Air Japan (AJX) B767
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: china
Age: 61
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet747;
Yeah, get rid of it. You sure wouldn't want anyone to think you can do something frivolous like fly round dials and raw data.
Hide that knowledge and experience. It will bite you in the @ss.
Crap, now I need to clean up my license. I need to get rid of those pesky 727,757,767, and 777 types off my license. Oh yeah and I forgot the 320 type as well. What was I thinking?
FOMCLMAO
Yeah, get rid of it. You sure wouldn't want anyone to think you can do something frivolous like fly round dials and raw data.
Hide that knowledge and experience. It will bite you in the @ss.
Crap, now I need to clean up my license. I need to get rid of those pesky 727,757,767, and 777 types off my license. Oh yeah and I forgot the 320 type as well. What was I thinking?
FOMCLMAO
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everything is on Record in Oklahoma and they are saying that It is a normal procedure to surrender a Type if a pilot don't need it anymore. It is legal and on record. Uncle Sam knows that. What is more important ? Having a Job or having a certificate and staying at home ?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Over the Pacific mostly
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@jet747
The information you were given at the FAA is correct as I understand it and it is one way of getting rid off restrictions, this isn't an effort to "hide" any sort of experience since you will be posting those times and work history during your application process, I know another person who did this with a restricted corporate jet type he had and wasn't planing to fly it ever again, he explained the reasoning during his interview and is now an A320 skipper, so evidently they accepted his solution.....!
However, I insist that you should get in touch with the contract companies and inquire about that particular solution to the restriction problem, because it might be that they will accept your application as is anyways....!
The information you were given at the FAA is correct as I understand it and it is one way of getting rid off restrictions, this isn't an effort to "hide" any sort of experience since you will be posting those times and work history during your application process, I know another person who did this with a restricted corporate jet type he had and wasn't planing to fly it ever again, he explained the reasoning during his interview and is now an A320 skipper, so evidently they accepted his solution.....!
However, I insist that you should get in touch with the contract companies and inquire about that particular solution to the restriction problem, because it might be that they will accept your application as is anyways....!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Expatsylvania
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone who feels the need to be snide here doesn't quite understand the problem. An SIC type rating (be it on the 727, the DC-3, or the A380) is a "restricted" type rating. Most contract companies specify quite clearly that a restriction of ANY KIND on a pilot's license is a disqualifying problem when converting from FAA to a local license.
Obviously, when dealing with the contract company, the best possible outcome would be for them to accept the license anyway, since the applicant has no intention of operating that particular type again on the new foreign license. While not unheard of, this would be unusual, and the licensing countries for which this "no restrictions" language is in effect are not generally known for making exceptions to rules.
I have met two people who were in a similar situation before coming to China, where this same rule is in effect. One was able to get his SIC rating changed to a normal type rating through his employer at the time, who put him through a full type rating course. The other applicant was not so fortunate, but all he had to do was very simply walk into his local FSDO, and declare his intention to "surrender" his SIC rating. The FARs clearly state that a pilot may surrender all or any part of his/her professional qualifications for any reason. Half an hour and a new 8710 form later, the pilot walked out of the office with a temporary ATP, one type rating and one restriction lighter. The Head Fed on duty that day mentioned that it's an uncommon request, but those that do it are almost always in the exact same position as our poster here. His FAA records will still clearly show that he had an appropriate type rating when he was an acting crew member on the 727.
The SIC rating was a joke, and another reminder that the FAA will happily make deviations from ICAO standards to save a quick buck, even if that makes life harder for FAA-rated pilots. Thankfully, the new ATP rules in the US have pretty much eliminated the rationale for the SIC type rating.
Obviously, when dealing with the contract company, the best possible outcome would be for them to accept the license anyway, since the applicant has no intention of operating that particular type again on the new foreign license. While not unheard of, this would be unusual, and the licensing countries for which this "no restrictions" language is in effect are not generally known for making exceptions to rules.
I have met two people who were in a similar situation before coming to China, where this same rule is in effect. One was able to get his SIC rating changed to a normal type rating through his employer at the time, who put him through a full type rating course. The other applicant was not so fortunate, but all he had to do was very simply walk into his local FSDO, and declare his intention to "surrender" his SIC rating. The FARs clearly state that a pilot may surrender all or any part of his/her professional qualifications for any reason. Half an hour and a new 8710 form later, the pilot walked out of the office with a temporary ATP, one type rating and one restriction lighter. The Head Fed on duty that day mentioned that it's an uncommon request, but those that do it are almost always in the exact same position as our poster here. His FAA records will still clearly show that he had an appropriate type rating when he was an acting crew member on the 727.
The SIC rating was a joke, and another reminder that the FAA will happily make deviations from ICAO standards to save a quick buck, even if that makes life harder for FAA-rated pilots. Thankfully, the new ATP rules in the US have pretty much eliminated the rationale for the SIC type rating.
Your JCAB, once earned (not so much 'converted', you'll find out why) will not have any of your previous ratings from your previous license anyway, so where is the problem?
You are reading something in this that doesn't exist
To apply, you must have a current, unrestricted jet type on your current license, fair enough, but please quote me where this is exclusive of other ratings, unrestricted or otherwise.
Again, and this is important, how will you account for hours logged on a type you have had removed from your current license.
You are reading something in this that doesn't exist
To apply, you must have a current, unrestricted jet type on your current license, fair enough, but please quote me where this is exclusive of other ratings, unrestricted or otherwise.
Again, and this is important, how will you account for hours logged on a type you have had removed from your current license.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Over the Pacific mostly
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how will you account for hours logged on a type you have had removed from your current license.
