Can you do a JAA SE IR in a Seneca? [Archive]

IO540

21st Sep 2010, 12:18

Reportedly, Switzerland does not need the 15hrs.

Whether you have any chance of passing an IR test without a thorough introduction to the examiner's peccadiloes (http://www.peccadilloes.org/) by an instructor who knows him intimately, is another matter :)

In the UK, the IR test is highly structured, with the routes selected according to the school's location (obviously), and I suppose a number of informal flights with a mate who happens to be a real IRI would do the job, but how will you find such a chap in Switzerland?

So I don't think the 15hrs is a major item. It is just the overall hassle package. The stupid 7 exams which are full of total crap. Even if you self study, you need a signoff to sit them, which costs about £1000+VAT. Again, £1000 is not a big deal, one might argue. The £1000 gets you access to the question bank, but I believe you can get that on bit-torrent (if anybody has got it, please email me :) ).

I have so far homed in on two "warm Europe" options, within easy Easyjet range. One of them sounds promising but it is ME only, which is OK but obviously costs more (time and money), and the other one is OK if you don't mind them not replying to emails (they quoted me 6k euros for a conversion to a SE IR & ME IR, in a DA42, but I understand that DA42 has since gone the way of many other Thielert DA42s...... their runway is ~ 3000m so maybe they do SE takeoffs?).

Currently investigating the first one; they have the usual clapped out piston twins.

Only the UK, AFAIK, requires the plane to be modified with the silly screens. Everybody else does it under the hood. This may seem a silly sentiment but I would be somewhat nervous about the screens, in case of an emergency. Especially as I fly an N-reg and for an N-reg the only option is the UK, and the UK examiner is less than likely to be all that current in a TB20.

Contacttower

21st Sep 2010, 13:58

Especially as I fly an N-reg and for an N-reg the only option is the UK, and the UK examiner is less than likely to be all that current in a TB20.

Is that because no other European JAA state allows the test to be taken on N-reg?

IO540

21st Sep 2010, 14:09

None I have found so far.

One school I found in Holland was recommended to me as able to do it but they never replied to any communications. I could have got a local to talk to them but could not be bothered to climb up hills right at the start :)

This is less of an issue for an IR conversion, due to the small # of hours spent flying (you can do quite a bit in a sim) and if there is an engine failure involved, you want them to crack their cylinders, not yours.

Shorrick Mk2

21st Sep 2010, 16:23

"In the UK, the IR test is highly structured, with the routes selected according to the school's location (obviously), and I suppose a number of informal flights with a mate who happens to be a real IRI would do the job, but how will you find such a chap in Switzerland?"

My instructor is a real Swiss IRI / examiner. Pretty nice chap too. Don't know whether he's current on the TB20 tho. I do not know whether the club's DA40s are IFR, but the PA-32 certainly is.

S-Works

21st Sep 2010, 17:19

I will just point out that the UK CAA can and do refuse to accept skill tests for the IR conducted in other countries for the addition to a UK licence if they do not believe the standards are in line with the UK.

I would suggest that you contact the UK CAA prior to embarking on an out of theatre course and ensure that they will accept the training and test from another country.

IO540

21st Sep 2010, 18:58

Or get a PPL from the same country where you got the IR.....

This can be done for under 10 euros in most "relevant" places. Greece for example converts a UK JAA PPL to a Greek JAA PPL for 6 euros.

This will satisfy any EASA requirement, especially in the context here which is to simply collect a (really totally pointless) duplicate set of Euro papers, in case the present EASA anti-N-reg proposals do make it through the Euro parliamentary / lobbying process, and the present 15hr conversion route disappears in the meantime.

I don't personally believe this (especially both of the above things) will happen and my money is on this proposal melting down but if it does happen it will happen only at the last minute (for obvious face saving reasons) and in aviation we already collect enough useless bits of paper "just in case" (like my FAA CPL which is worth a chocolate teapot in Europe, but I always knew that).

I don't suppose the UK CAA is very happy about the foreign options but there is nothing they can do.

Last I heard from somebody who actually tried to attach another JAA IR to a UK PPL (rather than someone who is just repeating old dark rumours) he got it done following a letter to the CAA from his solicitor, reminding them of their obligations under JAA :ok:

One needs to make sure a UK medical is good for that country's PPL, however, otherwise you have to travel to that country for a medical renewal. I don't know the issues here but there has been some funny business with France, IIRC. But nobody would do the IR in France...

S-Works

21st Sep 2010, 19:29

There are no longer any obligations under JAA as JAA no longer exists. It is entirely within the remit of any state to refuse the training of another.

I would also suggest you look up the rules on state of issue for a JAR licence. You can't just get another JAR licence issued by paying a fee when you already hold one. You need to do a state of registry change and meet the requirements for it.

Glad to see you have become an overnight JAA expert. ;)

IO540

22nd Sep 2010, 04:46

You can't just get another JAR licence issued by paying a fee when you already hold one.True but not relevant because you can fly any EU-reg plane on any JAA PPL, so losing one's UK JAA PPL doesn't matter.

If EASA mandates the acquisition of EASA PPL/IR paperwork to continue flying an N-reg (because the N-reg is operated by a EU resident entity) then any EASA PPL/IR issued anywhere will meet the requirement. What the UK CAA thinks of those particular papers will be irrelevant. If Albania is JAR-FCL (I think it is) then an Albanian issued PPL/IR would do just fine for flying an N-reg all over the EU, on an FAA PPL/IR as at present.

One would have those papers purely to make the operation legal i.e. to maintain the insurance cover in case of a claim. There will be no possible ramp enforcement because there will be no practical way to check the operator's EU residence status. It's all a load of crap.

Whopity

22nd Sep 2010, 06:19

so losing one's UK JAA PPL doesn't matter.
Unless you reside there more than 185 days a year!
the licence holder may subsequently
transfer a licence issued by the State of licence
issue to another JAA Member State, provided that
employment or normal residency is established in
that State (see JAR–FCL 1.070).

The UK CAA accept JAA IR training wherever its completed if the FTO is JAA approved. They may not accept IR tests conducted in another State if the training was not conducted there.

