|
FAA 61.75 'Piggy back' Certificate Validity
Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere. I've found much discussion about the process of getting this certification based on an EASA PPL(H) and understand that, but remain unclear on one point. I have been told that the FAA 61.75 'restricted' certificate (like the full FAA license) is not based on specific aircraft type ratings. Because of this, in effect, the 61.75 certificate allows the holder to fly any helicopter (up to a certain MTOW) in the UK, without having to go through the EASA process of type conversion involving 5 hours conversion training, exam, etc. On the other hand, I have also been told that: "...the 61.75 certificate covers only the type’s on your UK license." Which is true?
If the FAA certificate does not restrict you to a type, you would, presumably, need to persuade your UK insurer that you were adequately trained to fly any aircraft on which you are not rated on your EASA license - and I'm not sure how you'd do that... |
You are limited to what is on your EASA certificate:
See Here Bold red added by me. Sec. 61.75 Private pilot certificate issued on the basis of a foreign pilot license.
[(2) Holds a foreign pilot license, at the private pilot license level or higher, that does not contain a limitation stating that the applicant has not met all of the standards of ICAO for that license;
(2) Within 24 months preceding the month in which the person applies for the instrument rating, the person passes the appropriate knowledge test; and (3) The person is able to read, speak, write, and understand the English language. If the applicant is unable to meet one of these requirements due to medical reasons, then the Administrator may place such operating limitations on that applicant's pilot certificate as are necessary for the safe operation of the aircraft. (e) Operating privileges and limitations. A person who receives a U.S. private pilot certificate that has been issued under the provisions of this section: [(1) May act as pilot in command of a civil aircraft of the United States in accordance with the pilot privileges authorized by this part and the limitations placed on that U.S. pilot certificate;] (2) Is limited to the privileges placed on the certificate by the Administrator; (3) Is subject to the limitations and restrictions on the person's U.S. certificate and foreign pilot license when exercising the privileges of that U.S. pilot certificate in an aircraft of U.S. registry operating within or outside the United States; and [(f) Limitation on licenses used as the basis for a U.S. certificate. A person may use only one foreign pilot license as a basis for the issuance of a U.S. pilot certificate. The foreign pilot license and medical certification used as a basis for issuing a U.S. pilot certificate under this section must be written in English or accompanied by an English transcription that has been signed by an official or representative of the foreign aviation authority that issued the foreign pilot license. (g) Limitation placed on a U.S. pilot certificate. A U.S. pilot certificate issued under this section can only be exercised when the pilot has the foreign pilot license, upon which the issuance of the U.S. pilot certificate was based, in the holder's possession or readily accessible in the aircraft.] Amdt. 61-124, Eff. 10/20/09 |
Gordy. Thanks for this...but I'm not sure that this answers my question. The section you highlight concerns flying 'aircraft of U.S. registry' - I'm talking about flying any aircraft (i.e. in effect G or N reg) in the U.K.
In addition, I think that 'limitations and restrictions' (which are carried across) are different to 'ratings and privileges' as defined on the EASA license. I cannot see any specific mention of 'ratings and privileges' being automatically carried across from the foreign (i.e. UK) license to the FAA certificate. Just above the para you highlighted it says that "(the pilot) ..is limited to the privileges placed on the certificate by the Administrator" - but that's not quite the same thing. It does seem unlikely to me that this is the case - but the reason I ask is that I am assured that there a significant number of pilots operating in this way - flying helicopters on their FAA certificates for which they are not specifically rated on their EASA licenses - in the UK currently. |
In the US, the license and ratings are considered a privilege. Therefore if you had "Robinson R-22 and Bell 206" on your EASA license, and you used that as the basis to get an FAA license, you are restricted to flying those aircraft types on the FAA license.
Is subject to the limitations and restrictions on the person's U.S. certificate and foreign pilot license when exercising the privileges of that U.S. pilot certificate in an aircraft of U.S. registry operating within or outside the United States; and The only way to add other types is to get the EASA rating or complete a full FAA checkride---one that is not based on 61.75 |
I realise I may be going up a blind alley here...but, as you quote, the US 'restricted' license is subject to the same limitations and restrictions as the foreign (UK) license.
