EU Pilot certification rules
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an "outsider", my input may not count for much, However, where empire-building "civil servants" (an oxymoron, if ever there was one!) , you can be sure that they will devise the most complex regulatory system they can devise.
The true reasons, - job-creation/security and ass-covering.
The commercial and practical desirability of international harmonisation is only valid in Euroland, where Brussels is head of the "old pals' club"
There is no logical reason ,to me, why any vehicle/vessel should not be freely transferrable to the register of the country where it is base.
AFAIK, the shipping world uses "flags of convenience" to circumvent the restrictions of more tightly-regulated countries.....the latter are at liberty to impose sanctions on those flag-carriers ,should they feel that there would be a safety-issue.(and insurers tend to apply an economic sanction there)
The airline world is different, they are not "one-offs" but series-produced with a demonstrated international operation and safety record. Therefore, an internationally travelled Pilot or Aircraft should be treated equally.
In the UK, American and some other import cars have to undergo certain modifications to lights and other minor items in order to meet Euro harmonisation.....BUT...as with the "N" reg. aircraft, short-term visitors can use British (and Euro?) roads/airspace, unmodified. It appears that common-sense goes out of the window ,when the pen-pushers are faced with something that doesn't fit in one of their carefully defined boxes.
Again, a foreign driver's license has a period of validity in euroland, before a conversion is required......but to restrict it's priveliges to a specific vehicle , is totally illogical lunacy.
If you're accepted to enter euroland, flying an "xyz", then logic dictates that you are competent to fly any other "XYZ " A conversion to a european license should not be needed....countries should recognise and accept free movement of pilots and aircraft between States (I accept that this , in turn , means a "club" of member-countries who agree to reciprocity) It is accepted that certain flag- carriers don't meet generally-recognised standards. Though insurers tend to make these less viable.
These beurocrats really need to be reined in.....a wiser man than I decreed the lunatics would take over the asylum.
The true reasons, - job-creation/security and ass-covering.
The commercial and practical desirability of international harmonisation is only valid in Euroland, where Brussels is head of the "old pals' club"
There is no logical reason ,to me, why any vehicle/vessel should not be freely transferrable to the register of the country where it is base.
AFAIK, the shipping world uses "flags of convenience" to circumvent the restrictions of more tightly-regulated countries.....the latter are at liberty to impose sanctions on those flag-carriers ,should they feel that there would be a safety-issue.(and insurers tend to apply an economic sanction there)
The airline world is different, they are not "one-offs" but series-produced with a demonstrated international operation and safety record. Therefore, an internationally travelled Pilot or Aircraft should be treated equally.
In the UK, American and some other import cars have to undergo certain modifications to lights and other minor items in order to meet Euro harmonisation.....BUT...as with the "N" reg. aircraft, short-term visitors can use British (and Euro?) roads/airspace, unmodified. It appears that common-sense goes out of the window ,when the pen-pushers are faced with something that doesn't fit in one of their carefully defined boxes.
Again, a foreign driver's license has a period of validity in euroland, before a conversion is required......but to restrict it's priveliges to a specific vehicle , is totally illogical lunacy.
If you're accepted to enter euroland, flying an "xyz", then logic dictates that you are competent to fly any other "XYZ " A conversion to a european license should not be needed....countries should recognise and accept free movement of pilots and aircraft between States (I accept that this , in turn , means a "club" of member-countries who agree to reciprocity) It is accepted that certain flag- carriers don't meet generally-recognised standards. Though insurers tend to make these less viable.
These beurocrats really need to be reined in.....a wiser man than I decreed the lunatics would take over the asylum.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Europe One USA Nil
This is going better than anticipated. Facilitation at its highest level, nes pas.
Delighted that EU will vote.
Positively semi erect if Us pilots return to the land of oil and sugar.............
in fact , pass me the bus keys and I'll drive them to the nearest airport. Yes
we are all affected by non US licences operating within our airspace. However , we didnt start the fire ok !
Of the utmost importance thar the EU protects its high aviation standards
from potential dilution by the coarsly throated american pilots.
Question yous all : what is the number of american pilots, yes american
pilots allowed to reside and work in europe.
More More please .
Am doing a jfk next week and will have space in the lower aft for a half ton
of size 26 girdles for the local residents, oh and some guides to effective
communication. All donations gratefully received.
Koi
Delighted that EU will vote.
