Faa & Jaa, moving closer???

[speedbird1701]

Does anybody know what the story is with the Faa and the Jaa meeting in Washington this week to discuss the differences between the Faa and Jaa commercial and ATPL licences?

It has been suggested that this is the first steps in an initiative by the Jaa, to make converting Faa licences to Jaa much easier in the future (could point to the much talked about pilot shortage in two years???).
Apparently there is a recommendation on the table in the Europian Commision , that if ratified would eliminate the groundschool requirement (700 hrs) for a Faa commercial pilot to convert to a Jaa equivilant. like so many others I chose the American route for training (mainly on a cost analysis)
and will be looking to return home in about 18 months with CFI, & CFII , and hopefully about 1500 hours total time (300 multi ,......fingers crossed). All Faa of course, and I am wondering does anybody out there know what a guy in my position would need to do in order to get my ratings converted and get a foot in the door in the job market in Europe?
Any advice or tips are gratefully accepted!
Keep optimistic! Thing might be on the up!!

Oh yeah , I also heard that Switzerland & Iceland independently have already aggreed to the recommendation mentioned earlier,.............anyone know any different?

[Genghis the Engineer]

I know nothing about that particular meeting, but the general practice is well known. All of the main JAA and FAA requirements (FCL, 23, 25, etc) have standing committees reviewing and amending them. Most of the JAA committees have an FAA observer, and presumably the converse is also true (I've only ever sat on JAA committees, so can't speak with certainty for the latter).

There are two reasons for this, one is that everybody accepts that in an ideal world, the matching requirements should be identical (for JAR and FAR-25 they virtually are now) making it far cheaper for any organisation working across the divide, and also making both authorities cheaper to run. The other is that where disagreements exist (to offer one example that I'm familiar with, JAR-23 permits only singles and twins, whilst FAR-23 has no limit on number of engines) each authority remains fully aware of the other's position, so that the differences can be accounted for and dealt with efficiently.

So, it sounds as if this is yet another move in that, generally very positive direction.

G