Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

EU Pilot certification rules

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

EU Pilot certification rules

Old 6th Oct 2010, 20:06
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EU Pilot certification rules

I find this really funny. The US has always had these requirements, and has never met it's ICAO responsibilities for licencing. They will not recognise any foreign licence or rating and require a full ground and flight course for everyone, no matter what licences and ratings he/she might have on a foreign licence. The most you will get is recognition of experience (flight time, instructor time etc). Now they bleat because Europe is proposing to do the same to them? Gimme a break!

EU poised to vote on pilot certification
Pressure mounts to ‘park’ the issue
By Dan Namowitz

With the European Union Commission nearing a vote on adopting EU-wide pilot certification rules, AOPA is warning that the package—which does not include acceptance of third-country pilot credentials—would erect trade barriers with consequences felt in the U.S. flight training and manufacturing sectors.


The EU Commission is set to vote following a hearing scheduled Oct. 13 through 14 on a package of flight crew licensing rules put forth by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). In 2008, EASA undertook certification revisions that would supersede member nations’ procedures for the conversion of U.S. pilot certificates.

If passed into law, the proposal would adversely affect U.S. flight schools that train foreign pilots, as well as pilots coming to the United States for training. Pilots who complete their flight training in the United States would be required to repeat most of the exact same training upon returning to an EU state, and it would render the FAA instrument rating useless in Europe. U.S. aircraft manufactures and flight training schools will suffer from a downturn in business from Europe as it is unlikely anyone would invest getting a U.S. aircraft or license which lasts for one or two years, said Craig Spence, AOPA vice president of operations and international affairs.

Pilots holding certificates of nonmember countries would be required to take EASA’s Air Law and Human Performance exams, hold a Class 2 medical certificate, demonstrate language proficiency, fulfill the requirements for issuance of a type or class rating relevant to the privileges the pilot holds, have at least 100 hours of pilot-in-command time in the relevant aircraft, and pass private pilot skill tests.

AOPA stated its concerns about the proposal to EASA’s Cologne, Germany-based rulemaking directorate in written comments in February 2009. The association pointed out that the changes would negate the value of flight training in non-EASA countries, including the U.S.

“Flight training in the U.S. is done because most EASA countries do not have the extensive infrastructure to provide the flight training to would-be pilots. Currently, people seeking a pilot’s license can complete their training in the U.S. and return to an EASA country and easily exchange their U.S. certificate for an EASA license. The proposed changes would eliminate that option,” AOPA wrote on Feb. 27, 2009.

The International Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (IAOPA) is expressing alarm at the impact facing pilots and aircraft manufacturers. “To fly an aircraft in Europe, no matter what the country of register, would require an EASA licence, and if applicable an EASA instrument rating, if you were domiciled in Europe. A stop-gap validation on a non-European licence would be available from national aviation authorities, valid for one year,” it explained to members in a special message. IAOPA Senior Vice President Martin Robinson said that late efforts were being made to persuade the EU to “park” the issue until the impact could be re-examined. He described the EASA proposals as “a smokescreen for political chauvinism.”

“The safety benefit will be zero,” he said.
boofhead is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 20:33
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: in a hotel
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ill thought out start to your posting

Yes Boofhead, you may laugh but I suggest you check out the Bizjet forum on here. Potentially thousands of Pilots both US and European Citizens resident in the EU, flying N reg on FAA licences may lose their jobs if this becomes law.

That doesn't take into account the many thousands of other personnel that would lose their jobs working for the companies that manage these Aircraft.

Think before you type
Thomascl605 is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 20:59
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They will not recognise any foreign licence or rating and require a full ground and flight course for everyone, no matter what licences and ratings he/she might have on a foreign licence.
Incorrect. The FAA hands out "based on" PPLs and IRs readily. The PPL is a 61.75 one and the IR is a foreign pilot exam.

Europe could do the same but they choose to run various restrictive practices instead.
IO540 is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 21:17
  #4 (permalink)  
koi
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EU Pilot certification rules

This is simply devine news.

I can scarse conceal my schadenfreude.

If this EASA vote confirms the adoption of EU Pilot certification rules, it will go a long way in redressing the huge imbalence existing between Europe and the US. Have a look at the number of USA operations that have hitherto been allowed to exist in Europe to the disadvantage of our own pilots, Fedex UPS etc. They operate on ATP licences far far inferior to EASA and have a great deal of trouble in the radio communications department as any European crewmember can hear !! Give me strength.

I suggest we shove them all home to their land of oil and sugar [witness the girths of their women and engines] with a copy of the regulations, a guide to radio communication and our very best wishes in re entering their US job market.
Woof woof
Koi
koi is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 21:35
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: in a hotel
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Do you need a Doctor ?

What huge imbalance, a couple of cargo companies ? What solid evidence do you have that an ATP is inferior to a European licence ? You have none.

Also, if an EASA licence is a ticket to the insanity that you appear to be showing in your posting, then I'll pass thanks !

By the way this is being written by an EU Citizen flying an 'N' reg Jet on FAA licences, so your insults of American Pilots are wasted on me.
Thomascl605 is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 21:43
  #6 (permalink)  
koi
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ahhh, touched a sore spot I see. FAA stands for Federal, not European.