IO540

22nd Sep 2010, 08:38

Unless you reside there more than 185 days a year!Why would that be a problem?

Presumably, if say one had an Albanian JAA PPL/IR but lives in the UK, one could then convert the whole thing to a UK PPL/IR?

They may not accept IR tests conducted in another State if the training was not conducted there. I would not be suprised; in fact (from my enquiries) I would be amazed if any country was willing to do an IR test without doing the training at their FTO.

About the only thing I have found anybody accepting from another country was the ground exams, which everybody seems to accept from the CAA at Gatwick.

For non-JAA IRs one can get an IR without doing training there, but then (an obvious circular statement) the IR is not a JAA one. This stuff is in the realm of FAA/ICAO to Euro (non-JAA) conversions and these are certainly still available but are not very useful to most people.

S-Works

22nd Sep 2010, 08:40

Is that because no other European JAA state allows the test to be taken on N-reg?

It would require the examiner to be dual qualified in order to receive remuneration for the flight in an N reg. With the desire by the NAA to do away with the N reg it would hardly be politically correct to be seen to be supporting them......

Fuji Abound

22nd Sep 2010, 08:45

If this happens to state the obvious it will have a significant impact on GA N reg operators. I suspect a lot of N reg operators have allowed their CAA / JAA licences to lapse. They have also spent considerable time, effort and money obtaining N reg PPLs and, some, IRs. I wonder whether pilots will be prepared to keep both licences going if these changes take place, when the main advantage of operating on the N reg will have vanished.

It also surprises me that those who have gone to this effort seem rather to relaxed about allowing these changes to occur. It seems to me in the GA arena there are thousands of pilots over Europe operating on N reg FAA IRs. There would seem to be no safety case why they should not continue to do so, and many have doubtless done so for years. This would seem to be a powerful lobbying group, if only they would take the time to gather themselves together.

It does seem to be fundamentally wrong that changes such as these should be enforced when it prevents pilots from exercising rights they have enjoyed for years and where these is no safety case what so ever that these rights should be restricted.

I find it particularly disappointing that I sense an element of self satisfaction on this thread and others presumably from those who have not gone the FAA route that the FAA fraternity will / may be finally kicked into touch whereas as a GA pilots we should be supporting each other. In reality unless there is a simplified IR the consequence of these changes will be to further diminish the number of GA pilots operating in Europe with an IR which will be to the detriment of safety. I simply dont except that pilots will follow the EASA route instead because there has been no evidence in the past that they would.

I am not in the slightest interested what commercial operators do and I am not sure why that creeps into these discussions. This is a GA forum. Whether or not commercial pilots are able and willing to spend £x on converting their FAA licences is entirely academic to us as a community. Whether or not private GA pilots who self finance these costs should be required to do so is the relevant issue.

If I could be bothered (and I cant) I would have the matter up before the European parliament.

S-Works

22nd Sep 2010, 08:48

Why would that be a problem?

Presumably, if say one had an Albanian JAA PPL/IR but lives in the UK, one could then convert the whole thing to a UK PPL/IR

JAR FCL 1.07 refers here Peter.

In order for you to exchange your UK JAA PPL for an Albanian or any other countries JAA PPL then you would need to be a resident for more than 185 days or be employed by an AOC operator from that country. You can't just change the state of issue of your licence on a convenience.

So in your case, you have a UK JAA PPL and to add an IR to it from another JAA country then you would need to establish that the country, the FTO and the examination are acceptable to the UK CAA in order for them to accept it and issue the IR on your UK PPL. You will also need to ensure that the exams will be acceptable. As far as I am aware you have to do the exams in the same country as they training.

Anecdotal evidence of past cases where an NAA have threatened with a solicitors letter does not make a case. We both no where that story came from and how old it was. I would suggest that things are a little different when dealing with the UK CAA.

You have a straight road in front of you, do the exams, do the 15hrs training and do the skill test. Or are you that afraid that you have become so dependant on your cockpit gadgets that you need to try and find a shortcut somewhere?

None of this is rocket science and a for a bright guy like you should be a no brainer.

IO540

22nd Sep 2010, 08:57

Fuji

I agree with your assessment.

However I think it is not hard to renew a JAA PPL, especially if lapsed less than 5 years (I have renewed mine with one flight for under £100). Doing combined medicals costs no more than doing one (I run both CAA and FAA class 1s purely as insurance).

It is the IR that is a lot more work. Some have found it easy but the generally older members of the private IR population don't have the fact swatting memory they might have had when they were younger, and it is clear from some recent attempts that many cannot get through the exams without a lot of work.

The commercial angle is IMHO relevant because most corporate jets are N-reg (or other FAA-based registers like Caymans) and that is where a lot more work will be involved due to the 14 exams, and also the aircraft owners have a lot more political clout. It is generally believed that the UK DfT's 2005 proposal to boot out N-regs after 90 days' parking was stopped by jet operators - not by UK GA which has no real voice at the top political level.

And yes if this did seriously shrink the N-reg population then we will lose the majority of IR private pilots in Europe.

I would have the matter up before the European parliament.That is where real lobbying is taking place. Not responding to EASA proposals on their website.

You have a straight road in front of you, do the exams, do the 15hrs training and do the skill test. Or are you that afraid that you have become so dependant on your cockpit gadgets that you need to try and find a shortcut somewhere?Usual bollox from bose-x (I am not going to type out his long list of "qualifications" again) who sent me a threatening PM when I obliquely referred to a potentially useful European based shortcut recently... as it happens I was there the other day and it isn't useful at all.

S-Works

22nd Sep 2010, 09:33

Usual bollox from bose-x (I am not going to type out his long list of "qualifications" again) who sent me a threatening PM when I obliquely referred to a potentially useful European based shortcut recently... as it happens I was there the other day and it isn't useful at all.

Always the same with you Peter, turn to abuse and insults and lies when someone tries to help you. :ugh: I have given you the reference that your require and told you how it works under JAR. Just because you don't like what you hear does not give you a right to start mudslinging.

It amazes me how you continuously look to try and find a short cut on what is a simple path. If you want to add an IR to your UK PPL then you merely need to meet the requirements. If you want to do it overseas then it has to be in a country and at a facility acceptable to the UK CAA. Not difficult is it?

