Faa Cfi To Jaa Fi
 

Just wanted to check if my understanding of LASORS Section H1.12 is correct. It relates to the conversion of a ICAO FI(H) rating to a JAA FI(H). Is it correct to say that the holder of a FAA CFI can obtain a JAA FI following 15hrs dual instruction and 30hrs theory instaruction, at a certified school, if deemed proficient for the flight test.
Also what restrictions will be placed on this licence and would a candidates previous level of experience under the FAA CFI have an affect on the restrictions imposed. All help appreciated.

What your saying is correct. They should take your previous experiance into consideration. So all the times you have sent a student on a solo flight count as well as all the hours of instuction completed. If you meet the requirements you should get a Unrestricted FI Licence.

You will need....
 

.....a JAA license before you can get a JAA instructor license. So if you have a JAA Private and a FAA CFI you can do it on the Private level.

Hi,
Does anyone know if things concerning FAA CFI to JAA FI using the "short" course described on LASORS2008 H1.12, will change by 2012 when EASA will finally run?
I have a JAA CPL issued by France and I already asked them (DGAC) but no reply...
Cheers,

Anyone have more info on this matter? If yes please share!

...also; not all FTO's are experienced with this short-course.

So if some-one has walked this path and has info/advice,

it will be greatly appreciated!

FTF

It's not quite a simple as saying the conversion course is 15 hours flying and 30 hours ground training. The requirement is currently contained in JAR-FCL 2.320(f), which states:

The equivalent provisions under EASA are contained in the Personnel Licensing Regulation of which Part-FCL is an annexe. The relevant information is in Article 7, which states:

Quote:

---

Applicants for Part–FCL licences and associated ratings or certificates already holding at least an equivalent licence issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 1 by a third country shall meet all the requirements of Part–FCL, except that the requirements of course duration, number of lessons and specific training hours may be reduced. The credit given to the applicant shall be determined by the competent authority of the Member State to which the pilot applies on the basis of a recommendation from an approved training organisation.

---

This says much the same thing, without referring to the 15/30 minimum. However, the CAA will not be able to be so free with their interpretation and the course length for each applicant will have to be assessed separately, based on his previous experience and a pre-entry flight test, the latter being a Part-FCL requirement.

Thanks BillieBob.

So the FTO should have the a 'special' CAA approval to complete a

(...let's call it a...) 'short'-course.

If you have advice on which FTO (EU soil) has these approvals in place,

please send me a PM !

Thanks in advance,

FTF

What I described is what should happen, not what does happen. Because the UK CAA cannot be bothered to comply with the requirements of JAR-FCL, any FTO that holds an approval to conduct the FI(H) course can conduct an abridged course for the holder of an ICAO FI rating/certificate. This course need be no more than 15 hrs flight/30 hrs ground training, irrespective of the applicant's previous experience and does not need to be separately approved. Provided that you find the right examiner for the Skill Test, you will be guaranteed to get an FI(H) rating.

After next April, unless the UK takes advantage of the 12 months opt-out agreed at the last EASA Committee meeting, the CAA will have no choice but to comply exactly with the requirements and approve each course individually.

FAA CFI to JAA FI
 

I converted my FAA CFI to a JAA FI not long after the introduction of JAR. I went to a place who were able to conduct FI courses full stop. There was no such thing that they had to be approved to do the short course.

I did 15 hours flying and 30 hours ground as what has been stated. I then needed to get the 25 solo's before having my restriction removed. That bit did not carry over from the States.

Just keeping asking the CAA until you get the answer you want and then get it in writing.

The difference between Amdt 3 and 6 to Appendix to JAR FCL 2.305 (or 2.300 HERE UK CAA) is giving me headaches. The information quoted by BillieBob is from there, but it seems to be under the rules for training for JAR FCL licences by non-JAA isntructor and the rules continue in appendix, for training abroad solely.

How does that translate to the reductions? I'm told by one of the heli school's Chief Pilot that the 'short course' rules will be cancelled or still not known what would be.
TWO MONTHS FROM NOW??
I can't fit in all the stuff I have to do this year, into few months, so I am also interested to know what'd happen. Current FAA (C)FI that needs to be used towards JAA/EASA FI(H), but not before April this year.

I thought the abridged course is not available outside UK, but now I see the regs on other national CAA which has the Amdt 6 App to JAR FCL 2.305, but as the title of appendix says, it's for training for JAA licenses outside JAA countries.

I looked at NPA 2008-17A HERE on EASA website, but only see cross-refencing of 2.305 on page 49, in line with the title of Appendix in JAR FCL to EASA Part-FCL.

AFAIK, the UK does the transition period after 8th April, right?

EDIT: Done with skimming through the EC 1178/2011 (EASA Part-FCL) HERE
No mention of FI certificates (not ratings, as per EASA speak) and conversion.
AMC and GM to Part-FCL looking up HERE didn't help either. So without the transition period, it's over, right?

