G'day,
I think the rules are slightly different if you already hold an ICAO ATPL (ie have the hours already).
Some references.
JAA
http://www.jaa.nl/jar/jar/toc0573.htm
This is the JAA FCL ATPL experience page,
http://www.jaa.nl/jar/jar/jar/jar.fcl.1.280.htm
UK CAA
http://www.srg.caa.co.uk/documents/s...te30012001.pdf
The bit that may give some hope to you is
page 14, In particular, if the holder of an ICAO ATPl is not in current flying practice on a multi pilot aircraft, he may be issued with a JAR-FCL ATPL provided that the experience req's of JAR-FCL 1.280 have been met. The lic will be issued on the basis of:-
* valid JAR FCL class 1 medical
* done the theory JAA ATPL
* undertaking a multi-pilot type rating course at an approved TRTO
passing the tye rating/ATPL skill test (inc IR renewal) App 1 to JAR-FCL 1.240 and 1.295 with an authorised examiner designated by the CAA.

As you know, wading through the JAA site is fairly cumbersome, however, I hope that JAA link will get you started. Come to think of it the CAA's site is fairly unwieldly too.

Good luck.


[This message has been edited by redsnail (edited 06 February 2001).]

I am disuaded from even coming there for a PPruNe weekend The CAA never fail to treat you guys like yu matter nowt

Yu should all leave and let them oversee horses & carts

Dizzy-

No! I was not having a go at you. I was having a go at the CAA! However it has become apparent from reading the above posts that the culprits are, as always, our friends in the Netherlands.

I just wonder what the CAA really think about JAR now... "seemed like a good idea at the time". Just like the rest of this integrated- Europe nonsense!

This is sad news.

Is it fair to say that most people commenting on this thread are ICAO licence holders who are in Blighty converting to a JAR-FCL? And that this includes UK Nationals who were entertaining the notion of gaining an FAA licence to bring home and convert also?

Then you must be all mighty brassed off at this outcome, as am I. That's putting it lightly.

There are those that might say that this is a protectionist issue, to keep foreign labour out of the EU and therefore keep jobs available for EU citizens. Others might say that it is a revenue generating exercise for the institutions involved.

Either way it seems to have heavily backfired. Your average aspiring English fella now can't afford flight training in his own country, and can't bring home an FAA licence to convert. Imagine all those Wannabees whose dreams are going up in a puff of smoke. Less pilots coming through the system is not going to be good for the industry. And then there are those that already hold ICAO licences from other countries who are here trying to do the same thing.

OK, I'm sure that there are loads of Brits who aren't happy about 'foreigners' coming to the UK to 'steal' English jobs. But remember that these 'foreigners' still have to be EU citizens to have the right to live & work here, and these days that means that one of your parents is British and some nice person issued you with a passport. As far as the government and JAA are concerned, they are EU citizens. It's not as if the floodgates are opening for antipodeans or whoever to come stampeding over here. A fraction (although it might seem more than that) are lucky enough to be British passport holders and come seeking work in a vibrant industry with more jobs and higher salaries than our own countries can offer. Technically we are British, even if we have funny accents. Be honest now and admit that if you had access to a green card, or the ability to live & work in any country of the world for that matter, you would jump at the chance.

So yes, you guessed it, I am one of those people from the Southern Hemisphere who has adopted England as home and trying to jump through the hoops to get a JAR-FCL. To be honest, the fact that I now have to completely repeat my IR isn't the biggest drag (although the cost is unbearable). My gripe is the way that the JAA constantly shift the goalposts from one week to the next. There is no level playing field. Like many others, I simply want the satisfaction of knowing from the outset what the deal is. My bank manager is getting sick of me turning up from time to time and saying, "Oh yeah, sorry, now I have to do this course and that course - can I have another couple of grand?"

Having been the victim of policy changes at very short notice on various occasions before, I was visiting a flying school less than a few weeks ago where I considering handing over vast sums of cash. Given how volatile the legislative environment is at the moment, one of my first questions was, "Are there any potential changes in the JAA pipeline that may affect licence conversion in the near future?" The answer was no. I believe I was given a sincere answer at the time and had no reason to think that the school would be so unscrupulous to suck me in for the money, and then tell me later on about the change. But what I found incredible was that the flying school, an institution that is in regular contact with the CAA, would not be aware of such an important change that was only weeks away. I'm not going to name the school, but they are respected and among those that feature regularly in discussion on this website. I wouldn't be surprised if other schools only just found this out recently either, much to their astonishment.

Surely there would be some notice of proposed rule making issued well in advance of the actual change, inviting comment from industry & government agencies alike? This is how it works in almost any other country in the world. Then at least they can say, "Don't say you didn't know about it coming!" I find this whole JAR-FCL thing an absolute fiasco and it is making a laughing stock out of Europe.

