EASA proposal to regulate FAA licensed pilots in Europe

[IO540]

EASA has published its proposals on regulating foreign licensed pilots in Europe

The list of documents is here

Rulemaking | Notices of Proposed Amendment (NPAs) (http://www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/r/r_npa.php)

and the relevant one is

http://www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/r/doc/NPA/NPA%202008-17b.pdf

and the relevant text is page 159-161 of the PDF.

Basically, if you are an FAA IR pilot, to keep flying you will need to sit some JAA ATPL exams, do the JAA IR checkride, etc.

I suggest this ludicrous proposal is publicised as widely as possible, and everybody affected writes in to EASA using the comment form etc.

The above is to do with pilot licensing. The proposal on regulating foreign registered airframes is due to come out soon.

[BizJetJock]

Err....those are the requirements for a foreign licensed (FAA or other) pilot to fly commercially on EASA registered aircraft, and are virtually word for word the same as the current requirements:confused:


Edited to add: The paragraphs about PPL's are referring to getting a validation, which under UK law you don't need so they are meaningless.

[redsnail]

As usual it's written in legalese but the way I see it is that if a foreign licensed person is operating a foreign licensed aeroplane for a operation based in a JAA member state then they need to do a check and an exam or two.
:confused:

[AA717driver]

Looks to me like they are trying to crack down on VP or N-registered aircraft operating for EU companies or individuals. TC

[NuName]

Seems to me that a 61.58 as a "test", being "the the type or class rating revalidation requirements of PartFCL relevant to the privileges of the licence held" should satisfy that bit. Hours, medical, English and the knowledge relevant to the individual. For most folks I guess no big deal.

[HS125]

I don't think it will be big deal for most but I cant say im impressed with this, or much of the rest of the document I have scan-read.

Let's not forget that the S in EASA stands for Safety, and I suspect that the Safety case for any of this is sketchy at best and more probably non exsistant. Planet earth already has a practical, safe system of regualtion for Flight Crew Licensing and it's called Article 14 CFR part 61; It appears that yet another golden opportunity to ditch the crap and ratify this will be lost.

This is simply regulation for regulations sake. It seems to be a broad acceptance that they can't just ban foreign registered aircraft, but is a move to ensure that EASA can derive some funding from those aircraft. As such we must stick to our guns and oppose this.

Before I don my tin hat I would like to add that I hold BOTH an FAA and a JAR licence and meet the medical standards for both.

[youngskywalker]

I can't download those pdf files at he moment. Can somebody clarify what you would need to do if you were operating in Europe under EASA with only an FAA licence? Is it the whole ATPL syllabus or a reduced version?

[IO540]

Seems to me that a 61.58 as a "test", being "the the type or class rating revalidation requirements of PartFCL relevant to the privileges of the licence held" should satisfy that bit

Are you saying than the FAA IPC would meet this requirement?

IOW, EASA is proposing to ban the FAA IR "6/6" rolling currency system. An interesting take on the proposal.

There is a precedent for this in that the UK CAA already ignores the FAA IR rolling currency system for the purpose of granting an IMC Rating to FAA IR holders. You have to have had an IPC within the last 2 years.

[NuName]

IO540, a 61.58 is a type rating renewal, this essentially is a IFR procedure and has to be done every two years. A PIC check, again being instrument based, is required every year but a 61:58 satisfies this. So, at least once a year a FAA pilot who flies a Jet and satisfies his insurance and FAA requirements will get a bi-annual review and a instrument renewal. Most of these take place in a simulator with Simuflite or FSI. Sounds like it should work to me.