FAA ppl to EASA conversion
 

Guys, sorry if this is a stupid question; but I've completely confused myself about how and what's needed to convert an FAA ppl to an EASA ppl via U.K. CAA.

I'm thinking of going to Florida and doing a ppl, then return and convert to a full EASA ppl. Some resources state I'd need to do the whole 45hrs and 9 exams. Medical and rt. other sources say 'training as needed' and all 9 exams plus rt and medical.

What's people's understanding? I see on the uk CAA website that an ico (which I understand the FAA is) with less than 100hrs needs the full 45hrs.... basically you start again from zero.

If it is just training as required.... what's the typical. I'd be doing part 61 so I'd have 40 hrs loged already... if it counts for anything that is.....

Confused dot com. The more I search the deeper I go into confusion.

I'm pretty sure you need to go to a Part 141 school as they are the only ones that can issue a M1 visa for flight training.
You can still do a Part 61 course at the 141 school though.
There are several schools in the USA where you can get a UK (EASA) PPL outright. Followed by a exam flight for the FAA PPL. You could also just do your FAA PPL and bimble around for another 50 hrs till the 100.....
No visa required for time building so you can go anywhere to rent within 30 days after completing your training.
Lots of options.

I understood it to be visa for the part 141 and not for the part 61. Both needing the flight training authority as a separate thing. Some part 141 schools will require part 61 students to gain a student m1 visa due to the schools registration not the students needs?

I was under the impression (hope) that I could come home to the uk with my FAA ppl and say 40hrs logged: top up the log book to 45 (using min hrs as example only); take our 9 exams, get a class 2 medical, gain an rt lisence, and take the EASA check ride for an EASA ppl?

I'm now reading that the FAA is seen as just another foreign licence and needs 100hrs to convert with 2 exams and a skill test; in which case I could get a Canada ppl even cheaper?

Am I also correct (or confusing myself even more)... that you can fly on a foreign lisence in the uk for 12months which you are converting.... but don't know the restrictions.

All threads are a few years old now so looking for fresh people who know or have done an FAA ppl then come back to the uk to convert to EASA ppl.

You can fly G reg on an FAA licence after jumping through some hoops. See ORS Series 4 No: 1228.
However, this may all change by April.


Canadian PPL would make the hoops different, as would any other licence from outside the EU.


Thanks again Europe............

MotoRinzler,

If cheap is your moto, and you intend to fly predominantly in the UK. then I'd recommend double checking the figures including flights, accommodation, local transportation, additional flight fees, visa fees, food fees etc... You must assume that you will not achieve the PPL within the 45hours stated, aim for the average which I believe is 50 - 60 hours (highly dependent on your ability of course) this may add 1 or 2 weeks to your planned timings abroad. Then add the few hours familiarisation to UK airspace, (and if required as not EASA school UK RT, skills test, class II medical and ground exams) And compare these with local prices. You will most likely find very little difference. When I did the maths, it was actually better to learn in the UK despite the higher costs per hour.

If however, you're looking at weather and time in which you can actually achieve the 45 hours, then perhaps abroad may be a better option - but, you could look at places in Spain or Italy which are EASA countries, and then come back to the UK, do a few hours to familiarise yourself with UK airspace. I think it would be considerably cheaper than crossing the Atlantic... but i may be wrong.

Hope this helps!

Alex... i hear you.

I've run the numbers and assumed 20% runover on ability plus 10% again for loss of currency of trg in the UK. Uk comes out at about 11k all up inc exams licence issue etc.

Faa comes out at about 8k but needs extra work back in the UK which I assumed (guess) is about 10hrs plus all exams and skill test etc... conversion adds 3k ish...

So yes. USA faa route is no cheaper but takes 8weeks plus uk conversion time rather than all uk at about 1 year (based on others report's due to wx).

I assume that a faa ppl time of say 45hrs is logable against easa needs and it's training time to change tact ro.uk airspace that drives the hrs needed to go for the easa skill test?

I see UK intensive courses but I just feel the wx in the UK is against you most of the time.

I suppose I could look at easa ppl from USA at UK costs but achieve USA timings.

Hi MotoRinzler have you not looked at heading towards spain to do your easa ppl? yes the weather is a hit & miss in the uk but it all depends on your availability in relations to lessons , yes you could go to the states but by the time you factor all the costs aswell as visa etc your probably looking around the 13k mark give or take and can have a license within 7/8 weeks, but the question is where is a good easa school in the states? the ones i have read about are crooks to say the least where they milk you for your money or there isnt any up to date reviews of other schools..

