JAA, JAR, Compliant
 

Hey guys,

What's the difference between the following.??

JAA-PPL(H)
JAR-PPL(H)
JAR Compliant PPL(H)
JAR-FCL PPL(H)

Thanks in advance..

Mungs.

None......

Sounds like someone has been looking at the UKFT website and wondering where the catch is :rolleyes:

Spot on...is there a catch?

I'm looking for PPL(H) training in the states and am wondering what all the different notations are.

I thought there was something odd about the JAR-Compliant license, in that it wasn't the same.

TIA

Mungs.

It should be a JAR-licence when stating that. You never know though, they could mean "complies with some but not all JAA requirements and is definately not issued as a JAR licence". It just plain simply sounds better with the misleading "JAR compliant".

Now I am confused, they say this;

• JAR Compliant PPL is recognized in the UK as well as 186 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) countries.
• Obtain both the JAR Compliant and JAA PPL - no extra course cost.
• No conversions required on your return to the UK, a JAA Member State or ICAO contracting state unless otherwise stated in the package.
• Fully inclusive JAR Compliant PPL packages- one price with no hidden costs- training up to 50 -55 hours.
• JAR Compliant Licences issued immediately upon passing your final flight test.
• FREE revalidations and renewals on your JAR Compliant PPL, per required minimums, exclusively to UKFT qualified pilots.

I presume the last point means I'll have to revalidate my ppl in the states as well.. more expense?

Could I have what they are offering explained in English please :confused:

Surely JAA (Joint Aviation Authority) is the licence you are enquiring about.
MY CPL(H) says it's a JAA licence.

JAR is Joint Aviation Requirement - Are they not the practical rules that dictate what must be done in order to get a JAA licence that would then in theory be accepted in JAA member states.

That being the case how could a JAA licence not be JAR compliant or a JAR compliant licence not a JAA licence.

Might be me but sounds like advertising waffle designed to make you think you're getting something more for your money. Willing to be corrected though

God, I'm grateful I've got my licence already. What a nightmare :ugh:

I do not know which website this is from, but here is my take:

Training the European market is big business, and this is not the first time I have heard of schools rather unscrupulously tell prospective students they are getting a JAR (compliant - please don't notice this bit) licence. Translation - an ICAO licence. Hours is hours. Read it carefully - "Obtain both the JAR Compliant and JAA PPL - no extra course cost".

My reading of this is that you get their national PPL and during the training you will cover all syllabus requirements for a JAA PPL. Therefore, on return theoretically you could sit a JAA PPL skills test somewhere else without any further training costs.

It's not a JAR licence because no JAR licence is "issued immediately upon passing your final flight test"

Caveat Emptor

Edit. Don't however concern yourself with distinctions between JAA and JAR - they are often used synonymously, as you will see I lazily have above.

They might also refer to that, with a foreign licence, such as an FAA, issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 1 you can without formality fly day VFR in UK airspace on a G-registered aircraft, limited to any restriction on your licence.

Mongoose is quite correct - The 'JAR-compliant' licence is a well-known and long-standing marketing ploy that has absolutely no meaning (or value). It is no more than a licence issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 1 that is, consequently, recognised as valid by every other ICAO member state. In the case of UKFT, mentioned above, it is a FAA PPL, which could be obtained at any other US flight school, probably at much less cost. In fact, it has no more value than a PPL gained in any of the other ICAO member states any of which can be converted to a JAA PPL in exactly the same way.

JAA is an acronym for the Joint Aviation Authorities and JAR for the Joint Aviation Requirements. The terms JAA licence and JAR licence are interchangeable in common parlance although the former is more correct. All a bit pointless as the JAA will cease to exist at the end of this year.

It was here HERE

What Billiebob is saying is spot on. You get issued an FAA PPL and thats it. I did my PPL there quite a few years ago and have lots of comments to make about them but dont think it would be right to post them on here :=

Give me a PM if you want more info.

Terminology
 

Imho this follows from the JAA text, cfr given ref by Mungo5.
Hope not to be pedantic...

JAA is the authority not the licence : for example my licence says Belgium, JAA (I just happen to have converted it last week)

The correct terminology for the license appears to be "JAR-FCL licence" cfr the following extract from www.jaa.nl :

Conversion of a licence issued by a non-
JAA State.
(1) A professional pilot licence and/or IR
issued by a non-JAA State may be converted to a
JAR–FCL licence provided that an arrangement
exists between the JAA Member State and the
non-JAA State. This arrangement shall be
established on the basis of reciprocity of licence
acceptance and shall ensure that an equivalent
level of safety exists between the training and
testing requirements of the JAA and the non-JAA
State. Any arrangement entered into will be
reviewed periodically, as agreed by the non-JAA
State and the JAA. A licence converted according
to such an arrangement shall have an entry
indicating the non-JAA State upon which the
conversion is based. Other Member States shall
not be obliged to accept any such licence.
(2) A private pilot licence issued by a
non-JAA Member State may be converted to a
JAR-FCL licence with single-pilot type ratings by
complying with the requirements shown in
Appendix 2 to JAR-FCL 2.015.


d3