TSA's Alien Flight Training/Citizenship Validation Rule
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TSA's Alien Flight Training/Citizenship Validation Rule
Here is an interesting ditty:
TSA has provided clarification on the definition of "flight training" for aircraft with an MTOW of 12,500 pounds or less; it now only includes flight training for a recreational pilot, sport pilot, or private pilot certificate; multiengine rating (at any level); or instrument rating.
It also appears this rule does not apply to CFI, CFII or MEI ratings.
Also the TSA has clarified that getting a U.S. certificate based on a foreign license does not need to apply.
So it appears that the Commercial Pilot Certificate is not included in that lot. This is interesting because a JAA PPL holder with a reciprocal FAA private, could flight train and sit the Commercial SE and gain the FAA CPL/SE certificate without having to go through the validation process. This would leave them with a standalone FAA certificate, no longer based upon their JAA licence.
Therefore if training for the Commercial Certificate is not classified as "Flight Training" by the TSA, then presumably no visa is required?
TSA has provided clarification on the definition of "flight training" for aircraft with an MTOW of 12,500 pounds or less; it now only includes flight training for a recreational pilot, sport pilot, or private pilot certificate; multiengine rating (at any level); or instrument rating.
It also appears this rule does not apply to CFI, CFII or MEI ratings.
Also the TSA has clarified that getting a U.S. certificate based on a foreign license does not need to apply.
So it appears that the Commercial Pilot Certificate is not included in that lot. This is interesting because a JAA PPL holder with a reciprocal FAA private, could flight train and sit the Commercial SE and gain the FAA CPL/SE certificate without having to go through the validation process. This would leave them with a standalone FAA certificate, no longer based upon their JAA licence.
Therefore if training for the Commercial Certificate is not classified as "Flight Training" by the TSA, then presumably no visa is required?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it appears that the Commercial Pilot Certificate is not included in that lot
Yes, this has been the case since TSA started.
The Visa situation is something else; there is no clear guidance.
Yes, this has been the case since TSA started.
The Visa situation is something else; there is no clear guidance.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it appears that the Commercial Pilot Certificate is not included in that lot. This is interesting because a JAA PPL holder with a reciprocal FAA private, could flight train and sit the Commercial SE and gain the FAA CPL/SE certificate without having to go through the validation process. This would leave them with a standalone FAA certificate, no longer based upon their JAA licence.
Therefore if training for the Commercial Certificate is not classified as "Flight Training" by the TSA, then presumably no visa is required?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you look at US law then no visa is required for any training if you do less than 18 hours per week, but that is an academic answer.
Of course as you say without an IR or ME rating the CPL isn't worth a whole lot, but you could go all the way to CFI with no visa / tsa requirement.
Interests me as I already have the ME and IR, I always wanted to add the CFI/II/MEI ratings but could never be bothered to get visa's (why break a habit of a lifetime
)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I can tell, an FAA CPL (with or without an IR) is close to worthless in Europe.
Outside some AOC context (which needs UK Govt permission anyway) the only thing I can think of is that you can be a paid company pilot.
However, a CPL can be worth doing for other reasons:
One is to get possible future grandfather rights. It's clear that a "professional" license is held in a higher esteem around the world. For example, look at the CAA/JAA concession for bypassing the Class 1 medical initial limits and going straight to the renewal limits - but only if you hold a CPL or ATPL. What does a CPL or ATPL got to do with your medical condition?? Nothing. But this concession alone can be worth doing a CPL, for some pilots.
Another reason is to do with who is going to get shafted on the N-reg kicking-out front. EASA is taking over from JAA on flight crew licensing. They also want to kick out N-reg planes from Europe (that's if the DfT doesn't beat them to it, in the UK). IMHO they cannot do this by force without repercussions in the form of a loss of Airbus sales in the USA. With a bit of clever lobbying and publicity in the right places in the US media, how many Americans would touch an Airbus, given 1) it's French (remember Gulf War II?) and 2) the Europeans are seen to be treating U.S. aircraft with such contempt on their own soil. EASA is Airbus; the two are totally wrapped up together. So EASA will have to do this by more-or-less embracing FAA licenses/ratings and FAA certification. Remove those two factors and very few people will bother with N. Now, this is going to be really hard to swallow for the "Europe is superior" majority crowd in the European CAAs, the Germans perhaps more than most. So somebody's privileges are sure to get shafted in the process, and who will that be? This business is all about IFR flight (EASA is going for some de-regulation and unification of VFR anyway) and one possibility is that FAA PPL/IR pilots will end up with somehow limited privileges. This won't bother most bizjet/corporate ops (who are the really powerful people in this game, politically) since their pilots tend to be CPL/ATPL anyway. It would make a good piece of meat to throw to the dogs in the various committees.
