Interesting US AOPA Article about EASA approach to FAA licenses

[AnFI]

New Pilot Rules In Effect In Europe (http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/New_Pilot_Rules_EASA_206492-1.html)

April 8, 2012
New Pilot Rules In Effect In Europe http://www.avweb.com/images-avweb/mailtoicon.gifEmail this article (http://www.avweb.com/cgi-bin/udt/im.send.story.prompt?client_id=avflash&story_id=206492) |http://www.avweb.com/images/printicon.gifPrint this article (http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/New_Pilot_Rules_EASA_206492-1.html?type=pf)
By Russ Niles (http://www.avweb.com/cgi-bin/udt/im.author.contact.view?client_id=avflash&story_id=206492&title=New%20Pilot%20Rules%20In%20Effect%20In%20Europe&author=Russ%20Niles&address=http%3A//www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/New%5FPilot%5FRules%5FEASA%5F206492%2D1.html&summary=New%20rules%20for%20foreign%20pilots%20and%20foreign %20registered%20aircraft%20in%20Europe%20came%20into%20effec t%20on%20Saturday%20and%2C%20depending%20on%20how%20member%2 0states%20of%20the%20European%20Union%20are%20implementing%2 0them%2C%20could%20mean%20that%20your%20FAA%2C%20Transport%2 0Canada%20or%20other%20pilot%20certificate%20or%20ratings%20 are%20no%20longer%20recognized%20by%20the%20European%20Aviat ion%20Safety%20Agency.%20%3Ca%20href%3D%22http%3A//www.easa.europa.eu/rulemaking/docs/npa/2008/NPA%25202008%2D17b.pdf%22%20target%3D%22%5Fblank%22%3EEASA%2 0Part%20FCL%3C/a%3E%20homogenizes%20crew%20licensing%20requirements%20in%20 all%20EU%20states%20and%20essentially%20means%20that%20those %20who%20want%20to%20fly%20in%20the%20EU%20have%20to%20prove %20competence%20and%20compliance%20with%20EU%20rules%2C%20ra ther%20than%20just%20use%20the%20credentials%20of%20their%20 home%20country.%20Depending%20on%20the%20kind%20of%20flying% 20involved%2C%20it%20can%20be%20a%20time%2Dconsuming%20and%2 0costly%20endeavor%20to%20earn%20those%20flight%20privileges %2C%20particularly%20for%20IFR.), Editor-in-Chief


http://www.avweb.com/images-avweb/clearpixel.gif
http://www.avweb.com/newspics/easa.jpg

New rules for foreign pilots and foreign registered aircraft in Europe came into effect on Saturday and, depending on how member states of the European Union are implementing them, could mean that your FAA, Transport Canada or other pilot certificate or ratings are no longer recognized by the European Aviation Safety Agency. EASA Part FCL (http://www.easa.europa.eu/rulemaking/docs/npa/2008/NPA%202008-17b.pdf) homogenizes crew licensing requirements in all EU states and essentially means that those who want to fly in the EU have to prove competence and compliance with EU rules, rather than just use the credentials of their home country. Depending on the kind of flying involved, it can be a time-consuming and costly endeavor to earn those flight privileges, particularly for IFR.

In an editorial (http://www.pilotundflugzeug.de/servlet/use/Home.class?frame&main=%7Bhttp://www.pilotundflugzeug.de/artikel/2012-04-07/EASA_Part_FCL_and_foreign_pilots%7D), German magazine Pilot und Flugzeug Editor Jan Brill says the new rule ignores acceptance of European qualifications in other GA nations and makes it costly and inconvenient for those licensed elsewhere to fly in Europe. "We insult our aviation-friends all over the world by rendering their certificates worthless, we repay the openness extended by nations such as Canada, Australia or the United States by pettiness and arrogance," Brill wrote. "To anyone who knows how to fly an aircraft, we're presenting Europe at it's very, very worst." Although the new rules theoretically took effect on April 8, some countries have implemented a two-year grace period.

How do people feel about this?

[Colibri49]

Pilots from outwith EASA land should be treated no differently from the way they were treated before the new rules came into effect.

As visitors, their licences and ratings should have the same validity as hitherto.

If they come to live and work permanently here, then they should be assessed in the same way as all EASA citizens.

Perhaps my opinion is already what has effect under the new dispensation, but I don't know and don't intend to research it.