It does not say that it is subject to the same ratings and privileges and I am led to believe that those are differently things. As I understand it, the FAA licensing system (unlike the EASA system) no longer has type ratings for helicopters under a gross takeoff weight of over 12,500 pounds. Therefore a full FAA license covers flying any helicopter that meets that requirement (except Robinsons, but that's another issue). The question is whether the 61.75 piggyback FAA certificate follows that same model. |
The validation/cornflakes box FAA ppl that you will receive will be based on your foreign license. you need to keep your EASA license and certificate current in every respect in order to exercise the FAA PPL you will receive based on your foreign license. if you’re planning on flying an N reg in the UK to avoid all the currency and beuracracy requirements that is EASA then you’re best to bite the bullet and spend a week and about 3-5k getting your FAA PPL or CPL and class 1 or 2 medical and be done with it and give EASA the middle finger. |
I am trying to help you dude. You are correct that:
Originally Posted by Gustosomerset
(Post 10217567)
the FAA licensing system (unlike the EASA system) no longer has type ratings for helicopters under a gross takeoff weight of over 12,500 pounds.
Therefore a full FAA license covers flying any helicopter that meets that requirement (except Robinsons, but that's another issue).
Originally Posted by Gustosomerset
(Post 10217567)
The question is whether the 61.75 piggyback FAA certificate follows that same model.
(e) Operating privileges and limitations. A person who receives a U.S. private pilot certificate that has been issued under the provisions of this section: (3) Is subject to the limitations and restrictions on the person's U.S. certificate and foreign pilot license when exercising the privileges of that U.S. pilot certificate in an aircraft of U.S. registry operating within or outside the United States; Seems pretty black & white & RED to me, but I have never had an EASA license and have no desire to get one. I second Havic's advice. |
Havick - thanks for that. I agree that, in reality, the only sensible option is probably to get a full FAA license.
Gordy, thanks for trying to help but we seem to keep talking past each other. Your quotes clearly show that the FAA 61.75 certificate is subject to the limitations and restrictions of the foreign (UK) license, but I cannot see where it says that it is also subject to the same ratings and privileges and I continue to believe that these are two separate sets of things. Thanks for your help in any case. |
I guess I have been out of the legal loop for a while---for those who know me, I was pretty active with legal interpretations. Here is the answer to your question, which s the opposite of what I was stating:
grossman-delvag luftfahrtversicherungs - (2014) legal interpretation To add, US law is based upon Juris Prudence. FAA law is technically "Administrative Law" in that the order of precedence for rules is as follows: 1. Public Law/statutes 2. Federal Regulations 3. FAA legal interpretations (for those interpretations that have been updated to conform to the current rules). 4. FAA orders (for those directives/guidance that have been updated to conform to the current rules) 5. FAA notices (for those directives/guidance that have been updated to conform to the current rules) 6. FAA bulletins (for those directives/guidance that have been updated to conform to the current rules) 7. Parts 61 & 141 Frequently Asked Questions, (Q&As) 8. FAA Advisory Circulars |
limitations and restrictions of the foreign (UK) license, but I cannot see where it says that it is also subject to the same ratings and privileges and I continue to believe that these are two separate sets of things. If your EASA certificate has a limitation that carries over. it is very common for non-FAA licenses and certificates to carry a maximum take off weight limitation. That carries over. if your EASA Certificate states that you are rated in a R-22 then that is also a LIMITATION in the eyes of the FAA as under the FAA License/Certificate system such type limitations do not exist. Another good example is your night rating. If you do not hold a night rating then you cannot fly at night in an N-reg on a piggy back certificate till you’ve met the FAA night flying requirements. Now....your EASA certificate does not say ‘No night’ It says VFR day. Follow me on the semantics. So for the sake of the discussion your EASA certificate states VFR Day R-22. On your FAA validation you can now only fly VFR day in a R22. The licensing systems are different so your permission to fly one type becomes a limitation or restriction on the other since no other types are listed. The fact you have a make/model/type listed becomes the restriction as by default that’s the only one you can fly in Europa land. Should make sense now. My background: FAA Flight Instructor full time for 13 years and 80% European customers as our school. We’ve literally done 100’s of these validations. |
Gordy - Ah! Thanks very much for that reply. That legal judgement is exactly on my point. The critical phrase, it seems to me, is: "the FAA has not considered the absence of a rating as a restriction on a person's pilot certificate." That is the distinction I was searching for and, as you say, shows that the answer to my question seems to be the opposite of a) what one would expect, b) what you were originally stating and c) what B2N2 subsequently says....unless, of course, the FAA interpretation has changed since that judgement.
