JAR IR in the US?

[g-mady]

Does anyone do this anymore?
I know Bristows FL dont and cant search the forum (too short words!)!

MADY

[Contacttower]

It can't be done. A JAR IR must be done in JAR land. Unfortunately. :(

[BillieBob]

Whilst you don't make it clear, your mention of the Bristow Academy suggests that you are looking for the JAA IR(H), in which case there are no training providers in the US that hold such approval. If, on the other hand, you really meant the IR(A), a cursory check of Standards Document 31 quickly reveals that there is only one training provider in the US approved by the UK to conduct such training - European Flight Training in Fort Pierce, FL. AFAIK, all other JAA states comply with Appendix 1b to JAR-FCL 1.055 and approve only integrated training to take place in non-JAA states, although this could have changed recently and you would have to check with the JAA or individual NAAs to be sure.

Contacttower is incorrect in his ill-informed assertion that IR training cannot take place outside the JAA. It is only the IR Skill Test and, common sense dictates, some acclimatisation flying that must be completed in a JAA member state.

[IO540]

It must be possible to do at least some JAA IR training in the USA, because some airlines have been doing it for years.

The other way to do this is to get the FAA IR and then follow the conversion route to JAA. In Switzerland you can convert with just the checkride. Plus the dreaded JAA IR ground school of course; no way to avoid that :) In the UK you can convert with 15hrs dual time, checkride and ground school. There is some outfit in Norway which offers some interesting options, too. This way, you end up with both FAA and JAA IRs (and hopefully with standalone PPLs/CPLs from both) and you can fly not only Euro-reg but also N-reg, fully IFR, worldwide. In this "paper collection game" you can never cover too many bases :)

[Contacttower]

Contacttower is incorrect in his ill-informed assertion that IR training cannot take place outside the JAA. It is only the IR Skill Test and, common sense dictates, some acclimatisation flying that must be completed in a JAA member state.

I didn't say you couldn't do IR training ouside of JAA, of course you can, but normally when someone wants to 'do' a rating or a school offers a rating they mean complete said rating. I am certainly not ill-informed, I did my IMC rating in the US and am planning to do the FAA IR in the summer. If it really was possible to do a JAR IR in the US then I'd be off in no time...:ugh:

[Shunter]

So the question is... how do the CAA react if you take your FAA IR and your JAA IR exams (done at Gatwick) and just do the checkride in Swissland?

[IRISHPILOT]

Shunter, that'll depend on which CAA that is: if it is the Swiss one, no problems. And if it is any other one, that'll depend on local regulations like LASORS in the UK (though they are pretty close to JAR). Do they care if you come with the certificate of the flight test?

The renewal is and has been done for many years in the US, Canada, Brazil, Thailand... on FFS, the initial can be done outside JAR only in Croatia, as far as I know.

There is no need whatsoever to an ME IR flight test in the UK (which is one of the most expensive places to do it), though some people choose to do it for sentimental reasons. Switzerland offers a cheap alternative (though a couple of familiarization flights are advisable), as well as the new EU countries.

There was a loophole for doing it in the US till not long ago, but that is gone now...

good luck! IP

[BillieBob]

I didn't say you couldn't do IR training ouside of JAA No, of course you didn't!It can't be done. A JAR IR must be done in JAR landIf you now want to split hairs to save to spare your blushes, feel free - it's hardly important.

The important thing is that the training for a JAA IR(A) must be completed in accordance with JAR-FCL 1 or any member state has the right to refuse to recognise the rating, and some have. If you have an FAA IR(A), you must complete approved flight training and pass the IR Skill Test in order to comply with JAR-FCL 1. There may well be JAA member states that will issue an IR(A) without the required compliant training but it's a dangerous route to follow.

[IO540]

The usual scare stories from BB, without references as usual.

how do the CAA react if you take your FAA IR and your JAA IR exams (done at Gatwick) and just do the checkride in Swissland?

The CAA have no say in the matter; a JAA IR is a JAA IR.