Positively semi erect if Us pilots return to the land of oil and sugar.............
in fact , pass me the bus keys and I'll drive them to the nearest airport. Yes
we are all affected by non US licences operating within our airspace. However , we didnt start the fire ok !
Of the utmost importance thar the EU protects its high aviation standards
from potential dilution by the coarsly throated american pilots.
Question yous all : what is the number of american pilots, yes american
pilots allowed to reside and work in europe.
More More please .
Am doing a jfk next week and will have space in the lower aft for a half ton
of size 26 girdles for the local residents, oh and some guides to effective
communication. All donations gratefully received.
Koi
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EASA has the power why do they not use that power wisely?
Longer answer: Since the formation of the EU there have been negotiations to harmonise a whole range of inconsistant and contradictory regulations into a single European standard in order to simplify trade and
qualifications, removing artificial regulatory barriers to trade.
When aviation rules came up for this process the regulators recognised that wider international issues were involved and offered the rest of the
world a chance to participate. Most of the world agreed to talk or at least to send observers but the USA refused to participate due to internal politics.
A few years later the EU finally agrees a common set of regulations for the aviation industry and the USA finally wakes up to realise that their interests have not been considered. What a surprise.
So now a pilot's licence issued in a third world country such as Botswana can easily be converted to an EASA licence but an American licence is simply not recognised.
Time for the USA aviation industry to kick some bottom in Washington and
say NO to silly protectionist policies.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typical Europe
A Protectionist, provider-driven, none-democratic, old-fashioned, none-evidence based, centralised, beaurocratic, inefficient, expensive, time consuming, wasteful of resources, manipulative, frustrating charade
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Florida winter Utah summer
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hilarious
Koi,
Your attempts at being annoying are quite amusing. Your love for the colorful residents of NYC would actually be shared by much if not all the residents of the western united states. If our nations melting pot is your only basis for the flattering opinions you shower upon us then your xenophobia is quite misplaced. We understand though, it's quite normal for the downtrodden to want to put down their superiors.
Most Cordially,
Hugh G. Rection
Your attempts at being annoying are quite amusing. Your love for the colorful residents of NYC would actually be shared by much if not all the residents of the western united states. If our nations melting pot is your only basis for the flattering opinions you shower upon us then your xenophobia is quite misplaced. We understand though, it's quite normal for the downtrodden to want to put down their superiors.
Most Cordially,
Hugh G. Rection
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ignoring the wind-up merchant...
The Ancient Geek thinks (please correct me if I'm wrong) that the EASA rule makers have considered some interests outside of Europe, just not the FAA.
I'd like to assure him that getting a JAA CPL / IR / FI, already holding the NZ equivalents, was the most tedious and expensive process I've done, and very much harder than it would have been to get the FAA equivalents.
It's expected that every Authority wants a law exam and a flight test for each qualification - fair enough. But only the Europeans require all exams to be re-sat as well as mandatory training in addition to the flight tests.
Like other world trade agreements, ICAO is almost dead when it comes to pilot qualifications. It's all our loss.
The Ancient Geek thinks (please correct me if I'm wrong) that the EASA rule makers have considered some interests outside of Europe, just not the FAA.
I'd like to assure him that getting a JAA CPL / IR / FI, already holding the NZ equivalents, was the most tedious and expensive process I've done, and very much harder than it would have been to get the FAA equivalents.
It's expected that every Authority wants a law exam and a flight test for each qualification - fair enough. But only the Europeans require all exams to be re-sat as well as mandatory training in addition to the flight tests.
Like other world trade agreements, ICAO is almost dead when it comes to pilot qualifications. It's all our loss.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was interesting to read the response from the Canadian chap who had a fast track to the US certificates. I had UK, NZ, Aus, SIN, and Taiwan ATP(L)s when I tried to get my US certificates, and I was told I had to do the full training, including ground school and test, medical, flight check etc just the same as any newbie. I was given credit for the hours I had flown, and was allowed to apply for the certificate based on my foreign licenses instead of having an authorization by a US CFI and proof of study. If I wanted my ratings, I had to do the full ground school and flight test on each type. Only ground school conducted at a US recognized facility would be allowed (this was at Boeing, for example, or at a foreign establishment if a FAA inspector attended to certify it).
When I turned up for my flight test the DPE refused my only current license (Taiwan) because Taiwan at the time was not a member of ICAO. He did accept my UK ATPL even though it was expired, because nothing in the regulations said it had to be current.
