Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Private Flying
Reload this Page >

FAA 61.75 licence validity question

Private Flying LAA/BMAA/BGA/BPA The sheer pleasure of flight.

FAA 61.75 licence validity question

Old 16th Jun 2019, 03:09
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,793
FAA 61.75 licence validity question

As I understand it, this depends on having a valid parent licence, current medical from the country of the parent licence or an FAA medical, plus an in-date FAA BFR. I have always presumed that it does not require the pilot to be within date on the parent country 'BFR equivalent' as well.

Is this correct?
QDMQDMQDM is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 04:01
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 13,555
That is my understanding. That said, as my EASA licence contains a specific rating validity dated, which is based upon my biennial - I don't think I'd like to try arguing that it was valid if that date had been passed. It seems a dangerous place to start playing "barrack-room lawyer".

Incidentally, whilst it's still nominally biennial, the FAA have decided to stop calling it a "Biennial flight review", and it's now just a "Flight Review" on the grounds that there may be reasons to have them at different intervals depending upon currency need.

G
Genghis the Engineer is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 16:43
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Cotswolds
Posts: 81
I raised this question with an examiner (EASA rather than FAA) very recently. I expressed the view that my FAA 'piggy-back' PPL was not current as I am not in-date with an FAA BFR. He told me that I did not require an FAA BFR as the FAA 'piggy-back' licence was rendered valid by my EASA PPL, BFR etc. being fully up to date.

Does anybody 'with stripes' have a clear view on this? Where can I verify this; Part 61.75(g) is not explicit, not to me at least?

(PS. I'm using the term BFR 'cos its easy and we all know what it means in both EASA-land and FAA-land).
Kemble Pitts is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 18:46
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Here
Posts: 1,784
Hm, no stripes but fairly certain that for 'piggybacks':

1. Your supporting paperwork must be 100% correct and legal (ie you can go fly a plane using it).
2. The only FAA additional requirement is the Flight Review which still has to be done.

But, happy to be corrected.
Sam Rutherford is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 18:48
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Moray,Scotland,U.K.
Posts: 1,363
I'd ignore anything an EASA examiner says regarding what I can do using my 61.75 under FAA jurisdiction.
I'd ignore anything an FAA examiner says regarding what I can do using my EASA PPL under EASA jurisdiction.
(As I also hold a UK National PPL, I suspect no-one is sure exactly what I can do within UK Airspace.&#128556
Maoraigh1 is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 19:19
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Cotswolds
Posts: 81
Thanks Sam, I've just found what could be the answer - and I (we) might not need an FAA BFR.

Part 61.19(c)(2) says:

The holder of a pilot certificate issued on the basis of a foreign pilot license may exercise the privileges of that certificate only while that person's foreign pilot license is effective.

Last edited by Kemble Pitts; 16th Jun 2019 at 19:34.
Kemble Pitts is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 19:58
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Cotswolds
Posts: 81
But, but, but...

If the much fabled FAA Flight Review (61.56) is required for 61.75 licence holders, then section 61.41(2) means that the 1 hour with an instructor accomplished to keep the EASA PPL up to snuff satisfies:

ß61.41 Flight training received from flight instructors not certificated by the FAA.

(a) A person may credit flight training toward the requirements of a pilot certificate or rating issued under this part, if that person received the training from:

(1) A flight instructor of an Armed Force in a program for training military pilots of eitheró

(i) The United States; or

(ii) A foreign contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation.

(2) A flight instructor who is authorized to give such training by the licensing authority of a foreign contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, and the flight training is given outside the United States.

(b) A flight instructor described in paragraph (a) of this section is only authorized to give endorsements to show training given.
Kemble Pitts is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 02:03
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 13,555
Going through parts 61 and 91 and the FAA's guidance on flight reviews, I can't see anything suggesting you are wrong Kemble.

But, I'm going to keep keeping mine up to date with an FAA instructor, in case you are, and for a straightforward life (and the fact that my local EASA IRE is also an FAA CFI, which helps.)

G
Genghis the Engineer is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 06:24
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,527
Kemble Pitts
moving slightly on from this I have both easa and full F‚a licences can I use my easa flight review as my review required for my F¬A licence

Steve


Originally Posted by Kemble Pitts View Post
But, but, but...

If the much fabled FAA Flight Review (61.56) is required for 61.75 licence holders, then section 61.41(2) means that the 1 hour with an instructor accomplished to keep the EASA PPL up to snuff satisfies:

ß61.41 Flight training received from flight instructors not certificated by the FAA.

(a) A person may credit flight training toward the requirements of a pilot certificate or rating issued under this part, if that person received the training from:

(1) A flight instructor of an Armed Force in a program for training military pilots of eitheró

(i) The United States; or

(ii) A foreign contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation.

(2) A flight instructor who is authorized to give such training by the licensing authority of a foreign contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, and the flight training is given outside the United States.

(b) A flight instructor described in paragraph (a) of this section is only authorized to give endorsements to show training given.
md 600 driver is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 09:34
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: near an airplane
Posts: 1,247
I'm only an EASA FI, but if someone would ask me to sign off a FAA Flight Review based on the bi-yearly SEP revalidation, I would politely decline that as I have no FAA qualifications. Looking at the intent of the regulations, I read this as:
1. You need to keep your non-US license valid, including the bi-yearly revalidation requirements. As mentioned, you need to be able to use this certificate for it to cover the needs of the piggyback FAA license.
2. You need to have a current FAA Flight Review, as that covers both the flying skills and the knowledge required. But I would hazard a guess that the intent here is to review the knowledge of FAA procedures, which would not be covered by the pre- and post-flight briefing for an EASA training flight. The best way to cover this would be to do your SEP revalidation with an EASA instructor who is also a FAA CFI, as this person would be able to make sure that the needs of the FAA Flight Review are met.

