FAQs of AFS-800 from doc posted online.
Well, not there yet, finding the precedent for using ICAO ATPL(A) and constituent IR(A) for FAA ATP(H) without IR(H) from anywhere. But it does ring very close to that 'mix and match' acceptability.
Either way, I FOUND GOOD PRECEDENT for
NOT HAVING TO DO CPL checkride, since you want ATP papers. You have CPL from Serbia or Slovenia (or thereabouts) and
once you have FAA IR(H) added to your 61.75 validation, you're
ready to do ATP ride with ATP written pass.
I can take 10% of savings as beer spending money if we cross our paths in real life, for all the research I've done for you.
QUESTION: An applicant holds a foreign commercial pilot license but does not hold an instrument rating from that country. This pilot holds a restricted U.S. private pilot certificate (issued on the basis of his British commercial pilot license in accordance with § 61.75). He also holds, on that restricted certificate, an Instrument-Airplane rating (U.S. Test Passed) earned in accordance with our Part 61 with required instrument training and our knowledge and practical tests. May this pilot “mix & match” these certificates to meet the eligibility requirement of § 61.153(d)(1) and/or (3) to make application for a U.S. ATP certificate?
ANSWER: Ref. § 61.153(d)(3); Yes. This has been acceptable policy within the Airman Certification Branch, AFS-700, Oklahoma City, OK, and they will accept applications with this “. . . mixing and matching of the two provisions” [i.e., § 61.153(d)(1) and (3)]. This policy has further been acknowledged as acceptable by the Manager of Certification Branch, AFS 840, Washington, DC. Because in this situation, the rationale for this policy is the applicant does hold a “. . . foreign commercial pilot license and an instrument rating, without limitations issued by a contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation.” Even though the Instrument Airplane rating is on the U.S. private pilot certificate, the United States is a “. . . contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation.” So, in effect, this policy is not considered a mixing and matching of § 61.153(d)(1) and (3), but is purely acceptable under § 61.153(d)(3) alone.
{Q&A-390}