Just a few thoughts; might be all rubbish, but then I wonder what really will happen. Got to keep 1 step ahead in this game.
Outside some AOC context (which needs UK Govt permission anyway) the only thing I can think of is that you can be a paid company pilot.
However, a CPL can be worth doing for other reasons:
One is to get possible future grandfather rights. It's clear that a "professional" license is held in a higher esteem around the world. For example, look at the CAA/JAA concession for bypassing the Class 1 medical initial limits and going straight to the renewal limits - but only if you hold a CPL or ATPL. What does a CPL or ATPL got to do with your medical condition?? Nothing. But this concession alone can be worth doing a CPL, for some pilots.
Another reason is to do with who is going to get shafted on the N-reg kicking-out front. EASA is taking over from JAA on flight crew licensing. They also want to kick out N-reg planes from Europe (that's if the DfT doesn't beat them to it, in the UK). IMHO they cannot do this by force without repercussions in the form of a loss of Airbus sales in the USA. With a bit of clever lobbying and publicity in the right places in the US media, how many Americans would touch an Airbus, given 1) it's French (remember Gulf War II?) and 2) the Europeans are seen to be treating U.S. aircraft with such contempt on their own soil. EASA is Airbus; the two are totally wrapped up together. So EASA will have to do this by more-or-less embracing FAA licenses/ratings and FAA certification. Remove those two factors and very few people will bother with N. Now, this is going to be really hard to swallow for the "Europe is superior" majority crowd in the European CAAs, the Germans perhaps more than most. So somebody's privileges are sure to get shafted in the process, and who will that be? This business is all about IFR flight (EASA is going for some de-regulation and unification of VFR anyway) and one possibility is that FAA PPL/IR pilots will end up with somehow limited privileges. This won't bother most bizjet/corporate ops (who are the really powerful people in this game, politically) since their pilots tend to be CPL/ATPL anyway. It would make a good piece of meat to throw to the dogs in the various committees.
Just a few thoughts; might be all rubbish, but then I wonder what really will happen. Got to keep 1 step ahead in this game.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This may be a good place to start
http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/types/types_1268.html
If you are going to the U.S. primarily for tourism, but want to take a short course of study of less than 18 hours per week, you may be able to do so on a visitor visa
http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/types/types_1268.html
If you are going to the U.S. primarily for tourism, but want to take a short course of study of less than 18 hours per week, you may be able to do so on a visitor visa
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the US Department of State website: "If you are going to the U.S. primarily for tourism, but want to take a short course of study of less than 18 hours per week, you may be able to do so on a visitor visa. You should inquire at the appropriate U.S. Embassy or Consulate."
The important bits here are "primarily for tourism" and the word "may". So if you are going to the US in order to learn to fly then you will need a visa as the primary purpose of your trip is not tourism. Also some courses of study may require a visa even is less than 18 hours a week are required.
More information at: http://educationusa.state.gov/usvisa.htm and http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/types/types_1268.html
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which leaves us the other case - of someone who is taking an extended vacation in the USA and decides to learn to fly whilst there. The primary purpose of their visit is tourism, and they could easily fall under the 18 hour limit. This is almostthe situation I'm in, as I'm considering an extended vacation there next year, and due to current time constraints may complete my PPL whilst there. I guess I should go speak to the Embassy...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure you can go to the USA on a holiday; anybody can. Obviously if you advertise to the immigration official that you plan to set foot within 1nm of a plane then he/she will go berserk and will be completely uninterested in your explanation about "18hrs", so this is a no-no.
The real question is whether the school will do the training without seeing the M-1 and the TSA authorisation. In my limited experience of dealing with several schools out there, none of them have ever read the regulations properly, if at all, and trying to explain that e.g. you don't need TSA for a CPL falls on deaf ears. They have enough domestic business and can't be bothered to read reams of this stuff.
Perhaps those schools in Florida which are geared up for a lot of foreign business are different.
The real question is whether the school will do the training without seeing the M-1 and the TSA authorisation. In my limited experience of dealing with several schools out there, none of them have ever read the regulations properly, if at all, and trying to explain that e.g. you don't need TSA for a CPL falls on deaf ears. They have enough domestic business and can't be bothered to read reams of this stuff.
Perhaps those schools in Florida which are geared up for a lot of foreign business are different.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So where is the law which says you need a visa to do a PPL if that course of study is less than 18 hours per week. I'd even say that as a PPL is mainly non classroom work, the cut off is 21 hours per week.