Just my two cents, I realise that this is a tricky subject...

Jhieminga is online now  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 12:17
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plumpton Green
Age: 74
Posts: 1,024
Training is very different to a Flight Review. In one you are PUT and in the other P1. That must mean that EASA training cannot replace an FAA Flight Review.
patowalker is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 13:37
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: near an airplane
Posts: 1,247
Then again, PUT vs P1 is a UK distinction, the FAA only recognises PIC vs Dual received. FAR 61.56 states that "a flight review consists of a minimum of 1 hour of flight training". I would expect that to be logged as 'Dual received', similar to the 1 hour training flight for SEP revalidation. FAA CFIs please confirm...
Jhieminga is online now  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 13:44
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Here
Posts: 1,784
Nope. The FAA flight review is logged as PIC time - the name of the instructor only appears in the short sentence they write and sign in the back of the logbook. Some also countersign next to the flight but this is not a requirement.
Sam Rutherford is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 14:39
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 412
Does anybody 'with stripes' have a clear view on this? Where can I verify this; Part 61.75(g) is not explicit, not to me at least?
Just look for yourself under ß61.56, which pertains to a flight review. There would be a specific mention in there one would have thought, if foreign training could be used. Also, part 91 of the regulations is to be covered... good luck finding any EASA only instructors/examiners who know what any of that (or even their own EASA regulation) means.
On a slightly different note, I know of someone flying on a 61.75 certificate who didnít have a current SEP rating, but I think this was more a lack of understanding of people at the school in the US who checked the UK/JAA license was in date, but didnít realise there was a separate SEP rating.
The sensible thing to do would be to ask the FAA. They donít bite, and are generally more accessible and informative than the majority of our lot working at the Belgrano who have little understanding of EASA or UK derogations to the regulation. Youíll probably get an answer back a lot faster too, and someoneís name who will be accountable and provide you with chapter and verse from the relevant FAR.
sapperkenno is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 14:49
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by Jhieminga View Post
Then again, PUT vs P1 is a UK distinction, the FAA only recognises PIC vs Dual received. FAR 61.56 states that "a flight review consists of a minimum of 1 hour of flight training". I would expect that to be logged as 'Dual received', similar to the 1 hour training flight for SEP revalidation. FAA CFIs please confirm...
When I give an FAA flight review I log PIC and instruction given and the flight review applicant logs PIC and instruction received. PIC and instruction received are not mutually exclusive. In nearly 40 years as an FAA licence holder I have never seen it done any other way.

Also, my FAA license does not become invalid if I don't have a current flight review. All that happens is that I'm not authorized to exercise the privileges of the licence until I do have a satisfactory flight review.
EXDAC is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 19:02
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: near an airplane
Posts: 1,247
Thanks for correcting me on that one EXDAC. I wasn't able to find the FARs on logging flight time. In EASAland the training flight should be logged as Dual, as the regs don't allow more than one PIC per flight. The exception to that is a succesfull skill test for license issue.
Jhieminga is online now  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 19:13
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Cotswolds
Posts: 81
Sapperkenno, I have studied Part 61 all the way through - hence me quoting some of the relevant sections. As is often the case with regulations though, they can be ambiguous. 61.56 defines the flight review but 61.41 accepts training given overseas by a foreign instructor.
I don't see anywhere in the regulations that says a 'flight review' does not qualify as 'flight instruction'? In EASA-land both get logged as PUT, I don't know about FAA-land. Sadly in this day and age pilots and instructors need to be barrack-room lawyers otherwise we will get driven from pillar to post even more than we are already.

Your suggestion of asking the FAA direct makes eminent sense but, in my experience, it is always a good idea to have read and digested the regs before talking to the Regulator.

Does anybody have the right FAA contact for such a query?
Kemble Pitts is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 19:45
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by Kemble Pitts View Post
Sapperkenno, I have studied Part 61 all the way through - hence me quoting some of the relevant sections. As is often the case with regulations though, they can be ambiguous. 61.56 defines the flight review but 61.41 accepts training given overseas by a foreign instructor.
I think you may have misunderstood the regulation you quoted.

"(2) A flight instructor who is authorized to give such training by the licensing authority of a foreign contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, and the flight training is given outside the United States." does not stand alone. It is subordinate to:
"(a) A person may credit flight training toward the requirements of a pilot certificate or rating issued under this part, if that person received the training from:"

Therefore 2) only applies to instruction toward a pilot certificate or rating and this para does not cover flight instruction for a flight review.

There is no doubt in my mind that an FAA flight review must be conducted by an FAA certificated flight instructor.
EXDAC is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 20:07
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 3,644
Originally Posted by QDMQDMQDM View Post
As I understand it, this depends on having a valid parent licence, current medical from the country of the parent licence or an FAA medical, plus an in-date FAA BFR. I have always presumed that it does not require the pilot to be within date on the parent country 'BFR equivalent' as well.

Is this correct?
I believe so. You may find the following CC opinions useful:

Collins which confirms that a BFR is required
Krausz which confirms that foreign regulation regarding validity does not apply.

I can't find it, but I think there's one that explicitly says that an expired foreign rating does not invalidate the 61.75.
bookworm is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 20:35
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Cotswolds
Posts: 81
Thanks EXDAC and Bookworm, the FAA letter to Collins is pretty conclusive.

Out of interest, where do you find these letters? Presumably somewhere on a US government FOI-type website?
Kemble Pitts is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.