The CAA are not delighted about so many ATPL candidates doing their initial colour vision test in Hungary, but they cannot do anything about it.

However the 15hrs is a bit moot because some local flying will be required anyway, just to get pointers on what the JAA IR examiner (whose habits will normally be known locally) will expect.

[Contacttower]

:hmm:....


If you now want to split hairs to save to spare your blushes, feel free - it's hardly important.



I don't really see it as a question of splitting hairs...by any reasonable definition of 'doing' a rating (as I assume the original poster was asking) as far as I know you can't do a JAA IR in the US.

It's not a question of saving blushes either - I'd be delighted if you could tell me that you can do a JAR IR in the US (and I am welcomed to be proved incorrect)...it's just that I've thought the same question in the past, researched the possibilities and concluded that it can't be done...but please do correct me if I'm wrong...:ok:

[S-Works]

You can't do a JAA IR in the USA. You may be able to do training towards it with a JAA approved FTO but you will need to do the test with a JAA examiner. Flight with an FAA Instructor does not count unless you do the whole ICAO IR and then convert it later.

If you are returning to the UK for the test it will have to be with a UK CAA examiner. It is possible to do the flight test in another JAA country and have the paperwork processed by the UK CAA. They don't like it but they do it.

There is also a quirk around where you do the theory element in relation to the flight training, but I am at work and don't have the reference handy.

[IO540]

It is possible to do the flight test in another JAA country and have the paperwork processed by the UK CAA. They don't like it but they do it.

Why would anybody want to do that? Any JAA IR is as good as any other.

There is IIRC a problem with doing the theory in one country and the flying in another. I wonder why this is.

[S-Works]

I am not totally clear on the reasons but in Spain for example the JAA IR Initital flight test can be done by any examiner and in the UK only by a CAA examiner. I understand there are issues around the standards of the initial tests in certain countries that our CAA do not like. You have to submit the test paperwork to the CAA that issued your licence for issue.

I will find chapter and verse on the theory element but there is something about the theory that causes a snag.

[IO540]

OK, you appear to be referring to a situation where the pilot has say a UK issued JAA PPL but did a Spanish JAA IR.

The CAA may refuse to allow that IR to be added onto "their" PPL. A bizzare "join JAA and then stick a middle finger up it" restrictive practice worthy of the French, but I can see this being possible because the CAA "owns" "their" PPLs.

It would seem easier to get a Spanish PPL, while one is out there flying in the sunshine. Then the CAA is out of the picture completely. IIRC one cannot hold two different JAA PPLs but the Spanish one should be good for flying any EU-reg plane.

Another approach, with an N-reg, is an FAA PPL and any JAA IR. This should work for all IFR, worldwide. I don't believe one needs an FAA IR to fly an N-reg IFR.

[S-Works]

I do believe there is a domicile rule about having to have a JAA PPL issued by your home state..... There are rules on duration that govern domicile.

[IO540]

So, there is a domicile/residence rule on a JAA PPL but not on a JAA IR?

I would find it suprising anyway because it would mean that somebody who went to live in say Spain could not commence PPL training for quite a while.

It should be possible to turn up in Spain and upon supplying a Spanish address (that of a mate for example) get a Spanish JAA PPL.

[BackPacker]

OK, you appear to be referring to a situation where the pilot has say a UK issued JAA PPL but did a Spanish JAA IR.

The CAA may refuse to allow that IR to be added onto "their" PPL. A bizzare "join JAA and then stick a middle finger up it" restrictive practice worthy of the French, but I can see this being possible because the CAA "owns" "their" PPLs.

I have a UK-issued JAA PPL but I fly in the Netherlands and thus have to have recurrent training, exams etc. by Dutch-issued JAA instructors/examiners. The way I have always solved this so far is by letting the JAA instructor/examiner fill in the UK CAA forms (instead of the Dutch ones) and add a copy of his/her license to the paperwork, then send the lot to Gatwick. I would assume you would be able to do the same thing for that Spanish IR.