Anyway, that's my truck and I'm done (thank God I can hear you saying). I am sad not only for my own position but many others who are affected by this, and their shot at their dream career possibly taken away at not even a moment's notice. What's next? They suddenly announce that all ICAO licence holders repeat the full CPL course as well? I'm not doing my whole licence again at three times the original cost for the pleasure of flying out of the UK. It just ain't worth it.

Righto, I'm off to Amsterdam this weekend to throw clogs at anyone who gets in my way.

H&H


[This message has been edited by Hot&Heavy (edited 06 February 2001).]

I'm pretty sure that no prior warning has been given to flying schools. I personally had not even heard a rumour that such a change might happen. I fail to see why the change had to be made immediately - why not set a date 6 months from now so that people could still squeeze it in if they could.

Hot+Heavy,
I am in the same boat as yourself.
I have contacted the CAA and the training organisation I am using in the UK.
Apparently, if you had the requisite hours to undergo "non-approved" IR training and were already in the system, studying the IR theory(ATPL writtens)or into the flight training prior to 30JAN2001 then then you will be OK, for the time being, Until the CAA has definite policy and interpretations nailed down.
I hope that is some help, and puts off yet another trip to see the bank manager!:confused

Mutant,

thanks for the supportive words. What I didn't add in my last post is that to some degree I have myself to blame for a lot that has happened. I arrived in the UK well prior to JAR-FCL and was quite happily cruising through the old syllabus doing a UK ATPL.

I got the Techs out of the way but failed the Navs. I then generally pissed about for a while and before I realised what was happening, I'd missed the cutoff date for getting all the credits so I could continue training for a UK ATPL.

So I am starting from scratch and not yet enrolled in any course or currently studying. I think I'm pretty well knackered unless I win the lottery or sell my body to Sloane Rangers.

Now there's an idea - see you guys in 6 months!

H&H

H&H, are you sure you fell off the end of the UK system? The rules have changed very recently and your techs are now considered valid for 18 months. The CAA have even allowed people who failed to get a partial as far back as Nov '99 to keep the exams they passed and stay in the system. If you are in the UK system this change on IR training requirements does not apply.

My last post only referred to training for JAA licences. Mr Whittingham is absolutely correct, when referring to the lucky b****rs
that have managed to stay with the old CAA system, this rule only applies to JAA IR training.
Good luck, whichever course your taking!

Bugger!

Here's my situation. Started the first phase of the ATPL groundschool at OATS in September under the understanding I would have to do an assessment and then get a reduction in flying hours required to sit the respective flight tests. Above posts talk about "approved courses" being exempt and "if you are in the system" you are covered by the old rules.

Now my question. Will I need to do a full approved course or am I able to still train under the old requirements? Having already sold one kidney to get this far I'm running out of options if I need to come up with another huge wad of cash.

Cheers.

Flying (soon to be walking) Kiwi

Flying Kiwi,
If you were training(writtens included)for JAA , before30 JAN 2001, and had the flying experience necessary to complete your training at the discretion of the CFI and not the full courses for skills and IR, then you should be O.K.
To be absolutely certain, call your flight training organisation and the FCL section at the CAA.

Hope it works out OK.

Thanks for the prompt reply mutant. Will get onto the CAA asap.

Cheers.

Want to hear my story on this? I'm a c130 captain with more than 3000 hours on type cat2 ils qualified and instructor in my squadron.
I was doing my JAR ATPL long distance course at PPSC and planned to pass my 7 papers in April this year when I heard the bad news,because I'm belgian I have to do now a full IR course (55 ME and 50 se)wich will cost me about a million belgian francs add to this amount what I already paid to PPSC for the course It becomes a lot don't you think and of course CAA doesn't want to accept my flying hours,so I'm back to square one.Why didn't you follow the ATPL course in your country I hear you say well very simple I'm a full time pilot and the only solution for me is to do a long distance course wich at the time didn't exist in my country.
JAR is only a new way of making big money for some guys out there a bit like EUrope in fact.It will bring nothing good for us little people.

Alex,

if this is really the case then you might have just made my year.

I have sent you an email at [email protected] with details of my exam pass dates etc.

There may be a god after all.

Cheers, H&H
:)

Thanks a hell of a lot for the info on the new IR conversion rules.

I'm from the UK, but am currently finishing off a PPL in Sydney and had planned to do an ME/IR here afterwards for about 3 grand.

What really p*sses me off is that I phoned the CAA just a week ago to check conversion procedures and was told that the test flight was all that was needed. I could easily have booked the course in Oz on that basis. How crass can you get to introduce a rule like this with immediate effect and without briefing the people staffing the information helpline.


[This message has been edited by Boss Hog (edited 11 February 2001).]

Got this from the AOPA(USA). It sets out their position and most likely the U.S. Gov position.

