FAA JAA hour building question
 

hi guys

i'm from belgium and i'm thinking to do some time building in the USA, i have a JAA PPL.
I know how i have to validate a FAA PPL on basis of the JAA PPL.
The overall goal is to obtain a JAA CPL ME IR (frozen ATPL), so i will do the CPL ME IR in belgium,
now the question is how it works with the logged hours in the USA to get it on the JAA PPL ?


Greetz and happy landings :ok:

Just notice that cross country and PIC time differs between FAA and JAA.

Cross country for qualifying purposes has to be 50nm in a straight line, whereas in Europe anywhere away from your home field/departure field is a cross country. I think you can log a cross country shorter than 50nm if it's not for qualifying purposes, but unsure of this.

Instruction received in Europe is also not PIC time, which it is in the US.

Cross country is defined in Amendment 7 to JAR-FCL 1 and EASA Part-FCL as "A flight between a point of departure and a point of arrival following a pre –planned route using standard navigation procedures." In member states that have not yet implemented Amendment 7 (e.g. the UK) there is no definition of cross-country flight for licensing purposes and it is up to each NAA to decide what it will and will not accept. There are, under JAA/EASA no distance limitations on cross-country flight.

A small correction to SoCal's final statement to remove any doubt:

Thank you very well guys !
This was the information that i was looking for :ok:
I came across ncb aviation to do some time building, there are really cheap, 70 $ per hour wet for a cessna 152 that's about 50 €, i'm now paying 180 € per hour for a piper warrior ( oke with glasscockpit :p ), big difference !
Anybody have some experience with them ? The aircraft are old, but as long as there safe it's oke for me :cool:


Greetz

Hey Adamfrisch, not to be nitpicky but wasn't one of thenchanges of the 2010 FARs the definition of a cross country from greater than 50NM to 51NM or greater? Also, for the purposes of part 135 minimums, I think a cross country has to include just a landing at a different airfield from that of departure, no min distance. Correct me if I'm wrong

Mr Piloot
 

There is an old Arab Proverb that says "Cheap is not is cheap".

I have to state my interest in this subject in that I rent my aircraft to hoursbuilders in Europe. This gives me a good feel for the economics and pitfalls of the industry as well as seeing who achives good results at the CPL skills test and more importently who has trouble.

The first thing is that the seemingly attractive rate of flying in the USA should be tempered by including the costs of getting to and staying in the USA that alone will bring the cost far nearer to the European cost than you might think.

Next you need to look at the small print in the contract, usualy if you pick up fuel away from base you will have to pay a lot more for it.

Is the aircraft allocated to you for the day or do you get it in two or three hour blocks?

Do you get your money back if weather prevents you from flying?

What is the real state of the aircraft? (this is not a comment about any particular operator but a comment on the USA hourbuilding industry).

You need to check these things out as they will have a large effect on the cost.

The Quality of what you do will have a great effect on your flying ability long after the hour building is over, just following the inerstate is no match for learning to navigate in Europe it wont help your situational awairness and the way the Americans use the radio is of little use in Europe, assuming that your aim is an EASA (f)ATPL you will have to take a lot more navigation trainning at CPL level than you would if your hourbuilding had been in Europe.........you need to make provision for this extra cost not just to pass the CPL but the extra cost of not being fully with the radio or being able to paint a good mental navigation picture will increase rapidly when you reach the type ratring simulator. As an airline pilot I have seen the badly trained newcomers repidly eat extra simulator time at vast cost to themselfs.

That having been said I took a look at the NCB aviation website and at first glance it seems like a reputable place, being away from the usual suspects in Florida is good for a start, it is cheaper to live and cheaper to fly in the Great Lakes area. Having worked for an airline based in Detroit I have to say that I enjoyed the flying but in the summer the area can be subject to massive thunderstorms hence you need to check if you get your money back if weather stops you flying.

I fully expect some people telling you that they had no problems with flying following hourbuilding in the USA, I have no doubt that they are telling the truth as individuals but over 30 years in the aviation business I have seen countless newcomers who have had problems that had the root cause in over reliance on flying in the USA. Because they have had problems they don't tend to talk about it on public forums.

And a final bit of advice.....................if you ever find yourself at Detroit Metro DONT go to the Landing Strip......... you can't afford it despite the low cost of entry!

Do go to the Wheat & Rye........ a first class bar........But DONT order anything from the menu in large, it will take you a week to eat it!

Hour building is usually hour wasting. Whilst you are flying around in circles in an indiciplined manner in a cheap aircraft, you could be gaining the same hours on a structured IR course. The hours will cost you more, but at the end of the day you will need less of them and you might just save some money!

Whopity
 

While I agree wholehartedly with your sentiments on Hour wasting I am having trouble understanding the way a "structured IR course" fits in with the PIC requirment for the (f)ATPL.

I don't quite get this "hour building" stuff.