I could not afford the training for the ratings, so I had a bare ATP. I had to do it all again a year later when I wanted to add single engine!
Everywhere else I had gone, the countries followed ICAO. In that situation, all licences issued by an ICAO country are recognised by any other ICAO country. All that is required is a medical, a law exam and a flight check. When I got my UK licence they charged me 100 pounds per rating, so I only paid for what I needed (B737, B757). However there were no special checks required for these ratings.
In countries that did not have their own licencing, I flew on validations, which meant that I had to keep the original licence current in order to maintain my validation. This is not the same as issuing a full licence. The US does this if you want to fly a US-registered airplane without a US license.
I remember complaining to the US authorities that since they were members of ICAO they had to follow ICAO rules. This got me nowhere as you could imagine.
Add to this the complications of the security rules and TSA clearances. For an initial issue of any US certificate you have to now do a full TSA clearance that costs $130 non-refundable and a mine-field of procedures. It applies even if you do not try to get it done in the US. If you do want to go to the US to do it, you need a flight school to endorse the application, get a student visa, and complete it within 12 months.
At least I had the option of doing all my training and checking piece-meal during visits or layovers.
Hence the comment starting this thread that I found it funny to see the US offended for the behaviour of the EU, since that is what they have been doing all along.
Of course I might not be aware of changes to policy; the US might have now accepted the rules according to ICAO and are following them, which would justify their complaint about the EU policy. Has anyone done a US license lately? (not a Canadian apparently, since they have a special relationship. I wonder if a Mexican gets the same deal?).
When I turned up for my flight test the DPE refused my only current license (Taiwan) because Taiwan at the time was not a member of ICAO. He did accept my UK ATPL even though it was expired, because nothing in the regulations said it had to be current.
I could not afford the training for the ratings, so I had a bare ATP. I had to do it all again a year later when I wanted to add single engine!
Everywhere else I had gone, the countries followed ICAO. In that situation, all licences issued by an ICAO country are recognised by any other ICAO country. All that is required is a medical, a law exam and a flight check. When I got my UK licence they charged me 100 pounds per rating, so I only paid for what I needed (B737, B757). However there were no special checks required for these ratings.
In countries that did not have their own licencing, I flew on validations, which meant that I had to keep the original licence current in order to maintain my validation. This is not the same as issuing a full licence. The US does this if you want to fly a US-registered airplane without a US license.
I remember complaining to the US authorities that since they were members of ICAO they had to follow ICAO rules. This got me nowhere as you could imagine.
Add to this the complications of the security rules and TSA clearances. For an initial issue of any US certificate you have to now do a full TSA clearance that costs $130 non-refundable and a mine-field of procedures. It applies even if you do not try to get it done in the US. If you do want to go to the US to do it, you need a flight school to endorse the application, get a student visa, and complete it within 12 months.
At least I had the option of doing all my training and checking piece-meal during visits or layovers.
Hence the comment starting this thread that I found it funny to see the US offended for the behaviour of the EU, since that is what they have been doing all along.
Of course I might not be aware of changes to policy; the US might have now accepted the rules according to ICAO and are following them, which would justify their complaint about the EU policy. Has anyone done a US license lately? (not a Canadian apparently, since they have a special relationship. I wonder if a Mexican gets the same deal?).
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Add to this the complications of the security rules and TSA clearances. For an initial issue of any US certificate you have to now do a full TSA clearance that costs $130 non-refundable and a mine-field of procedures. It applies even if you do not try to get it done in the US. If you do want to go to the US to do it, you need a flight school to endorse the application, get a student visa, and complete it within 12 months.
Tough sh*t sherlock.
NB.
It's all been changed, anyway, boofhead....and we don't especially care about your personal problems.
Don't like it...leave and don't come back.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are medical requirements the same?
EASA requires a much more detailed and expensive process (no surprise there, certainly
) with about...the same failure rate as the FAA equalivent....3%How do I know?
The AME I attend for my FAA medical, also issues EASA, DOT Canada, and several others.
My FAA First Class medical (with EKG) costs $120.
EASA?
$450 for initial, $350 for renewals.
EASA...a profit center, make no mistake.
The pilots, on the other hand...screwed, big time.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anybody know the definition of a Microsoft Pilot???? Anyone??? Anyone??? KOI... that's what a microsoft pilot is. I do have to ask... wher does he come up with this stuff
? Anyone??? Anyone???