Fuji, While I think the loss of the FAA IR as tool in Europe would be sad, I do have to admit to a certain degree of schadenfreude having said this was coming a number of years ago and being told very vehemently a certain poster why I was wrong and there would be enough political clout to overcome it....... :p

Cows getting bigger

22nd Sep 2010, 10:15

Hi chaps :) Just a bit of clarification to a previous comment by Bose X.

You do not have to do the theory exams in the same JAA state as the flying training. However, you are required to do all the flying training in one JAA state. Adding a rating (such as an IR) to a JAA licence is quite easy. Indeed, the CAA even have a specific form (SRG1193) (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/SRG1193FF.pdf)

There are a few 'gotchas' and the bets advice is to discuss the proposed route with your final destination (the CAA in this case) before you start. I suspect that PPrune isn't necessarily the 'definitive'.

Pace

22nd Sep 2010, 10:19

10540

There are thousands of us with FAA ATPs who would loose our incomes and positions. To convert to EASA ATP would be expensive and certainly not an overnight job but one which would run into A minimum of months if not years.
Obviously owners would not ground their aircraft while we vanished for months at school.

I have stated before that this has been tried and failed before.without some sort of grandfather allowances to protect my and others positions and incomes EASA would most certainly fail again in the European Courts under prejudice and human rights.The whole thing stinks of anti both those areas.
EASA can propose what they like but it is the courts who decide if they are within the European laws in doing so. This latest shambles is so obviously not within those laws that they would without doubt fail if challenged.

I for one would be quite happy to ignore that proposed jurisdiction as being unlawful if they ever try to put it in place and let EASA take us to court.
They might as well ban coloured pilots its just as discriminatory

Failing that a mass exodus to IOM?

Pace

S-Works

22nd Sep 2010, 12:22

They might as well ban coloured pilots its just as discriminatory

Playing devils advocate here for a bit of fun so don't take it personally, but why do you think it is discriminatory? You choose to operate in another authorities jurisdiction on a flag of convenience on order to circumvent said authorities requirements and they choose to stop it. I don't think it is discriminatory at all, harsh maybe, but there is not a legal case that I can see.

IO540

22nd Sep 2010, 12:30

Cows Getting Bigger - thank you for that form.

However, the first part is entitled INCLUSION OF AN INSTRUMENT RATING AEROPLANE IN A JAR–FCL PILOT’S LICENCE – APPLICATION (FOR IR COURSES NOT APPROVED BY THE UK CAA)

How is it possible at all for the CAA to add an IR from a non CAA approved (which presumably means non JAA compliant, otherwise the CAA would be in breach by not accepting it) course to a UK PPL?

Come to think of it, why can't the CAA add an FAA IR to the UK PPL? One could tick most of the boxes OK :)

Whopity

22nd Sep 2010, 12:39

from a non CAA approved (which presumably means non JAA compliant, No it meets a JAA Course that has been approved by an Authority other than the CAA!

Cows getting bigger

22nd Sep 2010, 12:46

To be precise, a "JAA authority other than the CAA". You also need to look at this (http://www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/s/doc/jar-fcl/EASA_MutualRecognitionMAY10.pdf). By implication, if a Licence issued by a JAA state is 'mutually recognised' the training provided for award of such a licence should also be mutually recognised.

Fuji Abound

22nd Sep 2010, 12:46

Bose

I will leave your friend to answer that particular question as I think it is directed at him rather than the forum in General.

This is what happened elsewhere:

His main aim was to
ensure that Kenya strictly adheres to ICAO standards and procedures, often at the expense of General
Aviation. Under his regime the KCAA was intensily bureaucratized, primarily through Kuto’s hobby horse –
the new Kenya Civil Aviation Regulations (KCARS). He managed to push that document of 1400 pages
through a storm of objections and warnings of the Kenyan aviators. In the last year of his term, all
communication with the stakeholders had broken down. The KCARS were gazetted, some of them
surreptitiously whilst negotiations between KCAA and the stakeholders were still going on.
Reportedly, during the recent audit of the KCAA by a team from the International Civil Aviation
Organization, the auditors agreed with the concerns of the stakeholders and advised the KCAA that the
new regulations are too bureaucratic, way “over the top” and hostile to Kenyan General Aviation and
Sport Flying. They are practically unenforceable because they rely on micro-control mechanisms that
require an army of enforcers, rather than ‘policies’ that place much of the onus of compliance on the
users. They also are based on a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach where rules for large Jetliners are equally
applied to the smallest two seat aircraft.

It should serve as at least some sort of warning that micro managing GA is a very dangerous game - but I doubt it will.

Pace

22nd Sep 2010, 13:30

but why do you think it is discriminatory? You choose to operate in another authorities jurisdiction on a flag of convenience on order to circumvent said authorities requirements and they choose to stop it. I don't think it is discriminatory at all, harsh maybe, but there is not a legal case that I can see.

It is discriminatory if that there is discrimination involved. There are thousands of foreign reg aircraft and pilots flying over Europe as we speak infact more so than EASA. I hold an ICAO ATP which legally allows me to fly in European airspace. I earn money doing so. If somebody says to me NO you cannot if you are a resident of Europe but yes you can if you are resident outside Europe then that is discrimination.
We both hold the same licences FAA ATPs we may both hold type ratings on the same jets.
If you want to bring out a law which says ALL aircraft and pilots flying in European airspace must comply with our laws fair dues if every airline pilot flying into Europe has to sit 14 EASA exams to do so then that is not discrimination. To select one portion of society and try to remove their livelyhoods for something which has been established for decades then that stinks especially as their is no safety basis to do so but one based entirely on protectionism.

The whole thing is that this is all a load of burocratic nonsense There is no evidence whatsoever much to EASAs dismay that European ATPS are any safer than FAA ATPS so why all this expensive and big brother rubbish

Pace

IO540

22nd Sep 2010, 13:35

Pace makes a good point actually.

It is particularly perverse in that the EU is supposed to act in the interests of its citizens (see e.g. the rafts of consumer legislation) but here it is acting expressly against their interests.