For the FAA ATPL you need 1500hrs TT of which 100hrs must be at night. That is a huge number of hours to log. Flying to exhaustion, say 3hrs/day 6 days/week it would take 83 days to accumulate that. Does anybody really do that??

For the JAA ATPL you need the same but 500hrs in a multi crew cockpit, which is totally beyond any private individual to do in a sim or in a real MC plane (unless you are a multi multi millionaire). This is why ATPL cadets do the CPL/IR and then look for an airline job ASAP. They cannot actually fly anything (safely) let alone a 737 with passengers, but the airline puts an old experienced ATP in the LH seat. These people don't need to hour build; it doesn't make sense.

What am I missing?

On a different tack, I bet a ton of logbook forgery goes on in this game.

Minimum hours to start the CPL course IO540.

G

IO540
 

You are quite right some people do get a lot of Parker Pen time in the log book but these cases are few due to the results if you get found out, I know the CAA had a good look at a mate of mine who did almost all of the (then) required 700 hours for licence issue on his own aircraft, I just happend to be in an airfield Opps office when the CAA FCL called to check the airfield movements log for my mates aircraft.

The requirment for EASA is to have 150 hours before CPL issue, this results in most wanabes having to get about 70 hours of flying as the rest of the 150 hours is taken up by flying on courses for licence issue.

Some hours builders just fly lots of local trips, I encourage my customers to go places and they have been as far as the Scotish isles and the south of France. For the guys who get up and go places it is not only fun but it teaches them a lot more that following another Florida Interstate highway.

Surely you could log unverifiable time between farm strips?

Farm strips are required to keep a movments log, the police & customs do turn up and check these.

If the CAA suspected someone of putting false entrys in a log book they can use the force of law (if required) to inspect these books.

They can also inspect the aircraft log books to check if these all tie up.


Slivaire1 Quote:- How's the experience with density altitude in northern Europe? Sorry but you have lost me with that one????????

Recently it seems that ALL of the Indian pilots certainly have...

Silvaire1
 

As always it depends were the hour builder takes one of may aircraft how usfull the hour building will be for his future flying, there is no reason why he/she should not fly one of my aircraft to Spain and find exactly the Density altitude and MSA problems that you discribe.

Most of the guys do get out and use the aircraft for long X-C flying and as you would expect practicing the EASA flight test way of navigation. Their aim is to pass the EASA CPL flight test and so the flying is directed towards this, just as my flying practice was aimed in a slightly diferent direction when I was practicing for the FAA CPL/IR.

I have tried to avoid saying that hourbuilding for a pilot seeking an EASA CPL in the USA is not worthwile because some of it clearly is, the problem is that to fly 80 or so hours in the USA and then expect to be able to fly in Europe to CPL test standards is clearly unwise just as it would be for a pilot seeking an FAA CPL who did most of his flying in Europe to think the same.

The aim is for the wannabe to get to and exceed the EASA licence test standard with the least cost. Flying in the mostly in the USA will in most cases not meet that objective.

A PPL holder only needs 50 hours X Ctry PIC and a Night Qualification to embark on an IR. The time gained on the IR course counts towards the 150 hours needed to start the CPL and the 200 total hours needed to qualify for a CPL, you still need the 100 hours PIC, but if you do the CPL first, then the IR it takes at least 250 hours; reversing the order can save up to 40 hours total time. (At £140/hr =£5600)

Whopity
 

I have no doubt you are correct but I think you are asking the tyro pilot to run before they can walk, I did The IMC rating with the sort of hours that you talk of to start the IR.

To tell the truth I dont think I could have taken the IR & multi engine all in with so little flying time to back it up, The IMC was the hardest thing I have ever done in aviation (apart from the A320 ground engineers CRS course) and to take that to another level and chuck in the multi engine as well is likely to be too much for most tyro pilots.

As for your pricing I should think that people should be paying IRO £100/hour for a 40 hour block.

If you can't hack it, then maybe commercial is not the way forward! All the ab-initios I have sent that way have saved money and been glad of the advice. It also saves the process of getting out of bad habits inevitably acquired in the hour wasting process.

I think that, like the "time to solo" etc, it strongly depends on the age.

Normally I would say you should be a very good and accurate VFR pilot before starting IR training. But then one would not get that by hour building either...

Whopity
 

Quote:-If you can't hack it, then maybe commercial is not the way forward!

I see this as a very negative statement, people learn at different rates. No doubt some would do well as you suggest but most would not, I think that IO540 is much nearer the truth of the matter.

The guys who fly my aircraft are encouraged to fly and navigate the CPL skill test way and not just burn holes in the sky, the aircraft is basic in the avionic depatment and GPS is discouraged, this is with the aim of them becoming accurate VFR pilots.

I am honest enough to say that I don't think that your way forward would be for me and you no doubt would have said that "commercial is not the way forward" and sent me off to find another way of making a living but now after 12,000 hours flying and 5000 jet airliner command time the facts would take issue with you.

The final thing I have to say is what is your interest in the subject ? I have stated mine at my first post on the subject.