Is anything being done to make JAA conversion simpler??
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
From: world
Is anything being done to make JAA conversion simpler??
Hello everybody.
Does anybody know of, or is anybody aware of any efforts that are taking place to make it easier to convert from other ICAO licenses to a JAA license?
I do not understand why the JAA makes this so difficult. I don't think there are too many other countries out there where you have to do so much in order to convert.
A highly expierienced airline pilot who has flown thousands of hours, all over the world, must still sit the 14 ATPL exams, and pass the checkrides in order to convert. Where is the sense in that?
I understand that there are different regulations which must be learned, as well as differences in airspace etc. etc. But a VOR or NDB in Slovakia, works the same as a VOR or NDB in Tennessee. Just as an airplane in Czech airspace flies the same as an airplane in New York's airspace.
Are there any movements or negotiations happening between the various agencies to make this process a simpler, more common sense practical approach?
Regards.
Does anybody know of, or is anybody aware of any efforts that are taking place to make it easier to convert from other ICAO licenses to a JAA license?
I do not understand why the JAA makes this so difficult. I don't think there are too many other countries out there where you have to do so much in order to convert.
A highly expierienced airline pilot who has flown thousands of hours, all over the world, must still sit the 14 ATPL exams, and pass the checkrides in order to convert. Where is the sense in that?
I understand that there are different regulations which must be learned, as well as differences in airspace etc. etc. But a VOR or NDB in Slovakia, works the same as a VOR or NDB in Tennessee. Just as an airplane in Czech airspace flies the same as an airplane in New York's airspace.
Are there any movements or negotiations happening between the various agencies to make this process a simpler, more common sense practical approach?
Regards.
PPRuNe Handmaiden
Joined: Feb 1997
Posts: 4,910
Likes: 184
From: Duit On Mon Dei
Unless it's changed recently, the UK CAA will issue a JAA ATPL only for use on G-reg aircraft if you have 1500 hours or more in command of an aircraft 30tonnes or more in primarily international operations or similar. You need to sit 2 exams and a CAA observed check ride. (Need a total time of 3000 hours or more as well)
Look through LASORS for the specifics.
If you then want to fly another reg aircraft, eg EI- or CS- or F- etc, you'll need to complete the remaining 12 exams.
Look through LASORS for the specifics.
If you then want to fly another reg aircraft, eg EI- or CS- or F- etc, you'll need to complete the remaining 12 exams.
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
From: UK
B767PL...
I am currently doing the JAA conversion from a Canadian commercial licence.
Obviously I do not possess the heavy time required to just sit the two exams / flight test, so am having to sit the 14 writtens plus 2 flight tests at the end of it.
Having sat the (admittedly basic, but fundamentally sufficient) Canadian CPL/ATPL exams, I have to say that for the most part, the amount of time and detail devoted to each subject as required by the JAA is laughable. It is (IMHO) a licence to print money. The only other purpose it has is as a filtration system. The subject matter is 90% surplus to realistic requirement - who cares about the trivialities of an AC electrical circuit in its minutae - a zener diode or a capcitance fuel system?! Am I really going to be repairing or discussing the intricacies of a remote indicating gyro compass, a selsyn system or gyroscopic transport wander, at the controls of an A320? - no! I was initially trained to fly and safely navigate an aircraft - not to build the bloody thing!
In answer to your question, money talks in the Euro zone. So does red tape and bums on seats in JAA headquarters being paid to administrate all the above. So its largely a case of bite the bullet, and "learn and dump" All in all, a very frustrating exercise, but a necessary evil.
I am currently doing the JAA conversion from a Canadian commercial licence.
Obviously I do not possess the heavy time required to just sit the two exams / flight test, so am having to sit the 14 writtens plus 2 flight tests at the end of it.
Having sat the (admittedly basic, but fundamentally sufficient) Canadian CPL/ATPL exams, I have to say that for the most part, the amount of time and detail devoted to each subject as required by the JAA is laughable. It is (IMHO) a licence to print money. The only other purpose it has is as a filtration system. The subject matter is 90% surplus to realistic requirement - who cares about the trivialities of an AC electrical circuit in its minutae - a zener diode or a capcitance fuel system?! Am I really going to be repairing or discussing the intricacies of a remote indicating gyro compass, a selsyn system or gyroscopic transport wander, at the controls of an A320? - no! I was initially trained to fly and safely navigate an aircraft - not to build the bloody thing!
In answer to your question, money talks in the Euro zone. So does red tape and bums on seats in JAA headquarters being paid to administrate all the above. So its largely a case of bite the bullet, and "learn and dump" All in all, a very frustrating exercise, but a necessary evil.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
From: world
Thanks for the replies guys.
I was looking into license validation in the country I hope to gain employment in. But I am not sure that even if they do validate your license in said country, will an airline accept a validated license like that? Anybody know?
As redsnail mentioned about the CAA and the heavy jet time, it seems that at least the CAA are somewhat going in the right direction. Unfortunently I do not even have 1 hour of heavy jet time, and probably will not for another probably at least 4 years, especially not as PIC.
I still think it is rediculous though that it has to be heavy jet time?? Why can't it be multi-crew time instead? There is absolutely no reason, or logic behind this at all. Flying a SAAB340 for 5 years, or flying a 767 for 5 years, in the end of it all both guys are only going to be more expierienced flying their particular aircraft, not flying. As a matter of fact, the guy on the SAAB is probably going to have more take-offs, approaches, landings made then the 767 guy. I know complaining about it isnt going to change anything, but it is just beyond me how little common sense is used in things or systems that affect so many.
Finals19, how is your conversion going? What are you finding to be the most difficult about the JAA exams compared to the Canadian exams? Good luck.
I was looking into license validation in the country I hope to gain employment in. But I am not sure that even if they do validate your license in said country, will an airline accept a validated license like that? Anybody know?
As redsnail mentioned about the CAA and the heavy jet time, it seems that at least the CAA are somewhat going in the right direction. Unfortunently I do not even have 1 hour of heavy jet time, and probably will not for another probably at least 4 years, especially not as PIC.
I still think it is rediculous though that it has to be heavy jet time?? Why can't it be multi-crew time instead? There is absolutely no reason, or logic behind this at all. Flying a SAAB340 for 5 years, or flying a 767 for 5 years, in the end of it all both guys are only going to be more expierienced flying their particular aircraft, not flying. As a matter of fact, the guy on the SAAB is probably going to have more take-offs, approaches, landings made then the 767 guy. I know complaining about it isnt going to change anything, but it is just beyond me how little common sense is used in things or systems that affect so many.
Finals19, how is your conversion going? What are you finding to be the most difficult about the JAA exams compared to the Canadian exams? Good luck.
