumed you have never been there. Training in the US does bring money into the UK GA industry although it may not be directly into the pockets of FIs, although having said that doesnt mean they will not undertake a course in the UK in the future. You also forget that there a number of N regs floating around, one down the road from me, avaliable for hire.

It is not only in this forum you have criticised US flying but also in others such as 'private', launching into your views on a system you know nothing about - recent example of discussion on WXBRIEF was a classic. How can you comment on something you havent used?

If you dont name and shame why did you name O****** FT?

I am an end user of flying schools and aircraft rental as I have always said - and as would be apparent if you looked at my profile - look no FI rating! I do however fly regulary in the UK and US hence feel able to comment. I would not however go around criticising say SA, Australia, etc as I havent flown there.

So the answer is not agitated but find it hard to understand how you can pass comments on various areas of something you know nothing about, that of flying in the US.

Interesting your rates go up, the training centre I use charges $35/HR no matter what rating.

Wee Weasley Welshman

31st Mar 2002, 23:17

Admitted? You are making something innocuous sound dodgy. What is there to 'admit'? I have recommended to many Wannabes over the years to consider going to the US for a PPL and hours building package. I have said so in countless threads. It is one of a range of complex recommendations one can make - dependent usually on personal circumstance.

That is not to contradict my belief that the practice of JAA training in non-JAA member states should be disallowed.

IF I were the ranting-anti-US-only-train-in-Britain maniac whose only aim was to defend his FI job - THEN how do you explain the countless times I have highlighted the possibility of PPL + 100hrs in the USA? Plenty of people have emailed with me and I have sent them heading towards Britannia or Naples..

You seem to think that because I have not flown in the US I cannot comment about it.

I did not actually do so.

I stuck to the thread which was discussing JAA regulatory training requirements.

Most of the PPRuNe hierarchy did PPLs and hours in the US. Many of my friends did. Many of my work colleagues when working as a FI did. Some of my current work colleagues did. I have no axe to grind or dislike of Americans, American Schools or the FAA. Please do not suggest that I do.

We are not talking about "flying in the US". They have the same aircraft, air and laws of Physics as us after all. We are talking about Training regulations. Nothing more emotive.

WWW

Naples Air Center, Inc.

1st Apr 2002, 01:12

WWW,

I would like to offer you a free flight at Naples Air Center. Give you a chance to see how we operate.

I must warn you though, if you take me up on the offer, you might not enjoy flying in the U.K. after flying to the Keys or Bahamas. :o)

Take Care,

Capt. Richard J. Gentil, Pres.
Naples Air Center, Inc.

Wee Weasley Welshman

1st Apr 2002, 08:31

Richard thank you. I might just take you up on that, Miss Welshman is nagging for a US Fly Drive holiday later in the year and I need reasons for going places.

I am sure the flying is great and I have heard nothing but praise for your school. Keep up the good work.

WWW:cool:

sennadog

1st Apr 2002, 09:46

I'd just like to step in here and heavily criticise EVERYTHING about American aviation. I can't say enough BAD things about it as I'd run out of space!:p

Richard - could I also have some free flights please?;)

:D

theRolfe2

1st Apr 2002, 16:08

WWW said:

theRolfe - thanks for your inputs here on your single issue stance
of defending US training of EU nationals.

WWW: You are undoubtably a smart guy. You are undoubtably good at what you do.
Which is why I don't understand how someone who works for one of those 'new' airlines -
the ones that plan on making money rather than flying a national flag - can be in favour of
*any* form of protectionism.

"Go" wouldn't exist if it wan't for liberalisation of the EU air market.
You have stated that you are in favour of protectionism when it comes to flight training outside the JAA 'economic area'.
You have stated that US schools 'nick' students from UK ones.
You have repetedly stated that this should be 'stamped out'.

Be very careful what you wish for. Once the protectionist genie is let out of the bottle
there is no stopping it. Suppose the
JAA manages to 'stamp out' foreign training. Or even FAA training of 'EU nationals',
which is the phrase you used! Then what? The US might decide
to impose tariffs on Airbus Industries. You can't erect barriers against people and expect them
to sit there and do nothing. That's why I don't think I'm harping on about a 'single issue' here
- if we go along with your line of reasoning I
can see a return to the 1970's with everybody
deciding that different bits of aviation are 'core national interests' that are 'strategic' and
need to be 'defended' from 'unfair' foreign competition. Your yourself have said that flight training is a
'strategic asset for UK PLC'
which implies that training in Spain is unacceptable.

If and when the EU gets its own pointless GPS system up and running - it's been refered to
as the "Common Agricultural Policy in space" -
all the protecionists will no doubt insist that US
GPS receivers will be prohibited on JAA aircraft. Will you agree with them? If you don't you'd be
a hypocrite for only being in favour of protectionism when it directly affects your
job. If you do then you're saying that perfectly good equipment should be
thrown away because it doesn't have 'made in EU' stamped on it.

You also have an amazing amount of faith in the JAA! As far as I can tell it lacks real political power of it's own
and is a bit like the commonwealth - everybody shows up, meets,
gives lip service to the need to stand together and them goes back to doing exactly what they
were doing before complete with national exceptions and predjudices. What makes you think they can pull this off?
Please answer as I'm genuninly curious...

theRolfe

PS - I know somebody who heard from somebody else that "Go" aren't very good.
When you get back from Naples can you give me a free flight?

Wee Weasley Welshman

1st Apr 2002, 19:31

Your post is ridduled with holes. I am off to bed now. I will reply in 24hrs.

WWW

clear prop!!!

1st Apr 2002, 20:20

Well Richard old son, that has got to be one of the smartest marketing moves ever!!!

One thing about good old WWW is that he is consistent!

If he’s flown there, been taught there, taught there or worked there, it will become the best thing since sliced bread.

Just kidding Weasley, honest!!.... You and Miss Welshlady will love it!
:D

theRolfe2

1st Apr 2002, 20:48

Your post is ridduled with holes. I am off to bed now. I will reply in 24hrs.

WWW

I'll await your reply with baited breath!

Actually..no...I won't. :)

You and I are not going to agree on this - you think flight training is a core national interest which need to be protected and I believe that the needs of consumers are more important than the needs of flight instructors. There is no middle ground on this one so we're just going to have to agree to disagree. We both have better things to do with our time than waste it trying to change each others minds or win points in a situation like this.

So I'm not really interested in why you think my post is 'riddled' with holes any more than you are interested in my views on the infectious nature of protectionism. The other thing is that I have to plan a xctry for tomorrow night and this is a needless distraction.

theRolfe

notice

1st Apr 2002, 22:11

WARNING: ADVICE FOR SALE
Hilarious exposure of Celtic selective memory moderation.
Anyone remember WWW working at Welshpool and recommending training in UK? Then, when working for Bae Jerez, the advice modified to training in Europe. After a freebie, could it moderate to flying in Florida?:rolleyes:

jmore

2nd Apr 2002, 04:04

to say that flight training of uk students in america ahould be banned (WWW) is missing the point -how many hard working instructors in the USA thoroughly enjoy their time out in the states teaching and building experience of a superb system and learning valuable lessons and then return to the UK to apply for jobs with airlines there.Give the people the credit they deserve.
If only your beloved CAA would give them that credit when they return home by recognising their ICAO license and asking nothing more than a check flight of them for conversion like virtually every other country.

