I'm aware the US refers to its licences as certificates. One could argue the philosophical difference between a 'licence' to do something and a 'certificate' of competency however the difference is meaningless in the context of this thread. No matter under which system one is approved to operate an aircraft, the individual must first accrue a mandatory minimum of training that covers a specified content and then pass specified theory & practical exam(s). Like I said, the difference in language is irrelevent.
As for separate 'licences' - a term I will continue to use because it's quicker to type - that still is the case. Under the US system one must pass a flight test in accordance with the Practical Test Standard by an appropriately authorised examiner for each category and class. That they're combined under a single licence number matters not a jot**.
In Australia, for example, that is not the case. One can add the equivalents to the FAA MEL/SEL/MES/SES (which ever applies) to one's licence by doing what amounts to differences training with an instructor and having it endorsed in your logbook or licence (administration has varied over time w.r.t. place of record but not the effect). No 'licence issue flight test' for it at all. What's more, pass a flight test for a higher level of licence and *all* your privileges are embraced by the higher licence which is most definitely not the case under the FAA.
It's a fundamental shift in philosophy between the licencing systems.
**Interestingly, the FAA instructor rating *is* issued as a separate licence number, unlike Oz, JAR and the like.
Last edited by Tinstaafl; 2nd August 2009 at 18:20.