CGB - what do the numbers in that table mean? Some countries which I thought were JAR-FCL, or working towards it, are not appearing.

S-Works

22nd Sep 2010, 14:09

By implication, if a Licence issued by a JAA state is 'mutually recognised' the training provided for award of such a licence should also be mutually recognised.

However, a NAA may still chose not to accept a rating for addition to a UK licence. JAR FCL was a set of guidelines that everyone signed up to not laws. As such an NAA could pick and choose if they so desired. Thats why we don't have a European wide IMCr..........

The only way to know if the training from one state is acceptable to another is choose the state you want to do the training with and then ask the CAA rather than just assuming!!

Some countries which I thought were JAR-FCL, or working towards it, are not appearing.

It only shows the countries that were mutually recognised at that time, not those that became recognised or were in the process of audit.

Cows getting bigger

22nd Sep 2010, 15:49

Bose, I think I said in my first post that the best port of call was the CAA and not proon.

IO540 - try and Google "mutual licence recognition EASA".

Pace

22nd Sep 2010, 19:33

Come to think of it, why can't the CAA add an FAA IR to the UK PPL? One could tick most of the boxes OK

10540

Common sense would dictate that at most ANY licence conversion would include a flight test and a differences exam but I am afraid these people dont know what the words "common sense" means!!! Remember EASA was almost disbanded for its laughable work and suggestions.

Pace

IO540

23rd Sep 2010, 04:52

As an update, this (http://www.aerodynamics.es/en/index.html) was one of the schools which do ME ICAO IR to JAA IR conversions only.

Unfortunately, their requirements, when actually checked out, are too confused for me to get my head around. It is possible they do only ME to ME, not SE to ME as some others do. SE to SE is harder to find because you have to do it at an FTO and most FTOs do commercial training only i.e. ME.

The great advantage of doing this project somewhere "south" is that you do it as a self contained intense course, not affected by weather. In the UK, unless you live near e.g. Bournemouth, you end up staying in hotels for a few days at a time, and there is the weather risk. Whereas a week in say Spain would do the whole thing. And no need for the window screens; it is all done under the hood.

The exams are done at Gatwick.

S-Works

23rd Sep 2010, 06:49

There is a fundamental lack of understanding here I think.

If you have an ICAO IR regardless of how many engines it was for, you convert it to a JAR IR by doing the same training regardless. If you do the IR in a ME then you get both SE and ME at the same time. If you do it in a SEP then you only get a SE and would have to do a top up test later which is the asymmetric elements.

Every school will do the bulk of the IR in a SE and the last few hours in a ME to keep the cost down.

So if you want a SE IR the. Just tell the school that.

edit:speeeling

Whopity

23rd Sep 2010, 07:23

You also need to look at this.This is only a list of which JAA Amendment is currently being used by various States. Since it was published, the JAA has disolved so its fairly meaningless!

So if you want a SE IR the. Just tell the school that. Even if the FTO don't have a SE IR Approval, the cost of getting one would be less than paying the extra to get a ME IR you don't want. In any event to do a ME IR you would in addtion need a MEP Class rating!

Cows getting bigger

23rd Sep 2010, 10:51

This related to that (http://www.easa.europa.eu/approvals-and-standardisation/mutual-recognition.php) which also relates to this (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/175/srg_lts_Mutually%20REcognised%20April%202010.pdf).

PS. The last "this" is more useful than the "that". :)

moona

23rd Sep 2010, 11:26

AEROFANFTO (http://www.aerofanfto.com)

These guys offer a FAA SE-IR to JAA SE-IR conversion at a very reasonable price / timescale. Previous students seem to have no probs getting ratings added to UK issued JAA licenses after.

421C

23rd Sep 2010, 13:22

Whether you have any chance of passing an IR test without a thorough introduction to the examiner's peccadiloes (http://www.peccadilloes.org/) by an instructor who knows him intimately, is another matter
I doubt if there is a more standardised testing regime anywhere in aviation. I don't believe the "examiner's peccadiloes" are of any relevance to passing a JAA IR test conducted in the UK.

I suppose a number of informal flights with a mate who happens to be a real IRI would do the job
No. The conversion has to be at an FTO. BTW, what is a "real" IRI?

the UK examiner is less than likely to be all that current in a TB20
Amongst the risks inherent in GA, the currency of a CAA Examiner in a specific type of light single is amongst the bottom of the list of risks I would ever worry about. Whatever the costs and irritations of the JAA training and testing process, the "risk" (!) has to be offset against the safety benefit of recurrent training. If there is a private single-pilot IFR operator who has so little to learn and is so current that a 15hr course and a skills test with a UK examiner isn't a net safety benefit for them, I have never met or heard of such a pilot.

This can be done for under 10 euros in most "relevant" places. Greece for example converts a UK JAA PPL to a Greek JAA PPL for 6 euros
If you move to live in Greece.

In the UK, unless you live near e.g. Bournemouth, you end up staying in hotels for a few days at a time, and there is the weather risk. Whereas a week in say Spain would do the whole thing.
Given you can do 10 of the 15hrs in a sim, the "weather risk" is down to 5hrs IFR training (eg. 2 training flights and a 170A) and a skills test. It's not a material risk IMHO.

Let's see the plan alternatives:
UK: do 10hrs in a sim and 5hrs in your own N-reg airplane, plus the skills test, somewhere which might be 30mins flight from your home base and 2-3 nights in a hotel. Train amongst a choice of schools where you will know fellow pilots who have done the conversion and can give you unbiased first-hand references (a personal comment to IO, who is a friend in the offline world!) . The school will do the screens and paperwork for you.
"Warm Europe": qualify for 185 days residency, cancel your UK JAA PPL, get a SE IR on a twin, base your school choice on websites and Pprune anecdotes, whatever.....isn't this all a bit silly?

