Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island

Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

Cardiff City Footballer Feared Missing after aircraft disappeared near Channel Island

Old 6th Feb 2019, 08:02
  #1121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 59
Posts: 1,345
"This accident, like so many before it, was caused by the pilot’s decision to undertake the flight in which the likelihood of encountering instrument conditions existed, in the mistaken belief that he could cope with en route instrument weather conditions, without having the necessary familiarization with the instruments in the aircraft and without being properly certificated to fly solely by instruments."

Civil Aeronautics Board Aircraft Accident Report on the "Buddy Holly" accident, released on September 23, 1959.

Useful site: https://lessonslearned.faa.gov/index.cfm
John R81 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 08:31
  #1122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 843
I don't see anything in 61.75 that would allow an instrument rating to be added
I don’t know the precise paragraph number in CFR; but suffice it to say that this route is a well-trodden path that lots of people have followed and indeed is how I got my own IR.
Jonzarno is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 08:43
  #1123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
A licence issued under 61.75 is a perfectly valid licence in its own right. Where a 61.75 licence holder passes a US IR Check Ride and completes the US IR written, the 61.75 will be endorsed with the phrase "INSTRUMENT AIRPLANE U.S. TEST PASSED".

Where the 61.75 licence holder has an ICAO instrument rating on his underlying licence, he can also validate that onto his he US licence by passing a cut-down version of the US IR written aimed at foreign pilots (known as the IFP). Whilst there is a little inconsistency on licence endorsements, the standard licence endorsement goes along the lines INSTRUMENT FOREIGN PILOT TEST PASSED
2Donkeys is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 09:04
  #1124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,219
Originally Posted by 2Donkeys View Post
A licence issued under 61.75 is a perfectly valid licence in its own right. Where a 61.75 licence holder passes a US IR Check Ride and completes the US IR written, the 61.75 will be endorsed with the phrase "INSTRUMENT AIRPLANE U.S. TEST PASSED".

Where the 61.75 licence holder has an ICAO instrument rating on his underlying licence, he can also validate that onto his he US licence by passing a cut-down version of the US IR written aimed at foreign pilots (known as the IFP). Whilst there is a little inconsistency on licence endorsements, the standard licence endorsement goes along the lines INSTRUMENT FOREIGN PILOT TEST PASSED
Absolutely correct! An FAA PLL 61.75 is a license on its own and handled as such. Some more:
If you validate an ICAO license to get an FAA 61.75 license, the only thing granted is PPL rights.
You add additional ratings and endorsements on the FAA 61.75 as if it would be a new license.
Experience from you foreign license will be evaluated and you may get easier access or waivers of exams for certain parts, i.e. for an ICAO IR to do a fast track FAA IR test.
Sometimes they grant fast track evaluation on first validation if your ICAO license already has additional ratings, i.e. IR, but this is not for sure.
A FAA 61.75 based on foreign license is not compatible with a 3rd class Medical, as the US easy access medical is non-ICAO standard, the pilot needs a valid ICAO medical on hisherit original license to fly.
ChickenHouse is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 09:16
  #1125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Originally Posted by ChickenHouse View Post
A FAA 61.75 based on foreign license is not compatible with a 3rd class Medical, as the US easy access medical is non-ICAO standard, the pilot needs a valid ICAO medical on hisherit original license to fly.
Not correct, I'm afraid. A part 61.75 licence is valid either on the basis of a valid medical supporting the underlying licence, or on the basis of an appropriate US medical (which for private pilot purposes includes the Class 3). Check out 61.75(b)(4)

(4) Holds a medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter or a medical license issued by the country that issued the person's foreign pilot license;