[FullTravelFree]

Another article in English & German:

Pilot und Flugzeug - Aktuelles - Dear International Pilots, You Are <u>Not Welcome</u> In Europe (http://www.pilotundflugzeug.de/artikel/2012-04-07/EASA_Part_FCL_and_foreign_pilots)

[s1lverback]

From CAA site:

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2330/g-FAQ%20FEB12_280212.pdf

Q.26 I have a licence issued by a non-EASA country (e.g. USA), how will the changes affect me?

Currently the UK Air Navigation Order gives a permanent validation of non-UK ICAO licences that allows the holders of those licences to fly UK-registered aircraft for private purposes only. With the implementation of European regulations, including the use of the derogations by the UK, this UK validation will remain for private flights until 8th April 2014. From that date forward the UK validation will be valid only for non-EASA aircraft registered in the UK.

So for private flyers at least, two year stay of execution:ok:...by which time it will only be commercial and the super rich private flyers who can afford to :}

I wonder if those member states such as US will reciprocate?

[nigelh]

its all nonsense . Carry on flying as nobody checks licences anyway :ok:

[Robbo Jock]

After a long and careful assessment of the safety factors, EASA have obviously come to the conclusion that when the day added to the month equals the last two digits of the year, all foreign licence holders become flight safety risks and must be grounded.
I think it's outrageous that the CAA is playing fast and loose with our lives, allowing these now-dangerous individuals to take to the air willy-nilly for the next two years.
And we should insist that EASA licence holders are at the controls of _every_ aircraft that flies into or out of European airspace as well. Otherwise who knows what mayhem may result?

[SASless]

when I have Breakfast with my Congressman next week....I shall tell him of all this....and suggest that the US FAA should do exactly as EASA is doing. We should continue to recognize all Non-EASA licenses as before....and take the new posture re EASA licenses as EASA is doing to us. Fair is Fair!

As it will be self evident how Aviation in EASA land is becoming a thing for the rich....my money says Barry Obama will see a new way to target the Rich Non-African American's who want to spend so extravagantly in his realm.

Prepare to "spread your wealth around" folks.....perhaps we can call this change in FAA policy the "Stall Buffett Rule".

[nigelh]

If i was the FAA i would ban all flying by EASA pilots in US airspace .....stick it up em :ok::ok:
As for being expensive ..yes it is ...it will cost me ( if i bother do it ) around around $20k to keep flying legal after this ...and thats just PPL :ugh:

[IceHeli]

We mortal and poor pilots have been complaining for years about the heading the training regulations have taken. We have not been heard nor will we be in the years to come.

JAR OPS/EU OPS and finally EASA PART FCL have approach is of pure and simple arrogance. The regulator and authorities have lost their focus on the most important stuff and are busy celebrating endless nitpicky facts.

Maybe the only way to lobby them and get some of this nonsense alleviated is for the FAA and other authorities to suspend their validations of foreign licenses as SASless proposes. It would us pilots badly, but might create the political storm we need to turn them of this path!

This move EASA’s behalf seems to threaten the ICAO rules and regulations.

We have lost in most parts the battle for a just, simple and cost effective regulatory structure for the issuance of licenses, ratings and medicals. Common sense is not so common and/or is being ignored completely.

[PapaechoIT]

Hi all folks,
I'm Italian with a JAA CPL (H) and..I definitively hate how EASA/JAA and anyone else in Europe is acting to regulated the, so damn' called, aviation in my area.
Why, and I say again, WHY should they close the door in front of everyone holding another license? Why, should they prevent non EASA pilot to fly in our environment too??
Also the regulation related to Conversions, seems to me so wrong and now they have fu..ed all up, writing this stupid rule.

As a JAA licensed one, I've nothing to loose but... I'm for a open world and... they're acting exactly in the opposite way.

Thanks EASA, we lost the last chance to be credible in the aviation world.

Disappointed, totally disappointed

PE :mad:

[Epiphany]

Last time I hired an N reg aeroplane in USA the flight school insisted that I had an FAA licence. You telling me that those Goddam Yanks ripped me off and I could have used my JAR licence??

[PapaechoIT]

Nop,
We know for sure that if you want to fly a N registered aircraft/rotorcraft, also if it is based in Europe, you need a FAA License.

To do that a conversion is possible with a consolidated exam, a bunch of hours and a flight check, maximum one week and you have done.

But now, EASA (European Aviation SCREWING Agency) have generated a new rule, stating that every pilot non-EASA, could not fly inside the EASA environment with their license. And, you know well, the FAA/CASA/TC to EASA/JAA conversion, isn't as simple as the JAA to EASA/TC conversion.

