PPRuNe Forums

Go Back   PPRuNe Forums > Wannabes Forums > Professional Pilot Training (includes ground studies)
Reload this Page Recency Clarification
Forgotten your Username/Password?
Register Forms FAQ Calendar Advertise Mark Forums Read


Professional Pilot Training (includes ground studies) A forum for those on the steep path to that coveted professional licence. Whether studying for the written exams, training for the flight tests or building experience here's where you can hang out.


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 1st Nov 2012, 23:03   #1 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: here
Posts: 15
Recency Clarification
Hi. I was wondering if somebody can clarify the recency experience for an FAA licence.

In the US if I have an ATP with A320, If I intend to fly as a co pilot do I need to only to a revalidation of my licence every 24 months?

I know this is very basic but I have a foreign licence and the rules regarding recency is a little bit different and the only source I can find is on the net.

My thinking is I haven't flown type in 12 months now and have an interview coming up. If I can just get some time in a sim that isn't FAA approved, It serves my need without the cost of going to the states to renew. However if it needs to be revalidated anyway well I guess I need to go there to keep it current.

Thanks for your help in advance.
PatTheDog is offline   Reply
 
 
This ad will disappear if you login
Reply
 

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT. The time now is 22:36.

Privacy Policy - Terms and Conditions - Contact Us - PPRuNe Home - Archive - Top

vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
© 1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the press may use it, or the unscrupulous, or sciolists*, to elicit certain reactions.

*"sciolist"... Noun, archaic. "a person who pretends to be knowledgeable and well informed".