FAA First officer do not require TR ???

[iaf_22]

Hi to all,
please correct me:

I was told that in USA, only captain needs a full Type rating. (theoretical + simulator), and that first officer doesn't really need a TR to fly the aircraft (that sounds weird..) or, at least, not a TR as extensive as the commander one....

Since it's a mouth to mouth sentence i heard... it might have been modified, but i'm curious to what exactly did it originally refer to ??
Is it true or was it true or do you have any idea to what was meant originally ??

Thank you

[candler]

First Officers recieve an sic type rating.at my Airline they basically go trough the same training as a captain.We are paired up as a crew and go through the TR course together.Captain gets a TR F.O gets a sic TR

[BelArgUSA]

FAA Type Ratings

Bonjour iaf -
xxx
You heard correctly - in USA, the FAA did not require a type rating (to be written) on a pilot certificate. As a matter of fact, in FAA pilot jargon, a type rating means a "captain rating". That does not mean that F/Os are not qualified. A F/O with a US airline receives a training that is probably same, or comparable to any other airline in the world.
xxx
Recently, ICAO questioned the FAA about that practice, so, the FAA now issues "SIC Type Ratings" indicated on pilot certificates, for pilots who require it for international operations.
xxx
With the FAA, a F/O training and qualification has little differences with captain's training. In the 747, a F/O does not have to demonstrate a "2 engines" approach, or an emergency descent as PF. On a check ride, he is required to maintain altitudes by + or - 100 feet. while captains standards are + or - 50 feet. On ILS instrument checks, captains are required to fly ILS approaches to 100 feet DA, while 200 feet is required for F/Os. Other than that, the ground training, aircraft systems and performance is same as any captain training curriculum.
xxx
When I give a check in simulator or airplane, shall I say that I am a little more lenient with F/O's standards than I am with captains. The training standards are so similar, that with my airline here in Argentina, which uses FAA standards, we initially qualify F/Os with a SIC/P2 rating, but on their next proficiency check, with their improved proficiency, they are trained and receive a PIC/P1 ratings.
xxx
I started my airline career as a flight engineer. My FAA F/E certificate just states "Turbojet" as rating, yet I was qualified on 707 and 727... so I have no type rating as flight engineer...
xxx
J'espère que cela répond à tes questions -

Happy contrails

[xtwapilot]

I really don't know what your talking about. In the US, the F/O goes through the exact same training as a Captain and is held to the exact same ATP standards, i.e. +/- 100 on alt, +/- 10 kts on speed, and +/- 10 degrees on heading. The ILS is flown to regular 200 DA and 100 about TDZE. etc etc. On the 747 it is true that the F/O is not required to be graded on a 2 eng approach, however, on all Prof Checks(PC), the FE must see a 2 eng approach, hence, the F/O must demonstrate a 2 eng approach, though it's not graded for him.
It is true that in the US, the practice has been that F/O don't receive a TR on their license, however, with ICAO pushing the issue, the FAA now requires a SIC TR for F/O operating internationally to meet the ICAO requirement. All pax airlines were already typing F/O for day one on international ops, however, many 2nd and 3rd tier freight companies were not, and their reasoning has always been that if they type the F/O he/she will leave after getting the type for a better job.

Xtwapilot

[galaxy flyer]

The issue outside of FAR 121 is business aircraft which do require a TR. The SIC training standards in FAR 61.55 are really quite "flexible" for being issued a SIC TR. The instructor, note instructor, no TRE, attests to training the applicant in aircraft systems, normal and emergency procedures, etc. The applicant for the SIC TR takes the application to the FSDO who issues the new license. Yes, many operators have both PICs and SICs complete the entire course and sim sessions together, it is NOT required for an SIC TR.

Check out FAR 61.55

[MarkerInbound]

US Air Carrier training is about the same for PICs and F/Os. The F/Os don't have to do 0 flap landings and and the 50% engine out approach if they have more than 2 engines.

[Superbad]

Under Part 91 co-pilot does not need a type rating or SIC rating.

[galaxy flyer]

He does indeed outside of the US. That is why the SIC rating was established!!!

[Wyle E Coyote]

When I was over there doing some training a few years ago, I was surprised to meet some pilots doing 727 training for a freight company, their training consisted of the ground course (essentially the CBT), followed by sitting in the sim for half an hour or so and learning where everything is and runing a few checklists. They never even flew the thing.