Sensible

2nd Apr 2002, 08:28

Is WWW about to discover that there is life beyond the Nissan hut in the middle of a waterlogged valley loosely described as an airfield? Will he cope with the shock of being able to obtain an IFR flight clearance from a GA airfield? Will he be able to convince himself that Naples is reality and not a dream?

Don't forget to go to the local flight standards office to get your free licence conversion before you fly WWW and remember that you can then dial freephone 1-800-WX-BRIEF to talk to a friendly flight briefer who will discuss the en route weather you can expect during your proposed flight. He/she will also give you Pilot Reports and Notams all without charge all from the comfort of the modern well equipped flight centre. Can you believe that? Yes, you can request the tower to give you class Charley services/VFR flight following before you take off too!

Ask for a tower visit WWW and see how a modern tower operates.

WWW you just won't want to give that airplane back to Richard!! If you do hang on to it, Cedar key and Marathon are places to go for daytrips and take a look at the warbird museum at Kissimee.

Happy flying!

englishal

2nd Apr 2002, 13:10

..and of course not forgetting that the FAA will issue you a nice shiny FAA IR, and all you have to do is show them your superb JAA one, and take a simple computer written exam, for a grand cost of around $75. Then, why not get a 'tower en-route' into LAX or IFR into Miami, with a taxi back, while picking up your new clearance to go somewhere else (because you can), the grand cost of all of this....just the flight time....

:D

DFC

2nd Apr 2002, 13:36

I think that a few important points have been missed.

1. We had a US based flight instructor who teaches JAR saying how great it was that they were going to get grandfather rights from the CAA. This ver same instructor then turned around and asked what was the difference between an RTF and an FTO. This is basic JAR knowledge required for the PPL and how can we trust instructors who don't know the system themselves.

2. The old requirement to build hours post PPL has all but gone with the JAR 200 hour CPL. If one works it out then to fit all the training in leaves very little hour building time especially if a FI course is completed. After the 200 hour mark, there may well be a requirement but you now have a "professional pilot" hour building and most likely doing it as an instructor.

3. Under the old system, a UK licence holder was limited to UK airspace in an N registered aircraft unless they held a US licence. Now that JAR is here, a JAR licence holder is restricted to the JAR countries in the same situation leaving most of Europe available.

Training in the US is fine. However to operate within the FARs, certain differences exist. Even if they are good, they are differences. Therefore, I am of the opinion that after completing JAR training in the USA, students should be required to complete differences training before operating in Europe. Operating in unfamiliar airspace can be as much of a danger than operating an unfamiliar aircraft. Exemptions to such a requirement for students with certain previous experience of European operations.

DFC

Wee Weasley Welshman

2nd Apr 2002, 18:17

I've recommended plenty of schools in my time - many that I know only by reputation.

I have also publicly and privately advised people to consider the PPL + hours in the USA. Many times over many years. IF circumstances suit their personal situation.

So lets lay off the - amusing - but thread wandering game of painting me as some jingoistic idiot. It obviously is not true.

This thread is about the UK CAA and how it approves training. I believe it should stop encouraging JAA pilots to train outside of JAA states. All other JAA member states agree with me. The changes will happen in the next couple of years of that I am confident.

Safe flying one and all,

WWW

englishal

3rd Apr 2002, 05:52

I believe it should stop encouraging JAA pilots to train outside of JAA states. All other JAA member states agree with me. The changes will happen in the next couple of years of that I am confident.

So you obviously don't give a toss that future students are going to be faced with a much higher flight training bill than you were.....Not in the interests of safety, but in the interest of your own pocket.....Maybe we should also restrict flight training to aristocrats and people of a 'good blood line' too? Suppose this is what happens when you reach that god like state of 'frozen ATPL holder'.

Rgds

BEagle

3rd Apr 2002, 06:03

Restrict the profession to exclude common riff-raff....hmmm. Didn't that used to be called BOAC?

Wee Weasley Welshman

3rd Apr 2002, 08:58

Englishal, the cost of gaining a JAA CPL/IR Frzn ATPL is now considerably cheaper than it was only five years ago if one compares the integrated vs CAP509 route.

The NPPL will keep non-professional pleasure flying training affordable. Indeed the growth of ultra and microlight flying is most encouraging.

For those who are flying in order to gain a JAA license allowing them ultimately to be paid to fly JAA aircraft I believe they should follow a JAA syllabus in a JAA member state.

Its not as if the US even has the cheapest flight training in the world. Why don't you go to Poland and get a Polish PPL. It will cost about £1,000. Ahh, the UK CAA does not have an automatic conversion system in place for Polish licenses! So why do the North Americans have one?

WWW

StephenRED

3rd Apr 2002, 09:39

Hmm...interesting thread.
WWW,if you were only just to hop across the pond and experiance the US aviation scene you`d understand,its such a great country for flying,everything is geared up for aviation,alot of people do go flying and enjoy themselves at weekends in their own planes,it is a big country,has everything you`d need,open spaces..and if you want busy,you can go do a touch and go at a large airport if you please..for no cost whatsoever.
I think most importantly for students its very relaxed,not alot of stress involved,which really helps out alot in your first few hours.

Not to start a flame war..but from my impressions..the CAA and JAA aren`t really a touch on the FAA..the FAA promote aviation,the CAA and JAA seems to act like they have been lumbered with it,don`t care,not really in touch with the pilots,only politicians and bank accounts.

Wee Weasley Welshman

3rd Apr 2002, 11:31

I do understand. Its just that its got nothing to do with JAA training regulatory policy.

WWW

englishal

3rd Apr 2002, 11:42

Its interesting to see the OAT ad on PPrune which states that OAT has now been granted approval to carry out its flight training in the US.....Pay £60,000ish AND train in the US ! Does this mean that OAT are a second rate training orginisation??

How dare they not support the ailing UK aviation industry !
EA

we have pleasure announcing that the OAT Training Centre in Tyler Texas USA has been awarded full JAA approval by the UK CAA to conduct flight and ground training for:
JAR-FCL 1 Integrated Training
JAR-FCL 1 CPL (A) Modular Training
JAR-FCL 1 PPL (A) Training

Wee Weasley Welshman

3rd Apr 2002, 12:04

Indeed. All OATS flying instructors have been given notice that they may soon be redundant at Kiddlington.

Flying careers are being exported to the USA because for historical reasons the British CAA have allowed US training to count towards or be approved for license issue.

If OATS move your job to Tyler and then the Feds won't give you any more than a two year Green card then thats your career as a professional flying instructor with OATS down the toilet.

If BAe move your job from Prestwick to Jerez (as they did) then you can hop on the next flight to Spain and relocate without filling in a form and continue your career.

The Spanish will even recognise your JAA CPL IR and FI ratings so you can fly their ES registered aircraft and teach Spaniards for PPL's on the side if you like.

THATS a very good illustration of the issue involved.