Hi everyone,

Revisiting this old thread as it remains a topic that my current Competent Authority refuses to acknowledge, and it apparently hasn't become any clearer since the implementations of Part-FCL regulations.

To sum up: I hold an FAA CFI/CFII as the original poster, my goal is to convert it into an FI(H). Based EU regulation (EU) N.o 1178/2011, Article 8, first three paragraphs, my understanding is that not only can one convert an ICAO Flight Instructor license but also that one may claim a course reduction both theoretical and practical.

The CA that issues my Part-FCL license states that there are no provisions for Flight Instructor conversions.

When pressed to justify their view, they surprisingly quoted “In accordance with Articles 7(2), (5) and (6)(e) and 12 of the Basic Regulation, instructor certificates issued by third countries can only be accepted in accordance with a bilateral agreement celebrated between the European Community and that third country” COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT (CRD) TO NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT (NPA) 2008-17B c.12 - Annex III, Annex IV published on 9th April 2010 - to which I responded that the document they refer to is a simple draft gathering comments and responses published back in 2010.

They later pressed on stating that regulation (EC) N.o 216/2008 does not support ICAO flight instructor conversions to Part-FCL FI. To which I responded stating that EU regulation (EU) N.o 1178/2011 lays down technical requirements and administrative procedures related to civil aviation aircrew pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council - they are therefore complementary.

I contacted EASA in Germany, spoke to one of their officers at the licensing department and was told over the phone that I was right: Article 8 of EU regulation (EU) N.o 1178/2011 does support ICAO conversions, however it is not the job of EASA to provide binding interpretations of laws, that is done by Competent Authorities.

I am baffled by their response: basically EASA drafts laws and proposes them to the European Commission, they also work towards bilateral agreements between the EU and other ICAO states. Once their regulations get approved by the Commission, they then become law and are passed on to the Competent Authorities of Member States - who can happily misinterpret those very same laws?!

I cannot comprehend how although we aim to move to towards increased standardization and uniformity across Europe, these situations can occur and yet there doesn't really seem to be a way around it other than taking the matter to court.

Thoughts anyone?

If your talking to the authorities in Germany , forget it. A close friend of mine tried to convert an icao cpl, they turned around and refused to give him the reduction in hours from the 30 hour course.

He went to Norway converted his cpl and instructor rating and then transferred the whole lot to Germany , nothing they could do about it

Yes, that's pretty much what it looks like nowadays. Madness!

Did my FI(H) in the UK cause the LBA in Germany wouldn't allow a reduction in flying hours and theory towards the EASA-FI(H) for holders of an ICAO-CFI (in my case FAA-CFI). Talked to a school in the Netherlands, Sweden and Norway and their CAAs all seem to be more than happy to allow that. Which is EASA-Law by the way, I was told by all represantatives of the schools abroad. The head of flight ops of a large German Flight School, who I talked to about this very problem told me: "What the LBA does is against EASA-LAW but if nobody takes them to court about it it won't change". Funny to take your future licensing authority to court.... But then the whole thing doesn't surprise me.
Compared to the LBA the UK-CAA is a completely different league of professionals from my experience. One only has to remember that for licensing purposes the LBA still requires documents to be FAXED or send BY MAIL, MAIL as in postal service. Laughable.

End of the story is I did my FI(H) in the UK, got it onto my UK-CAA-CPLH. Transfered it to Germany and tadaaaa, FI(H) on my LBA issued CPLH, nothing they can do about it. Another buddy of mine is doing it in Sweden right now.

Ciao

Are you saying that the LBA is in breach of "EASA law" by not allowing any reductions to training time? If so, please quote the appropriate regulation or implementing rule.

@Mustapha
I was told by representatives of foreign schools that it was EASA-LAW. Also by the head of training of a large German school and that they talked to the LBA about this very problem for some time but the LBA won't have any of it. So why do other countries CAAs allow the reduction in training? Just for the fun of it?

Gents thanks for all the inputs.

Funnily enough, the EASA official I spoke with did hint at the possibility of transferring the state of issuance in order to bypass the excessively zealous and crassly ignorant pen pushers...

@Mustapha, if you read my post earlier today, I mention Article 8... Read the first three paragraphs...

It's sad that the alternative is either taking your (In)Competent Authority to court or transfer of state. I have had to transfer state a few times due to work reasons and it's a lengthy process taking at best a couple of months - I simply do not have the time and energy to do it again.

@Muermel: I seem to recall that the UK CAA published LASORS stated very clearly that a holder of an ICAO fight instructor license could convert to a JAR-FCL license through an abbreviated course of 15 hours - which was brilliant really and I am bummed I didn't take advantage of that opportunity back then.

What I don't understand is the fact that current EU regulations specifically state that one may convert and may be granted credits. How come a Competent Authority can simply deny this?

Do you mean phrases such as (my underlining):

And

So my question to muermel still stands.

You were told that what was EASA-LAW, exactly?

I'm still trying to undertsand where you believe the LBA is in breach of the Regulation.