Certain other countries have expressed doubts about the FAA Class 3 medical, including our own beloved CAA, but the position I quote above is the US position in law.
2Donkeys is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 09:19
  #1126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Originally Posted by ChickenHouse View Post
Sometimes they grant fast track evaluation on first validation if your ICAO license already has additional ratings, i.e. IR, but this is not for sure.
.
This is also not strictly correct. There is a specific process for endorsing a foreign ICAO IR onto a US 61.75 licence. It is the Instrument Foreign Pilot exam. The process does not vary and there is no 'sometimes' or 'fast track' about it. 61.75(d) sets out the process and requirements.
2Donkeys is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 09:28
  #1127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,219
Originally Posted by 2Donkeys View Post
Not correct, I'm afraid. A part 61.75 licence is valid either on the basis of a valid medical supporting the underlying licence, or on the basis of an appropriate US medical (which for private pilot purposes includes the Class 3). Check out 61.75(b)(4)
Now we come to penny-pickin'. The 61.75 license may be valid on the basis of a 3rd class medical - if ever anybody issues that on such constellation -, but as the underlying foreign license has to be valid to execute the rights on the 61.75 and I never heard of any foreign license granted execution rights on the basis of the non-ICAO US 3rd class medical, you need the appropriate medical of the underlying license to render that valid.
ChickenHouse is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 09:41
  #1128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 7,202
It’s a moot point. As has already been stated he was colourblind.
S-Works is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 09:43
  #1129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Originally Posted by ChickenHouse View Post
Now we come to penny-pickin'. The 61.75 license may be valid on the basis of a 3rd class medical - if ever anybody issues that on such constellation -, but as the underlying foreign license has to be valid to execute the rights on the 61.75 and I never heard of any foreign license granted execution rights on the basis of the non-ICAO US 3rd class medical, you need the appropriate medical of the underlying license to render that valid.
A pilot flying on the strength of his 61.75 has the choice of which medical is valid from an FAA standpoint. 61.75(b)(4) could not be more transparent and requires no interpretation.

When a pilot is flying outside the US, in reliance on his 61.75 licence (such as a pilot on a UK PPL and FAA 61.75 flying an N-reg outside the UK) the same principle applies. The underlying UK PPL is not rendered invalid by reason of the absence of a UK medical. If the pilot has the correct FAA medical, then he has a valid licence.

Where that pilot seeks to do something which relies on his UK licence (such as exercising the privileges of an IMC rating whilst in UK airspace), then his UK licence needs to be valid, up to and including his UK medical.
2Donkeys is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 10:39
  #1130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Zulu Time Zone
Posts: 638
2Donkeys has it correct as easily verified by actually reading the CFRs.

To reiterate:

If you have an ICAO IR you only need pass the FAA IFP knowledge test to get the IR on your FAA piggyback certificate when first issued.
The medical can be either FAA or from the country that issued the licence on which your piggyback licence is based.

Chickenhouse:

Now we come to penny-pickin'. The 61.75 license may be valid on the basis of a 3rd class medical - if ever anybody issues that on such constellation -, but as the underlying foreign license has to be valid to execute the rights on the 61.75 and I never heard of any foreign license granted execution rights on the basis of the non-ICAO US 3rd class medical, you need the appropriate medical of the underlying license to render that valid.
The CFRs state the 61.75 certificate is valid based on either the FAA medical or the foreign medical. There is no "penny pinching". The regulation is clear enough and 2Donkeys already quoted it.

Also, the FAA medical is not "non-ICAO". It is ICAO compliant. ICAO does not issue medicals they only publish Standards and Recommended Practices. Filing a difference to a SARP with ICAO does not make something non-ICAO, merely non-standard.
oggers is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 10:59
  #1131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Bremen
Posts: 6
Licence