Anyway... background checks??? Let me tell you about background checks... 4 months to get the approval for an airport entry pass with a BAA airport. Oh... if the date format is incorrectly entered on any reference form??? bounced back. Did I mention if the reference letter is signed in a different color ink used on the form??? yep... bounced back.
I was happy that I did not have to pay the some $250 plus fee for the background check nor the $116 for the pass itself.
? Anyone??? Anyone???Anyway... background checks??? Let me tell you about background checks... 4 months to get the approval for an airport entry pass with a BAA airport. Oh... if the date format is incorrectly entered on any reference form??? bounced back. Did I mention if the reference letter is signed in a different color ink used on the form??? yep... bounced back.
I was happy that I did not have to pay the some $250 plus fee for the background check nor the $116 for the pass itself.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Miami
Age: 59
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EU Bureaucracy and guys like Koi
Yes, indeed Koi is an immature self imagined elitist who probably is masking some deep seated personal insecurities and personal disappointments with his childish commentaries. Part of the problem is that there are too many elitists like Koi populating the halls of power in European aviation, and also in the leadership of American Trade Union halls. Both use the misguided premise that they are better and try to hinder the free flow of goods and skills with their discriminatory practices. In any case, I have expended enough commentary on such an immature gnat.
As far as the famous EU bureaucracy, it is indeed something that stifles innovation, industry and productivity as much as American protectionism does. Sadly, on both sides of the Atlantic, there are people who want to ruin whole industries because of the narrow goal of personal gain regardless of the cost to the infrastructure as a whole. These people, whether they be EU bureaucrats or US Trade Union protectionists are no better than rogue traders who try to bankrupt whole nations in order to profit from the spoils. And as someone already pointed out, someone will indeed profit from the spoils.
But there is a bureaucracy even worse: Russia. While EU overregulation merely stifles and handicaps aviation in Europe, Russian bureaucracy is completely killing their aviation industry and Europe ought to have a hard look at what over regulation and absurd policies are doing to that country's aviation infrastructure. Two weeks to clear a part out of customs for an AOG airplane? No wonder the aircraft repair industry is non existent there. And the aircraft registry looks equally as bleak. There has to be a reason and it is bureaucracy. Europe ought to take a long hard look at that poor role model and reconsider it's misguided effort at trying to emulate it. Look at the ramp at Moscow Vnukovo, and notice that all the shiny Gulfstreams and Legacys and Global Expresses are not Russian registered, they are European, VP or US registered for the most part. And when it comes to EU registry, it is self evident that the owners and operators also look to EU countries that if not outright facilitate aviation, at least do not do their best to hinder it. That's why half of those planes in Vnukovo are registered in Austria for example. Because Austro-Control is fairly progressive as far as aviation is concerned. France for example only has about 17 AOC holders, while Austria has over a hundred. Why? Odd that a small country has such a booming aviation industry while a great country like France does not. It's probably because the numbers are reversed. Austria probably has only about 17 SAFA inspectors running around on ramps hassling pilots, while France has probably hundreds. Some countries (Like France and Russia) simply prefer to employ bureaucrats with clip boards than productive workers, while some other countries prefer to obfuscate the process with antiquated labor protection laws. Both are merely job protection schemes and both are equally as absurd.
Regardless, when it comes to international operations, be it oil tankers or airplanes, or accountants, the standards ought to be the same worldwide, and in fact largely are (in spite of delusions held by people like Koi). Sadly as always, safety takes a back seat to politics and the rest of us cogs in the machine end up suffering.
As far as the famous EU bureaucracy, it is indeed something that stifles innovation, industry and productivity as much as American protectionism does. Sadly, on both sides of the Atlantic, there are people who want to ruin whole industries because of the narrow goal of personal gain regardless of the cost to the infrastructure as a whole. These people, whether they be EU bureaucrats or US Trade Union protectionists are no better than rogue traders who try to bankrupt whole nations in order to profit from the spoils. And as someone already pointed out, someone will indeed profit from the spoils.