Cheers,
PE :ok:

[GoodGrief]

Re-check your knowledge:

FAR § 61.3 Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.

(a) Pilot certificate. No person may serve as a required pilot flight crewmember of a civil aircraft of the United States, unless that person—

(1) Has a pilot certificate or special purpose pilot authorization issued under this part in that person's physical possession or readily accessible in the aircraft when exercising the privileges of that pilot certificate or authorization.
However, when the aircraft is operated within a foreign country, a pilot license issued by that country may be used;

[DennisK]

As a 14,000 hours plus guy, I'm now being told that under EASA rules, my CAA/JAR ATPL(H) which I've held since 1976 can only be converted and re-issued as a CPL. (plus a couple of hundred pounds and 50 hours in a twin) ) Not that I care too much being on the verge of full retirement, but how's that for idiocy. Dennis K.

[md 600 driver]

Goodgrief you said
However, when the aircraft is operated within a foreign country, a pilot license issued by that country may be used;

So if in the uk a pilot can fly a n reg on a uk licence. But can he fly on a easa licence, the easa licence is a Europe licence and its issue is stateless and its not a uk licence

[HillerBee]

Don't see the problem at all. They've been talking about thos for years so everyone could prepare.

You can't fly on a JAA/EASA license in the US either, you can only get a PPL based on. The same applies here, it's easy and straightforward to either validate or get an EASA PPL based on a foreign license.

As for typeratings try to fly/rent a helicopter in the US when you have less than a 100 hours on type. When you have more than a 100 hours on type in the EASA system you get a typerating pretty easy (only a typerating practial exam)

Why should someone who got a FAA CPL, get the EASA equivalent where the theoretical part is far more extensive. In other words people who have studied their arses of get laughed at by people who didn't.

BTW I have both FAA and JAA/EASA CPL(H)/CFI(H) FI(H)

[GoodGrief]

Not too long ago in Germany:
A 900 hour robbie pilot did a VFR type rating on a BK117 or B222 and automatically fulfilled the requirements for an ATPL. He was given one.
No IR, no MCC, nothing. Now what is that piece of paper worth?

The rules have changed and now an ATPL calls for an IFR, MCC and 350+ hours on big iron.
It is the highest achievable licence and only the highest qualified pilots should hold it. This is not about good or bad pilots...

Since you (and I) don't hold those quals we are not entitled to that licence.Simple.

ATP or CPL, it doesn't belittle your qualifications, achievements or your 14000+ hours.

[Ready2Fly]

@md600
He can, but only in the state of issuance (and afaik only to the level of PPL), i.e. with a JAR-FCL CPL issued by germany you can fly N-Reg in germany but not across any border. If you want to ferry a N-Reg AS350 from France to Germany you'd either need a FAA license or two pilots, one with a french issued JAR/EASA license and another one with a german JAR/EASA license.

The difference between now and before 08th April 2012 (note: the implementation has been postponed - inofficially, remember this is not law ... still) is: Before you were allowed to fly N-Reg on a FAA CPL across europe acting as PIC in commercial transport even as a non U.S. resident (i.e. living/working in europe). Now you'd require a JAR/EASA CPL.

Similiar to the U.S.? Well, the only difference being 9-14(?) theoretical exams and practical exam incl. typerating (FAA => EASA) vs. reading two books, nailing PPL and CPL theoretical exams, oral (to me this seems the hardest part) and practical exam after 5(?) hours of instruction - imho definately worth the time to spend at a foreign airport if you never flew in the US before (EASA => FAA).

Please bear with me if i mixed up important details but i think you get the idea.

To me it is terrible to see what EASA-FCL has grown into and the 'implementation' is even more embarassing. :sad:

[md 600 driver]

Ready to fly

Surely That must be against eu law then, for flying ppl privildges not cpl you can only have your licence issued by one state in the old days you could have a jar licence issued in france germany holland belgium and fly through all countrys they are discriminating against him /her by not making the easa licence Europe wide

[Ready2Fly]

I was referring to flying N-reg aircraft in europe on a JAR/EASA license. This is only allowed in the state of issuance.

The main controversy is with flying N-Reg aircraft on a FAA license in europe (commercially) which was allowed before EASA-FCL and (as it seems) is going to end (read: it had already come to a stop if EASA-FCL was implemented on 08.04.2012 but the implementation got postponed because the date was a surprise to the legislation of many member states :E ) and how to get a license (FAA => EASA vs. EASA => FAA) based on your initial license.

