FAA knowledge test question

[acuba 290]

can somebody tell me please, how long time i can have between knowledge and practical test by FAA? I think to do knowledge test maybe on next US business trip and next time make practical with some training....

[IO540]

The written is valid for two years

[acuba 290]

The written is valid for two years

thanx a lot!;)

[IO540]

You do need TSA and Visa for most (not all) FAA flight training but not for the written exam. Whether you need it for ground school is a good question but IMHO it would be stretching things massively because the training could apply to flying in any airspace and in any aircraft registration.

There is also an 18hr/week figure in the regs, for the Visa I vaguely recall, below which it doesn't apply. The TSA requirement is fairly clear but the Visa one varies according to which person in which Embassy you speak to. Most flight training and most ground school would fall under the 18hr/week figure.

That incidentally is a way to avoid TSA issues for flight training in Europe: all ICAO-instructor training is allowable for FAA requirements and particularly if done in a non-N-reg plane nobody can say whether it was towards an FAA requirement, or just any old recurrent training flight.

[slim_slag]

No No No.

It's not ANY training, it's FLIGHT training that you to get visas and TSA approvals for. Flight training is not done in books, it's done in aircraft or aircraft simulators. You don't need approval to do a written exam.

[slim_slag]

I must find better things to do :)

49 CFR 1552.1 Scope and definitions. (http://tinyurl.com/nphgu)

Flight training means instruction received from a flight school in an aircraft or aircraft simulator. Flight training does not include recurrent training, ground training, a demonstration flight for marketing purposes.....

[IO540]

My second point based upon IO's reply - is that flight training whether done in a N reg or not - and whether done in the US or not will require a TSA approval if it leads to a FAA certificate and I do not think can be avoided as IO suggests.

Time to tear all my hair out. Actually I am sure this has been done to death here already.

Example: you do 50hrs in a G-reg plane here in the UK, with a JAA instructor of course. The intent of doing those 50hrs can be anything whatsoever; it can be a JAA PPL, it can be a Mongolian ATPL, or recurrent training without any aim whatever. Then you go to the USA; they will accept that training towards the FAA requirements.

Are you telling me that you needed TSA approval for those 50hrs done in the UK? :ugh:

As regards which FAA training doesn't need TSA (a separate issue):

This US AOPA link

http://www.aopa.org/tsa_rule/index

shows that below 12500lb these requirements apply only to flight training for a recreational pilot (applicable to US only), sport pilot (applicable to US only), private pilot (FAA PPL), instrument rating (FAA IR), or multiengine rating. A BFR, for example, is exempt. Training towards the FAA CPL is also exempt.

To paraphrase the foregoing, only "Category 3" requires TSA, reference

http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/p80/310342.pdf

and this makes it clear that the Category 3 rule only applies to the initial Pilot Certificate (recreational, sport or private) the Multi-Engine rating and the IFR rating.

There is a further exemption for TSA for flight training commenced before Oct 2004, reference:

http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf90/300642_web.pdf

[IO540]

The following requires TSA, without question AIUI:

1. FAA PPL or IR done in the USA

2. FAA PPL or IR checkride done anywhere

3. Training towards the above with an CAA CFI/CFII, done anywhere but this "depends" because a flight with an FAA CFI/CFII in your own N-reg plane could be towards practically anything else too, or nothing at all, couldn't it?

An FAA CPL, and some other stuff, is not subject to TSA. This of course means that any flight that could count towards a CPL is TSA exempt.

Going back to 3. there is no requirement at all for FAA flight training to be done with an FAA instructor. All ICAO training is allowable for FAA purposes. What you do need is to be signed off by an FAA instructor that you are ready for the oral+checkride, and understandably no such instructor is likely to sign you off unless he is pretty damn sure you are up to standard, which in practice means doing the last 3 hours in the last 60 days before the checkride with that FAA instructor, and those 3 hours (or more, as necessary) will obviously be subject to TSA.