But there is a bureaucracy even worse: Russia. While EU overregulation merely stifles and handicaps aviation in Europe, Russian bureaucracy is completely killing their aviation industry and Europe ought to have a hard look at what over regulation and absurd policies are doing to that country's aviation infrastructure. Two weeks to clear a part out of customs for an AOG airplane? No wonder the aircraft repair industry is non existent there. And the aircraft registry looks equally as bleak. There has to be a reason and it is bureaucracy. Europe ought to take a long hard look at that poor role model and reconsider it's misguided effort at trying to emulate it. Look at the ramp at Moscow Vnukovo, and notice that all the shiny Gulfstreams and Legacys and Global Expresses are not Russian registered, they are European, VP or US registered for the most part. And when it comes to EU registry, it is self evident that the owners and operators also look to EU countries that if not outright facilitate aviation, at least do not do their best to hinder it. That's why half of those planes in Vnukovo are registered in Austria for example. Because Austro-Control is fairly progressive as far as aviation is concerned. France for example only has about 17 AOC holders, while Austria has over a hundred. Why? Odd that a small country has such a booming aviation industry while a great country like France does not. It's probably because the numbers are reversed. Austria probably has only about 17 SAFA inspectors running around on ramps hassling pilots, while France has probably hundreds. Some countries (Like France and Russia) simply prefer to employ bureaucrats with clip boards than productive workers, while some other countries prefer to obfuscate the process with antiquated labor protection laws. Both are merely job protection schemes and both are equally as absurd.
Regardless, when it comes to international operations, be it oil tankers or airplanes, or accountants, the standards ought to be the same worldwide, and in fact largely are (in spite of delusions held by people like Koi). Sadly as always, safety takes a back seat to politics and the rest of us cogs in the machine end up suffering.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411A, what do you mean? Of course it only applies to foreigners, isnt that the point? And what do you mean, get out if I don't like it?
I am a US citizen now but I have alien students and would like to keep up to date, so please inform me what has changed in the TSA requirements. It might be important...
I am a US citizen now but I have alien students and would like to keep up to date, so please inform me what has changed in the TSA requirements. It might be important...
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am a US citizen now but I have alien students and would like to keep up to date, so please inform me what has changed in the TSA requirements. It might be important...
Let's say you desire to send new pilots to Delta, for simulator training.
It could even be on the L1011...
Anyway, Delta does the entire process, from obtaining TSA clearance to visas...everything.
Occasionally, there will be a snag with visas, but this is quite rare.
All you have to do (as the originating company) is....pay the bills.
A streamlined process, in effect....now.
I expect Flight Safety has a similar process for their corporate clients.
Also, where I park my private airplane in Arizona, CAE has at least fifty training aircraft, and they do nothing else but train foreign pilots, day in and day out.
Do they have problems with TSA or visas?
The answer seems to be...NO.
Chinese, Indians, a few Jordanians, Europeans...they have 'em all.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: france
Age: 62
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devine news.....
Devine news really? 
Allow me to remind everyone of the result of the first protectionism measure implemented by France in 1983 when the civil authorities put a ban on US licenses validation based, for the first time in civil aviation, on the place of residence of the pilot.
The result? Well you did not want the US system, the US system came to you! 93000 US licences with European adress. This is the number from the FAA 3 days ago. So Bravo.
In my humble opinion, Europe is making an enormous mistake. This does not simple concerns the "few" private pilot flying IFR in their "N"ovember. If Europe does not drastically review it's training programs from PPL to ATP, mark my words:
IN 25 years time, when the sky is fully open to competition and that an Indian airline can offer London to Nice and Paris to Roma with the aircraft going to rest to Malta will you still applaud then? And guess where the pilots will have taken their training? and where will the aircraft they fly will have been built?
I'm thinking of my children and grand children and Europe should realize that the time of the overpowering colonies has ended. The only way, in my views is harmonization.
Fly safe, be happy.
Olivier
Allow me to remind everyone of the result of the first protectionism measure implemented by France in 1983 when the civil authorities put a ban on US licenses validation based, for the first time in civil aviation, on the place of residence of the pilot.
The result? Well you did not want the US system, the US system came to you! 93000 US licences with European adress. This is the number from the FAA 3 days ago. So Bravo.
In my humble opinion, Europe is making an enormous mistake. This does not simple concerns the "few" private pilot flying IFR in their "N"ovember. If Europe does not drastically review it's training programs from PPL to ATP, mark my words:
IN 25 years time, when the sky is fully open to competition and that an Indian airline can offer London to Nice and Paris to Roma with the aircraft going to rest to Malta will you still applaud then? And guess where the pilots will have taken their training? and where will the aircraft they fly will have been built?
I'm thinking of my children and grand children and Europe should realize that the time of the overpowering colonies has ended. The only way, in my views is harmonization.
Fly safe, be happy.
