Those pesky Aussie ATPL exams

[DUXNUTZ]

Have been employed overseas for a couple years now. The time to move back to Oz is near and wondering what the go is with seeking employment with a converted ATPL from the basis of an o.s license (FAA ATP).

Again i have actively been working o.s and not trying to shortcut the system. I had passed 5 of the exams but that has since lapsed..

Do you think i have a shot at an interview with anyone (primarily QF/VB) without the theory passes???? Losing alot of sleep over this and it means the difference between maintaining my job overseas and buggering it all to come back to sit the theory in one hit.

Cheers

-Nuts

[Chimbu chuckles]

No chance.

[The Hedge]

Do you think i have a shot at an interview with anyone

In the current climate I would definately disagree with the previous post (except for QF mainline). DJ have been looking of late, specificallty targeting O/S crew.I would doubt that the countless regionals who are short of crew would care less, assuming you have time on type.

If you have relevant experience on type, I would doubt that your application would be discounted on the basis of how you obtained your licence.

Cheers

[Defenestrator]

Also a very important point to consider. QF/VB won't touch you without subject credits. If you choose to sit the exams to obtain the credits and subsequently fail one (or more) CASA will cancel your ATPL on the basis that you failed an exam for a licence that you already hold. Might be best to give them a call to find out exactly where you stand.
D:)

[Chimbu chuckles]

Exactly...and I know of pilots, friends of mine, that have been in the situation described...lost their Aust ATPL issued on the basis of a FAA ATPL gained in one of those weekend full emersion courses after failing an ATPL subject because VB demanded proof of Australian ATPL subject passes..they got it back when the subjects were all passed and were just very lucky that their job didn't require an ATPL at the time...and another who withdrew his VB application because of that.

QF are the same and they control entry to J*, Sunstate, Eastern etc...when I applied for a Kiwi ATPL (via the trans tasman agreement) for my current job, they required certified true copies of my Australian subject passes...so clearly Air New Zealand, Pacific Blue etc are out of the picture too...irrespective of the airline's possible view on the subject because you don't get to first base without the relevant licence...NZCAA was very clear that a Kiwi ATPL would not be issued on the basis of an Australian ATPL issued on the basis of an FAA ATPL...I assume nothing has changed in that respect in the last 4+ years.

That makes a US ATPL, rightly or wrongly, a VERY limited licence in this part of the world...not so in others like the ME....worthless in the EU too...as is an Australian ATPL.

Like I said above...No chance.

[The Hedge]

QF/VB won't touch you without subject credits

I take it that this is designed with back door, one weeks trip to All ATPs.com, cut the corner ATPL holders. Not bona fide blokes and gals who have been O/S for ages.

What about JAA ATPL holders? Is it a blanket ban on non AUS exam passes or just the FAA?

[Chimbu chuckles]

I don't know for certain but I suspect UK subjects would be viewed positively because they are at least has comprehensive as those in Australia...people I respect who hold both licences (having passed all exams in each country) report one is really no harder than the other...despite what some Brits may claim...the UK one is more expensive, frustrating and time consuming but not actually 'harder'.

I am not suggesting that a US pilot operating within the US system (in it's entirety) is less 'qualified', but the US ATPL written exam as a stand alone entity is vastly less comprehensive and testing than commonwealth exams are...that is self evident...the mere fact that you can pass it by spending 20 hrs memorising answers makes it so....that is rote learning and that completely circumvents understanding....the parts of the US system that promote understanding and application are missed by those merely taking the written and then using that to obtain, for instance, a Ozzie licence...sometimes/usually via further 'laundering' the FAA through a third party licence such as PNG.

That, for me, is the bottom line...if you get a Oz licence based on essentially, a FAA written + Oz Air Law, you have circumvented BOTH systems.

I agree with the stance taken by QF,VB etc.

That doesn't man I think someone who has operated professionally as 737/NG crew within the US domestic scene for an extended period, define that as you will, is in any way, shape or form less qualified than than his Australian counterpart...but those who have circumvented the system here have spoiled it for the few people who didn't circumvent the system there.

[The Hedge]

I suspect UK subjects would be viewed positively because they are at least has comprehensive as those in Australia

Having done both sets of exams JAA and AUS, I can say that the AUS were far more challenging, and more importantly relevant.

It makes me wonder as to under what basis it has been decided that the FAA ATP's are a croc and the JARs are the holy grail of aviation knowledge.

JAR exams. while daunting at the outset, require nothing more than a large amount of rote learning. All the questions word for word are on an online database . My lowest score was above 95% in all 14. I came nowhere near that in Oz.

So why they are universally lauded as being of a higher standard I dont know. They used to be but not now.

Handy to have though.

