C A A Knows Best!!!!
Thread Starter
C A A Knows Best!!!!
An experienced pal of mine with 41,500 hours (no, thats not a mistake, forty one thousand five hundred hours) 39,500 on helicopters and 2000 on aeroplanes recently applied to the CAA for the issue of a UK ATPL, based on his FAA ATPL (every rating possible on his FAA licence). You will be surprised his request was rejected and he was informed that he had to do all the 14 exams in order to get a UK ATPL..
Now come on, this guy is probably the most experienced guy in the US, and probably has more exerience than ALL the CAA guys put together!!!!!
So, if anybody else was thinking the same, don't bother!!!!
Now come on, this guy is probably the most experienced guy in the US, and probably has more exerience than ALL the CAA guys put together!!!!!
So, if anybody else was thinking the same, don't bother!!!!
seems a lot of flying to me ..... ;)
Assuming your pal is about 60 and he started flying with 18 this would mean he has been flying just short of 1000 hours every year of his live since he got his license ......
if thats true ...... RESPECT !
I have done just short of 800 last year (which is the max here in the UK for commercial flying of that kind) and I felt bloody knackered......
What sort of flight time limits do you have over there (US)?
Woolf
PS: no britbashing again, please!
if thats true ...... RESPECT !
I have done just short of 800 last year (which is the max here in the UK for commercial flying of that kind) and I felt bloody knackered......
What sort of flight time limits do you have over there (US)?
Woolf
PS: no britbashing again, please!
I wonder about a logbook audit......not to be insulting here...but as they say in Missouri...."Show Me!". I know some very high time pilots......17,000-19,000 hours seems to be the average for them but then who knows.....course if he was a Gulf of Mexico pilot....errrr.....normal schedule of one week on...one week off...throw in some workovers.....errrrr.....and he was 18...did five tours in Vietnam....that would mean 5,000 hours or so by age 23...and he is now 59.....36 years.....at another 1,000 hours per year.....yes he could have 41,000 hours. .......NOW PLEASE! Pull the other one.....! Not a Brit here either.........just a Doubting Thomas!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Lone Star State
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Woolf,
If you are flying Part 135 (on-demand commercial operations) the basic FAA flight time requirement is: (for one pilot crew) 1400 hours per year. There are some other calendar quarter limitations, but this is the "biggie".
If you're flying commercial ops not under Part 135 (external load, ag, cattle herding, etc...) - you're on your own.
We don't like workovers, SAS?
C Ya
If you are flying Part 135 (on-demand commercial operations) the basic FAA flight time requirement is: (for one pilot crew) 1400 hours per year. There are some other calendar quarter limitations, but this is the "biggie".
If you're flying commercial ops not under Part 135 (external load, ag, cattle herding, etc...) - you're on your own.
We don't like workovers, SAS?
C Ya
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA...CAA....CASA
Whats news...!!!
The Aussie Authority will recognise the CAA and FAA qualifications.....and normally grant the equivelant licence with little fuss.
HOWEVER,,,,what catches people out is that the basic hours and tasks to gain the initial qualification had better be greater than the same stipulated in the CASA regs...or that licence or rating will not be granted...regardless of how much experience you have.
eg....if the CASA Instructor experience prior to the Flight Test is 50 hours.......and the oversea's applicant has only 20 logged prior to his [FAA or CAA] Flight Test.......the regs don't acknowledge this training, even if this guy/gal! instructed Igor......they won't get past GO here.
However that will all change with the rewrite of the Regs to parallel the FAR's......all to be in place by December 2004.
Oh no....then we will have more Yanks tham Poms...!!
The Aussie Authority will recognise the CAA and FAA qualifications.....and normally grant the equivelant licence with little fuss.
HOWEVER,,,,what catches people out is that the basic hours and tasks to gain the initial qualification had better be greater than the same stipulated in the CASA regs...or that licence or rating will not be granted...regardless of how much experience you have.
eg....if the CASA Instructor experience prior to the Flight Test is 50 hours.......and the oversea's applicant has only 20 logged prior to his [FAA or CAA] Flight Test.......the regs don't acknowledge this training, even if this guy/gal! instructed Igor......they won't get past GO here.
However that will all change with the rewrite of the Regs to parallel the FAR's......all to be in place by December 2004.
