FAA PIC time when converting..
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Ganddal, Norway
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA PIC time when converting..
If anyone of you can explain this, I'll be amazed!
Just discovered that the Implementation of new EASA rules in EU, are creating me some issues. The norwegian CAA says that FAA training started prior to june 7th 2013 will have all their PIC hours approved even if they where received as dual.
If you start the FAA trainig after this date, which I did, the PIC hours logged as "dual received", will only be accredited to your easa liscense if you can prove that you are the sole manipulator of the controls.. In effect, the Faa ir is certainly not wise time spent as you then miss out on a lot of PIC hours..
Anyone else know anything about this, if this is the same all over Europe now, or if it is just a thing in Norway.
Been searching for answers for hours and hours without finding good sensible information.
Just discovered that the Implementation of new EASA rules in EU, are creating me some issues. The norwegian CAA says that FAA training started prior to june 7th 2013 will have all their PIC hours approved even if they where received as dual.
If you start the FAA trainig after this date, which I did, the PIC hours logged as "dual received", will only be accredited to your easa liscense if you can prove that you are the sole manipulator of the controls.. In effect, the Faa ir is certainly not wise time spent as you then miss out on a lot of PIC hours..
Anyone else know anything about this, if this is the same all over Europe now, or if it is just a thing in Norway.
Been searching for answers for hours and hours without finding good sensible information.
This has always been the case in the UK. There can only ever be one pilot in command in an aeroplane at any one time. Mind you, under EASA definitions, even PICUS is not permitted in single-pilot aeroplanes - you can either be PIC or Pu/t. This is what happens when you allow the rules to be written by bureaucrats.
This has always been the case in the UK. There can only ever be one pilot in command in an aeroplane at any one time. Mind you, under EASA definitions, even PICUS is not permitted in single-pilot aeroplanes - you can either be PIC or Pu/t. This is what happens when you allow the rules to be written by bureaucrats.
Genghis, that is entirely the point - if PICUS can be claimed only in MP aircraft, as the EASA definitions state, what should be claimed in the case of a successful test? My swipe at the bureaucrats was prompted by this lack of understanding of the realities of the world they seek to regulate.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: EGYD
Posts: 1,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm the first to criticise Eurocrats, but what's wrong with the basic concept that in a single pilot aeroplane you're either commander or under instruction? I've never seen the sense in the FAA version - expedient for certain people, but not particularly clever surely. I just can't see why, save possibly in a test, PICUS is anything but "student" ?
My understanding of the history of the regulation (91.109) is that it was introduced to enable people to be able to rent a multi engine piston solo, but insurance companies wouldn't insure someone solo with such low hours, so the FAA introduced a way to let students log pilot in command happen to meet FAA CPL requirements.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Germany used to have a similar way of allowing training time to be counted as "PIC" time if the training was after PPL issue. It was not logged as PIC, but as PU/T, but you could count the time towards the hours requirement for advanced licences and ratings.
There, the rationale was that it removed a disincentive to receive advanced training while building hours.
The above went out with JAR-FCL.
There, the rationale was that it removed a disincentive to receive advanced training while building hours.
The above went out with JAR-FCL.