[training wheels]

I've mentioned this on a different thread ...
If you look at the Jetstar recruitment website (http://www.bfound.net/det-entry.aspx?jobid=49015&CoId=27&rq=2), it now says this;
In some circumstances the General Manager Flying Operations may determine that a pilot is sufficiently qualified and experienced for recruitment with less than the qualifications and experience specified above.
So I gather if you're experienced, then there's still some hope. :)
Good luck!

[DUXNUTZ]

Believe me, i'm not trying to get in a pissing match in respect to which license is better, i just want to leave my current job with a job back home to go to, or without making a large step back in equipment to make it not worth going back in the first place.

Had a chat with a Qlink Hr guy and he was most concerned with having a current medical in order to be given an interview. Brought up the subjects question and he just said that if its good with CASA then its fine with them. The issue may need more clarrification re: later doing subjects and losing ATPL because of a failure.

[Defenestrator]

NZCAA was very clear that a Kiwi ATPL would not be issued on the basis of an Australian ATPL issued on the basis of an FAA ATPL...I assume nothing has changed in that respect in the last 4+ years.


Not so old soldier. Mine was issued on the exact basis that you have described. Go figure.

D

[Brindabella]

Defenestrator is correct.
Mine too was issued under these circumstances.
Jetconnect did not have a problem with it nor did Pacific Blue. Although it is two faced and cynical of Virgin Blue to not accept a converted US lic. A seasoned airman from the 89 era proposed to me that VB's management not accepting foreign converted licenses is a throw back to 89 when overseas pilots were used as 'stike breakers'. Perhaps with particular reference to Eastern/ Continental pilots coming from the US. Who Knows?
Regardless, I have found that the only airlines that will look at me are JCL and Pac Blue with a converted US ATP. In fact it was not even an issue as long as I could tick the ATPL box on the application. And now despite having 300-900 endorsments with time on type, Virgin Blue would still not consider me for the latest round of NG interviews.
I have sent several unanswered emails to Virgin Blue asking them to clarify their policy with regard to the foreign converted lic issue. Can anyone let me know how/what method of correspondance I can use to get an answer from them?
Chimbu Chuckles.
Would you feel cheated if you were beaten to a job by someone who has a converted US lic despite having essentially the same experience?
Brin.
Oh... PS... DUXNUTS... i had a psych and skills with easterns.... FAA converted to OZ atpl.... did not even ask about it. They did not even appear to care.

[Howard Hughes]

Why not just sit the two that you haven't passed? That way you can go to the airlines and say that you have passed all 7 Australian exams (the fact that some are lapsed should not matter, as that is only a CASA requirement).

That way you will have your ATPL, experience on type and passed all 7 exams at one time or another! Just don't f:mad:k the two up, cause then you will be left without a licence.;)

Cheers, HH.:ok:

PS I actually think that requirement was brought in to stop people with limited experience circumventing the Aussie system. If you have an O/S licence and some considerable experience on type (ie:not a bare type rating), I think the airines (perhaps with the exception of QF) would look most favourably on your application.

[DUXNUTZ]

Yeah passed the first exams over 3 yrs ago so sadly not valid anymore.

[maxgrad]

Hey DUX!
Good to hear your on the way back home.
All I can add is ph CASA but take your time to make the final choice.
Beers my place!

[victor two]

What is the current time frame to have passed all exams anyway? Is it 2 years to have done all exams starting from the date you passed the first one or something like that?

[OhForSure]

Hedge: Agreed. Have spoken to numerous people who have sat both JAR and AUS ATPLs and not a single one thought the JARs were more difficult. Everyone seemed to think the AUS ATPLs were the hardest anywhere!

I also agree with CC - the FAA ATP can be had by anyone with a weekend off. We have standards here in Aus the Aussie pilots must meet. By all means let the others come home and give them a job if they meet the SAME standards. QF & DJ:ok:

[DUXNUTZ]

I did my ATP flight test in a transport category turboprop level C simulator during company upgrade training. If your talking same standards, shouldn't you have to do the same instead of no flight test?

Theory is all and good (i will be doing the writtens here shortly) but if you were talking about standards, join the rest of the world!

Cheers

[Brindabella]

Duxnuts....
ATP check ride indeed. I havent yet met an Ozi ATPL holder who had to do a check ride for their ATPL. I did the same as you with a 6 hour exam.... 3 hour oral and 3 hours in the turboprop as the sim was booked solid.

Not to mention that the afternoon in question saw the snow blowing sideways in 40kt winds. The check ride took 3 hours as we had to hold 30 mins for the Vis to come up to 1/2 mile to shoot the last approach... I get sick of arrogant Ozzies that think they are the only ones that can fly a friggin plane cos they did 7 written tests for their ATPL.