Its about trading blocs, employment regulations and training validity. Not mindless Yank bashing :)

WWW

rolling circle

3rd Apr 2002, 14:33

According to the nice lady at the CAA, OATS do not have approval for the CPL modular course at Tyler, in fact up until last week they hadn't even applied for it. It seems that OATS Marketing have this continuing difficulty with the truth, as so many of their customers have discovered.

Caveat Emptor

Meeb

3rd Apr 2002, 16:49

StephenRED's signature:

<<"Lower the standard to which our standards are set and everyone will reach greater standards.">>

That indeed is a very worrying statement, I do hope you are not an instructor of any persuasion...

Chuck Ellsworth

3rd Apr 2002, 17:19

Meeb:

I hope what he meant was to lower the mindless expansion of rules and goofy pseudo scientific garbage that is now part of the training process.

That would indeed improve pilot training.

Mind control is a very interesting thing, tell something often enough and it becomes the norm.

Your bureaucrats have suceeded in doing this admirably one need only note the slavish manner in which some instructors embrace some of this garbage.;)

Cat Driver
....................
:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

Meeb

3rd Apr 2002, 18:33

Chuck, It is pretty straight forward, it is you who tries to muddy the water...

Delta Wun-Wun

3rd Apr 2002, 19:24

Well I think the UK can offer a lot to the US and vice versa.The US could adopt our trade and employment polices and we could adopt there low cost ,open to everyone GA Industry.

notice

3rd Apr 2002, 19:44

WARNING:WELSHMAN STILL AT IT

After his bleating and attempted diversions, the jury's still out on one mixed-up and mutton-headed moderator but....

The point of this was JAR PPL's in USA

As was said, at the start, there has been a school cull and the truth, from the CAA, is that there are now only 4 places for:

JAR-FCL 1 PRIVATE PILOT LICENCE (AEROPLANE)
Approved by the UK CAA for training for JAR-FCL 1 PPL (A) outside of a JAR member state

Orlando Flight Training (-the Cabair crammer/clipper in Florida)

European Flight Training (-a nearly new nipper)

Flight Training College of Africa (Pty) Limited (-S. of Zimbabwe)

BTW- the (joke descriptions) are not from Aviation House and
-CAA make no reference to any OATS JAR PPL approval in USA

I have only met a few who went to any of the others. Any school and training might be big, cheaper and better (or small, crap and expensive) but, whatever, I just don't see how anyone reckons that these few (only 3 in USA) approved schools could take on a major share of all the PPL training- either from UK or rest of JARLAND.

Anyway, some people simply won't have the time or ability to do a 3 week PPL course and, as always, most students will train over the whole of the spring and summer, at a local airfield, paying for a lesson whenever there is enough cash, an aircraft available and suitable weather for it.

So amazed anyone, especially WWW but excluding the flying club CFI's, on here wants to cut choice and competition for Wannabes.

Trade protection is always bad for the punters.

Is anyone really suggesting stopping the Go, Easy, Ryan etc. 'rubbish' and returning to the 'good' old days- of BOAC/BEA !?.

WARNING: WELSHMAN LOSING IT

Please note and further to the above, I have had to edit out/remove the most recent rantings of our mad moderator, which he had the audacity, or is it lunacy?, to insert on my posting and between my points ! Like anyone, he is entitled to his fantasies, obsessions, opinions, prejudices and pet-hates but, apart from being largely off-topic and cat-calling, his contributions- including his proposals on Portugal's economic and political policy !! (which would be as big a laugh in Lisbon as they are in Leeds) and his Flying Instructors (interests are more important than those of students !!!) froth- should, like WWW, be posted or promoted elsewhere.

Chuck Ellsworth

3rd Apr 2002, 23:27

OK Meeb:

If you feel I am muddying the waters how about giving me your opinion on the following.

Several years ago I had to write the Commercial Gyroplane Rotorcraft exam. It was a one hundred question exam of which seven were on determining time and distance by using time and bearing changes with an ADF.

Now if that is not stupid as well as about the most inefficient method of determining your position in this modern age please tell me what you would call it?.

Just one example of stupidity in the training, exam requirements brought into the sylabus because some moron had nothing better to do.

Have you ever "had" to use the ADF to determine time and distance from an NDB or any other radio transmitter that an ADF will receive?
......................
:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

StephenRED

4th Apr 2002, 06:44

And Meeb..thankyou for your kind comment about my signature..its actually a quote from none other than Benny Hill ;)

And I`m not a flying instructor..plain 19 year old 45 hour PPL..:p

Wee Weasley Welshman

4th Apr 2002, 08:51

Chuck: exam of which seven were on determining time and distance by using time and bearing changes with an ADF.

Chuck, I have on many occassions whilst working as a PPL instructor had to rely on single indication NDB navigation using a manually set OBS. There are plenty of aircraft out there without VOR DME fit and plenty of airfields and areas without VOR or radar coverage in the the UK. Just like I had to use the speechless procedure for real once - now sadly no longer part of the syllabus under JAA. As for dropping the requirement to learn Morse code at the CPL/ATPL level - lunacy! But this digresses us.

-------

notice - stop throwing insults please. I have argued my views and you are welcome to disagree with them. But that is all.

Those 4 schools that you list take at a rough guestimate something like 15,000 flying hours out of UK flying schools.Thats about 20 flying instructors livelihoods a year.

I did indeed reply to each of the points you raised in your last post. You've deleted them which is your choice.

My point about Portugal was I feel a valid one.

With BAE being the only school to have moved from one JAA state to another I think we need to give things time to adjust in JAA land. What I would like to see is - say Portugal - decide to encourage flight training within its borders. They could drop local tax on vocational training (no VAT on flying lessons) reduce their already lower petrol taxes, exploit their favourable climate, their underused airspace, their cheap labour and building costs. There is no reason why Portugal should not become the Florida of European aviation.

I would have no problem with any of that. They could easily be as cheap as the USA and just as popular. This being the case then any flying instructor from any JAA member state could permanently and easily relocate to Portugal - our new focus of flight training. That might mean things get even harder for UK flight schools. Well thats competition for you. Thats choice.

What is unfair is for a country outside of out trading agreements to come in and poach our customers whilst denying us the right to relocate there. Whilst Florida exists there is no viable chance for the Portugese Ministry of Enterprise to make the case for becoming the flight training hub of JAA land.

notice - can you please give us your thoughts about the Kiddlington OATS flying instructors currently under notice of redundancy and OATS proposed move to Tyler in the USA? To me it looks like American flying instructors 1, British flying instructors 0.

WWW

englishal

4th Apr 2002, 09:58

WWW,

You still miss the point...

What is unfair is for a country outside of out trading agreements to come in and poach our customers whilst denying us the right to relocate there.

It is not the yanks that 'poach' us, but the high costs involved over here that 'drive' us away......do you really believe the yanks could give two hoots about training JAA students? Most JAA schools in the US were started by Brits who saw an emerging market, and capitalized on it. The FAA CFIs couldn't give a toss whether they train JAA students or FAA students. But Equally, what about the British instructors working in the US training FAA pilots because they have an FAA CFI rating? It may only be for two years, but I'd say the number of Brits in the US training US students for the FAA raings is higher than the number of US CFIs training Brits. Indeed, all my IR training was carried out with a British instructor with FAA CFII rating.