I do believe there is a domicile rule about having to have a JAA PPL issued by your home state..... There are rules on duration that govern domicile.

The only rule that I am aware of is that you can (but do not have to) transfer a JAA license to another JAA state if you live in that state for more than 180 days per year. For me that means that I'm quite happy to fly around on a UK-issued JAA PPL, but I can transfer it to the Dutch authorities if I choose, but not to e.g. the German authorities. However, once transferred to the Dutch, I cannot transfer it back to the UK CAA, unless I physically relocate to the UK.

[S-Works]

There is no such thing as a Spanish IR. The IR is a rating that goes onto your licence. If you sit the IR in Spain you send the paperwork to the state that issues your licence for inclusion on your licence.

It is this that I understand our CAA are a little sniffy about.

I was under the impression that if you made a permanent move you were supposed to move your state of issue, but I could be wrong.

[BillieBob]

Shunter's question related specifically to a situation where the holder of an FAA IR passed the JAA IR exams and just completed the checkride in Switzerland (i.e. did not complete any JAA approved flight training). This is not compliant with JAR-FCL 1.205(a), which states "An applicant for an IR(A) shall have participated in a course of integrated flying training which includes training for the IR(A) (see JAR–FCL 1.165) or shall have completed an approved modular flying training course."

In the case of the holder of an IR issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 1 (e.g. an FAA IR), JAR-FCL 1.016(a) states that he "shall meet all the requirements of JAR–FCL, except that the requirements of course duration, number of lessons and specific training hours may be reduced." i.e approved training is still required but the duration may be reduced.

The scenario that Shunter presented is, therefore, clearly not compliant with JAR-FCL and JAR-FCL 1.015(a)(1) requires mutual recognition only where ratings have been issued "in accordance with the requirements of JAR–FCL and associated procedures".

Now, what part of my response to Shunter's question is factually incorrect or not supported by JAR-FCL 1?

[englishal]

Anyway....the way the likes of the JAA-IR-in-the-us bunch used to work is to do all but 15 hours training in Florida, then send the candidate to Bournemouth or somewhere to do the remaining 15 hrs and flight test.

Bit of a con if you ask me, paying almost JAA prices for using US aeroplanes, US avionics, US prices and probably more than likely FAA CFII's who get $30 per hour. It'd have to be FAA CFIIs doing the training as JAR FIs don't have any authority over there. In the *old* days, all an FAA instructor had to do to be "approved" to teach JAA stuff at a JAA school was to have "knowledge of JAR" - in otherwords passed an airlaw exam or hold a JAA PPL. Not sure what the deal is now.

You can do the JAA renewal in the USA though with a UK examiner...

[IO540]

In the case of the holder of an IR issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 1 (e.g. an FAA IR), JAR-FCL 1.016(a) states that he "shall meet all the requirements of JAR–FCL, except that the requirements of course duration, number of lessons and specific training hours may be reduced." i.e approved training is still required but the duration may be reduced.

Do you have a reference for how much it may be reduced? There I suspect is your answer.

Why do some people have such mental blocks on the concept of demonstrated competence? You passed the checkride!!

Why fly extra hours? Even if you do fly the extra hours, if you have reached checkride competence early, any honest instructor will try to not waste your time and money and maybe will do some other useful stuff which is not required for the IR checkride but which might come in useful.

Anyway, unless you work for the CAA (do you, BB?) who cares once you have the IR? A few months later, the new IR holder is only as good as his last flight. A few years later, all of the original flight training has gone right out of the window.

The theory exams go out of the window within a few months at most.

[englishal]

Why do some people have such mental blocks on the concept of demonstrated competence? You passed the checkride!!
That is the thing about JAR ! They don't seem able to accept that the flight test should be good enough to determine if a candidate is suitable to have the rating issued. Instead (re. FAA IR conversion) they say "must do 15 hrs"...Why? Surely if you are the worlds best instrument pilot, you can jump into the left seat in any airspace and fly the flight test to the required standard.

