It's my experience that the US licence is not worth the piece of paper its written on.
I did more licence conversions for International pilots than I care to admit and I found the quality of US pilot to be despicable. Like
class-e
- I often questioned if licences were issued based on peoples ability to recite the ingredients of a Big Mac.
Dicko, you said:
...you all insist we have lower standards. I say they are just different.
What a stupid thing to say. Your standards are different - and they are lower. This is an undeniable fact! The only way to appreciate how pathetic your standards are is to go and evaluate the way things are done in countries such as Australia and the UK.
The Australian and European ATPL can take up to three months of study. The FAA ATP can be done in 2 days! The PPL licence theory can be done in the States in 2 days when it takes the rest of the world 2 or 3 weeks. US instructors can get their (virtually unlimited) Instructor ticket in 5 hours when it takes 55 in Australia. In the US you can teach Multi Engine IFR on your first day on the job but in Australia you have to have a minimum of 750 Instructing hours, pass a series of Instructor Upgrades and then do a thorough course in Multi Engine instructing before you are allowed to teach more advanced sequences. Need I continue?
The (presumably experienced) Conversion candidates that I have helped overcome their inherent inadequacies have had the knowledge of a low time VFR pilot and the skills to match.
I don't blame the very capable individuals for the sloppy way in which they fly. I blame the system in the states which has lost all regulatory control over the way in which things are done...and this is due in part to the huge number of people that fly there. We have such (relatively) small numbers here that fly it's easier to maintain a high standard and ensure conformity and control.
[This message has been edited by Swamp (edited 09 December 1999).]