Its the whole attitude of GA in this country which has caused this problem....money money moeny. If you want IMC training you pay more, if you want instrument training you pay more again, if you want to shoot an approach, you pay for it, if you want to fly from A to B you have to pay your landing fees, if you want to park over night, you pay more again. I recently flew to Palomar airport in CA, and parked over night, do you know what it cost....? $3.00. Now thats what I call a fair price.

Cheers
EA

Wee Weasley Welshman

4th Apr 2002, 11:00

I don't wish to re-hash all this - we've all had enough. Clearly there are arguments and strong opinions both ways.

Time will tell what happens post JAA.

Cheers,

WWW

notice

4th Apr 2002, 11:56

WWW, glad to hear you've calmed down (or sobered-up?)

Your last posting can only mean 'bat and ball home', after a beating, so trust you are now able to modify your behaviour.

BTW, if you ever go to Florida or Texas, do NOT call the locals 'Yank/Yankee' (unless you want another unpleasant learning experience). Also, avoid use of 'boy'. This is more challenging for a Celt but, beware, it might be your last insult.

Wee Weasley Welshman

4th Apr 2002, 13:18

At no time was I either angry or drunk. I am coolly disspasionate about what is a rather dry topic - JAA training accreditation.

Err, thanks for the 'tip'. If you ever go to Wales don't call anyone Boyo and whatever you do don't touch another mans sheep...

WWW

Chuck Ellsworth

4th Apr 2002, 15:30

Hey Weasley:

The point I was driving at was we are no longer flying in the world of Radio Ranges, ADF, Celestial navigation and HF radios as our only means of communication.

I may be wrong but to have seven questions on such a doubious means of determining time and distance is really stupid.

I sort of agree on the morse code thing for the identifying of radio aids, however voice idents were brought into the system as far back as the early sixties and make far more sense than morse code.

By the way when I received my instrument rating training in the 1950's we had to read morse randomly selected by the examiner before taxiing.

Having said all that I flew many, many thousands of hours IFR and never, never,never had to figure out time and distance by using an ADF to figure time and distance. I have never really flown an ADF that was accurate enough to exactly determine the real bearing of a station with any reliability.

Anyhow enough of this, are you going to make it to North Weald when we are doing the flying there?

......................
:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

Wee Weasley Welshman

4th Apr 2002, 15:44

Hey Weasley:

The point I was driving at was we are no longer flying in the world of Radio Ranges, ADF, Celestial navigation and HF radios as our only means of communication.

I regularly fly outside of the promulagated range of VOR's and ADF's across the Bay of Biscay.

I may be wrong but to have seven questions on such a doubious means of determining time and distance is really stupid.

Not really. If you can't work out a simple bearing/distance/time problem then best you don't fly a jet airliiner..

I sort of agree on the morse code thing for the identifying of radio aids, however voice idents were brought into the system as far back as the early sixties and make far more sense than morse code.

No voice idents in Europe. And not at all common in the rest of the world. What about NDB and ILS DME idents? What about visual beacon idents of airfields?

By the way when I received my instrument rating training in the 1950's we had to read morse randomly selected by the examiner before taxiing.

Having said all that I flew many, many thousands of hours IFR and never, never,never had to figure out time and distance by using an ADF to figure time and distance. I have never really flown an ADF that was accurate enough to exactly determine the real bearing of a station with any reliability.

Well the procedures are drawn with +- 5 degrees allowance for the NDB - that should be enough.

Cheers,

WWW

Chuck Ellsworth

4th Apr 2002, 16:29

OK Weasly:

I just can't seem to get through to you what I am trying to say.

As to the + or - 5 deg. with an ADF needle that is just being intelectually dishonest , you know damn well that is pure crap.

I knew how to figure simple time and distance problems when flying probably before you were born, and as far as flying jets go that is being nothing but condesending, has it occured to you that maybe I was flying jets long before you were around?

One more little comment as far as international navigation goes, I just checked my records and during the past six years I have flown to forty six different countries related to my ferry business. ( Have you landed at that many different airports? nevermind different countries? )

Don't you think that I just may know almost as much about flying as you? One more thing Weasly, being beyond receiving distance of VOR's etc. is normal during trans oceanic ferry flights so what exactly is your point?

Now my dear friend, once again I will be at North Weald around the end of May and me and my crew would just love for you to drop by and share your expertise with us. :):):)

Hell if you are really nice I might let you try and fly a real airplane!!

Cat Driver:

.............
:D The hardest thing about flying is kowing when to say no.:D

Delta Wun-Wun

4th Apr 2002, 18:30

Chuck...30...Wee Weasley.....15.......New Balls please!:D :D

Naples Air Center, Inc.

4th Apr 2002, 19:32

Chuck,

Something I found interesting, when I renewed my CFI last month, was the new view by the FAA on training.

They are now encouraging CRM. It is not a full blown CRM, but utilization of the person in the right seat.

They are now looking favorably at telling the person on the right to pull out a chart, take the controls of the aircraft and hold a heading, etc.

You still need to demonstrate you are capable of doing it on your own, but they are looking for good use of all the recourses in the cockpit, which includes the instructor and examiner.

It's a small step in the right direction!

Take Care,

Capt. Richard J. Gentil, Pres.
Naples Air Center, Inc.

Chuck Ellsworth

5th Apr 2002, 03:35

Richard:

CRM when properly thought out and aheared to is one of the most important disiplines in flight safety.

Many years ago I flew for Mobil Oil and they had the best crew coordination I had seen to that point in time and I have used the lessons learned ever since.

For me there should be very slight difference between the Captain and the first officer except the Captain has final authority.

As far as flying goes I split it 50 / 50 period, including changing seats.

There is no restricions as to weather decisions or take off and landing conditions. The pilot flying that leg or sector will perform all flying duties for that leg. Generally speaking if the x/wind or weather minimums are to difficult for the first officer they then are by definition not doable for either pilot.

My basic beliefe is the first officer be brought to Captain standards in the shortest time possible as far as the actual flying skills are concerned.

Experience will then be the only limiting factor to Captancy.

One other very, important item. When I held chief pilot positions in large flight operations if personality clashes arose I would seperate the pilots involved as safety is compromized when two pilots resent each other..It is unavoidable in the real world of human nature, so we should make all effort to watch for and seperate such indivuals.

Another comment, I found the first officers to be invaluable when trying to determine if there was a crew problem that needed correcting, all I did was listen and very often the warning signs were there to see. ( It is amazing what fratrenizing with the crew will bring out in the right circumstances,,usually in a bar.) :):)

......................
:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

Julian

5th Apr 2002, 07:07

WWW seems to have changed tact from supporting UK GA to JAA EA, ie.

No it won't. Even if half the British PPL's currently training in the US don't ever train due to the extra costs the UK GA scene will benefit from millions and millions of extra revenue every year. Less pilots yes. More money for UK airfields yes.<

and..