Another thing that gets my goat is the 170A - a pre test, test. You need to "pass" this to be put forward to the test! Why!! My instructor in FAA land knew when I was suitable for the test and put me forward. They don't put people forward willy nilly because if they put people forward who fail, the examiner comes to find them to "have a chat".

I wanted a Night qualification on my JAA PPL and asked the CAA if I could have one based upon my extensive night hours flown in the USA (under VFR and IFR). All they did was cut and paste me the relevant section saying what training I required and that I'd have to complete the training in accordance with blah blah blah.....

[BillieBob]

Do you have a reference for how much it may be reduced?Only that it may not be reduced to zero since JAR-FCL 1.205(a) states "An applicant for an IR(A) shall have .... completed an approved modular flying training course."

Now, IO540, you still haven't explained which part of my previous "scaremongering" post was factually incorrect.

[IO540]

BB, you have posted a reference for a requirement for a training course, followed by one saying it can be "reduced" but you haven't found one saying how much it can bre reduced by. So, reducing it to zero is still "reduced". I seriously doubt the paragon of virtue called Switzerland would bust JAA rules after joining up.

Regards scaremongering, you have posted rumours about people having problems by not following what you call proper procedure but no references to actual cases.

Like I said, the CAA isn't happy about ATPL candidates going to Bongo Bongo Land for their initial CV test (presumably so that a failure is not recorded on their UK pilot record, enabling them to re-take it elsewhere later) but they can't do anything about it. Once you have the paper, you have the paper. This game is mostly about paper. Flying a plane under IFR is the (relatively) easy bit.

I can see that doing a JAA IR in say Switzerland could get one into a blind alley if one has only got a UK JAA PPL and wants to add that IR to that PPL, and the CAA refuses to play ball. But do they refuse?? If so, when have they refused - actual cases please.

I wouldn't do a JAA IR now anyway. EASA will take over FCL soon enough and then all bets are off. The IR (which has got harder year on year since day 1) cannot possibly get any harder under EASA, IMHO. What is sure to happen under EASA is that all this "we are in JAA but we refuse to accept papers from another JAA country" stuff will come to an end.

[flightbooking]

The CAA are not delighted about so many ATPL candidates doing their initial colour vision test in Hungary, but they cannot do anything about it.

What is the point of the ATPL candidates going to Hungary to do vision tests?

[IO540]

I am sure somebody will correct me on this, but AIUI there are about 4 different CV tests approved under JAA, and once you have done one of these (and failed it) you are not allowed to repeat that test ever in your entire life. You have to move to one of the others. So pilots shop around.

Many people fail the initial test - the Isihara plates. This test is a meaningless indicator of CV anyway, as a recent study commissioned by the CAA (I read it but wish I could find the URL again) confirmed. So they have to do one of the others.

The advantage of doing the CV test in some far away place is that a method may be available which is not available in the UK. Or that a failure is not recorded so you could later try the same test again?

The problem is on the JAA initial medical. On a renewal medical you are not tested for CV, and you can invoke demonstrated ability on a lot of things anyway. The JAA initial/renewal system is a farce.

[S-Works]

The JAA initial/renewal system is a farce.

Only for those who can't pass it. Those who don't are a minority and it's no good moaning about it as it is unlikely to change, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few I suspect.

[IO540]

OK, bose, I have a question for you.

You go to Heathrow for a holiday. Which JAA medical are the two pilots on the G-reg 747 flying on?

- the initial, or

- the renewal

Should be an easy question to answer.

Next, how long ago did the average British Airways (the cream of the cream) ATP do his initial medical?

I await a rational case for the stricter initial medical ;)

[S-Works]

Sorry mate you are asking the wrong person, I don't care.

The fact is the standards exist, they effect a minority and moaning about it won't change it. Making it out to be some sort of conspiracy won't change it.

The initial baseline was set and some people don't make the bar, tough it's the same in all sort's of work.