Non-resident aliens do need a B visa to visit the US for pleasure. Some people are permiited a waivers to this requirement. Where is the law which says you need an M visa to get a PPL?
As I said it's academic as they can deny you entry for any reason, but you know how these threads go
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting angle on this, relevant to the 18hrs figure, is whether ground school is included in the "course of study". I think it is.
It is feasible (not by much though) for a PPL or an IR to exceed 18hrs/week especially if ground school is included. On a PPL or an IR you are likely to fly twice a day, 6 days a week, which is 12hrs/week, but obviously one could go past that if not feeling too tired and there is no thing else to do in the area.
But most of the other "courses" in flying aren't going to get past 18hrs/week, especially if (as is most strongly advisable) you sit the ground exams before going to the USA.
As I say above, it is down to the school in the end.
It is feasible (not by much though) for a PPL or an IR to exceed 18hrs/week especially if ground school is included. On a PPL or an IR you are likely to fly twice a day, 6 days a week, which is 12hrs/week, but obviously one could go past that if not feeling too tired and there is no thing else to do in the area.
But most of the other "courses" in flying aren't going to get past 18hrs/week, especially if (as is most strongly advisable) you sit the ground exams before going to the USA.
As I say above, it is down to the school in the end.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 961
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is an interesting ditty:
TSA has provided clarification on the definition of "flight training" for aircraft with an MTOW of 12,500 pounds or less; it now only includes flight training for a recreational pilot, sport pilot, or private pilot certificate; multiengine rating (at any level); or instrument rating.
TSA has provided clarification on the definition of "flight training" for aircraft with an MTOW of 12,500 pounds or less; it now only includes flight training for a recreational pilot, sport pilot, or private pilot certificate; multiengine rating (at any level); or instrument rating.
I have lost lot of money and time, after being denied by the TSA for a type rating in the USA.
And I am not the first one or the last one.
They have no visa for type ratings and the tourist visa is not authorized by the DHS.
Legally all non US citizen going to the USA (for a t/r)are simply illegal aliens and can face deportation.
if you go to the USA with a visa waiver, and you say you are going to learn how to fly an Airbus, Boeing,...and you don't need a visa because you heared you don't need one... they will lock you for 2 weeks before your deportation.
So be very very careful with what your TRTO tells you. Specially when they say you do not need a visa, or just come with a tourist visa because this is an upgrade training...(that's all BS).
If you have read on some websites that you "may" obtain flight training if your first intention is to visit the USA under a toursit visa, again, this is BS and you risk deportation (and jail time).
Recently a TRTO sent me an old form telling the INS accepts the tourist visa for type rating(BS again). This form was dated of 2001 by the INS. The INS doesn't exist any more, and some TRTO continues to "lie" to us to come with a visa waiver. I was too stupid, and I started to pay for the application, finger prints,...(non refundable)
what can happen to you? if you are lucky and you did a t/ rating or a privat license in the USA...they can at anytime take your license away from you and ban you from the USA for 10 years.
As you have obtained the license without proper visa (illegaly) , this can go against you in the futur.Even if you have obtained TSA clearance, you still have to obtain a visa (M1-J1-F1) that can not exist for a training (in my case they have no visa for type rating on eavy aircraft, and the tourist visa B1-B2 is not valid).
I will think twice before spending 20-30'000$ in a flight training or a type rating in the USA.
Canada is excellent . They have excellent level, good and cheap planes, and you will learn to fly in hard conditions during winter time...and if you don't like the USA, like 99.99% of people in this world, spend your money somewhere else.
Last edited by dartagnan; 1st Oct 2006 at 20:09.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would blame the school who gave you duff advice rather than the country, I'm in the .01 who loves the US then, everytime i've been for flight training i've had no problems, I had an M-1 visa everytime though and got TSA clearance before paying for the course.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 961
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I liked to fly and be trained in the USA too, but they went to far...it is all based on different governmental interpretations.
the TSA say you need to contact the DHS, then the DHS says you need to ask the TSA, and the TSA will send you back to the DHS(this happened to me),..ad the "opinion" of the FBI, CIA, FAA and at the end you have nothing and you risk to be ban and lose everything.
I give you another stupid exemple of how it works in this "wonderful" country of freedom.
A flight instructor can not give flying lessons to a 0 hour pilot except for discovery flight.
but he can receive 40 hours of discovery flight, and know how to fly an aircraft.
So even if a guy can not receive his TSA clearance, he can still learn how to fly a plane through some discovery flights....
there is no requirement for discovery flights,and it can be on a cessna 150 or a B747..and this is legal.
the TSA say you need to contact the DHS, then the DHS says you need to ask the TSA, and the TSA will send you back to the DHS(this happened to me),..ad the "opinion" of the FBI, CIA, FAA and at the end you have nothing and you risk to be ban and lose everything.
