What do I need to fly a turbine?

[flyinbeaver]

I hold a CAA PPL, and an FAA Private Pilot Certificate which piggy-backs on my UK licence. I'm told that the FAA certificate is only valid for anything that can legally fly on my UK licence, but I can't find where that is written so I don't know if thats true or not.

If I want to fly an N reg turbine in the UK, anyone know what additional licence / letter of authority I need? If I had a "stand alone" FAA Pilots certificate, I guess I would be okay, but my CAA licence is SEP, the P being piston so I guess that means it isn't valid for a turbine variant of an aircraft I already have experience of?

The guys who fly JPs seem to get some sort of letter of authority. Can I get something similar? If so, any idea how? If I wanted to fly to France, would that still be valid?

Thanks in advance to anyone who knows their way around the minefield that is aircrew licencing!

[BackPacker]

I'm told that the FAA certificate is only valid for anything that can legally fly on my UK licence,

Initially that's true, but AFAIK you can add ratings and such to the FAA PPL, even if it's a piggyback. But you're building a house of cards which can be brought down by something as simple as a license number change of the underlying CAA CPL.

Flying a turbine is going to cost you big money in any case. Why not set aside some of that money, take a commercial flight to the US and get a standalone FAA CPL there? With your current experience that should maybe be a weeks work. This will avoid a significant portion of the minefields.

Your SEP license indeed doesn't cover turbines. You either need a SET rating or a type rating, depending on the aircraft you want to fly.

[flyinbeaver]

Thanks Backpacker. I had thought of doing that because I think it makes the insurance a little cheaper too (every little helps!) but I wanted to check out the options and see if there was a paperwork route that worked.

Now all I need to find is somewhere sunny that I can do a CPL

[IO540]

It is believed that if you have a UK PPL without say a PA46 Type Rating, and get an FAA piggyback PPL, you cannot fly an N-reg PA46, even though if you had a standalone FAA PPL then you could fly the PA46.

It kind of makes sense

Piggybacks are a hassle - as any of the hundreds of European holders will tell you, scrambling around to get the ICAO English Language statement added onto theirs...

I don't know what is involved in getting a PA46 TR here in the UK ... probably a lot more than it takes to go to the USA and do a PPL checkride

[ab33t]

There is a little statement on the back of the FAA pigyback licence that states all restrictions of foreign licence apply , now how about that for a can of worms.....

[Genghis the Engineer]

Originally Posted by ab33t

There is a little statement on the back of the FAA pigyback licence that states all restrictions of foreign licence apply , now how about that for a can of worms.....

Very necessary when the FAA PPL includes night training, but in JAAland a night qualification is separate.

G

[Genghis the Engineer]

Originally Posted by IO540

It is believed that if you have a UK PPL without say a PA46 Type Rating, and get an FAA piggyback PPL, you cannot fly an N-reg PA46, even though if you had a standalone FAA PPL then you could fly the PA46.

It kind of makes sense

Piggybacks are a hassle - as any of the hundreds of European holders will tell you, scrambling around to get the ICAO English Language statement added onto theirs...

I don't know what is involved in getting a PA46 TR here in the UK ... probably a lot more than it takes to go to the USA and do a PPL checkride

There are special rules on the PA46 for JAA licences at-least - see here, page 2, which also explains how to get a single engine turbine rating on your JAA PPL.

G

[IO540]

Interesting GTE

So no need to sit the 14 ATPL exams to fly a piston PA46 on a UK PPL.

But the Meridian, and presumably the Jetprop too, needs the ATPL exams.

So much better to get the standalone FAA PPL. Then one can fly the TP versions.

Why does the CAA require this ludicrous level of theoretical knowledge? The management of a JP is by all accounts easier than the management of the PA46 piston engine which from the # of in-flight issues seems to be hanging in there by the skin of its teeth.

[lotusexige]

Given that to make use of a tutbine aircraft rather than just fly it an IR is need a full FAA licence and IR would seem to make the most sense.
I would suspect that at the end of the day keeping the insurance company happy may be the decideing factor.

[IO540]

The Lasors extract, if I read it right, says than an IR is not enough for a PA46 TP unless you have also done the ATPL exams.

I agree an FAA PPL/IR is the minimum worthwhile level. A friend of mine flies a JP.

[IO540]

But those are trivial relative to sitting 14 ATP exams, no?

Makes me smile to see the "CFI" requirement. In the UK, a "CFI" is basically anybody who has made themselves relatively senior at the flying school. But the CAA loves this stuff.

[Big Pistons Forever]

IO540

In the US a "CFI" is a Certified Flight Instructor, that is someone who has a flight instructor rating on their license. Commonweath nations tend to all use "QFI" or Qualified Flight Instructor to describe this kind of individual and "CFI" is used to describe the QFI who holds the Chief Flying Instructor position......it is often a source of confusion here in Canada since we are next door to the Americans.