I suppose you would like to see the standards lowered? How about allowing the deaf or the blind or just the plain stupid fly a 747?

The line has to be set somewhere, the JAA set theirs at a level you don't like, they have less restrictive renewal to account for the fact that as people age they wear out, seems pretty reasonable to me!

Here is a totally random link (power of the internet), did you know for example that if you have had laser eye surgery you cant work for North Wales police and that is one of many examples. Shall we get them to change the rules so that if someone does not meet the grade they can still get in?

And as far as people going to places like Hungary etc to try and circumvent the system, one could ask if they are prepared to find a curve in a straight road what else are they prepared to cut corners on?

[IO540]

they have less restrictive renewal to account for the fact that as people age they wear out

and the time lag for an ATP candidate from the initial to the renewal is what, 1 year, isn't it. Yeah I really think the 25 year old graduate of the initial medical is going to be so worn out and knackered at 26 that he needs a more lax renewal medical. Then it's another 10 years before he is in the LHS so he's had 10 (ten) renewal medicals by then.

:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

You need to do better than this kind of argument, bose. Actually for some single pilot Transport ops the renewal gap is 6 months. You really need the renewal medical to be easier then ;)

I am all in favour of adequate competence, or demonstrated ability as it's called in medicals. It's pure stupid pointless illogical elitism I object to. It would be just as good to have an initial medical requiring your two big toes to be within 3mm of each other, or some other rather more personal "dimensions" I could think of, and allow any larger variation under "demonstrated ability" on the renewal.

In the RAF, where there used to be hundreds of applicants for every fast jet job, they could do this kind of stuff because they actually want to kick out 99% (especially in recent years where they don't need so many navigators anymore). But civilian aviation? Look at some of the obese unfit captains climbing into a British Airways (G-reg) 747 these days. They would have never passed an initial medical in that state. Many will be on BP and probably other medication. They are perfectly safe pilots though, which is what matters.

did you know for example that if you have had laser eye surgery you cant work for North Wales police and that is one of many examples

which will last precisely until somebody gets some pennies (lots of them) together and takes action under the European disability laws. This stuff is illegal nowadays and exists only because nobody bothers to challenge it.

The CAA is living on borrowed time. Baseless rules have already been challenged - see e.g. the Pape victory in Australia.

[S-Works]

What argument. You are arguing with yourself.

So what if they choose to set a different standard for initial to renewal? The line has to be drawn somewhere and thats where they have chosen to draw it.

I am an average beer drinking pie eating member of the flying community and I passed a Class I medical. If I had failed should I have asked them to lower the bar to fit me. How far do we ask them to lower the bar?

Lets see, we ask them to lower the hearing bar so you can pass, then we ask them to lower it again so those who are colour blind can pass. What next we ask if they will lower it for those with high blood pressure or diabetes?

Yes some people might need an medical every six months and I am sure those people would still pass the initial standards. In 10 or 15 years they might not and so a little allowance is given for the effects of age. Seems reasonable to me, or are you saying we should keep the initial standard for ever? No I think what you want is for the standard to be lowered to meet your perception of what is right?

[IO540]

One should have the same constant standard for ever. That's what the vast majority of the world's pilots (including 747 pilots flying into Heathrow right this minute) fly under: the FAA Class 1 medical. I've got one of those myself.

With demonstrated ability, not arbitrary requirements that are as relevant as the pilot's private part dimensions.

Then it becomes demonstrably and objectively fair.

[S-Works]

You know what I will agree with you, the initial level should be maintained and it should be ICAO standard with no filed differences.

[llanfairpg]

It would be difficult and prohibitive for the average AME to equip his surgery with the same level of equipment as the CAA have for conducting medicals to initial Class 1 standards.

CAA have always been loathe to take a pilots livelyhood away for not meeting standards that they would have needed for the initial, which makes sense in my opinion.

As our company doctor said once, " basiclly if you can walk, talk, hear and see you have passed the Class 1 medical."