OhForSure... you are exactly the type that pisses me off. You think DJ and QF have got it right yet you say if they meet the same standard. I have done check and training in both countries and I can assure you that any American APT holder with airline time exceeds the standards of the Australian ATPL.

For a start. The type ratings in Oz for a turboprop type rating is a joke compared to the US.

US turboprop (metro/1900) type rating. 16-24 hours required in the sim plus check ride in instrument conditions. Same as a full instrument check ride.

Aust type rating (metro/1900) 5 hours training... no check ride. Limited amount done in IMC/simulated IMC conditions

US ATP check ride in instrument conditions. Same as full instrument check ride.

Proficiency Checks. All done in IMC/ simulated IMC or in Simulator.

Duxnuts is absolutely right... and as a check airman and turboprop instructor in both countries I can assure you that those airmen and women coming back from the US with experience, more than meet any standard that your hallowed 1500 hour piston popper guru with his 7 exams can muster.

Fed up with Ozi arrogance....
Brindabella.

[k_flies]

Kiwi chick recently relocated to Aus. Have full credits for NZ ATPLS and was wondering if anyone had luck with Aussi operators WITHOUT aussi ATPLS? Casa stance wont give credit for ATPLS since not full endorsement?

[OhForSure]

YIKES.

Brinda. Settle down mate. I think there may have been an unhealthy amount of inference associated with your last post. I believe the following quote has been rather taken out of context:

We have standards here in Aus the Aussie pilots must meet. By all means let the others come home and give them a job if they meet the SAME standards.

Allow me to expound... Australian pilots have to pass 7 ATPL exams. Therefore it is only fair that Aussies working O/S whom want to return home, should have to pass the same 7 exams in the same way as all the others have. Likewise, if Aussies want to fly in the US, they should have to pass the US ATP (and any associated flight test) just as any American pilot would have to. Nothing complex here. Not bagging Americans or Aussies. Fair go for everyone. We should all have to play by the local rules.

So once again, DJ & QF :ok:

[Brindabella]

Yes OhForSure .... I apologise for the tone of my last post. It was rather unprofessional.

Here is the problem I have with the blanket "no exams" policy. You say pilots like me need to meet the "same" standard as Australian pilots yet by your measure of standards a 22 year old flight instructor with 1500 hours and a Oz ATPL is of somehow of a higher standard than someone with thousands of hours of airline and bizjet time from all over the world.

Two Qantas group companies and two Virgin group companies (not to mention all the regionals etc) do not require these exams. Don’t you think if they were concerned about the standard of pilots they would change their hiring policies to that of DJ and QF mainline?

Who remembers even a fraction of the garbage in the ATPL exams! No one. Don't pretend these exams make better pilots, they don't.

I asked Chimbu Chuckles if he would feel cheated if someone with a 'converted' ATPL with essentially the same experience got a job ahead of him.(No answer yet) I would ask you the same question.

We should all have to play by the local rules.
I have "played by the local rules". I did the IREX, comm law, ATPL law and an instrument check ride to get my Oz ATPL yet it's your belief that its unfair that I got a job back here because I should have to pass the same 7 exams in the same way as all the others have.

It is clear that your reasons are based on what you perceive as fair and nothing to do with standards or playing by the local rules. In fact I would suggest that most people that agree with this policy would feel the same way.

Level with me OFS.... this policy does tilt the playing field in your favour just a bit doesn't it. I would much rather you come out and say that its better for you as it cuts out some of your more experienced competition. I can respect that position more than making up some unsubstantiated argument like "rules", "fair" and "standards".

Enough band width on this has been taken up on this subject.... I won't be revisiting it, my opinion on this is clear. You're welcome to have the last word though.

Brinda.

[maxgrad]

Brindabella,...I tend to agree that it does tilt the field a little in our favour. Seems to me a little like the wheat Board (or any other agency in the same vein) arranging with the pollies to reduce the amount of imports to protect the industry in Aus.
I am NOT buying into the argument that O/S is better/same /worse than here, I have not been O/S, I have not looked into the standards or cross exam and licence transfer situation. I will say though that it would be nice if an international agreement was set to transfer back and forth with set targets and standards. OK I'm now dreaming.....Doe!

[OhForSure]

Brinda: Fair enough mate. I can completely sympathise with you on the matter. At the end of the day, you've got your opinion and I have mine. In some respects I couldn't agree more with you, however I think you're missing the point of my argument. But yes enough bandwidth has been wasted already. I only replied a second time to provide some clarity in regards to my previous (perhaps slightly ambiguous?) post, as you seemed rather upset about it.

And yes, you're spot on, it does tilt the field(???) in my favour, and yes I'm grateful for that! But no, I still have what I feel are legitimate reasons for my opinion.

All the best. ;)