Is there a difference between ATPL or bush pilot CPL?

[SmartiMarti]

HI
It's a rookie question so be patient. But all of full CPL deals i see advertised seem to to aim to those who want to fly 737s for Ryannair. What about those of us who see themselves getting a CPL cos they want to fly Beachraft twins in Africa or Asia? Is there a difference? Also, if there is, can anyone recommend a full package (from zero - rookie to completion) for such a license? In other words a flight school in the UK or in the EU which could do the whole nine yards so that you end up with a CPL which would allow you to fly turbo props, single and twins and not commerical airliners?

Apologies in advance if this is a really stupid quesion.

MJ in Beirut

[paco]

Talk to [email protected].....

[pineteam]

HI
What about those of us who see themselves getting a CPL cos they want to fly Beachraft twins in Africa or Asia? Is there a difference?

I think that's probably one of the best flying experience you can do and I strongly encourage you to do that before joining the shiny metallic jet. You will never regret it, I can garanty you that.
That's all I can say, I'm not familiar with the European pilots school, sorry. But if you can, better do all the way to the ATPL, at least it's out of the way for good. Going only for the CPL, you would only be able to fly as captain on small aircraft eg less than 5700kg. Thereafter you can enjoy the flying and not stressed about written exams anymore.

[SmartiMarti]

I think that's probably one of the best flying experience you can do and I strongly encourage you to do that before joining the shiny metallic jet. You will never regret it, I can garanty you that.
That's all I can say, I'm not familiar with the European pilots school, sorry. But if you can, better do all the way to the ATPL, at least it's out of the way for good. Going only for the CPL, you would only be able to fly as captain on small aircraft eg less than 5700kg. Thereafter you can enjoy the flying and not stressed about written exams anymore.

So, if i understand correctly, you have to go 'all the way' to ATPL even if you saw yourself flying twin turbo props? Can 't you just get a CPL with a twin rating and MIR and stop there if the shiny jet scene wasn't of interest?
And wouldn't that be a lot cheaper?

MJ

[Genghis the Engineer]

So far as the CPL/IR there really is little difference in effort between that and fATPL, but having the fATPL gives you the option.

The differences are:-

(1) Doing the MCC course

(2) Doing the ATPL writtens, versus the separate CPL and IR writtens.


The only real reason *not* to do the ATPL writtens is that you don't plan to do the IR in the time before the exams lapse. (Which is what I did, I did CPL writtens only, as I saw no likelihood of going for the IR in that timescale. In that I was correct, but my position was unusual and this probably won't apply to most other people.

G

[Tinstaafl]

I think you're confusing the glossy ads that promote a school's training for a frozen airline transport pilot licence or fATPL, as it is often abbreviated. There is no such licence! The licence you will have at the end of your training will be a commercial pilot licence (CPL) + instrument rating (IR) + passes in the ATPL exams (and often now, completion of a Multi Crew Cooperation course). 'fATPL' is used as shorthand to refer to that. Unfortunately, many schools aren't clear about this. It's in their own interest if prospective students think they're getting something more than a CPL issued (hint: They're not). Eventually though, after gaining the required, much more, additional experience & flight tests, you can apply for the issue of an ATPL. Until then you hold a Commercial Pilot Licence.

Note that in most pilot's careers, ATPL theory (and MCC) will be necessary if they ever fly aircraft that require more than a single pilot - including being the co-pilot. To be the captain requires holding an ATPL, not just CPL + ATPL exams.

The reason for doing the ATPL exams in the EASA system is that both the CPL and IR content & exams are a subset of the ATPL. Passing the ATPL exams automatically gives you credit for the CPL & IR stuff, and at the same time, allows for the possible future licence upgrade. The alternative is to sit the CPL exams, the IR exams, and then later in your career, have to sit the whole of the ATPL exam series if you want, or need, to upgrade. .In doing so, you will repeat all that content for you did for CPL & IR and be examined on it. Quite a waste of time and $$$.

FYI, in other countries ATPL exams don't provide CPL/IR credit because they don't include that content. ATPL content is additional to CPL & IR content. In those countries you must sit the CPL, IR, & ATPL exams separately.

[rudestuff]

There is no point in doing the CPL exams. The ATPL exams have loads more support from question banks etc, so ironically they're probably easier.

[MR172]

To defend CPL a bit :ok: - the QB's have a CPL only option which you set and it excludes the LO's for ATPL and drops the question amounts down considerably and covers CPL only, there are a couple that sneak through alright. Subjects like performace for example on aviation exam have 395 questions for CPL Vs 797 for ATPL, so its quite a bit in some subjects.

Problem is with the books, it is tricky to know what to cover and what not to cover, so you end up doing more than you should.

[paco]

If you do the ATP you will need to do the IR within 3 years and keep it going to keep the exams valid (they last for 7 years from the date of last expiry). It won't matter to a bush employer if you have ATP subjects. There is about 40% studying difference between the two and 400 less hours for the CPL.

For your purpose the CPL will be fine - the only wrinkle is if you need the ATP later you will need to do the exams again.

As mentioned, talk to the guy I mentioned above - he can do the whole CPL thing for around £40K

[Piltdown Man]

I don’t think one European school will properly prepare you for bush flying. They’ll teach you to fly but not to operate. The schools that can teach are in bush territory. The areas that come to mind are Australia, Canada, South Africa and South America, the areas where there is bush flying.

PM

(ex-bush pilot)

[rudestuff]

... Because bush flying is cool and dangerous. Nothing cool and dangerous is allowed in Europe.

[paco]

The course I mentioned above takes place in S AFrica

[Jason Middleton]

SmartiMarti,

You will need to do an IR on top of your CPL to be useful in bush flying. It might sound strange, but running down an ILS with autopilot on in a B737 (say) is a lot easier than a circling approach using an NDB, or a GPS approach without vertical guidance, to an airport in a valley surrounded by large chunks of granite at night in bad WX in a B58 on a single Pilot IFR flight ( with a pax being sick down the back of your neck).

Typically a bush pilot job will start out on a single, maybe C182 or 206, and only later will you get into piston twin, then after several hundred or a few thousand hours a job flying small turboprops might become available.

In Aus, the top GA ( bush pilot) job is as a Royal Flying Dctor Servce Pilot flying a PC12 or B200. From the RFDS website Pilot experience requirements are : "Minimum 3000hrs time in command. Minimum 500 hrs of night flying. Minimum 2000hrs time in command of a multi-engine aircraft" So you can see this is not a job for a novice.

GA flying can be very rewarding, and every flight is different, as you are often challenged by having to fly at altitudes inhabited by granite and the WX, and not above them.

As you are based in Europe, I would recommend doing ATPL theory because it covers the CPL. This is not true in most other non-EASA states.

good luck

JM