Ultimately IO, it's your choice. If as a matter of principle, the whole EASA thing is so annoying you just want to not do the IR in the UK, fair enough. Private flying is to an extent about indulging one's personal preferences, at least it is for me. No-one can tell us what our personal preferences should be. Go to Greece if you want to go to Greece. I am only writing in case some one should take some of the other stuff seriously about "risks" of doing an IR conversion in the UK.

brgds
421C

ps. I know it's not in the spirit of the thread, but dare I make a hesitant, squeak of a comment: that training can actually be interesting and a good thing, and that whilst the costs and bureacracy of UK training may not be ideal, there are excellent people involved one can learn a lot from.

The principle of having to do an FAA>JAA IR conversion is intensley annoying. The principle of the JAA TK exams is particularly annoying. In practice, the exams aren't as bad as they seem and the flight training is all good stuff. The skills test is not a stretch for an experienced IR pilot after the 15hrs. You just have to accept that there's an element of luck on the day of the test, and any of us might fail it (or, more likely, get a partial).

421C

23rd Sep 2010, 14:57

The whole thing is that this is all a load of burocratic nonsense There is no evidence whatsoever much to EASAs dismay that European ATPS are any safer than FAA ATPS so why all this expensive and big brother rubbish

Pace,
Firstly, I agree with you about the FAA system. There could not be a more black and white example of a giant controlled experiment than the experience over the JAA years of the FAA vs JAA systems. Net result: FAA-regulated airlines and FAA-regulated GA are as safe as (I believe) the best JAA countries. I personally don't buy any of the "Europe is different" arguments, in my experience the traffic density and mix, and the extremes of weather and terrain, are greater in the US than Europe. I also think we tend to forget in Europe how much real safety innovation has been driven from the US. Europe may lead the world in regulatory bureaucracy, but wasn't it United Airlines that invented modern CRM concepts and training? Whilst European regulators were doing what? Drafting the JAA training regime and the 14 ATPL exams so schools could churn out standardised 20 year old FO cadets for low cost airlines? If it wasn't for the US GA industry, in Europe we'd still be training using methods and avionics from 50 years ago.

I suspect the underlying motive behind a lot of the euro-standardisation is not fear of the US model, but fear within the European model. Think about the trend of European integration and cross-border trade principles. 20 years ago this began to conflict with the old ICAO model of national sovereignity over CAT. If you were an airline or AOC operator regulated by the UK CAA (or German or French NAAs) what was your biggest fear? I suspect it might have been competition in your own market from operators based in low-cost European countries where "standards" were not enforced as rigorously or expensively as in your home market. Hence, the whole JAA/EASA thing of "harmonised European standards". I am not saying there weren't flight safety issues involved too, but there's an awful lot of EASA/JAA stuff I can't explain on flight safety grounds which does feel like "expensive/highly regulated" bits of Europe wanting to set a playing field at their level.

This underlying motive also feeds, I think, another European theme: the "approval-driven model" (vs. the US "enforcement-supported model"). Europeans look at the relatively "light" US regulatory framework and they wonder how it could possibly work. An FAA instructor, working solo, could train someone right up to ATP level with no more paper work than a few logbook endorsements and some 8710s. An FAA-qualified solo IA can sign off maintenance work and modifications that would need a Part M Organisation and EASA design approval. It utterly inconceivable in Europe. It works in the US because the FAA is fairly active in enforcement and oversight. The FAA instructor knows that if a poorly trained student lucks out on the checkride but goes on to fly badly or hurt some one, between the FAA inspectors and the courts, that instructor is in trouble. Potentially very big trouble. An FAA engineer knows that if they perform and sign-off bad work, even if it's in collusion with an owner, the next owner might catch them out and call the feds. Very, very bad for career and livelihood. In Europe, if you have the right EASA paperwork, it seems to me you can commit just about any crimes against good maintenance practice with surprisingly little fear of recourse. Because there is no equivalent enforcement model in Europe (and 'rich Europe' fears that any enforcement that did exist in principle would be evaded in practice in some parts of Europe), the European solution is the front-loaded, regulation-heavy model we have with very big hurdles for "approval" (of organisations for maintenance, training, AOCs etc).

(BTW, someone usually mentions the additional point that some GA training standards in the US are driven by the insurance industry. This is partly true, but insurance is not mandatory in the US and people regularly self-insure to overcome some of the more onerous insurance requirements and costs)

This is a long-winded way of explaining why we are where we are with EASA. A secondary theme is that some European regulators have had a bee-in-their-bonnet about private (personal and corporate) aircraft in Europe flown under foreign registers. The GA political lobby was able to counter all of that except the most "die hard" prejudice, that EU residents shouldn't fly IFR in Europe without a Euro IR.

It may be that we are pleasantly surprised by some last minute lobby success, but the final draft of EASA FCL is published and the Basic Regulation that all EU resident operators must abide by all EASA regulations (including the FCL ones!) is already law. On this basis one has 2 options
- plan accordingly
- type things on forums like "I don't believe it will happen", or convince yourself that there is some human rights legal case that has not occurred to anyone in the EU or EASA or any of the national NAAs and Transport Ministries that have been involved in the drafting (a legal case that not one lawyer has ever mentioned in the zillions of words written about EASA regulations and in the thousands of comments EASA got on their FCL, and that no one in AOPA Europe or the big array of organisations under Europe Air Sports has picked up on)

You can guess which of these two options I would advise!

brgds
421C

IO540

23rd Sep 2010, 17:44

FWIW my view on EASA's ability to pull off this stupid and aggressive stunt has not changed.

On a purely political outlook (which is the only outlook that actually matters, because this proposal and in fact most of EASA is little to do with "aviation") I would give it a ranking similar to the 2005 DfT proposal to kick out N-regs after 90 days' parking.

In those days nobody with a brain thought they would pull it off but nobody could be quite 100% sure because - like the EU today - the UK Govt could 100% definitely have just done it.

But (as I have said before) it is always worth keeping an eye on suitable insurance policies.... in this game you have to watch your 6 o'clock :)

And BTW if I wanted recurrent training I would pay for and get recurrent training of an appropriate realistic European-IFR nature, with an instructor expert on the type, not flying Bournemouth to Cambridge (or whatever) in a rigged up plane with screens stuck in the windows and paying dearly for the privilege. Nobody should pretend that an FAA IR pilot who flies around Europe for real (or perhaps an FAA ATP who flies for a living) will be doing this as anything more than a silly paper collection exercise.