Oh no....then we will have more Yanks tham Poms...!!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Refusing to recognise foreign licences is ludicrous.
Why should for example an FAA ATPL I/R not be given the equivalent British licence and rating on the strength of his FAA licence. The sooner we have world recognised licences and ratings the better. The UK wasted millions joining the JAA. Far better if we'd just adopted the FAA rules and regs.
Why should for example an FAA ATPL I/R not be given the equivalent British licence and rating on the strength of his FAA licence. The sooner we have world recognised licences and ratings the better. The UK wasted millions joining the JAA. Far better if we'd just adopted the FAA rules and regs.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a day dream that the FAA open a district office opposite Belgrano House at Gatwick and open up in competition with the CAA. The only problem is that UK aviation is so small, it probably would not warrant a district office 
41,000 hours hey? Why doesn't HE have helicopter back?
Seriously though, I am with MaxNG here, the exams should be a breeze for the guru. Good signature block that one - havent we all seen examples of that?
Anyway, it might get him out of the air for a day or two to do the exams so someone else can have a fly!!
Seriously though, I am with MaxNG here, the exams should be a breeze for the guru. Good signature block that one - havent we all seen examples of that?
Anyway, it might get him out of the air for a day or two to do the exams so someone else can have a fly!!
The exam issue is BS.
Typical pommie "we know best attitude".
I was offered work in Ireland a couple of years ago and found that the CAA may recognise my experience.. (note MAY) but I would need to sit all exams at a cost of about 5000 pounds and a six month course.
My impression about this is that the CAA are sheltering the UK industry and helo pilots there encourage this to protect their jobs.
Its definately not the situation when a brit rolls up in another country and needs only the law exam or less.
This is a point noted by a lot of OZ/NZ operators when you come looking for work......
Share and share alike.
Typical pommie "we know best attitude".
I was offered work in Ireland a couple of years ago and found that the CAA may recognise my experience.. (note MAY) but I would need to sit all exams at a cost of about 5000 pounds and a six month course.
My impression about this is that the CAA are sheltering the UK industry and helo pilots there encourage this to protect their jobs.
Its definately not the situation when a brit rolls up in another country and needs only the law exam or less.
This is a point noted by a lot of OZ/NZ operators when you come looking for work......
Share and share alike.
I wish to take a dissenting view to the idea that one license is as good as another. Being the proud holder of both US and UK ATPL's.....there is a great difference of knowledge required for each license that is applicable only to the individual license and the knowledge that is common to both is very limited. We all know the standards maintained by the CAA are under assault each day and hopefully the FAA will one day see the light and improve their poor standards.
I suggest that the concept of adjudging the magnetic course of another aircraft by viewing its nav lights is very basic to all of us....and that to be able to do while flying at night is what we all do as a matter of course while flying. The FAA never has asked for us to do that on a written and merely requires that we be able to ascertain what aspect of the opposite aircraft we are viewing and then utilize the relative motion of the aircraft to determine collision potentials without mentally computing the magnetic course the other aircraft is flying.
I also find it to be most important to know all about direct reading compasses....afterall we encounter those things on a daily basis. Thus the CAA is most correct in demanding that we be able to answer technical questions on such pieces of equipment. The FAA has never asked a question on those.
How could anyone not see the need for a pilot to discuss valve overlap and cam timing in great detail? The CAA once again leads the FAA in applying the more professional standard here. Despite the pilot not being able to do anything about the overlap or timing....I just cannot see why the FAA doesn't see the necessity for all pilots to know this.
As to distortions created by different types of maps....Lambert Conformal and Mercator Projections for instance....why once again, every pilot should be able to discuss at length the variances and answer detailed questions about the two methods. Once again the FAA falls way short of the mark!
Then we get to checkride standards.....the FAA misses the point once again.....why should we have to spend hours with the examiner prior to flight and diagram all of the aircraft systems and prove a technical knowledge of the aircraft we fly. Afterall, this could have been done by written exam as part of the licensing procedures whereby one is tested by use of multiple guess questions with a fair percentage of wrong answers being satisfactory whereas the examiner might just require a complete knowledge of the systems prior to actually flying with you in the aircraft.