I give you another stupid exemple of how it works in this "wonderful" country of freedom.
A flight instructor can not give flying lessons to a 0 hour pilot except for discovery flight.
but he can receive 40 hours of discovery flight, and know how to fly an aircraft.
So even if a guy can not receive his TSA clearance, he can still learn how to fly a plane through some discovery flights....
there is no requirement for discovery flights,and it can be on a cessna 150 or a B747..and this is legal.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a few points to note.
While one can TSA approval for practically every flying school in the USA, and even for individual (freelance) FAA instructors (in the USA and elsewhere), getting a visa drastically narrows down the school options, because to get a visa you need an I-20 and to get that the school needs to be in SEVIS and to get into SEVIS the school has to be FAA Part 141. And many or most U.S. schools are Part 61 only, so you can't get a visa to train there even if wanted to...
I also don't see how having received non-visa training could be a future problem if you did not violate any U.S. law at the time. Notwithstanding many personal opinions here and elsewhere to the contrary, the law on visas seems to be clear enough.
It's also no good asking the TSA for visa guidance; their reply is a straight handwashing exercise.
While one can TSA approval for practically every flying school in the USA, and even for individual (freelance) FAA instructors (in the USA and elsewhere), getting a visa drastically narrows down the school options, because to get a visa you need an I-20 and to get that the school needs to be in SEVIS and to get into SEVIS the school has to be FAA Part 141. And many or most U.S. schools are Part 61 only, so you can't get a visa to train there even if wanted to...
I also don't see how having received non-visa training could be a future problem if you did not violate any U.S. law at the time. Notwithstanding many personal opinions here and elsewhere to the contrary, the law on visas seems to be clear enough.
It's also no good asking the TSA for visa guidance; their reply is a straight handwashing exercise.
Official PPRuNe Chaplain
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Witnesham, Suffolk
Age: 80
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The best advice is the simplest: forget the "apparent" loopholes. The immigration inspector will send you straight back home, with no arguments, if you mention flying training and you don't have a visa and TSA paperwork.
You could lose a lot of money by trying to be "clever". Just jump through the hoops - it's not that bad - pay your TSA fee, go for your interview at the Embassy, and then enjoy your training.
You could lose a lot of money by trying to be "clever". Just jump through the hoops - it's not that bad - pay your TSA fee, go for your interview at the Embassy, and then enjoy your training.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A strange use of the term "loophole".
If there was a loophole it was that non-USA students were being trained without scrutiny by the law enforcement agencies. In the early days after 9/11 they didn't have the TSA in place, so they paniced and forced people to get M visas (even though there was no law requiring this).
Now they have the TSA security checking flight students, that 'loophole' (in another very loose definition) has been closed - yet people still say you need an M visa.
People should question authority, not bow down to them.
So what happens if you turn up at a US border with an M1 visa and you get an immigration official who knows the law. He knows that an M1 visa is required for a 'course of study' and knows the definition of that is 18 or 21 hours a week depending on whether mainly classroom based. You describe a 4 week PPL course which the regulations say is a total of 40 hours flight time + 20 hours of groundschool. 60/4 = 15 hours per week, so it's not a 'course of study'. Can the immigration officer turn you away for having a visa which is inappropriate for your intended purpose of visit?
If there was a loophole it was that non-USA students were being trained without scrutiny by the law enforcement agencies. In the early days after 9/11 they didn't have the TSA in place, so they paniced and forced people to get M visas (even though there was no law requiring this).
Now they have the TSA security checking flight students, that 'loophole' (in another very loose definition) has been closed - yet people still say you need an M visa.
People should question authority, not bow down to them.
So what happens if you turn up at a US border with an M1 visa and you get an immigration official who knows the law. He knows that an M1 visa is required for a 'course of study' and knows the definition of that is 18 or 21 hours a week depending on whether mainly classroom based. You describe a 4 week PPL course which the regulations say is a total of 40 hours flight time + 20 hours of groundschool. 60/4 = 15 hours per week, so it's not a 'course of study'. Can the immigration officer turn you away for having a visa which is inappropriate for your intended purpose of visit?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nobody on this thread has actually stated that they came to the US and did a course that lead to a cert/license without a visa
PPL (JAR)
IR
ME PVT
CPL SE
CPL ME
IR and onwards is post 911.....
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... to ensure that paperwork is now in order...
Anyway, if the worst comes to the worst, I'll just get my green card