421C

23rd Sep 2010, 18:26

I would give it a ranking similar to the 2005 DfT proposal to kick out N-regs after 90 days' parking.

In those days nobody with a brain thought they would pull it off but nobody could be quite 100% sure because - like the EU today - the UK Govt could 100% definitely have just done it.

But the Dft thing never got further than a consultation. It was ill-conceived in several respects - not in the least the fact that the timing was wrong. No government was going to raise a fuss over something that was about to be passed on to EASA. The difference is that EASA already has done to it to an extent (when the Basic Regulation became EU law).

And BTW if I wanted recurrent training I would pay for and get recurrent training of an appropriate realistic European-IFR nature, with an instructor expert on the type, not flying Bournemouth to Cambridge (or whatever) in a rigged up plane with screens stuck in the windows and paying dearly for the privilege. Nobody should pretend that an FAA IR pilot who flies around Europe for real (or perhaps an FAA ATP who flies for a living) will be doing this as anything more than a silly paper collection exercise.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to sell you on the conversion being desirable! What I am saying is that if you want to do it (or end up having to do it) there is a benefit to the excercise beyond the paper collection. It is good recurrent training. At least that was IMHO as an FAA IR pilot who flew around Europe for real. It's not a comment on which is "better" (FAA or JAA), the training styles are somewhat complementary. The JAA focus on checklist and procedural rigour adds some good disciplines to the FAA IR style - just as the FAA training and test method stretches one in a different way, with intense unbriefed workload - which is useful the day things go wrong on a route you haven't spent hours dissecting on a whiteboard and with a plate you haven't seen before, let alone practically memorised.

brgds
421C

Cathar

23rd Sep 2010, 19:47

(or other FAA-based registers like Caymans)
The Caymans are not an FAA based register. As a UK overseas territory the register is governed by UK legislation and the aviaton requirements are established by a CAA susidiary company.

Quote:
I would have the matter up before the European parliament.

That is where real lobbying is taking place. Not responding to EASA proposals on their website.
Part FCL will be secondary legislation, ie a Commission Regulation. The European Parliament's scrutiny role is therefore limited to ensuring that the correct procedures have been followed and the Regualtion does not exceed the enabling powers.

FWIW my view on EASA's ability to pull off this stupid and aggressive stunt has not changed. .
It is all out of EASA's hands now. The Regualtion will be adopted by the Commission acting on the advice of the EASA Committee (formed of Member State representatives). From what I've heard the Commission is keen to move quickly to adopt the Regulation

mykul10

24th Sep 2010, 09:16

yes - if you can find a SE Seneca!

BillieBob

24th Sep 2010, 10:57

Whilst nothing in JAR-FCL 1 explicitly requires a SEIR course to be conducted in a SE aeroplane, the skill test must be.

JAR-FCL 1.210(c) - Single-engine aeroplanes. For a single-engine aeroplane instrument rating the test shall be taken in a single-engine aeroplane.

In any case, I can't imagine that any JAA Authority will have approved a SEIR course in a ME aeroplane or that any FTO will have applied for such approval. If the course is not approved then the CAA are not obliged to, and are unlikely to, accept the rating for inclusion in a UK issued licence.

Fuji Abound

24th Sep 2010, 11:05

Out of interest where are we now on the various time lines?

If this comes to past from what date will resident FAA IR holders no longer be able to excercise their priviliges in European airspace?

On a related theme assuming the IMCr is no longer valid under EASA, and the CAA are unable to file a national variation, when will IMCr holders no longer be able to excercise the priviliges of their license?

I am aware the dates keep changing and that the CAA has already said it will have difficulty in "complying" with the proposed time table. However presumably this will have no impact on the "ban" on N reg operators in the terms discussed on this thread which will "instantly" come into effect when the legislation is adopted? (and from when the CAA will presumably be responsible for enforcing the legislation).

IO540

24th Sep 2010, 11:20

I don't think anybody knows the answer to the above, because once EASA have finished with it, it then goes to the drafting stage and there is where the serious lobbying takes place.

The real risk that I see is that we will not see any clarity until probably at the same time as the present 15hr conversion route risks disappearing.

And the cost of doing the full 50hrs at an FTO is probably 5x to 10x higher than doing the conversion route.

Fuji Abound

24th Sep 2010, 11:57

No, I appreciate no body can provide a definitive answer.

The question was really about what peoples views are on the current timelines? In other words what could be the earliest conceivable dates and what people think are realistic dates.

I think this is relevant because I know of one or two people currently doing FAA IRs or IMCrs; since it is a question that often comes up it seems to me it would be interesting for them to know what the lifetime of their "rating" might be.

wsmempson

24th Sep 2010, 12:22

Quote
"Can you get JAA SE IR on Seneca?
yes - if you can find a SE Seneca!"

I believe there are plenty of SE seneca's about; Piper re-named them, though, and If you look at a Piper Lance I, you will find that it is exactly that - a SE seneca!:O

IO540

24th Sep 2010, 12:26

The question was really about what peoples views are on the current timelines? In other words what could be the earliest conceivable dates and what people think are realistic dates.

I think this is relevant because I know of one or two people currently doing FAA IRs or IMCrs; since it is a question that often comes up it seems to me it would be interesting for them to know what the lifetime of their "rating" might be.My take is that IF this really happens then there will be havoc in the business jet community (99% of which is totally unaware and the rest does not believe it will happen) and so much sh*t will hit the fan that a phase-in period will be required, of 1-2 years.

That's the worst case. The best case is of course a total meltdown of this stupid proposal.

Note also that there is a 1-year one-off validation opportunity, anyway.

As to when the 1-2 years will commence, I think this is sometime in 2012.

So if you do your FAA IR in 2010, you should get 3-4 years out of it before you have to do something. That is a lot of flying. I got my FAA IR in 2006 and the four years I've had flying around Europe have been absolutely priceless.