His FAA records will still clearly show that he had an appropriate type rating when he was an acting crew member on the 727.
The restriction is a problem for many jobs abroad, this is not in question, what I don't know is if it is an issue at AJX, we don't really know the answer to that. That is why I recommended that he inquire with the contract agencies.
Dom, are you suggesting that at the JCAB check, with license and logbooks on the table, and being quizzed as to how you logged 727 time with no rating, you smile and tell them to refer to the FAA archives?
Majikayo?!
Majikayo?!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Over the Pacific mostly
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not suggesting anything, simply pointing out that this HAS been done before to solve the restriction issue and I also said for him to check with the contract companies to see if that would be acceptable here.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Over the Pacific mostly
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Besides, back in the day you didn't need to be typed to fly as an F/O in any airplane, I have time in a couple of radial powered hunks of very old metal and I'm not typed in any of them, back then it was "take this manuals home, read them and come and do three bounces tomorrow" voilą, your an F/O now....!
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: china
Age: 61
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for my quip before. I didn't understand the problem.
I don't know if having a 727 only restriction will have any adverse effect on ANA. If JCAB says no, they aren't known for their flexibility.
If it was a 320 or 737, you might be able to do a "short" course at CAE or Boeing to upgrade a SIC type to a full type, if they have an approved training program for this.
If you look on our license, "English Proficient" shows up in "Limitations" instead of "Ratings". At first, some foreign agencies thought this mean our english proficiency was limited. You wouldn't believe the reason it is in limits and not ratings.
I don't know if having a 727 only restriction will have any adverse effect on ANA. If JCAB says no, they aren't known for their flexibility.
If it was a 320 or 737, you might be able to do a "short" course at CAE or Boeing to upgrade a SIC type to a full type, if they have an approved training program for this.
If you look on our license, "English Proficient" shows up in "Limitations" instead of "Ratings". At first, some foreign agencies thought this mean our english proficiency was limited. You wouldn't believe the reason it is in limits and not ratings.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: hang on let me check
Posts: 654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys sorry for the off topic, but since we' re talking licences... I tried to look for it in the previous posts but couldn't find an answer.
When you join a Japanese company and go through the JCAB conversion, what happens to your EASA/FAA licence and ratings once you have a JCAB licence??
Will you have 2 valid licences? or is your EASA licence dead and you only have a Japanese licence??
Thanks
When you join a Japanese company and go through the JCAB conversion, what happens to your EASA/FAA licence and ratings once you have a JCAB licence??
Will you have 2 valid licences? or is your EASA licence dead and you only have a Japanese licence??
Thanks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Japan.....
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA
As far as FAA, you will retain that and thus maintain both FAA and JCAB. I have both certificates as the JCAB is similar to the FAA, you don't lose it when out of currency which is what I understand happens with the EASA. I do keep my JCAB medical current for no particular reason, along with my FAA and a couple others.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Over the Pacific mostly
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have three licenses myself, they are independent from eachother but you have to deal with currency issues with each one, depending on the training program that your airline has (Boeing approved program, the training is approved by the FAA to conduct training outside of the US....etc.) they might accept it to meet recency requirements in the US, but some training programs abroad might not be, a couple of my friends that fly in China have to rent a GA contraption a couple of times a year for that purpose....!
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Neither here nor there
Age: 41
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fail rates during training
Could anybody give details about fail rates during training. Is it similar to Koreanair where about 20-30 percent fail the training? I heard back to back rostering of off days used to be possible. Is this currently still the case? Could anybody who is currently flying there shed light on these questions? Thx
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 日本
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although I don't have any official figures to hand, the failure rates are very low and the situation is very different to KAL, when they had the problems with malicious 777 trainers. Training itself is pretty much non-existent; you'll be expected to have studied and know the answers without any instruction from your trainer.....it seems this is the 'way' in the East. When you are line training you'll fly with 'Western' trainers for some of your sectors and this is your opportunity to ask all the questions you were never able to ask and try to figure out what the Japanese were talking about when they asked you awkward questions that you were unable to answer.
Now, although actual training doesn't exist in the way that you might be used to, the Japanese instructors are, for the most part, honest, friendly and not vindictive. There are no politics involved in trying to oust the 'Western' pilots as was the case with the KAL 777 fleet. So, all in all, a completely different scenario and one that doesn't bear comparison.
Back-to-backing is still possible. It is used regularly by some pilots and occasionally by others. I'm more of an occasional user (maybe twice per year) but one of my mates does it almost year-round. I've never had any problems with doing B2B days off and I've never heard of anyone else having any snags. It's good because you get a decent time off at home AND you get to keep $2000 for one of the month's commuting allowance but, on the other hand, you've got to 'pay' for that time off at some point and 5-6 weeks in Japan can be a killer
Now, although actual training doesn't exist in the way that you might be used to, the Japanese instructors are, for the most part, honest, friendly and not vindictive. There are no politics involved in trying to oust the 'Western' pilots as was the case with the KAL 777 fleet. So, all in all, a completely different scenario and one that doesn't bear comparison.
Back-to-backing is still possible. It is used regularly by some pilots and occasionally by others. I'm more of an occasional user (maybe twice per year) but one of my mates does it almost year-round. I've never had any problems with doing B2B days off and I've never heard of anyone else having any snags. It's good because you get a decent time off at home AND you get to keep $2000 for one of the month's commuting allowance but, on the other hand, you've got to 'pay' for that time off at some point and 5-6 weeks in Japan can be a killer