Regulatory Brief
JAA-FAA Harmonization of Flight Crew Licensing (Pilot Certification) Requirements
The issue:
For years, the European national civil aviation authorities have worked to harmonize the existing patchwork of national aviation regulations into a single standard for all signatory nations under the European Union. This work has come under the auspices of the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) resulting in a European standard for civil aviation regulation known as the Joint Aviation Requirements (JARs). As the JARs continued to develop in Europe, the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), under direction from the White House, has worked toward harmonizing US aviation regulations with the new European JARs. Preliminary efforts focussed on aircraft certification, maintenance, and operations standards. More recently the emphasis has shifted to harmonizing flight crew licensing requirements between the United States and Europe. The Flight Crew Licensing Harmonization Working Group, under the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC), was charged with developing recommendations to facilitate flight crew licensing harmonization between the JAA and FAA. AOPA has been an active participant in this group. The JAA regulations for pilot certification, included in Joint Aviation Requirements – Flight Crew Licensing (JAR-FCL), are scheduled to take effect in Europe on July 1, 1999.

The importance to our members:
The new JAR-FCL, due to take effect on July 1, 1999, does not contain any provisions for the conversion of US pilot certificates to the new European JAA certificates. This means that US pilots would not be allowed to fly aircraft registered in any European country since pilot privileges are tied to the national registry of aircraft. Similarly, because there are no provisions for the conversion of a US pilot certificate to a JAA pilot’s license, European students who come to the US to learn to fly would be unable to convert their US certificates to JAA certificates upon their return home. This would have a significant impact on the US flight training industry, which relies heavily on foreign students.

Significant provisions:
To understand the issues surrounding FCL harmonization, it is important to make the distinction between validation and conversion of airmen certificates. A validation of a foreign pilot license is a temporary authorization to fly aircraft of national registry based upon the foreign pilot’s license originally issued to the airman. For example, a US pilot planning to fly German-registered aircraft in Europe may seek out a temporary validation of a US pilot certificate from the German LBA (FAA) to fly these aircraft. This is solely an authorization and is predicated upon the currency of the underlying US pilot certificate. A conversion, on the other hand, involves actually issuing a new certificate. For example, a US pilot could approach the same German LBA to seek a permanent German pilot license. Once the conversion is complete, the two licenses are independent of one another and either can be dropped. If both are maintained, the respective currency requirements of each license or certificate must be adhered to in order to exercise the privileges of the certificate. A description of the existing U.S. and European validation and conversion provisions follows:

Under current FAA regulations, a JAA pilot license of any level (private, commercial, or ATP) will convert only to a FAA private pilot certificate.
Current JAA regulations require a bilateral agreement between the United States and the issuing country in Europe for conversion of a U.S. pilot certificate to a national license in Europe. There is no similar provision for conversion to a JAA license.
JAA flight crew licensing requirements permit validation of FAA pilot certificates with full privileges of the corresponding JAR-FCL license, though the process can be difficult.
FAA regulations technically do not allow validation of JAR-FCL licenses, but they do provide for the issuance of a special purpose authorization for flying U.S. registered aircraft in air carrier operations.
Discussions are complicated by the fact that there are two distinct approaches taken to pilot training in the United States and Europe. The JAR-FCL has two training systems for acquiring pilot licenses and ratings — an integrated training program (ab initio), as well as a step-by-step modular training program. Both JAA training systems emphasize formal theoretical knowledge training along with skill testing. In sharp contrast, the FAA system of airmen certification emphasizes skill testing, which individualizes the training and improves theoretical knowledge. These philosophical differences make any direct comparison of the licensing programs impractical and complicate efforts to harmonization regulations.

AOPA position:
AOPA believes that United States and European licenses should be converted or validated in either direction with a minimum of additional requirements. Both United States and European pilots have comparable safety records and, though training philosophies differ significantly, the end product remains essentially the same. In the absence of specific language in the JAR-FCL permitting validation and conversion, AOPA encourages the FAA to negotiate bilateral agreements with each of the European Union countries to allow for conversion of US airmen certificates to European national certificates.

Status:
The final meeting of the FAA-JAA Flight Crew Licensing Harmonization Working Group was held in February 1999. While the group failed to reach agreement on many issues surrounding airmen validations and conversions, the groundwork was laid for further talks between the FAA and JAA. Talks continue between the JAA and the FAA on the development of bilateral agreements between the United States and individual national civil aviation authorities. Currently, there is a JAA Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA-FCL 10) out for public comment, with comments due by May 31, 1999. None of the validation or conversion issues are addressed in this document. AOPA continues to press for bilateral agreements that would enable the validation and conversion of US airmen certificates to European pilot licenses.

All very laudable and interesting but sadly out of date. This article was clearly written sometime between February and July 1999 and so is almost 2 years old. Since then talks between the FAA and JAA on licence harmonisation have been suspended and there is no immediate prospect of a resumption. NPA-FCL 10 has been included in JAR-FCL 1 as Amendment 1, issued in June last year and the next amendment, including NPA's up to and including 14 is currently under discussion (in dispute).