But, like I keep saying, the real risk lies in the present conversion route going away and not being replaced, so you are looking at some £10k-£15k doing the full lot. And there is some precedent for this kind of c0ckup e.g. the 2000-2002 disappearance of the PPL/IR ground school and the need to do all 14 ATPL exams. If this risk could be ruled out, then there is no point in taking any action at all and simply waiting would be the smartest route. Of course the regulators know this too and they will run this proposal for maximum scare value (as they always have).

The above is worth what you are paying for it, and you would get a better view by watching the complete series of Yes Minister (but that will cost you considerably more).

I believe there are plenty of SE seneca's aboutThat may be so but there are a helluva lot more SE DA42s about ;)

BTW, no apostrophe (http://eileenbrown.wordpress.com/2010/06/28/the-grocers-apostrophe/) in "seneca's" ;)

S-Works

24th Sep 2010, 13:58

What will do your noodlesis that after EASA you will no longer be able to fly any EASA aircraft including G Reg on a ICAO (eg FAA) licence. You will have to validate it and that validation is a one time only thing with a limited life of a max of 1 year. You will be able to extend it once only in extenuating circumstances which are that you are converting to an EASA licence but have not completed it yet.

As far as if this is going to happen, I will tell you now, it is a done deal. Tell me I am wrong but in the meantime go and look up the meaning of schadenfreude.......

IO540

24th Sep 2010, 14:08

The inability to fly a G-reg on an FAA PPL is prob99 a done deal, but who cares?

Very few people knew about this option (if many did, the UK PPL training business would have been crippled many years ago, with just about everybody going to the USA) and even fewer actually use it.

Those who do rely on it can convert with minor hassle. I imagine there may be some medical scenarios but those can go on the NPPL which (by the time this option disappears) will be grandfathered into the LAPL, and anybody who can walk unaided into their GP's surgery can get that ;)

Talking about schadenfreude (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schadenfreude) just makes the writer look like a 5 year old playground twit, because only a twit will be gloating at other pilots having extra work to do just to stay where they are. No wonder UK GA is fragmented in its representation, when a pilot purporting to have held an FAA IR since about 2004 is writing this kind of stuff.

S-Works

24th Sep 2010, 14:23

Actually the comment was directed at you. You told me I was wrong a number of years ago and that it would be dropped. It does not matter how many threads you start on the subject attempting to seek comfort from others the fact is if you want to keep flying your aircraft on all of these wonderful trips you regale us with you are going to have to bite the bullet and meet the regs.

The schadenfreude comes from watching you trying to find a curve on a straight road to try and beat the system. Resistance is futile...... :p

I on the other hand have no issues about continuing to fly N reg aircraft VFR or IFR as I already have the correct bits of paper.

I do have an element of sympathy for those this will effect and it just stirs up my anti establishment feelings. The reason that the corporate people are generally oblivious if this is that the vast majority of the crews are dual qualified already, most having gained the coveted JAR fATPL and the realised there was no work so went and did FAA qualifications as well and got a job. The owners of these jets are not interested, if they need a new crew they will just go out and get one, unless you have not noticed there are zillions of unemployed commercial pilots in a shrinking market.

Schadenfreude is probably wrong, but it is more fun than I told you so.......

IO540

24th Sep 2010, 14:52

watching you trying to find a curve on a straight road to try and beat the system

You need to be a little careful writing the above, Steve, haven't you... pot and kettle come to mind. For quite a long time, half the world was keeping a very keen eye on the license scans you had on your website, with not a little amusement going around every time you accused somebody of looking for kinks on a straight road, and then you go for the biggest possible kink that's doable in Europe, all by yourself ;)

S-Works

24th Sep 2010, 15:14

LOL, knock yourself out if you think thats the case Peter. Surprised you have not tried to emulate whatever it is you think I managed if thats the case!!
;)

BillieBob

24th Sep 2010, 16:00

Out of interest where are we now on the various time lines?The enabling Regulation is due to come into force on the day after its publication in the Official Journal and to become applicable on 8 April 2012. Some limited derogation is permitted in various areas for 3 years after the entry into force of the Regulation but this does not include the provisions relating to third country licences.

Aerial Chauffeur

24th Sep 2010, 16:09

I was thinking that I might be able to get a licence issued on the basis of my FAA one, by a country which is not yet JAA, then wait for that country to become JAA / EASA.

So far as I can recall, Hungary used to do this.

IO540

24th Sep 2010, 16:25

The enabling Regulation is due to come into force on the day after its publication in the Official Journal and to become applicable on 8 April 2012. Some limited derogation is permitted in various areas for 3 years after the entry into force of the Regulation but this does not include the provisions relating to third country licences.

Billiebob - are you willing to state that as of 8/4/2012 every N-reg pilot living in the EU will have to get a JAA PPL/IR to fly private IFR, and this is a full and complete statement of the EU legislative process? If not, please post details.

I was thinking that I might be able to get a licence issued on the basis of my FAA one, by a country which is not yet JAA, then wait for that country to become JAA / EASA.

So far as I can recall, Hungary used to do this.

Yes, it is fairly standard around the world that if you have an ICAO CPL/IR (or ATPL) then you can get a validation, or even a conversion, to a local CPL/IR (or ATPL) as a paper exercise, sometimes with a flight test required, provided you have a "relationship" with a local commercial operator.

For obvious reasons these things are not openly advertised but you don't have to contact many NAAs to dig out a few possibilities.

The gotcha is getting a JAR-FCL compliant set of papers. JAA seeks to stop this (other than through the full 14-exam route) but nevertheless it has been available. Ireland used to do it, until a few years ago.

I was in Hungary very recently (to have a go on a 737 sim for 300 euros :) ) and asked around; they still do it but you only get a national (ICAO, non-JAA) CPL/IR. They have some sort of transfer timetable to JAA, culminating in Feb 2011. I did not pursue it, because I don't have any chance of a "relationship" ... well, not with an aircraft, and if I tried the other sort (which would be very easy indeed to arrange) my girlfriend would have something to say ;)

And obviously there are other countries in "Europe" which are not JAA, and if you can wangle yourself a job (paid or not) flying a plane on their reg then you can get yourself into the pipeline, and maybe one day get a grandfathered JAA CPL/IR or ATPL.