I can fly a (D-Reg) helicopter whereever my JAR/EASA license is valid.

[CS-Hover]

As a 14,000 hours plus guy, I'm now being told that under EASA rules, my CAA/JAR ATPL(H) which I've held since 1976 can only be converted and re-issued as a CPL. (plus a couple of hundred pounds and 50 hours in a twin) ) Not that I care too much being on the verge of full retirement, but how's that for idiocy. Dennis K.

DennisK

i don't know if I'm seeing it wrongly or if i don't understand your statement, but on Article 4 of EC 1178/2011

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:311:0001:0193:EN:PDF page 3)

it says:

1. JAR-compliant licences issued or recognised by a Member State before 8 April 2012 shall be deemed to have been issued in accordance with this Regulation. Member States shall replace these licences with licences complying with the format laid down in Part-ARA by 8 April 2017 at the latest.

so, if one has a licence issued by a national authority, according the national legislation (copy/translated/transfer of JAR FCL), should have "automatically" the new EASA license(or what they call now)

i'm reading wrongly or is somewhere written a different thing... :confused:

seems there is already an "ammendment" called EC 290/2012, but it seems that on this matter only changes effective dates

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:100:0001:0056:EN:PDF

regards

[SASless]

Hiller Bee....don't confuse Insurance requirements with FAA Regulations....the 100 hour rule is an Insurance requirement and not an FAA Regulation.

Two different kettles.....

[paco]

Given that all licences are supposed to be ICAO standard, I think ICAO should take on worldwide licensing issuance. At least it would be standard nonsense.

Discuss.

Phil

[HillerBee]

Hiller Bee....don't confuse Insurance requirements with FAA Regulations....the 100 hour rule is an Insurance requirement and not an FAA Regulation.

Two different kettles.....Not entirely, because either way you can't fly.

In Europe Regulators decided not to leave it up to commercial companies to regulate.

[Epiphany]

They were my thoughts Hillerbee.

What is so difficult about obtaining a JAR PPL? If you want to fly in Europe why should you not need one? The rules for flying in both countries are very different. I need an FAA PPL to fly in USA.

[md 600 driver]

epipany

its the other way around i now have to get a new faa licence to fly a n reg privately in europe

prior to all this i had a national licence with a us validation which allwed me to fly a n reg anywhere [61.75]

now or when it arrives in post i have a new easa licence which allows me to fly n reg in the country of issue only

so i will now have to reapply for a us validation of my new easa licence and go through all the hoops again 61-75 or get a standalone licence

[IceHeli]

"I need an FAA PPL to fly in USA."

Actually you don't. What you need is a validation of your ICAO compliant licence. The FAA receive a package from you and your authority and issue a validation of your foreign licence. As a result you are allowed to fly on N reg aircraft as long as the condition of your original licence are met i.e. currency, pc, medical etc.

There is no training required if everything is current. The responsibility is yours...

IH

[DennisK]

For CS ... I don't understand it either. All I can say is that having completed the licence conversion application, that is what I am being told by our CAA. Dennis K.

[206Fan]

Right after reading through all this I'm still not 100% sure. I hold an FAA PPL and currently Flying an N-Reg 300 in Northern Ireland.

Going by the CAA Website am I correct in saying I'm safe until 2014 on the FAA PPL?

Also I would like to add that the Schweizer Helicopter might be sold on by the end of the year which would mean jumping over to a G-Reg Helicopter to continue flying here. I am not aware of any other N-Reg machines in the North or the South.

Q.26 I have a licence issued by a non-EASA country (e.g. USA), how will the changes affect me?

Currently the UK Air Navigation Order gives a permanent validation of non-UK ICAO licences that allows the holders of those licences to fly UK-registered aircraft for private purposes only. With the implementation of European regulations, including the use of the derogations by the UK, this UK validation will remain for private flights until 8th April 2014. From that date forward the UK validation will be valid only for non-EASA aircraft registered in the UK.

[SASless]

So....CAA Permanent Validations....are vaild until 2014.

I thought the World was supposed to come to an end this year according to the Mayan Calendar.