That was my intro to the FAA system.

[ironbutt57]

well cyote...you must have missed something.....

[thepotato232]

Well, you caught us Coyote. FOs in the U.S. are never taught how to fly. The big shiny things up front are far too intimidating. I soil myself every time I so much as see an airplane. We sit in the right seat primarily for balance purposes.

Seriously though, if US carriers typed all of their FOs, said FOs would leave for greener pastures immediately. If you guys think the Yanks are taking too many jobs now, just imagine what would happen if every angry regional pilot in the states was eligible to apply to the same jobs as you. If my E170 type didn't say 'SIC' next to it, I'd only be one sham marriage away from a cushy European street captain job. The SIC type is just one more wall that's keeping the current mess in the US airlines from crossing borders.

[SNS3Guppy]

When I was over there doing some training a few years ago, I was surprised to meet some pilots doing 727 training for a freight company, their training consisted of the ground course (essentially the CBT), followed by sitting in the sim for half an hour or so and learning where everything is and runing a few checklists. They never even flew the thing.

That was my intro to the FAA system.

We had six weeks of ground, nearly four weeks in the sim, then two months or more of initial operating experience line training in the airplane. Perhaps you misunderstood your "intro to the FAA system."

Every single flight, and each aspect of each flight, required documentation, signed off by the check airman or training captain, and separate line checks were required for various aspects ranging from the INS and individual nav systems or radios, to north atlantic checks, etc...to say nothing of checks into individual airports and on certain routes. Numerous checkrides, oral exams, written tests, etc, took place throughout training. During ground school written tests were taken and graded on each topic and phase, as well as end writtens, and exit orals when passing from one area to another...don't pass that exam, don't get to move on.

Now it's certainly true that one can achieve a type rating in a simulator and be legally qualified on the airplane without ever setting foot in the airplane. It's also true, however, that one can achieve far more advanced and realistic training in the sim than in the actual airplane, because there are a lot of things you can do in the sim that you simply cannot do in the airplane.

I've been to simuflite or FSI and come away with a type rating after several weeks of study and plenty of hours in the sim, as well as passing oral, written, and practical tests. My type for my present job was issued based on a sim check...not wasn't given out with abandon, and was earned. Moreover, on arrival on the line, nothing was assumed, and I was held to the same checkride standards every step of the way.

Yes, a SIC needs a type rating for international flight. Some operators try to get away with the bare minimum, but most hold a SIC candidate to the same practical test standards as a PIC candidate. Some operators only issue the SIC until the individual upgrades, which means that they're not providing full type ratings so the individual can then take the training and run to another operator. Once the individual upgrades, the full type rating is issued, and hopefully both the individual and the operator mutually benifit.

I suggest that if you truly feel that the training and oversight you receive under FAA certification is so poor, you seek training elsewhere in the future. Your training dollars, euros, riyals, shekels, or whatever else you use to pay, are certainly welcome, but definitely not needed.

[Wyle E Coyote]

well, that raised a few hackles huh? sorry boys, not intended as a dig, just an observation.

The training I received in the US was excellent, I never suggested otherwise. I did a command rating and thoroughly enjoyed my time there.

The two gentlemen I met at my hotel were training at the same place, and that's the training they got - straight from the horses mouth. I don't know what the legal FAA minimums are for FO training, but the operation they had just been hired by was a new startup, and it sounded a little dodgy - whether it ever eventuated I don't know. I would suspect cost saving was an important factor in the amount of training they received.

This of course raises the question, If the FO doesn't get typed, is there a minimum standard they must meet or demonstrate? I'm talking legally here, not opertator SOPs.

I'm sure they would have received more line training etc as matter of course, and I'm sure this in mandated by the FAA, however I was surpried they didn't get to fly the sim, as that's the whole point of the sim centre really. They also seemed rather surprised and disappointed that they didn't get to fly it.

Some operators try to get away with the bare minimum, but most hold a SIC candidate to the same practical test standards as a PIC candidate. Some operators only issue the SIC until the individual upgrades, which means that they're not providing full type ratings so the individual can then take the training and run to another operator

and

if US carriers typed all of their FOs, said FOs would leave for greener pastures immediately

Do you really thaink that the TR (or lack of) is the only thing keeping FOs in their current job? If this is the case, why not pay for a command check with an outside training organisation and get your type signed off? just a thought.