|
Originally Posted by B2N2
(Post 10217692)
The licensing systems are different so your permission to fly one type becomes a limitation or restriction on the other since no other types are listed. The fact you have a make/model/type listed becomes the restriction as by default that’s the only one you can fly in Europa land. Should make sense now. My background: FAA Flight Instructor full time for 13 years and 80% European customers as our school. We’ve literally done 100’s of these validations. You may wish to go read the legal interpretation I posted. You are in-correct, as was I initially. FAA flight instructor 28 years. Trained many Europeans back in the day. |
Originally Posted by Gustosomerset
(Post 10217700)
unless, of course, the FAA interpretation has changed since that judgement.
|
Originally Posted by B2N2
(Post 10217692)
We’ve literally done 100’s of these validations. now if your want to switch your license to an FAA certificate which requires a flight test then that’s a different story and then a flight school and DPE would have involvement. |
Gordy - So that legal interpretation is very clear. FAA 61.75 'piggy back' certification, based on a foreign (i.e. EASA) license DOES NOT (contrary to popular belief) restrict the holder to fly only those types for which he or she is rated on their EASA license.
Instead, it confers the FAA privileges of 'an airplane category rating' which, in the case of light helicopters for example is 'any under a gross takeoff weight of over 12,500 pounds'. I imagine this could be very useful to anyone wishing to fly multiple types without having to go to the expense of gaining multiple type ratings under EASA rules. However, the FAA go on to say that: "...our interpretation addresses only the requirements to operate a U.S.-registered aircraft under our regulations. Our conclusion in no way limits another country's ability to impose other pilot certification requirements for flights operated within that country's airspace." So I take that to mean that: a) The interpretation applies only to N reg aircraft (wherever flown) and b) that other countries are at liberty to impose certification restrictions within their own airspace that, in effect, could over-rule the privileges conferred by the FAA certification. Am I right on both points? The first seems straightforward enough but as to the second, is there any evidence of any country ever having sought to do so - the CAA in the UK, for example? |
Originally Posted by Gustosomerset
(Post 10217971)
Gordy - So that legal interpretation is very clear. FAA 61.75 'piggy back' certification, based on a foreign (i.e. EASA) license DOES NOT (contrary to popular belief) restrict the holder to fly only those types for which he or she is rated on their EASA license.
Instead, it confers the FAA privileges of 'an airplane category rating' which, in the case of light helicopters for example is 'any under a gross takeoff weight of over 12,500 pounds'. I imagine this could be very useful to anyone wishing to fly multiple types without having to go to the expense of gaining multiple type ratings under EASA rules. However, the FAA go on to say that: "...our interpretation addresses only the requirements to operate a U.S.-registered aircraft under our regulations. Our conclusion in no way limits another country's ability to impose other pilot certification requirements for flights operated within that country's airspace." So I take that to mean that: a) The interpretation applies only to N reg aircraft (wherever flown) and b) that other countries are at liberty to impose certification restrictions within their own airspace that, in effect, could over-rule the privileges conferred by the FAA certification. Am I right on both points? The first seems straightforward enough but as to the second, is there any evidence of any country ever having sought to do so - the CAA in the UK, for example? |
Don't forget if you have a piggy back 61.75 you may want to get it re issued...
FAA certificates for UK licences UK Civil Aviation Authority Soon! |
Nubian - I actually don't (I'm perfectly happy with my single rating at the moment) but I was just intrigued by the number of people telling me different things about the validity of the 61.75 FAA license.
In particular the strongly asserted opinions of those that certainly should know the rules but who, it turns out, don't. That said, if at some unlikely point someone kindly offers me the opportunity to fly their N reg MD500 I'd seriously consider doing the requisite conversion training and the paperwork to get my 61.75 FAA license to be able to do so, rather than spending the time and money to get and then maintain the separate rating via the conventional EASA route. As I said above, I understand a significant number of pilots are already doing this - I just couldn't find the confirmation of how this worked. All credit to Gordy for having done so. |
Originally Posted by Gustosomerset
(Post 10217971)
Am I right on both points? The first seems straightforward enough but as to the second, is there any evidence of any country ever having sought to do so - the CAA in the UK, for example?
|
If you obtained your 61.75 licence based on a fixed wing and subsequently added a rotorcraft licence do you need to inform F a to amend your 61.75 also does your FCL licence number change when you add rotorcraft |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 00:02. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.