[paco]

I think the guy who was doing the Mayan Calendar just went off for a coffee and never came back....... :)

Phil

[nigelh]

Hiller Bee ....you said ....As for typeratings try to fly/rent a helicopter in the US when you have less than a 100 hours on type. When you have more than a 100 hours on type in the EASA system you get a typerating pretty easy (only a typerating practial exam )

I may be misreading you but i have nearly 1000 hrs on AS 350 and 500 + on 206 , 200 on MD500 ....i have an FAA CPL CFi and UK CAA PPL .......
I have to do 2 hrs training and a check ride on each type and also 8 hrs training and ground school for the 109 ( which i am flying today with 200 hrs ....).
As for what reg heli i can fly in what country .....just like the rest of you i havent got a clue :ugh: Luckily for me i can afford to jump through all the hoops for some imbicile in a suit ...sadly i think there will be many out there who just cannot afford to pay for the hire of the aircraft , the instructor and school and the EASA fees . They will either fly illegally ....just hand over your wealth to your wife or kids to look after in case you get sued ....or just give up . Neither is ideal...

[rotarywise]

nigelh - you have been misinformed (assuming that you are doing this in the UK). For single-engined helicopters, if you have more than 100 hours on type and operational experience on the type within the last 5 years, there is no requirement for refresher training. All you need to do is to pass the relevant type rating approved theoretical knowledge examination and a proficiency check. I suggest that you point whoever told you that you needed 2 hours on each type in the direction of LASORS para F9.1.

In the case of multi-engined helicopters, you need 350 hours on type to transfer the rating, hence the need to do the full type rating course on the A109.

As the CAA have finally got their act together and published the derogations, these arrangements will now remain in place until 31 May, after which the EASA rules kick in.

[SASless]

As the CAA have finally got their act together and published the derogations, these arrangements will now remain in place until 31 May, after which the EASA rules kick in.

So let me get this straight.....if I have 340 hours in a 109, the factory course, check rides and writtens all along.....no accidents or incidents.....I now have to take the full Type Conversion course? And pay all the fees to the CAA of course!

Did I read that right?

And you suggest the "CAA has its act together..."!:ugh:

[GoodGrief]

if I have 340 hours in a 109...

They used to demand 500 hours a couple of years ago...

[nigelh]

OK then ....out comes the sharp pencil and bump your hrs up to 350 ....Simples :ok:

[rotarywise]

SASless - I see what you are trying to do but the disruption of context is a little too blatant to be credible. The righteous indignation is also a little contrived when you consider that this has been the situation for the last 20 years or so. You would, perhaps, be better employed in venting your spleen on what is to come rather than what is (almost) past. If you want a convenient bandwagon on which to jump, in the context of extracting (extorting?) money, the CAA has just played an absolute blinder and almost nobody has noticed - yet. Oh, and I didn't say that a pilot with 340 hours on type would need to do the whole course - try reading the post again (and the reference).

Better luck next time.

[AnFI]

I think they extended the acceptance period for converting UK ATPLs to JAR ATPLs (and thereby EASA ones) up until 2004 (should have been 2000?).
After that date people had to properly comply with the new minimum requirements.

[odemacon]

Just an update on the thread as the implementing dates have been postponed from 2012 to 2014 and now to 2015. Just to put it in a simple way and to make certain all have understood the bright idea behind the EASA crew licencing rule:

It does make the privileges of a Pilot in command depend on where he lives!
YES - That is all it means.

You want to conduct a "N"ovember registered aircraft and you reside in the E.U, then you need an E.U pilot licence.

You reside outside of the E.U: You just need your F.A.A licence and you're not concerned! :ok:

Very smart no?! What a brilliant idea, so now my good friends 10 miles away from me in Monaco, (which is not Europe) can conduct business as usual but for me, leaving in the E.U I've got to retake all my E.U ATP exams. :D

What a joke! Fully in line with the competency of the EASA actors and E.U commission people from whom we have been able to appreciate the efficiency over the last 2 decades!

Luckily, there are several ways around the most stupid ruling...

Fly Safe, Be Happy,

[unstable load]

Those of you that hold one should try converting your ICAO Engineer's license to EASA if you want an exercise in cost and frustration.....

[Darren999]

I agree with Paco.

Get ICAO To address this pilot Licence issue. If you have a pilots Licence issued by a member states it's valid around the world, regardless of type... It's a pilot Licence!

If you intend to work in a country you need the right to work there first, and I have no issue in doing an air law exam for that country.

I hold dual ATPL and yet need to undertake 14 exams to fly in the EU, plus a 15 hour conversion of my instrument rating!! Absolutely ridiculous!!!