I would be interested if anyone has info in the bare FAA mandated minumums to sit in the right seat though. (if, for example, I got my hands on an old 727 and decided to start a freight business with it as cheaply as possible)

[galaxy flyer]

Read FAR 61.55 Ground School and three take-offs and landing, one of which is with OEi will do it. There is no FAA practical test, only an instructor's sign-off for the TR (SIC)

GF

Yes, it can be VERY basic.

[thepotato232]

Heh, point taken. In answer to your question, there are other factors in why people don't just take the TR and leave: Training bonds, the need to build competitive flight time, the lack of immediate prospects, comfort level in a current job, etc. Privately funded TR courses are bloody expensive, and your average 1st year regional FO simply doesn't have that kind of cash laying around. Plus, there are the usual right-to-work issues that I alluded to when looking for a job outside your home country. My long-term plans all take me outside of the US, and I'd be willing to pay for a PIC type if that was the only way to get on with another carrier. Or I could just wait around for my upgrade and change jobs at my leisure. I was being a bit facetious, but the purpose of the SIC type in America actually is to make the recipient of the TR less marketable for competitive job offers. Most major airlines will PIC type both pilots, but very few regionals do. It's enough to make one quite bitter...

To answer your question about the hypothetical 727s: Legally speaking, to fly right seat in such an operation domestically in the US the FAA only requires a Commercial/Multi Engine certificate. Only when you go international do you require a SIC type. As galaxy flyer mentioned, the actual legal requirements for this type are very basic. That said, most operations will not simply award one based only on the applicant's ability to fog a pane of glass. The one at my company is not exactly a picnic - we are expected to perform to PIC standards, and the checkride is a jeopardy situation.

[MarkerInbound]

In the US you can't operate a 727 under part 91 of the rules, it would have to be under part 125 or 121. Both parts require an FAA approved set of manuals which would include a training manual. While you can create a reduced initial program for current and qualified new hires, I find it really hard to believe you could get a Fed to sign off on using a previous employer's checkride. And if the training was at a contract training center, they would have a part 142 certificate which would be in jeopardy. No matter what the horses said, I think we're missing something.

Galaxy Flyer, 61.55 also says you have to bring your training records to the FSDO. If you took your AA 737 training to the DFW FSDO (they probably actually have a designee in house do it) it wouldn't be much of an issue but I'll bet if I signed you off for a CE-500 rating Mr. Fed Friendly would spend a minute or two looking through the training package.

[Wyle E Coyote]

That would raise another question, if the FO never receives a type rating, at what stage is his type conversion considered complete, and his line training started?

Could these guys have gone on to start line training on revenue freight runs with an approved training captain?

[MarkerInbound]

A "normal" airline training program has a programed number of hours of ground school, broken down into so many hours of aircraft systems, so many hours CRM, so many HazMat, etc. That's going to be the same PIC, F/O or F/E. Then there will be a flight training syllabus, say 5 sims and checkride. There are a couple extra things on the PIC checkride but pretty much the same. Then the training program may have a LOFT segment. At this point the crewmember would receive the rating on their certificate. Then in the 121 world there is a matrix of required hours of operating experience depending on whether the crewmember is PIC, F/O or F/E and whether it is initial, transition or upgrade training. The OE is under the supervision of a Line Check Airman. At the end of the OE, the PIC receives a Line Check, which is different from the PC check in the sim. Then and only then is the crewmember "turned loose."

I have no idea what "type conversion" converts into in the US system but when the F/O's ground school is complete, when their flight training has been completed and they've passed their checkride, then they go fly line flights with a Check Airman.

[WorldDC10]

That would raise another question, if the FO never receives a type rating, at what stage is his type conversion considered complete, and his line training started?

Could these guys have gone on to start line training on revenue freight runs with an approved training captain?



Every job I have had in the USA from Pt135 Learjet SIC, Pt121 CL65 SIC and PIC and DC10 SIC completed all training in the SIM. My first flight in a DC10 had over 200 pax - I hadn't even seen the aircraft before climbing the steps and turning left!

I haven't personally come across any airline in the USA that still does circuits in the aircraft before line training - not to say it doesn't happen.

[MarkerInbound]

You have to do the bounces if the sim for the checkride was level A or B.