Faa Ppl
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
From: England
Faa Ppl
If I do an FAA PPL(H), would I be able to fly a twin turbine without doing a rating, this is what I've been told, it sounds a bit odd considering what one would have to go through if following the JAA route.
Would the aircraft have to be N reg? I am asking this from a private pilot point of view, but is the situation the same for commercial flights?
Would the aircraft have to be N reg? I am asking this from a private pilot point of view, but is the situation the same for commercial flights?
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 189
From: Redding CA, or on a fire somewhere
In the US, yes you could, as long as the AUGW is less than 12,500 lbs and the aircraft does not require a type rating under the Type certificate data sheet.
As for flying it in the UK--I have no clue.
As for flying it in the UK--I have no clue.
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
From: Toledo, OH
Location actually has little to do with it. It has to do with the nationality of the registration. If you hold a FAA issued helicopter certificate, you can fly any N number helicopter that has a gross TO weight of 12,500 pounds or less. Unless that helicopter requires a type rating. However, I have heard of some countries attempting to enforce their pilot qualification requirements and/or ICAO pilot requirements on pilots of N number aircraft.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: An Irish dude in Houston, TX. I miss home!!!
I'm pretty sure you can fly a N reg twin turbine under 12,500lbs in any ICAO country without a type rating. But my question is why, if you have the money to fly a twin turbine don't you just do the CAA PPL with a type rating? Twins can become fairly complicated to fly when it comes to emergency procedures such as OEI. The FAA PPL won't address that sort of thing at all and will leave you wholly unequipped to deal with the systems on a twin. The type rating will give you the tools you need to fly the twin safely.
I'm a FAA CFII currently doing the JAA ATPL(H) exams and I can tell you that I totally disagree with most of the crap we're made learn for these BS exams that the JAA or CAA or whoever writes them expect of us. But, I can also tell you that the FAA PPL will get you nowhere near the level you need to be at to go flying in a twin. I would consider any of my newly minted PPLs a danger to themselves, anyone in the aircraft and on the ground around them, if they were to hop into a twin after a few hours browsing over the POH, even though they would be perfectly legal to do so. I'm not saying you'd be dumb enough to try that but just thought I'd make it as clear as possible that you would need plenty of extra training with an experienced & qualified instructor who has plenty of time on type after getting the FAA PPL.
Also, if you do your training in the UK you'll get a lot more experience with your local weather that you'll be dealing with each time you fly. That is if you plan to fly in the UK.
Unless there's a reason for going the FAA route other than it being more convenient than the CAA/JAA, do yourself a favor along with anyone else that will be sitting in the aircraft with you and go the UK route with the type rating.
But if however, you do decide to go the FAA route, give me a shout. I could do with the extra work right now, and I've got plenty of R22s and R44s with your name written all over them!!!
I'm a FAA CFII currently doing the JAA ATPL(H) exams and I can tell you that I totally disagree with most of the crap we're made learn for these BS exams that the JAA or CAA or whoever writes them expect of us. But, I can also tell you that the FAA PPL will get you nowhere near the level you need to be at to go flying in a twin. I would consider any of my newly minted PPLs a danger to themselves, anyone in the aircraft and on the ground around them, if they were to hop into a twin after a few hours browsing over the POH, even though they would be perfectly legal to do so. I'm not saying you'd be dumb enough to try that but just thought I'd make it as clear as possible that you would need plenty of extra training with an experienced & qualified instructor who has plenty of time on type after getting the FAA PPL.
Also, if you do your training in the UK you'll get a lot more experience with your local weather that you'll be dealing with each time you fly. That is if you plan to fly in the UK.
Unless there's a reason for going the FAA route other than it being more convenient than the CAA/JAA, do yourself a favor along with anyone else that will be sitting in the aircraft with you and go the UK route with the type rating.
But if however, you do decide to go the FAA route, give me a shout. I could do with the extra work right now, and I've got plenty of R22s and R44s with your name written all over them!!!
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 582
Likes: 1
From: Where I'm pointing...
I don't believe anyone operating under FAA regs would let anyone with an FAA ticket (regardless of PPL, CPL, ATPL) loose in an aircraft they are not qualified to operate.
Often this is done with a factory course, and is an insurance requirement.
In effect a type rating.
Can someone with more knowledge of FAA regs confirm or correct this please?
For myself, I feel much more comfortable knowing that someone signed off that I know not just how to give an A check, start the machine and the appropriate emergency procedures and limitations, and have passed a technical test on the aircraft (though one aimed at practical knowledge, rather than red tape).
The idea of keeping and demonstrating currency is also important to me, though as a non-professional pilot who flies low hours every year, this is for my own comfort, and my comfort in knowing those in the machine with me are in good hands.
