Convert FAA Instrument rating to EASA

[gerpols]

Ladies, Gents,

Anyone who has some smart ideas how to convert my FAA Instrument rating to EASA instrument rating ?
Holder of FAA ATP and EASA CPL.
Easiest and cheapest way preferably.....:)
Thanks.

[rudestuff]

Assuming you've got the exams, find an ato and do 10 hours SIM and 5 in a plane, take the test.

[Transsonic2000]

It's called "competency based IR" prerequisites are an ICAO IR and a minimum of 50 hr PIC IFR (actual or simulated). Since you already hold an FAA ATPL you meet this requirement. I was told that an ATO (flight school) doesn't necessarily need to be involved, makes it less costly probably. Basically all you need to do is go find a flight instructor (EASA and/or FAA) who prepares you (if not current) or signs you off for the check-ride and take the checkride with an EASA examiner. Usually the instructor knows an examiner.

I found an older thread here on the forum which deals with the same topic - see quote and link below:
People already holding an ICAO IR can convert to the EASA version by:


completing the skill test
demonstrating to the examiner (during the skill test) an adequate knowledge of air law, meteorology and flight planning
having at least 50 hours of flight time under IFR as PIC on aeroplanes, in actual or simulated IMC

Source: http://www.pprune.org/professional-pilot-training-includes-ground-studies/547698-competency-based-instrument-rating-vs-regular-ir.html#post8659256

PS. if you are not instrument current anymore on your FAA license, or if a few years have past since your last IFR flight (then probaly a few more hours are required to get back into IFR flying again). I'd recommend considering a trip to the US. Since it's a hassle (in terms of finding an FAA CFII and N-reg airplane here in Europe) and crazy expensive to get current again. For the same money you can easily go for a trip to the US get current there and even fly more hours (based on my own expereince).

[BillieBob]

I was told that an ATO (flight school) doesn't necessarily need to be involvedYou were misinformed. In all cases, the CB-IR course must include at least 10 hours of instrument flight time under instruction in an aeroplane at an ATO. Also, a pre-entry flight test must be completed at an ATO to determine the amount of credit to be awarded and to establish the specific training needs.

[gerpols]

Oke guys, thanks for the input !
I am currently in Holland doing my CBIR. I passed airlaw and flightplanning theoretical exams. Now studying meteorology which I find to be a big pain in the ass subject !! www.Aviationexam.com has 1350 meteorology questions in their database, and to me 500 questions are just plain BS !
So I was wondering if these theoretical exams are a Dutch thing or do all EASA mebers require you to pass for these 3 exams ?
By the way: I don`t need an ATO approval to do my CBIR training.
Another thing here in Holland is that if you do not want to do these 3 theoretical exams, you can still take the exam, but the reality shows that you will never pass the oral for the exam :}.
Also here in Holland: once you have passed the 3 theoretical exams, you do not need 10 hours of Sim-time and 5 actual flight hours, its not a hard requirement which I believe it is in England. Correct me if I am wrong !

Anyone else with some smart ideas or information ?

[Transsonic2000]

In all cases, the CB-IR course must include at least 10 hours of instrument flight time under instruction in an aeroplane at an ATO.Well I think that's more a UK specific requirement, since I talked with a senior examiner in Germany and he said that it can be done without an ATO being involved.

[gerpols]

Oke thanks !
Does the British CAA requires you to pass the 3 theoretical exams also before you can take the practical exam ?

[LastStandards]

Appendix 6 to FCL states - among other things - that:

8. Applicants for the competency-based modular IR(A) holding a Part-FCL PPL or CPL and a valid IR(A) issued in compliance with the requirements of Annex 1 to the Chicago Convention by a third country may be credited in full towards the training course mentioned in paragraph 4. In order to be issued the IR(A), the applicant shall: (a) successfully complete the skill test for the IR(A) in accordance with Appendix 7; (b) demonstrate to the examiner during the skill test that he/she has acquired an adequate level of theoretical knowledge of air law, meteorology and flight planning and performance (IR); and (c) have a minimum experience of at least 50 hours of flight time under IFR as PIC on aeroplanes.

The UK's current interpretation of this is contained in para 2.3 of IN-2016/102 (http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapplication.aspx?catid=1&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=7643). The UK Flight Examiner's handbook states: "Applicants for an IR or EIR who are credited in full with the theoretical knowledge and flight training requirements of Part-FCL on the basis of holding a valid IR, issued in accordance with the requirements of Annex 1 to the Chicago Convention, may apply directly to Flight Test Bookings for designation of an examiner. Further information is in Standards Document 1."

Finally, the relevant reference in UK CAA Standards Document 1 states: "Notwithstanding the previous statement, applicants for an IR or EIR skill
test credited in full with the Part-FCL training requirements that have not received training at an ATO, do not require a course completion certificate or recommendation for test."

With all this in mind, it shows that an applicant for an IR using the Competency Based route with a credit for previous ICAO experience does not require ATO involvement unless their national procedures specifically require - the UK does not, while other nations may require the theoretical knowledge to be demonstrated by written assessment notwithstanding the wording in FCL. While there may be an individual sensible use of an ATO for pre-IRT guidance this is not a regulatory requirement.