Have you decided when to start your ppl?

I haven't looked at Spain really other than quickly at fte which want 11k ish. With languagr errors on the website I was out off.

The US school I'm using for costs is flying academy in Florida which comes out at 9.5k with 8weeks accommodation, flights, visa and trg.

Which is go; if I can confirm that the hrs done would then be able to be counted towards the easa ppl 45hrs... then top my skills up back in the UK... which is where the 10hr est comes in. Assuming of.course I can get to grips with UK airspace in 10hrs.

That top up inc exams and fees comes out at about 3k so a total for a FAA part 61 ppl plus a EASA ppl is about 12.5k with 48hrs us and 10hrs UK.

The UK is actually cheaper at about 11k and 59hrs but the trg times are way out.

The end result so far is usa route gives hassle vs UK give long training time and fragmented. All assuming id not nees to do the whole 45hrs easa requirement of course... which I'm actually not sure of.

Although I'm not looking for 'cheap... I am looking to use my money wisely and get value for money within a reasonable training time frame. After all... we all want to have the licence so we can then go off on adventures 😁

I'm open to school or route suggestions.

Flight training towards the issuance of a license or certificate requires a M1 visa.
Unless something changed recently only Part 141 schools can issue the I20 which is the visa application form you need to take to the US Consulate.
I'm doubting your numbers a little bit.
60 hrs at $160/hr is already $9k plus living expenses, tickets, accommodations.

In any case this place offers EASA PPL:
http://www.flyingacademy.com/EN/Flying-Academy-USA

Yeh... the hr rate is
$96 solo.
$49 instructor... so
$145 dual and $96 solo to be paid. Part 61 needs 30hr dual, 10 solo as a min... unless I've misunderstood; which is possible 😊

And thank you... I've re-educated myself with visa needs and you are quite correct. Which in some way changes my possible approach to now lookimg at part 141 training which reduces costs in relation to USA training.

Ok, how about you link to the website of the school and we can all have a look at it?
I'm assuming those numbers are for a C150/152?
How many they have ?
What if there's a problem with availability?
Unfortunately the more unscrupulous schools will overbook a type so students are forced to fly another more expensive type.
Under FAA rules it's also allowed to have airplanes '141' and airplanes not on the '141' certificate as MX requirements are different.
Wouldn't be unusual if they have a couple of 'timebuilders' which are not on the 141 certificate.
Anyway, most of us are here to help so all you need to do is ask ;)

Thank you. I'll link the schools latter once I'm off work. It's all a bit of a mine field.

Hi, that depend on the country where you want to convert the license.
But actually there is no need to re-do the whole program..

But when it comes to technical exam, you might have some knowlege before attending for the exams as EASA technical exams are totally based on real theory.

and country to country they have their own minimum requirements as Approved Training and Non Approved training.

As long as you go with a valid and current FAA - PPL the requirement will be less..

So best thing is to contact the respective Authority and ask for the procedure

Time to ask Bose-X to talk about Fly In Spain I think! :-)

You don’t need to convert, its a PPL.

rudestuff
It's only that simple when flying N reg in the UK. For any EASA reg aircraft there are procedures that need to be followed. See #4.

It all changed in July. It's now quite straightforward to get an FAA certificate validated for use on EASA aircraft (indefinitely or until a BASA is agreed).
You just need a chat with an FE to make sure your knowledge of Air law & ATC is up to scratch (or take the exam) - and send in SRG2140

........plus an SRG 2142 which will take a few weeks.

Not exactly straightforward......

Don’t forget the £45…

Perhaps our definitions of straightforward differ? To me £45 and two easy forms sounds much more straightforward than easa exams, a skills test, license fee, waiting for a license, and having more stringent revalidation criteria.

I'm just about to begin this procedure, I'm a FAA ticket holder, and for the past 6 yrs I've been splitting my time between the UK and Florida (8 weeks home, 8 weeks across the pond) so didn't worry about flying in the UK as I was able to log lots of hours while in Florida.

But with work changes I'm only going to see Florida maybe twice a year for 3 or maybe 4 weeks per trip. So I now want to fly in the UK.

I'll report back once I've jumped through the hoops with the SRG2140