As a pilot I aim to keep my bar raised high rather than low, but that's just me.
Often this is done with a factory course, and is an insurance requirement.
In effect a type rating.
Can someone with more knowledge of FAA regs confirm or correct this please?
For myself, I feel much more comfortable knowing that someone signed off that I know not just how to give an A check, start the machine and the appropriate emergency procedures and limitations, and have passed a technical test on the aircraft (though one aimed at practical knowledge, rather than red tape).
The idea of keeping and demonstrating currency is also important to me, though as a non-professional pilot who flies low hours every year, this is for my own comfort, and my comfort in knowing those in the machine with me are in good hands.
As a pilot I aim to keep my bar raised high rather than low, but that's just me.
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 189
From: Redding CA, or on a fire somewhere
Birddog
I did--see post #2.
If you have a PPL, you are permitted to fly a twin under 12,500 lbs in the US. Whether you "should" is a different matter. Also you may have high insurance premiums. I know of a few people who have ppl's who own and fly their own Twinstars. As far as I know, they carry liability insurance but no hull insurance.
Can someone with more knowledge of FAA regs confirm or correct this please?
If you have a PPL, you are permitted to fly a twin under 12,500 lbs in the US. Whether you "should" is a different matter. Also you may have high insurance premiums. I know of a few people who have ppl's who own and fly their own Twinstars. As far as I know, they carry liability insurance but no hull insurance.
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 582
Likes: 1
From: Where I'm pointing...
Thanks Gordy.
I meant to emphasize "would anyone let someone loose" rather than could they.
i.e. it is an owner/operator/insurance/PIC issue.
edited to add
(And I doubt they would without appropriate qualifications and liability protection.)
I meant to emphasize "would anyone let someone loose" rather than could they.
i.e. it is an owner/operator/insurance/PIC issue.
edited to add
(And I doubt they would without appropriate qualifications and liability protection.)
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: An Irish dude in Houston, TX. I miss home!!!
I don't believe anyone operating under FAA regs would let anyone with an FAA ticket (regardless of PPL, CPL, ATPL) loose in an aircraft they are not qualified to operate.
Often this is done with a factory course, and is an insurance requirement.
In effect a type rating.
Often this is done with a factory course, and is an insurance requirement.
In effect a type rating.
Sorry if my post sounded preachy, but having read his initial post, I got the feeling that Firefly25 was looking for a quick & easy way to get into a twin. I may have been wrong there, but I wanted to get the point across that quick & easy ain't the way to go, especially with the bigger ships.
Last edited by darrenphughes; 30th March 2009 at 04:57.
Fleet Manager
Joined: Aug 2006
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 7,081
Likes: 2,938
From: Ontario, Canada
I think we're talking about a twin turbine helicopter here, right? I cannot speak for the FAA, but in Canada, every helicopter type you would like to fly solo, must be type endorsed on your license. What ever model you take your training on, is automatically endorsed on your license when you get your license.
A type endosement is a sign off by an experienced commercial pilot who is qualified on type, and has flown with you to his/her satisfaction.
I cannot imagine circumstances where you would want to be let loose in a new helicopter type without knowing that a more qualified pilot agreed you were ready. It is a certainty that the insurance company will not let you loose without that endorsement!
Pilot DAR
A type endosement is a sign off by an experienced commercial pilot who is qualified on type, and has flown with you to his/her satisfaction.
I cannot imagine circumstances where you would want to be let loose in a new helicopter type without knowing that a more qualified pilot agreed you were ready. It is a certainty that the insurance company will not let you loose without that endorsement!
Pilot DAR
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 189
From: Redding CA, or on a fire somewhere
Thanks Gordy.
I meant to emphasize "would anyone let someone loose" rather than could they.
i.e. it is an owner/operator/insurance/PIC issue.
edited to add
(And I doubt they would without appropriate qualifications and liability protection.)
I meant to emphasize "would anyone let someone loose" rather than could they.
i.e. it is an owner/operator/insurance/PIC issue.
edited to add
(And I doubt they would without appropriate qualifications and liability protection.)
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
From: England
Just to make it clear, I am NOT 
wanting to do a FAA PPL, I am undertaking the JAA route, it is just that people I have met have asked why I don't go down the FAA route.
My personal feeling on the matter, is that full training should always be undertaken, especially when it involves flying complex twin turbine machines.
I asked the question to get other peoples views, not as a way of trying to short circuit the system.
wanting to do a FAA PPL, I am undertaking the JAA route, it is just that people I have met have asked why I don't go down the FAA route.My personal feeling on the matter, is that full training should always be undertaken, especially when it involves flying complex twin turbine machines.
I asked the question to get other peoples views, not as a way of trying to short circuit the system.