This is why the usual scenario is that people get all their training done here, perhaps in a G-reg with a JAA instructor, and then get TSA+Visa and go off to the USA to finish off.

As for the US Visa, this is unfortunately a grey area all around, not least because of the sub-18hrs/week exemption for a course of study which some sources such as the US Embassy in London washed their hands of when it came to flight training (I have the reference if anybody wants it). In practice you have a great choice: you either try to explain some fine detail of some regulation to a gun-carrying national minimum wage worker of average intelligence at a US Immigration entry point with 50 exhausted holidaymakers queuing behind you or..... you turn up with an M-1 Visa :)

[Keygrip]

Just to throw the cat in with the pigeons....

Do the groundschool through the Gleim program and you don't need any sign off at all.

[IO540]

It is a requirement that training be given by an "Authorised Instructor" as defined in 61.1b(ii). A non FAA instructor does NOT qualify under this definition (I called the Van Nuys FSDO and got it direct).
Therefore when the individual turns up for his last 3 hours, it is touch and go whether the FAA instructor would be prepared to put his name against any prior training (as you indicate above) simply based on log book entries.

The above is thankfully incorrect. You need to ask somebody better qualified for a ruling, and such a ruling has been given plenty of times by the FAA itself.

It is absolutely routine for previous ICAO training to be accepted towards FAA licenses and ratings, in the USA. That's a fact going back years.

If it wasn't, you would have to do everything all over again. A CAA PPL holder with 1000 hours would have to do a whole new PPL in the USA, every lesson... etc

This is the way it works in most places in the world; even the ultra blatently protectionist JAA accepts FAA flight training to a degree (for the PPL they make you sit the exams; for the IR they make you fly 15hrs and do all the exams).

The trouble with aviation is that asking one interested party about it is a bit like asking a turkey whether he likes christmas (do Americans eat turkeys for xmas?).

I have spoken to many US flying schools about this, and many other people too, and the FAA itself, and universally they accept previous training. The "last 3 hours" bit I agree with you but the reason is IMHO a practical one.

This method has been regularly used by less than honest FAA training outfits around the UK to generate extra revenue; typically they say (for the IR) that you must fly 15hrs min with them before they will send you off for the checkride. It's all b*llocks but businessmen who have money but don't have time to queue up at the US Embassy have little choice but to pay for the convenience. Personally I think they are wasting their time; they would be better off going to the USA for the whole lot, and nowadays it's very hard to get DPEs to come to Europe anyway.

The thing I would say is that some sort of authentication of logbook entries might be asked for (but never has been AFAIK). That's why, right back to the very first instrument lesson I had in the UK, I got the instructor to sign his ID next to each lesson. This is particularly advisable if the lesson doesn't lead to anything; for example if your logbook shows instrument training but you never did complete any instrument-type Rating, then somebody could question the authenticity of the logbook. But if you did get e.g. the UK IMC Rating (and turn up in the USA with the CAA certificate) then they can hardly question that you received the training (which for the IMCR happens to be 15hrs; same as the min logbook requirement for the FAA IR). Of course the FAA IR requires a lot more training than the IMCR but we are talking about acceptable logbook entries.

[OVC002]

This is the way it works in most places in the world; even the ultra blatently protectionist JAA accepts FAA flight training to a degree (for the PPL they make you sit the exams; for the IR they make you fly 15hrs and do all the exams).
Whilst some have presented the relatively recent reduction in Flight training requirements for IR conversion (it used to be required to do the full 55hr course) as the result of a more enlightened approach by the CAA. It is worth bearing in mind that the JAA regs require only that the Ground and Flight exams be passed. Switzerland, and I believe a number of other JAA states, use this approach.

[IO540]

That's very interesting, OVC002.

Unfortunately it's perhaps less relevant to many than might at first appear, because the time (and consequently the cost, unless one is on the dole) of doing 15hrs is absolutely insignificant to the time it takes to study and pass the JAA ground school. I would estimate 1-2 years of study, for somebody with a business, family, life, etc. One could knock off 15hrs of flying in 3 days.

