PPRuNe Forums - Doing the ATPL exams..... Again

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Professional Pilot Training (includes ground studies) (https://www.pprune.org/professional-pilot-training-includes-ground-studies-14/)

- - Doing the ATPL exams..... Again (https://www.pprune.org/professional-pilot-training-includes-ground-studies/610582-doing-atpl-exams-again.html)

I can see that I've confused you a bit, I'm not talking about an FI with an IR!

Lets say Billy takes the ATPL exams.
If he wants a PPL, they are valid for 2 years.
If he wants a CPL they are valid for 3 years.
If he wants an IR they are valid for 3 years.
If he wants an ATPL it is last IR+7 years.
If he wants an FI certificate they are valid forever. Even if he never gets an IR or CPL, he can still use those ATPL passes 20 years later for his FI course.
If he wants wants to use them for a multi pilot type rating, there is no reference to validity periods.

references:

FCL.720.A (d) 3 MPTR requirements, requires ATPL, no mention of validity.

FCL.915.FI (b) (2) (a) for FI, exams last forever

FCL.025 (c) exam validity periods. No mention of Type Ratings. It refers to LAPL, PPL, SPL, BPL, CPL, IR, EIR only. Where it says
* Note: the validity period specified are for the issue of a licence or rating, as applicable
It is only referring to the licences and ratings specified, not ANY rating. And clearly the emphasis is on the word issue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverserbucket (Post 10186687)

From the perspective of obtaining an FAA IR to circumvent the 7 year rule, based on my understanding of the FAA IR, for someone looking to achieve a job flying EASA types in the EU, you could better prepare yourself by just renewing the IR in the EU in view of the fact that you will need to undertake the proficiency check there regardless. If you haven't used your ME IR for 7 years, best of luck to you getting through an assessment with an FAA IR and previous, distant experience.

As i have said before, the 7 years only relates to getting an ATPL. Which is years away. An FAA IR and 50 hours PIC under IFR will exempt you from the IR exams. Either way, some training at an ATO will be required, there's no getting away from that.

With a CPL/IR/MCC/JOC the only remaining issue is can you use ''old" exams for the MPTR. If someone REALLY doesn't want to do the ATPL exams again, there are options.

Quote:

FCL.720.A (d) 3 MPTR requirements, requires ATPL, no mention of validity.
FCL.915.FI (b) (2) (a) for FI, exams last forever

Sorry to sound pedantic rudestuff, but I have to question your interpretation of Part-FCL - a PPL with no IR and without an ATPL issued cannot retain ATPL credits indefinitely. You are correct that neither FCL.720 or FCL.915 mention validity periods and certainly a PPL with ATPL TK credits could undertake an FI course in 20 years from now but would not maintain the original ATPL credits unless they held an IR and had renewed it at least every 7 years. Same for a Type Rating - the intention of Part-FCL is that the credits are valid at the time of course commencement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverserbucket (Post 10187233)

a PPL with no IR and without an ATPL issued cannot retain ATPL credits indefinitely.

I agree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverserbucket (Post 10187233)

a PPL with ATPL TK credits could undertake an FI course in 20 years from now but would not maintain the original ATPL credits unless they held an IR and had renewed it at least every 7 years.

I agree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverserbucket (Post 10187233)

Same for a Type Rating - the intention of Part-FCL is that the credits are valid at the time of course commencement.

Is it though? What does 'valid' mean? Intention is all well and good, but what is written is:

have passed the ATPL(A) theoretical knowledge examinations in accordance with this Part;

Not much there to deconstruct.. have passed indicates just that, no mention of a period of validity. In accordance with this part I take to mean in accordance with Part-FCL. The only mention of validity is FCL.025, but that only mentions licences and the IR/EIR, not type ratings or class ratings. Since there is an explanatory note in the flight instructor section regarding validity, that would indicate it is an interpretation, so it's quite possible that the same could apply to type ratings. Since it's such an unlikely scenario perhaps no one has asked the question yet?