This costs jobs in the UK flight training industry and undermines the development and expansion of UK (or JAA) GA flight training.. .. .Its all very well saving a few quid on your PPL course by going to the States but then you shouldn't cry about their being no Flying Instructors jobs for you in this country once you have that coveted CPL

to...

If BAe move your job from Prestwick to Jerez (as they did) then you can hop on the next flight to Spain and relocate without filling in a form and continue your career.

Seems to me that WWW argument doesnt hold any water now asby BAE moving to Jerez, or any other JAA member State, the upshot is the same - GA in UK goes downhill because no one is in the UK to do any flying they are all abroad!!!

JAA or US the money is outside the country.

Not everyone wants to work in Spain, OK if you are single but what about those with famailies, jobs, houses, etc...?

What do you want to do WWW?
Keep money in UK GA or not?

Julian.

Wee Weasley Welshman

5th Apr 2002, 07:27

Julian - I want to keep money within the economic area that I have a right to work in. Preferably the UK but we are in the EU and JAA now - hence the UK CAA having to come in line with what France and Germany want, i.e. No JAA training in the US.

Local GA is likely to be best supported by locals doing PPL or NPPL courses. People doing professional training would be the more likely to locate around the EU. Either will benefit from the US being disallowed.

More pointedly I want all the OATS instructors to keep their jobs in preference to Hank Banderbuger III at Tyler.

---------
Chuck,

As to the + or - 5 deg. with an ADF needle that is just being intelectually dishonest , you know damn well that is pure crap.

Is it? I know no such thing. If you can't hold an ADF within +-5 degrees you fail your IRT.

I merely raised the point that ADF navigation skills are still very relevant in the UK. I have had to do half a dozen NDB approaches in a Boeing in the last 3 months. I raised this point not as a challenge but you appear to have taken umbrage...

Congratulations on flying before I was born. I will be flying after you are dead. Same thing really.

Cheers,

WWW

slim_slag

5th Apr 2002, 10:12

www

Congratulations on flying before I was born. I will be flying after you are dead. Same thing really.

It is not the same thing at all. What Chuck is trying to tell you, and which you don't get, is that is that he knows a **** load more about flying than you do. Also there is no guarantee that you will be flying when he is dead. There is also no guarantee that you will ever be as competent a pilot as Chuck, even when he IS dead :)

Not really. If you can't work out a simple bearing/distance/time problem then best you don't fly a jet airliiner..

I really liked Chuck's opinion (or whoever he is now, lol) that a FO should be similarly skilled to his captain. Back to the whole premise of this thread (JAA and FAA training), I find it illustrative that it is possible in JAA land to be a FO in a passenger jet with only 250 hours. That would never happen in FAA land. In fact, in a previous thread you stated that it was a reason why FAA was inferior to JAA.

Now I'm sure that a 250 hour JAA CPL can fly figure of eights around an NDB for hours with far more precision than a 250 hour FAA CPL (I've see the JAA boys training in PHX do it in the sim I am so very impressed). I'm less impressed when I get on a 737 in JAA land and consider the possibility that if the captain makes a bad/borderline decision our 250 hour FO doesn't have the experience to know this is a bad decision, and so use his (probably excellent on paper) CRM skills to do something about it.

But during that thread you were obviously saying that the system should be set up for the professional pilots, it was good because you could be a professional pilot with 250 hours. It's only going to be a matter of time before a plane goes down and the accident report says 'probable cause, inexperience of FO'. You obviously don't care much about the consumer being able to choose how he spends his time and money, but I'd have though you would care more about your passengers! Your FO in an FAA jet may be less precise in his ADF skills, but who cares, he will be competant. The system here is set up to provide him with the vast experience he needs before becoming FO in a jet with 150 people behind him. You have to face the facts, it's better in FAA land, and you should not be stopping people from coming here to train at facilities over here and experience all this. If JAA/Europe was set up like FAA/USA then maybe our low time pilot would be able to be gain some good experience prior to his first real job, but it isn't, so he cannot.

Cheers

englishal

5th Apr 2002, 12:57

It's only going to be a matter of time before a plane goes down and the accident report says 'probable cause, inexperience of FO'

In fact the Gulf air or Emirrates (what ever it was) airbus that crashed into the persian gulf a few years ago was blamed on a captain who thought he was the best pilot in the world, and a 250hr FO who was too **** scared to question the captains decisions.....

EA

RowleyUK

5th Apr 2002, 13:20

OK children back to class!:rolleyes:

Talk about abuse of bandwidth!:rolleyes:

I should be a moderator:D :D :p :D :D

slim_slag

5th Apr 2002, 14:41

EnglishAl

I find it interesting that when something really really nasty happens (not an engine failure, though bad management of that has caused fatalities) on a two pilot plane, and the plane is lost. You get all these really experienced and old guys coming out and saying 'if only we had the FE still, we need three guys on the flight deck to handle real emergencies'. Now we can have one experienced guy and one person just out of nappies. Undoubtably the green JAA FO is a precision pilot, but sometimes it takes a lot more than that.

Hey Rowley. Before you can be moderator you have to have something interesting and useful to say. So as you haven;t done so yet how about starting now :D

At least www posts valuable stuff and doesn't appear to want to censor posts, which I assume would be your method. www just knows jack about the US and wants to tell us how to spend our money :D

WWW, if you want to do a great fly drive in the US then fly to LAX, rent a convertable mustang (red if possible) and on the first night drive like mad all the way to north California and Shasta. Spend the next week or two driving back down the Pacific Coast Highway to LA. Beats anything that Florida can offer, in my opinion.

Chuck Ellsworth

5th Apr 2002, 15:05

My dear weasly friend:

Please, please, stop being condesending, professional pilots with even a glimmer of experience do not mention they have done half a dozen ADF approaches in any given time frame no more than they would describe the intricaties of how they tie their shoe laces in the morning.

Can't you understand that there was a time when ADF's were the only approaches pilots had as approach aids for most of their flying? Given we flew many more trips and hours per month due to the maximum hours per month not being inforced as much in that time period is it not reasonable to believe we understood the limitations of the ADF?

You should think before you post such infantile remarks as the one about failing a test ride due to not being able to fly within + or - 5 degrees. Surely someone must have told you that in the real world ADF signals can be very unreliable due to many factors and 5 degree averaging is not possible.

Now here are two questions.

First: Your D.I. has failed and you are in the area of magnetic compass unreliability, to add to your problems you cannot get a star , moon or sun shot. The ADF needle is slowly revolving all over the place. Would you use the beat frequency occilator position to home in on a beacon that you know to be your destination? And what would be your method of proving 180 degree ambiguity?

Second: While flying in very low temperatures and ice crystals the ADF needle starts to go slowly all over the place.

Just using your finger on the windshield what would that it tell you may be causing the needle unreliability?

OH, by the way weasly do you let your Captain fly the odd ADF approach so he / she get a chance to practice for their check rides??:):):)

I guess I had better quit picking on poor WWW.

........................
:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

notice

5th Apr 2002, 15:29

From his 4th April posting, WWW seemed to be signing-off this but no such luck.

After only a few years of flying, WWW seems to have forgotten that, no matter how much you rate yourself, there are always people with more......... brains, experience, mates, money, muscles etc.