There are also countries which are not EU, want to be EU but frankly never will be, but who may be JAR-FCL one day. That is a longer shot...

Canada validates FAA papers easily (as do others over that way) but it's a dead end for JAA, AFAIK.

I honestly don't know of anybody who today will convert an FAA CPL/IR into a JAR-FCL one, but if I did know I would not be posting it :) And like most people I would be on the first flight there ;)

S-Works

24th Sep 2010, 16:25

Alas not, but a good try. Still the minor issue of passing the exams that people are trying to avoid and doing a skill test....... Hungary will convert any ICAO licence to a JAA if you pass the JAA exams and flight test. ;)

421C

24th Sep 2010, 18:27

And the cost of doing the full 50hrs at an FTO is probably 5x to 10x higher than doing the conversion route.

More like 3x. 50hrs ab initio vs 15hrs conversion (mix of sim and aircraft similar; 40:10 vs 10:5).

LH2

24th Sep 2010, 18:35

Last I heard from somebody who actually tried to attach another JAA IR to a UK PPL (rather than someone who is just repeating old dark rumours) he got it done following a letter to the CAA from his solicitor, reminding them of their obligations under JAA :ok:

FWIW I did exactly that with no problems whatsoever about two or three years ago (assuming by UK PPL you mean a JAR job issued by the UK CAA, not an NPPL)

Cows getting bigger

24th Sep 2010, 20:55

I'm sat here wondering whether Bose & IO540 were ever married to each other? :eek:

BillieBob

24th Sep 2010, 21:16

....are you willing to state that as of 8/4/2012 every N-reg pilot living in the EU will have to get a JAA PPL/IR to fly private IFR, and this is a full and complete statement of the EU legislative process? If not, please post details.That is possibly the most arrogant post I have ever seen on Pprune. Fuji Abound asked a simple and straightforward question and I provided a clear and factually correct response. That response was not directed to you, was not related to any of your posts and, to be frank, is nothing whatever to do with you.

IO540

25th Sep 2010, 07:15

Calm down, BB, and read your post again in the context of the thread. You post apparently authoritative posts here, suggesting that you are some kind of a CAA or EASA insider, and then you complain when somebody picks you up on this.

LH2

25th Sep 2010, 13:32

I don't have any chance of a "relationship" ... well, not with an aircraft, and if I tried the other sort (which would be very easy indeed to arrange) my girlfriend would have something to say

Why should she have anything to say about your renting a small place in Hungary and claiming residence there for a few months? :ok:

englishal

25th Sep 2010, 16:13

Can one not do a conversion at somewhere like EFT in Florida? That would be easy for a FAA IR holder, considering you'd be flying N reg aeroplanes in US airspace ;)...

youngskywalker

25th Sep 2010, 17:13

I could be wrong but I don't think you can do the JAA/EASA IR test in the States. You can certainly sit the theory exams for the ATPL though.

Contacttower

26th Sep 2010, 16:30

Yep as far as I'm aware JAA IR test in the US is not possible.

IO540

26th Sep 2010, 16:46

I am certain of this (the UK FTO business would be pretty well terminated otherwise) but years ago I saw some TV prog where some Euro airline (KLM?) was training a load of ATPL candidates in Senecas in Arizona... wonder how that worked? Were they just hour building? Surely you would rent a C150 for that, and mindlessly fly it back and forth.

S-Works

26th Sep 2010, 18:04

A lot of the sausage factory schools train in the US and then bring them home for the IR test. The IR is only done by a staff examiner and they do not operate in the US.

englishal

27th Sep 2010, 16:41

Ah I see..... well you can do the IR reval flight in Florida ....Perhaps it is just the initial test which has to be done in JARland.

S-Works

27th Sep 2010, 17:47

Ah I see..... well you can do the IR reval flight in Florida ....Perhaps it is just the initial test which has to be done in JARland.

You can indeed, in fact you can do the reval anywhere, that is devolved to us as industry examiners. As I said, the initial test has to be done by a CAA staff examiner in the UK they don't operate in Florida.....

IO540

27th Sep 2010, 19:19

(http://www.aerofanfto.com/)AEROFANFTO (http://www.aerofanfto.com/)

These guys offer a FAA SE-IR to JAA SE-IR conversion at a very reasonable price / timescale. Previous students seem to have no probs getting ratings added to UK issued JAA licenses after.

Just an update: They replied with a one-liner from an un-named person, saying they don't do this.

moona

27th Sep 2010, 21:14

Admittedly when I was talking to them it was about the full 45hr course but they list the ICAO conversion on their price list.

http://www.aerofanfto.com/downloads/admin/comercial_i/AEROFAN-price-list-2010.pdf

seat 0A

28th Sep 2010, 07:36

IO540,

Did you have a look at singles and twins (http://www.singlesandtwins.nl) flying school in Holland?

They seem to offer what you are looking for.
I have done my MEP(VFR) with them and I was very pleased with them.

From their website:

Conversion FAA SE-IR to UK/JAA MEP(land) with IR-SPA-ME:

Your FAA IR-SE can be converted to IR-SPA-ME in accordance with LASORS 2008 Section E1.2 by undertaking 15 hours IR training in a Multi-engine aeroplane. Before commencing the IR training, you need to hold the MEP(land) rating or have completed the MEP training. The MEP training consists of 6 hours training. For ME and/or IR-ME training, we use the PIPER SENECA II.

Pre-entry requirements : * Valid JAA Medical class 1 or 2.

* Holder of UK/JAA CPL(A) or UK/JAA PPL(A) with NQ(A)

* Holder of UK/JAA ATPL(A) theory including Radiotelephony licence.

* 50 hours X-country as PIC.

* Current en Valid FAA licence including FAA Medical.

* 70 hours PIC on aeroplanes.

MEP Class Rating :

6 hours PA 34

20 approaches/landings

Groundschool PA34
Pilot Operating Handbook PA34

Total amount MEP Class Rating € 3.552,50

IR-SPA-ME :

15 hours PA34
43 approaches/landings

Skill Test

1,75 hours PA34
6 approaches/landings

Skill Test including JAA Flight Examiner

Total amount IR-SPA-ME conversion € 9.742,00