[IO540]

What I said is that it is up to the FAA "Authorised Instructor" as defined in FAR 61.1b to determine whether to put his name against previously recorded log book entries. This is especially relevent (as I am sure you will agree) when the entire prior training is 100% outside the US and being used to gain an initial certificate.
He is after all, the one putting his reputation on the line.
It is the "Authorised Instructor's" responsiblity to ensure that all the flight requirements of 61.109 are met - not the foreign instructor.

OK, we agree on that one :)

This issue is moot because practically nobody does a load of training in say Mongolia and then turns up in the USA and asks for a checkride. Everybody turning up in the USA will end up doing some hours in a plane, simply because he won't get signed off otherwise.

Curiously, the ATPL may be an exception; you can indeed just turn up in the USA with a non-US ATPL and go straight off to do any writtens and the checkride for an FAA license/rating, without an endorsement from an instructor. This is what a colleague was told, by no less than John Lynch himself, IIRC.

[SD.]

Here's a question.................

I currently hold a valid M1 visa and will be travelling over to Florida to convert my FAA CPL to JAA CPL. I have been cleared through TSA twice before during my training.

Once my M1 visa has been transferred to OFT, will they have to TSA and finger print me again?

Ta

[mcgoo]

No, your fingerprints with the TSA stay on file.

[SD.]

Thanks for that mcgoo, ca_flyer :ok:

[acuba 290]

As I mentioned in a previous thread, you really should contact the FAA Field Office in Frankfurt and get the facts

i called them, and they don't have anything with licensing to do. Only registration of aircaft. i spoked today with FAA in Oklahoma and they told me that FAA-PPL on basis of JAA-PPL only possible to get in USA

now i just wondering if i can fly with FAA instructor my 5 hr night training...No TSA or VISA need for that, but if i can use this 5 hr for JAA NQ later still a question...have to call CAA and ask maybe...

[MIREX]

Hi All,

I have FAA knowledge certificate but it's expired already (more than 2 years), After the knowledge test I worked in an Airline under part 121,outside US,using my ICAO ATPL. I asked FAA but between one and another they have different answer and my question in website hasn't got reply till now. Does anyone know clearly, can I take practical test with that certificate as per part 61.39 b (i) (ii)?

[IO540]

You must ask the DPE. This should be within his discretion.

Which FAA DPE are you using in Jeddah? There's an interesting question!

[MIREX]

Thank IO 540,

Yes I did in DBX then worked under part 121 company in JED. That's the problem, I got 4 responses from FAA Branch, only one said that I have to do the test again because I supposed to work inside US in US company under part 121, 125 or 135 after the test as per part 61.39 b (i) (ii) said 'under this chapter'. But why each FAA branch has different interpretation of this regulation? Please does anyone else know about this? Thank for sharing.

[IO540]

If something is not defined in the FARs, then it is a kind of a grey area and different FSDOs will give you different answers.

The definitive answer can come only from the FAA Chief Counsel, and a website with those rulings is here (http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/).

There is a whole load of obscure stuff which is not defined in the FARs, especially involving obscure aspects of training and flight experience outside the USA.

The bottom line in practice is that if the DPE accepts something, does the checkride, and signs your certificate, then you are done and you move forward from there.

You need to speak to the actual DPE who you will be working with and check this with him.

[MIREX]

Thank SoCal App,

That was ATP 121

[MIREX]

IO 540,

Thank you so much for your suggestion, I have emailed the Chief Counsel and just waiting for the reply. Just wondering what was the reason behind of this part 61. b.1 (i) and (ii). If this regulation was made with assumption that the pilot keep applying the content of the 121, or 125 or 135 regulation in the working environment so his ATP knowledge will always current, so it means no matter which company's location as long as applying the part 121, or 125 or 135 as per FAA part respected the pilot can continue through Practical Test even with expired knowledge test report.
Once again thank for the suggestion and sharing.