This is a common problem amongst professional pilots which is usually caused by wearing uniforms, substance abuse, weak management, too much sex (or even having thick friends and relatives!)

Anyway, back to the answer to the topic, which no-one has contradicted.

CAA approve 3 schools for JAA PPL training in USA:

Ormond Beach Avaition
Orlando Flight Training
European Flight Training

BEagle

5th Apr 2002, 15:45

Quite correct - Ormond Beach Aviation has been added to the list of such organisations approved by the CAA.

I'm intrigued to know the answers to our esteemed PBY driver's questions; many of the techniques used way back when are still valid, but are rarely needed in modern aircraft - fortunately!

It's the weekend, it's sunny even in the UK. Some of us would to well to mellow out and listen to the words of the wise ones!

Chuck Ellsworth

5th Apr 2002, 16:45

Yeh Beagle:

The world evolves, but if we had not understood all those early methods of navigation very few of us would be here to talk about them.

Somehow even though I am from the dinosaur age I managed to evolve with technology and believe it or not I even understand the Airbus laws of computer flight, ie. law normal, law alternate and even law direct.. I bet you wouldnt believe me but I can make it go where I want even in law direct. :):)

Sooooo you see even dinosaurs can learn. :)

P.S.:

Do you think I could .... with luck pass an ADF flight test????

......................
:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

BEagle

5th Apr 2002, 18:37

And I'll bet that you took the time and trouble to make sure that you had a thorough understanding of the Airbooooos FBW laws - whereas present day Nintendo kids with 250 hrs and bum fluff chins probably think that the gold stripes on their shirts are more important than a proper understanding of basic theory!

Exams = spot questions, then forget everything as soon as you've left the examination room. Because you'll never be examined again and you think that there'll never be a need to apply theoretical knowledge so long as you sit there in your nice white shirt, watch the autopilot fly the ac and wait for the monthly cheque to arrive.

Chuck Ellsworth

5th Apr 2002, 20:13

BEagle:

Wouldnt it be refreshing for WWW to take me up on my offer to show me his expertize and settle the experience versus ego thing in an airplane that you actually have to fly?

The Airbus thing was given to me by Airbus as a thank you for the flying I did for them in the Sur Les Traces De L'Aeropostale commerative flight we did in 1998. Toulouse to Santiago.

I found their technology to be facinating and am privilaged to have been given the opportunity to have sampled their product.

And yes it requires very in depth study to truly appreciate how the thing flys.

It is not an airplane as you and I have flown, rather it is a beautilful many colored video game that allows you to fly an airplane.

.....................
:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

AMEX

5th Apr 2002, 21:29

:D :D :D
Keen to hear the answers Chuck.

slim_slag

6th Apr 2002, 12:25

It's gone quiet here, we haven't lost a plane over the Bay of Biscay have we?:D :D :D

I'm guessing that St Elmo's fire is the cause of number two. You'd see weird glowing moving spiders web type phenomena on the window as your finger changed the local electrical field. Sort of like you get with those excutive toys with the transparent balls with discharges in them, when you touch the surface of the ball you change the pattern of discharge within the ball.

So this would give you precipitation static, which disproportionately affects radio frequencies in the ADF range. The ice would cause the build up of static by friction and also would take away some charge, leving behind a net charged airframe.

No friggen idea about number one. Do I win £5?

DFC

6th Apr 2002, 13:15

Chuck,

Next time why not come over and renew your IR in the UK. It is an annual test where you will be required to track an NDB within +/- 5 deg. If you can't you fail.

If you don't believe me then here is the CAA document:

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/175/srg_fcl_01.PDF

To me this is a great example of why training for JAA licences should remain within JAA States. It is too hard to prevent instructors 3000+ miles away from using Chuck's tracking when the CAA's tracking is required.

The old ADF position fix using bearing, speed and time can be used in many situations. What we must not lose sight of is that much of the training we complete is just for those few minutes when things go wrong or don't work. When your GPS stops working then somewhere over the pacific, you might be glad of the ole ADF.

Some delivery pilot years ago was glad of a Air New Zealand captain who remembered the basics of celestial nav and used it to find and guide hime to safety.

I am not against people from JAA States going to the US or elsewhere to do training. I am against those people receiving JAA approved training outside the JAA States.

If every JAA State stops this approval system of US and other schools then it will not stop people going to the US to train. However those people will return with business cards saying that they are US pilots and will have to undergo a conversion course to obtain a JAA licence.

The CAA is on the fence. It says that approved US schools can teach for the JAA IR. However if you train at the same school and obtain a US IR before returning to the UK then you will have to complete a full JAA IR course before they will give you a JAA IR. Same instructor, same school, different answer.

Let those who want to train in the USA for US licences. Let those who want to train in the JAA for JAA licences. There are clear systems for validation and conversion.

DFC

slim_slag

6th Apr 2002, 13:32

It is an annual test where you will be required to track an NDB within +/- 5 deg. If you can't you fail.

Not so black and white as you might suggest.

4.1.3
Throughout the flight the aeroplane should be flown as accurately as possible. The limits for
operation are given as guidance to applicants but do not necessarily indicate that a 'failure' will
result if any boundary is exceeded.

Same Document as you cited (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/175/srg_fcl_01.PDF)

"Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"

Well I never, I do believe that is attributed to none other than Douglas Bader.

Cheers

Chuck Ellsworth

6th Apr 2002, 14:24

Hi DFC:

You by any chance related to WWW?

It is obvious by your post you lack a clear understanding of the subject. You cannot be failed on an instrument flight test for the malfunctioning of any aid to navigation.

There are many reasons that an ADF needle will give eroneous indications and a pilot must understand the limitations of the system he/she are using. The ADF is an aid for non precision approaches and a rough guide to desired track when navigating.

Only the ignorant will believe that + or - 5 degrees is a guaranteed error limitation when using the ADF.

Next time I am flying in your exclusive airspace would I have to advise airtraffic control to allow for Chuck's tracking so I don't get lost?

As to celestial navigation go to www.ebushpilot.com and under your stories you will find one called Arcturus missing hours and fate.

Read that story then come on back and tell me about celestial nav.

Oh can you answer question no. one that I asked WWW?

You have a good day now.......

.........................
:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

Chuck Ellsworth

6th Apr 2002, 14:43

Slim_Slag:

Yeh, it is St Elmos fire and is a constant problem in the Arctic when flying in ice crystals or dry snow.

You can draw dirty pictures in blue fire on the windshield with your finger. :):)

It never ceases to amaze me at the myopic understanding of aviation by some of our JAA challenged brethern.

Do these guys really believe that JAA has reinvented Aviation for the benefit of their victims?

I fly all over the world and nothing...nothing even comes close to N. America for the freedom of flight and first class service.

( Well maybe Angola could compete with N. America ) :):):)

.......................

:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D :

englishal

6th Apr 2002, 15:09

The CAA is on the fence. It says that approved US schools can teach for the JAA IR. However if you train at the same school and obtain a US IR before returning to the UK then you will have to complete a full JAA IR course before they will give you a JAA IR. Same instructor, same school, different answer.