I never did understand how I flew in the USA without knowing what kind of lights and/or signals would be displayed by a lighter-than-air aircraft if it was underway at night without power? I sure needed to know that each time I took the airlaw exam in the UK......despite the first time when there were none of the sausage looking things on the UK registry.
But......the absolute best indicator of the superiority of the Bristish CAA system is knowing that every ten years I get to take my cute little white book down to the nice man and give him 400 GBP for the renewal of the license. I pray God that the FAA never gets as professional as the CAA in this matter. I kinda like the idea of maintaining my currency and medical per the regulations and bypass the donation of hard earned money part.
I suggest that the concept of adjudging the magnetic course of another aircraft by viewing its nav lights is very basic to all of us....and that to be able to do while flying at night is what we all do as a matter of course while flying. The FAA never has asked for us to do that on a written and merely requires that we be able to ascertain what aspect of the opposite aircraft we are viewing and then utilize the relative motion of the aircraft to determine collision potentials without mentally computing the magnetic course the other aircraft is flying.
I also find it to be most important to know all about direct reading compasses....afterall we encounter those things on a daily basis. Thus the CAA is most correct in demanding that we be able to answer technical questions on such pieces of equipment. The FAA has never asked a question on those.
How could anyone not see the need for a pilot to discuss valve overlap and cam timing in great detail? The CAA once again leads the FAA in applying the more professional standard here. Despite the pilot not being able to do anything about the overlap or timing....I just cannot see why the FAA doesn't see the necessity for all pilots to know this.
As to distortions created by different types of maps....Lambert Conformal and Mercator Projections for instance....why once again, every pilot should be able to discuss at length the variances and answer detailed questions about the two methods. Once again the FAA falls way short of the mark!
Then we get to checkride standards.....the FAA misses the point once again.....why should we have to spend hours with the examiner prior to flight and diagram all of the aircraft systems and prove a technical knowledge of the aircraft we fly. Afterall, this could have been done by written exam as part of the licensing procedures whereby one is tested by use of multiple guess questions with a fair percentage of wrong answers being satisfactory whereas the examiner might just require a complete knowledge of the systems prior to actually flying with you in the aircraft.
I never did understand how I flew in the USA without knowing what kind of lights and/or signals would be displayed by a lighter-than-air aircraft if it was underway at night without power? I sure needed to know that each time I took the airlaw exam in the UK......despite the first time when there were none of the sausage looking things on the UK registry.
But......the absolute best indicator of the superiority of the Bristish CAA system is knowing that every ten years I get to take my cute little white book down to the nice man and give him 400 GBP for the renewal of the license. I pray God that the FAA never gets as professional as the CAA in this matter. I kinda like the idea of maintaining my currency and medical per the regulations and bypass the donation of hard earned money part.
I'd have thought the CAA would be within it's rights to make him take the UK air-law exam(s), but the rest seems a bit excessive.
Still, they're at-least consistent. When Colin Bodill (round the world microlight pilot) did his UK PPL(H) just after getting back, they made him do all the qualifying cross-countries. Now to me, anybody who has just flown solo around the world in an aeroplane with virtually no navaids, is not in need of their navigation skills assessing (assuming he'd meant to anyway).
G
Still, they're at-least consistent. When Colin Bodill (round the world microlight pilot) did his UK PPL(H) just after getting back, they made him do all the qualifying cross-countries. Now to me, anybody who has just flown solo around the world in an aeroplane with virtually no navaids, is not in need of their navigation skills assessing (assuming he'd meant to anyway).
G
Join Date: May 2001
Location: perth
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I looked at converting my Aussie ATPL over to Uk, it was so expensive and time consuming, yet, CASA let the Uk ATPL through the door with just the Air Leg exam.
Maybe the air is different over there or something, or, we just dont know what the hell we are doing.
Its crazy, and with the greatest respect to our English colleagues, I dont see the difference in standards at all. Im not Britbashing either guys, its just the system im talking about.
SL
Maybe the air is different over there or something, or, we just dont know what the hell we are doing.
Its crazy, and with the greatest respect to our English colleagues, I dont see the difference in standards at all. Im not Britbashing either guys, its just the system im talking about.
SL
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Moderator....see what you have caused...!!!
Hey boys..........have'n flown with a few white and a few non white pilots from distance places........we are all the same......humans can't do a super human feat [despite a few that think they can].