Olivier
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411A OK, but I am not at your lofty level any longer. I work in flight training and general aviation now. It is definitely a problem there.
And having a legion of facilitators to manage the bureaucracy does not take away the fact that it exists.
The problem is reciprocity. ICAO is meant to make this possible and in most parts of the world it works well. Not so in the US.
If every contracting state followed the ICAO rules we would not be having this discussion.
And having a legion of facilitators to manage the bureaucracy does not take away the fact that it exists.
The problem is reciprocity. ICAO is meant to make this possible and in most parts of the world it works well. Not so in the US.
If every contracting state followed the ICAO rules we would not be having this discussion.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boofhead
It is true that the USA has made many exceptions to ICAO (some without filing a difference, too) but the real bottom line is that the USA is very welcoming of foreign pilots:
- The FAA accepts foreign training towards all US qualifications. No European country (AFAIK) does this - except in the narrow context of the 100hr ICAO PPL to JAA PPL conversion route, and 1 or 2 other bits
- The FAA accepts training in any aircraft reg. Europe bans any foreign-reg training or checkrides, except the UK which allows it with DfT permission (not viable for ab initio PPL anyway, but OK for say the JAA IR)
- For noncommercial stuff, the FAA hands out piggyback (61.75) PPLs to anybody with an ICAO PPL, and hands out an IR to anybody who can pass the foreign pilot exam. No other country in the world makes it so easy.
- You can do a checkride for any US license/rating anywhere in the world - if you can get a DPE to come out to you (and if his conditions are not too onerous; another subject
). No other country allows this.
Most US deviations from ICAO are in the "easy" direction e.g. penetration of Class D requires only a 2-way radio contact; no clearance is required.
I have trained in both the UK and USA.
The TSA+Visa is indeed a hassle but not a major one in the wider picture - if you get a decent checklist from somebody who has done it before. There are lots of gotchas e.g. TSA allows you perfectly easily to register a Part 61 school, but only a Part 141 school can be in SEVIS and can issue the I-20 which you need to get the Visa I reckon it is 2 days' work in total.
Yeah but think of all those poor useless good for nothing people in the various CAAs and FTOs who would lose their jobs This is all about job protection. But the place where I see the least amount of job protection (at least the crude overt totally shameless in your face kind which is seen all over Europe) is ........ the USA.
This EASA proposal is going to create absolute havoc, especially among the older and highly experienced CPL/IRs who fly private and corporate jets and turboprops, who will be looking at 14 exams, packed with total crap which is irrelevant to real flying.
It is true that the USA has made many exceptions to ICAO (some without filing a difference, too) but the real bottom line is that the USA is very welcoming of foreign pilots:
- The FAA accepts foreign training towards all US qualifications. No European country (AFAIK) does this - except in the narrow context of the 100hr ICAO PPL to JAA PPL conversion route, and 1 or 2 other bits
- The FAA accepts training in any aircraft reg. Europe bans any foreign-reg training or checkrides, except the UK which allows it with DfT permission (not viable for ab initio PPL anyway, but OK for say the JAA IR)
- For noncommercial stuff, the FAA hands out piggyback (61.75) PPLs to anybody with an ICAO PPL, and hands out an IR to anybody who can pass the foreign pilot exam. No other country in the world makes it so easy.
- You can do a checkride for any US license/rating anywhere in the world - if you can get a DPE to come out to you (and if his conditions are not too onerous; another subject
). No other country allows this.Most US deviations from ICAO are in the "easy" direction e.g. penetration of Class D requires only a 2-way radio contact; no clearance is required.
I have trained in both the UK and USA.
The TSA+Visa is indeed a hassle but not a major one in the wider picture - if you get a decent checklist from somebody who has done it before. There are lots of gotchas e.g. TSA allows you perfectly easily to register a Part 61 school, but only a Part 141 school can be in SEVIS and can issue the I-20 which you need to get the Visa
I reckon it is 2 days' work in total.
If every contracting state followed the ICAO rules we would not be having this discussion.
This is all about job protection. But the place where I see the least amount of job protection (at least the crude overt totally shameless in your face kind which is seen all over Europe) is ........ the USA.This EASA proposal is going to create absolute havoc, especially among the older and highly experienced CPL/IRs who fly private and corporate jets and turboprops, who will be looking at 14 exams, packed with total crap which is irrelevant to real flying.
Last edited by IO540; 10th Oct 2010 at 17:52.