More jobs for the boys...A prime example of how completely messed up the JAA is. Why should we be forced to do the ENTIRE JAA course? Instrument flying is instrument flying no matter what side of the pond you're on, and the JAA /CAA are more than happy to let FAA IR pilots fly N Reg's IFR over the UK. I could understand having to do a flight test in the UK, or even a cut down 'conversion course' but not the entire course....

And another thing.....When will people start trusting GPS? I've used it for the past 7 years in my job and never once seen a problem lasting more than a minute or so...!

(Better stop now before I get started again)
:p

Cheers
EA

DFC

6th Apr 2002, 15:25

Why I don't trust GPS

I have never had a complete engine failure yet am always in practice and on the look out for one.

Luckily however, Dubalya does not have his hand on my aircraft ignition switch unlike the GPS system.

However not trusting a system is not the same as not using it.

I use GPS on a daily basis. However I will not use it without suitable back-up and cross check available from visual navigation or radio aids and I will never use it to make approaches.

DFC

Evo7

6th Apr 2002, 15:57

The Airbus thing was given to me by Airbus as a thank you for the flying I did for them in the Sur Les Traces De L'Aeropostale commerative flight we did in 1998. Toulouse to Santiago.

Chuck - offtopic, but is there more about this flight anywhere?

slim_slag

6th Apr 2002, 16:07

I use GPS on a daily basis. However I will not use it without suitable back-up and cross check available from visual navigation or radio aids

FAA certified GPS receivers cross check themselves. It's called RAIM. If the GPS is deemed unreliable, which happens, it will not go into Approach Mode. This technology has been used for years and it really is a total non issue. If you get a very rare RAIM outage just hang around until you need to go to your alternate.

and I will never use it to make approaches.

As PIC that's your call of course. I'd take a GPS approach over an NDB any day, but that's my call too. I'd even take a GPS over a VOR approach. I would get into my destination while you would be off to an alternate.

As for the fact that the US military has control over GPS, that is also a non issue except we Europeans make it so. Do you really think that the US would turn off GPS? How much money would that cost US industry? It's simply not going to happen. Having said that I totally agree that the EU should put it's own system up there in space. I like competition you see.

Chuck Ellsworth

6th Apr 2002, 16:22

Evo7:

Yes there is a hard cover book by Patrick Baudry and Cyril LeTourneur. It has many very good pictures as well as the story.

The book is named

Un vol de L'egende Sur Les Traces de L'Aeropostale..

It of course in printed in French only but is worth buying for the pictures. The ISBN number is 2-235-02238-3.

It was a very difficult trip due to the time restrictions we were placed under in order to meet the schedule for all the places we stopped ,,, media and VIP's and all that sort of stuff.

We departed Toulouse on Oct. 14, 1998 and landed Santiago on Oct. 29, 1998.

Cat Driver:

BEagle

6th Apr 2002, 16:33

The use of ADF in the UK has, regrettably, turned into a ridiculous art form at certain schools. Particularly old wives' tales about how to fly an NDB hold.

Chaps - it's a system prone to errors and is a NON-PRECISION device! Precisely as Chuck states.

When I examine pilots on IRs flying an NDB approach, I expect them to descend on the procedure only when they're in the 10 degree sector and to manoeuvre the aircraft safely to remain within that sector. If the needle starts twitching and oscillating, I do not expect them to chase it all over the sky, but to mean out the needle's wanders and to fly a steady approach. I've been told of other countries where a 'twin NDB' approach is flown - there are 2 beacons - one very close to the aerodrome and one about 8 miles out - both of which are on the approach course. You line them up so that your ADF needles are on top of eachother and hold them that way until you fly over the first beacon, then if you wander off course the needles will form a shallow arrowhead - you ease away from the pointy bit to bring them back into line. Apparently it's dead easy and you never have to remember what the QDM is - you just keep the needles in line. When the second needle topples, if you have landing criteria you land, if you don't, you go around!

Regarding GPS - if it's RAIM enabled and IFR certified, no problem with a GPS non-precision approach. Even the p-code GPS aided FMS in the ac I fly isn't approach certificated, but it's dead handy to have the inbound course from the FMS set on the HSI whilst flying a TACAN or NDB approach on the RMIs ( we can't display TACAN radials on the HSI) or to have the runway centreline set if on an SRA. However, VFR only GPS can only ever be a useful back up to other navaids or a map!

DFC

6th Apr 2002, 17:40

BEagle,

How do you match your requirements (+/- 10deg) for ADF tracking with the CAA requirements for +/- 5deg. I see your point about the wandering needle and the need to average but can not see how you can totally disregard a CAA/JAA requirement when conducting a flight test.

I think that the +/- 5 deg is also a requirement for adequate obstacle clearance on final approach under ICAO PANS OPS.

DFC

BEagle

6th Apr 2002, 18:14

DFC - I think you’ll find that ±5˚ is equal to 10˚. Or at least it did when I went to school!!

Chuck Ellsworth

6th Apr 2002, 20:50

It is becoming quite obvious this discussion will go nowhere because their are two entirely different thought processes at work here.

On one side we have the by the book and rules pureists who do not take into account the real world of operational flying. Their only goal in life seems to be to forge ahead in the misguided belief that the CAA / FAA or what ever who make up all these rules and policies actually work in the real world.

What you must understand is when an examiner is giving any flight test, the criteria by which the skills and knowledge of the person being tested is measured by their ability to not only fly accurate headings and profiles, but, at the same time recognize when things are going all to hell. It is what the person being tested does when they recognize an anomoly in any procedure that truly counts.

By the book is great when you are " testing " someone, however I personally do not want that mindset in any airplane I fly.

Did you read that story?, and any comment on celestial nav. you would like to share with me DFC?

......................
:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

slim_slag

6th Apr 2002, 22:23

I really like this quote, and it's so appropriate too, let's put it out again.

"Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men" Douglas Bader

Examiners are in general wise men. They know their stuff and have seen so many people fly they can probably tell if you are going to bust your NDB approach before you commence it!

Come on DFC, you repeatedly quote from that document you cited, but conveniently miss my post where I pointed out where the document says the Examiner can ignore them. Are you really so blinkered?

Chuck is yet again correct on how the system really works. I myself busted the altitude standards in a major way on my FAA private checkride. I got myself into a spiral dive while intercepting a VOR radial under the hood. What a pillock, but I recognised it and correctly recovered. During my debrief the Examiner, a very experienced fellow, told me that although I had completely cocked up he would still pass me. Everything else was above average and I had demonstrated I could get myself out of trouble. It's a licence to learn, if you look at the private standards they are nigh on impossible to attain with 50 hours. He dragged my instructor in and told him to take me out and do further hoodwork. He was confident I was actually safe, and now I should go out and learn how to fly.

Guys like Chuck are getting harder and harder to find. They are all getting grey hair and failing their medicals. You can learn more from just listening to these crusty old guys than you can flying with a new boy. I used to hang out with these part 135 charter and ferry pilots in high altitude airports in the Rockies. When you got the priviledge to fly with them they would teach you more in one hour than these young fellows could in twenty. They would laugh at me with my new fangled ideas.