[IO540]

Yes, here AIUI a "CFI" is basically a self-appointed title. You could be a one-man flight training outfit and then you are of course a "CFI". In a bigger business, the CFI will be the one who has been hanging around the longest. It has no legal meaning I know of.

The FAA CFI/CFII I know about. These are specific ratings.

Back to a Jetprop - there may be an interesting twist here. These could never be G-reg and AFAIK still cannot be. But a lot (10-20?) were registered in Europe over the years, in (IIRC) Belgium or Netherlands or something like that. These are now JAA/EASA-reg and can presumably be flown on JAA licenses. I wonder if that country where they are registered also has the same ATPL-exam requirement to fly a JP? I find it hard to believe that all those pilots would have sat the 14 ATP exams just to fly a JP, when they could all have gone the FAA route.

Of course, most JPs in Europe are under the FAA system anyway...

[BackPacker]

I know a PA46 w/JetProp conversion on the Dutch register.

The (four) people that are now licensed to fly this aircraft all have JAA ATPLs, I think. CPLs at the very least. The main problem was the lack of JAA examiners on type. Only three or so people in the whole of Europe had JAA instructor/examiner authorities for this type, and two of them were unavailable. The third gave the TR course (in his own aircraft) but thereby was automatically disqualified from proctoring the exam. Eventually the Dutch authorities decided that the best cause of action was to put the examinee up front, the instructor in the RHS as safety pilot, and a non-TR JAA examiner in the back to proctor the exam.

If anyone is seriously interested in finding out more about this aircraft and the way the paperwork was handled, send me a PM and I can get you in touch with the owners/pilots.

[BillieBob]

But the Meridian, and presumably the Jetprop too, needs the ATPL exams.

No, it doesn't. The ATPL exams are not a pre-requisite for any SPA class or type rating; if the aircraft is designated as HPA, then the requirement is to complete an approved HPA course or have passed the ATPL exams. Neither is there a pre-requisite for an IR for any SPA class or type rating, although it's difficult to see the point of an HPA type rating without one.

These could never be G-reg and AFAIK still cannot be.

Why not? The PA46DLX appears as a type in the EASA type rating endorsement list and so there is no reason why it should not be put on the UK register. Neither is there any problem with endorsing the type rating on a JAA licence provided, of course, that you can find a TRTO that holds approval to conduct the course.

[IO540]

Maybe it is possible today but it appears to be widely known that the UK CAA refused to do it.

I never looked into it myself since I can't afford a Jetprop

Edit: it is of course definitely possible now, post Sep 2008, under EASA, because any EU certification acceptance is grandfathered all over the EU.

[Grassfield]

I've got the same type of question, but not entirely.

I have a JAA CPL/IR and I want to fly a N-reg turbine (single engine) plane. So from what I understand the whole route getting a ´piggy back´ Private + Instrument FAA license is not really an option since I cannot fly the turbine on my underlying JAA license.

BAsed on this I'm left with two options:

1) Get the above (´piggy back´FAA) AND a SET (Single Engine Turbine) rating in JAA environment. I assume I could then fly turbine since my underlying JAA license allows this (with the SET rating) and I have the ´piggy back´ Private+Instrument. The issue with this is I would guess that the SET standalone is not enough as I probably also need a typerating on the aircraft. For a PA46 I believe it would be relatively easy as there are quite a number of those flying in Europe BUT if I want to fly e.g. a turbine conversion like the P210 Silver Eagle how do I get a type rating on that (but do I need a TR for these?) since these are most likely N-reg and I don't have the FAA piggy back yet. In addition if doing a SET rating on e.g. PA46 I would have paid extra for the SET rating since I would need proper training (TR ?)) on e.g. P210 Silver Eagle anyway.

2) Get a standalone full privileges FAA private + instrument (e.g. through fixing theoretical exams at Flight Safety in Paris and then practical check rides in the US) and then voila, I wouldn´t need the SET rating issue in JAA land given the beauty of the FAA license.

Which option would you choose and Why?

Grateful for any insights on this.

/Grass field

[IO540]

If you have the time to go standalone FAA then do that, because it will give you a separate set of papers which will always be yours, regardless of what happens in Europe.

Too many people have had too much hassle with piggyback stuff. It was popular in the goode olde days when you could pick it up at the London Heathrow FAA office, quite a few years ago. Today, it is a house of cards.

[Grassfield]

What´s your estimate of the time needed in the US assuming good weather there and that I´m current in flying SE IFR?

Costwise, are there any obvious differences? Of course the devil is in the detail, but I guess going to the US would require a few extra hours of training and chek outs before the actual check rides but on the other hand I don´t need to spend time on a SET rating in JAA land which I guess is EXPENSIVE...

[BackPacker]

Costwise, are there any obvious differences?

You're going to fly a turbine privately and you're worried about the cost of obtaining the TR?