As has been quoted by others here, DI essentially had a US piggyback FAA 61.75 PPL no IR. This is normally gained for the purpose of holiday flying in the US or hour building there. According to airmen registry he also had an FAA Class 2 medical. Whether or not an FAA Commercial was pending update online, and was he flying with a FAA CPL temporary airmen certificate ? has not been addressed, my guess would be that he probably only held a 61.75 PPL and his UK licence. Therefore no requirement for FAA written exams for the issue of an FAA PPL and therefore itís possible there was little to no knowledge of FAA regulations.
established28 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 12:03
  #1132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 886
I have had a 61.75 for many years. Commercial Pilot, Single, MEP, Instrument Airplane. (I took the written IR exams in Frankfurt FAA office)
(No EASA IR)
cessnapete is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 12:18
  #1133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 7,202
Originally Posted by cessnapete View Post
I have had a 61.75 for many years. Commercial Pilot, Single, MEP, Instrument Airplane. (I took the written IR exams in Frankfurt FAA office)
(No EASA IR)
You can't be a Commercial Pilot on a 61.75.......
S-Works is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 13:03
  #1134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 46
61.75 - continued

Originally Posted by ChickenHouse View Post
Absolutely correct! An FAA PLL 61.75 is a license on its own and handled as such. .
I don't understand how that position can be reconciled with 61.75 (e) Operating privileges and limitations. A person who receives a U.S. private pilot certificate that has been issued under the provisions of this section: ( 3) Is subject to the limitations and restrictions on the person's U.S. certificate and foreign pilot license when exercising the privileges of that U.S. pilot certificate in an aircraft of U.S. registry operating within or outside the United States; and

If a 61.75 issued PPL is subject to the limitation and restriction of the foreign licence then it is clearly not a licence on its own. (The 61.75 licence is not even valid unless the foreign licence is in the possession of the pilot.)

Can someone please point me to an example image of a UK PPL with no night rating. I was unable to find one.

Last edited by EXDAC; 6th Feb 2019 at 13:21. Reason: change spacing to get rid of silly "emoticon"
EXDAC is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 13:18
  #1135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In an ever changing place
Posts: 1,032
What is obvious from the last few posts, there seems to be quite a few pilots out there who don't understand the privileges of the licence they have, and thats from some posting on here, I can now only imagine how many there actually might be out there.
Above The Clouds is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 13:24
  #1136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Bremen
Posts: 6
Validation

A 61.75 piggyback FAA PPL would probably be better described as a licence validation, rather than a licence in itís own right


Originally Posted by EXDAC View Post
I don't understand how that position can be reconciled with 61.75 (e) Operating privileges and limitations. A person who receives a U.S. private pilot certificate that has been issued under the provisions of this section: ( 3) Is subject to the limitations and restrictions on the person's U.S. certificate and foreign pilot license when exercising the privileges of that U.S. pilot certificate in an aircraft of U.S. registry operating within or outside the United States; and

If a 61.75 issued PPL is subject to the limitation and restriction of the foreign licence then it is clearly not a licence on its own. (The 61.75 licence is not even valid unless the foreign licence is in the possession of the pilot.)

Can someone please point me to an example image of a UK PPL with no night rating. I was unable to find one.
established28 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 13:39
  #1137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 1,431
Originally Posted by S-Works View Post
You can't be a Commercial Pilot on a 61.75.......
Yes you can, I have one, but with all the restrictions on it you can't do much.

But true, they do not issue it anymore.
flydive1 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 14:41
  #1138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 843
Can someone please point me to an example image of a UK PPL with no night rating. I was unable to find one.
Me again

I no longer have an image of my old JAA licence but can confirm that it had no such rating / privilege. I did a separate night rating before going to the US to do the IR I referred to in my earlier post.
Jonzarno is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 14:46
  #1139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: S.E.Asia
Posts: 1,763
The old CAA PPL I received back in 1981 never had a night rating. It was an add on just like the IMC.
Mike Flynn is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 14:48
  #1140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,219
AFAIK there is no set handling by EASA on how to document a night rating, correct? Some countries put *Night* in Section XII of Part.FCL licenses, some put *no Night* if not, some document nothing at all in the license, some do for PPL, but do not when *IR* is added - a mess.
ChickenHouse is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.