Every now and again a Flying Fortress turns up at my airfield and gives rides to the few remaining creaky old WW2 pilots who suddenly come out of the woodwork. These are the folk you should talk to, though they tend not to say much in return. These fellows would bring a plane back from a mission in continental Europe with half the control surfaces missing and a bullet in their leg. These new CPLs don't even know what the rudder pedals are for!

But I am also a relatively new boy at this game, and have nowhere near the experience of the Chucks and Beagles of this world, and never will. I try not to be too arrogant though, and these people here who tend to obey the rules without question should consider this too. I guess these people are just the product of a regulatory regime which doesn't give the freedom to explore that the FAA system still provides.

But then, with the lack of experience some of these new flyboys have, maybe they shouldn't be encouraged to think out of the box. Yeh, maybe it's better for them to obey the rules without question, and we should be grateful that modern transport planes are so reliable that significant human intervention is rarely needed anymore. :D :D

Naples Air Center, Inc.

6th Apr 2002, 22:51

I thought I would put in the views of someone that teaches FAA, CAA, and JAA Courses.

There are many ways to teach how to fly. Which way is the best? None. Each way has its strong points and its weak points. You need to study each program to see the big picture. Over the years, we have incorporated the strong points from all three programs. The attitude that there is only one way to do everything will get you killed. You need to keep learning and be ready to change as technology changes.

The only instructing I have personally taught in the last 10 years has been CRM and real world flying. When you are learning to fly or adding a rating, the instruction is geared to meeting and exceeding the requirements to ultimately pass an exam with an examiner. This has nothing to do with the real world. (This would be an topic for a new thread, so I will not go into detail here.)

Flying by its very nature crosses all borders. Your thinking cannot be limited to one country or one organization or one governing authority.

Are people that Train in the UK better than people that train in the US? No.

Are people that train in the UK and the US better than people that just train in either the UK or the US? Yes.

Are people that train in three countries better than people that trained in just one or two countries? Absolutely.

Aviation is global and people need to think globally.

Happy Flying,

Capt. Richard J. Gentil, Pres.
Naples Air Center, Inc.

Chuck Ellsworth

6th Apr 2002, 23:22

Slim-slag and Richard:

Excellent responses. :):)

Soon it will be time for me to quit, not because I want to but because the clock is running out.

Fortunately my health is still excellent , but I am getting tired.

There is only one thing that I wish to do before I finally have to quit though and that is pass on what over thirty thousand accident free hours has taught me, but that is impossible as there is no way I can do that.

So what I am doing is trying to reason with those who think they know how it should be done without the experience to prove they are right.

The best advice I can give is have an open mind because some day you to will realize we never really even scratch the surface of perfection. What we can do is listen, evaluate, then choose how we plan and fly each flight, maybe with the right attitude and a lot of luck you to will reach the end of your career still able to teach based on all the lessons you have learned.

Nothing, I repeat nothing will replace experience and the ability to recognize when we are wrong, then learn from it and have the strength of character to admit to being wrong, after that it gets easier.

Have you ever really thought about how I sign off??

:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.:D

:D :D You will also note I do not post anonymously.:D :D

clear prop!!!

7th Apr 2002, 08:09

First class posts!

Any comments WWW...??

jmore

7th Apr 2002, 10:30

i agree unreservedly with the last few posts -when the FAA examiner signed my logbook for my ppl skills test his words were -congratulations a license to learn! -words every pilot should live by no matter what authority stamped the book or what system you fly under -you should continue to update your knowlegde every time you walk towards an aircraft or even better -before you even think about going flying!

DFC

7th Apr 2002, 11:30

Beagle, sorry, having read the post again I now see that you did say 10deg "sector". 5 each side!! Should have known that you would not say otherwise.

Chuck et al,

I agree totally that any licence pass is only the start of the real learning process. The test standards are the minimum safe standards that must be acheived. With experience and practice, I expect that those standards will be far exceeded. For example, PPL flight test height keeping is +/- 150ft. Any PPL I know usually keeps it within +/- 50ft when trimed straight and level.

I also agree that at the end of the day it is the examminers feeling that this student is a safe operator which will result in a pass. Not Chuck Yeagar flying.

However entering a spiral dive from simulated instrument flight is an unsafe departure and as the examminer quite rightly pointed out required further training. The idea being that this PPL having flown VMC into IMC will most likely be at or worse below the min safe altitude and any significant loss of height would kill. On the other hand, not keeping the wings perfectly level and allowing the heading to wander back and forth would not be as bad provided nothing dangerous happened.

In the case quoted, if all the other flying was fine then I would have given a "partial pass" and told the guy to come back for a second check of the IF part before I would sign the paperwork. That is me taking out an insurance policy on that guy which prevents him from ignoring the further training "advice" (which is all it can be after the licence is signed) and operating on the licence. Or more importantly it protects the unsuspecting passengers that he might take up. I know full well that without practice this guy's ability to operate by sole reference to instruments will disappear. However when I read about their VFR to IFR loss of control accident, I can sleep tight knowing that I did all that I could do to prevent it.

I have checked again and did not see any reference to the CAA document where is says examiners can disregards the laid down minima. Perhaps someone could give me the reference again.

ICAO sets worldwide standards agreed by the member countries. What makes things difficult between the Americas and Europe is that in many respects the FAA ignore ICAO and have to go their own way...visibility in Statute Miles, TERPS, etc. Yes, the UK does have some differences but overall the number are small.

Big note for everyone I am not saying which system is better, I am saying that there are differences and it is the differences that count.

Once again, I say that I am in favour of any European going to the US to train if it suits them and being trained for any FAA rating they choose. They can then return to Europe and convert that licence if they so like. There are clear well laid down conversion procedures.

I am not in favour of them being trained for a European licence in the US unless the instructors and Examminers have the same experience of European operations as any instructor based in Europe and meet the same standards with regard to instructor renewal i.e. seminar etc. Again, I highlight the question asked earlier by one US instructor which clearly demonstrated his total lack of knowledge of JAR. In fact I would have a fair chance of being correct if I stated that most of the US based instructors teaching for the JAA licences/ratings have never studied JAR-FCL or JAR-OPS.

Because of the differences in rules and procedures, a flight conducted in the US totally as per European requirements may be illegal under the FARs. Thus, it is not possible to fully teach European operations in the US.

Many returnees from the US with JAA qualifications know all of the FARs but none if any of the JARs. This is only natural since they were operating under the FARs but it is not good enough.

To turn the tables. How would like it if I was training US pilots for US licences in Europe. Do you think that they would be safe operators on returning to the USA never having has VFR flight following or never operated in the Class E airway system of the US or never came across any of the terminal area procedures.

Do you think that a newby pilot who is used to Class G operations and automatically selects 7000 on the transponder will go down well in the US when they call up and ask for a "Radar Information Service"??????? By issuing the licence, the FAA have stated that the student requires absolutely no further training in the US to operate and carry passengers. Is this true do you think?

The celestial nav comment was just an example of how "useless old procedures" can become very usefull in certain situations.

The difference is the differences.

DFC