We all steer the thing around the place trying to stay the rightway up and our tail out of the weeds....and most of us can do that really well.
Skill and dedication is not a National trate..its an individual one....
I understand the CAA system to be very "Theory" orientated, the FAA practical........and the "Old" Aussie system a good mix [as is/was the NZ system].....as far as the new Aussie Cyber Exams....who knows yet??
Sasless......hope you don't carry a non metalic screwdriver to adjust your compass...??.....sure its nice to know about "ONUS!!"...but with two HSI's two RMI's, GPS [and my portable], two ADF's and a Flight Director...geeee..now where was that other thing. Yes I still use it....sometimes.
Please tell me that the question about the enternal working of the CRT is not still in the syllabus???....
But your welcome here....anytime.
We all steer the thing around the place trying to stay the rightway up and our tail out of the weeds....and most of us can do that really well.
Skill and dedication is not a National trate..its an individual one....
I understand the CAA system to be very "Theory" orientated, the FAA practical........and the "Old" Aussie system a good mix [as is/was the NZ system].....as far as the new Aussie Cyber Exams....who knows yet??
Sasless......hope you don't carry a non metalic screwdriver to adjust your compass...??.....sure its nice to know about "ONUS!!"...but with two HSI's two RMI's, GPS [and my portable], two ADF's and a Flight Director...geeee..now where was that other thing. Yes I still use it....sometimes.
Please tell me that the question about the enternal working of the CRT is not still in the syllabus???....
But your welcome here....anytime.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Steve,
I don't think many pilots here (UK) have too many good words for the exams. A lot (me included) train abroad and then convert. We also have to do the damned things, and a more worried pissed off bunch of people, you won't find. Lots of pilots get binned having passed 13 /14 exams. The UK proffesional licence exams have allways been ATPL standard (even for CPL) and then you automaticaly get ATP when you get enough hours. Which may be one reason for the difference in licence standards. (this is changed under JAA)
I do agree that someone with that sort of experience should go through, after all, FAA pilots fly in to Heathrow about every 20 minutes, and do so without any fuss.
However the FAA exams (just doing them now) do seem P**s poor. Multi guess from THREE and no nav trip! for a commercial pilot??. The JAA/UK exams are not easy, or very relevant in many areas. The examiners are not really rotary conversant. There is no RW performance exam for instance (maybe they don't think it affects helo's), but of course I don't think that the UK authorities really want us to fly them like helicopters.
The chap in question can get a full CPL with IR with just air law and Human performance (won't even have to learn morse, lucky b***er)
P.S As the bloke has SO many hours, does he want to sell some, you know, just the old ones he doesn't use any more
I don't think many pilots here (UK) have too many good words for the exams. A lot (me included) train abroad and then convert. We also have to do the damned things, and a more worried pissed off bunch of people, you won't find. Lots of pilots get binned having passed 13 /14 exams. The UK proffesional licence exams have allways been ATPL standard (even for CPL) and then you automaticaly get ATP when you get enough hours. Which may be one reason for the difference in licence standards. (this is changed under JAA)
I do agree that someone with that sort of experience should go through, after all, FAA pilots fly in to Heathrow about every 20 minutes, and do so without any fuss.
However the FAA exams (just doing them now) do seem P**s poor. Multi guess from THREE and no nav trip! for a commercial pilot??. The JAA/UK exams are not easy, or very relevant in many areas. The examiners are not really rotary conversant. There is no RW performance exam for instance (maybe they don't think it affects helo's), but of course I don't think that the UK authorities really want us to fly them like helicopters.
The chap in question can get a full CPL with IR with just air law and Human performance (won't even have to learn morse, lucky b***er)
P.S As the bloke has SO many hours, does he want to sell some, you know, just the old ones he doesn't use any more
What makes the 41,500 hours more impressive is that they're (probably, I'm only guessing here) US FAA hours which means actual "air time" or "weight off wheels time", and not "rotors turning" engine on to stop after final landing time (which is the CAA method of recording flight time). So 41,500 FAA hours equates to at least 45,000 CAA hours!! I know this comment is not really relevant to the original posting, but it does complement the general thrust of the other replies. But getting back to the point, CAA wake up, let the pilot do the Air Law exam and medical and a check ride and give him the licence.... er, like just about everywhere else in the world (except of course for the canuks!!)