The European training is vastly superior, ask any training school or TRE, the standard of american communication piss poor.


Let the debate begin.

K
koi is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 21:45
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Incorrect. The FAA hands out "based on" PPLs and IRs readily. The PPL is a 61.75 one and the IR is a foreign pilot exam.

Europe could do the same but they choose to run various restrictive practices instead.
True, but that is max a PPL with IR, in europe it is quite easy to get some very easy conversion of a US CPL into a JAA one, depending on country. And that is the main issue corrected here. True as well, they went slightly (but only slightly) overboard with the inclusion of the PPL into the regulation (though there seems to be a quite large time window to recertify), but as others i do see it as a tiny step on the way of evening the odds between the very much closed US job market and the very wide open european one.

I have to admit i do not really pity those companies that might have to move their aircraft and crews onto a european registry with that legislation, they flagged out in the first place to circumvent european regulation (and probably taxation).
Denti is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 22:07
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: in a hotel
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm sure that your American friends will like you for that comment. However, I fail to see your point as you are directing your comments at American Pilots, and many thousands of us flying on non EASA licences are not.
Yes, If I asked a JAA training school in Europe, they may say demeaning things about non EASA licences. Then again they are trying to relieve us of tens of thousands of pounds for the privilege of flying the same Aircraft, that we have flown safely for many years before.
Thomascl605 is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 22:10
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: world
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If this was to be approved, when would said changes come into effect?

To convert from an FAA certificate to a JAR is a huge expensive pain in the ass as it is. Making it anymore so is not at all practical, and has ZERO logic behind it, which is a trait also demonstrated by advocates of this movement here in this thread.

Thomascl605 has it right.
B767PL is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 22:13
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: in a hotel
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Then again Koi, there's a name for Pilots who flew 'down under' a few years ago like yourself. I guess you're not welcome there either. Let me guess, the Australian licence is now inferior too ??
Thomascl605 is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 22:18
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: in a hotel
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks B767PL, have a look at the Bizjet forum for more info http://www.pprune.org/biz-jets-ag-fl...pa-latest.html

Also AOPA IAOPA News on third-country licences

The vote is next week, this has been dropped on the Aviation world at the very last minute.
Thomascl605 is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 23:25
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Red face

This is simply devine news.

I can scarse conceal my schadenfreude.

If this EASA vote confirms the adoption of EU Pilot certification rules, it will go a long way in redressing the huge imbalence existing between Europe and the US. Have a look at the number of USA operations that have hitherto been allowed to exist in Europe to the disadvantage of our own pilots, Fedex UPS etc. They operate on ATP licences far far inferior to EASA and have a great deal of trouble in the radio communications department as any European crewmember can hear !! Give me strength.

I suggest we shove them all home to their land of oil and sugar [witness the girths of their women and engines] with a copy of the regulations, a guide to radio communication and our very best wishes in re entering their US job market.
Woof woof
Koi
Sounds like you haven't gotten lucky for a while, mate!

Who bl00dy cares if the R/T procedures are not as exact as in Euroland? Show me one example where non-procedural R/T has caused disaster in the US or Europe! I'd rather be worried about eroding hand-flying skills as I have seen in Europe than this @n@l retentive R/T crap! Whereas the requirements of obtaining a FAA ATP is easier than the JAR/EASA one, I'd feel as comfortable in an N-registered plane as a EU one. It's less academical, but requires more practical skills.

The European training is vastly superior, ask any training school or TRE, the standard of american communication piss poor.
Complete ignorance. In what respect is the training superior? What defines American R/T procedures being "piss poor"? Care to examine your spelling issues? Ever flown into ORD? The first thing that comes to mind with EU training is the quick-ish disappearance of money from your account with rather little flight time and experience.

Got some inferiority complexes you want to share with us today?

I have to admit i do not really pity those companies that might have to move their aircraft and crews onto a european registry with that legislation, they flagged out in the first place to circumvent european regulation (and probably taxation).
I guess you'd see a mass movement from N-registered planes to M-registered ones...

Last edited by Squawk7777; 6th Oct 2010 at 23:40.
Squawk7777 is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2010, 23:51
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Republic of Tejas
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Koi,

Are you familiar with the term "Reciprocity"?

bs
Bluestar51 is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2010, 00:27
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: A Marriott somewhere
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Koi.

I am a European holder of both the FAA and JAA ATP. The FAA test was a practical test, the JAA was purely theoretical.

I have had European copilots who told me they would not fly a visual approach. When I asked why the answer was "I have never done one". Yup, you are right. That is superior training.

I have heard a European crew so stressed out going in to Moscow on a windy day with only the NDB approach available telling the controller to "Shut up" when he told the in plain English that they were correcting the wrong way. After they went missed we landed (with two US pilots) before the European made another approach and went missed again. (It was well above minimums, just 30 knots of crosswind during the IMC portion of the flight).

So I guess I should yell at the controllers and be a ****ty instrument pilot to meet your high standards???
DA50driver is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2010, 00:30
  #15 (permalink)  
742
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the standard of american communication piss poor.
Koi -

Minor point, but the "standard of communication" always favors the home team. Or to put it in terms that you might understand, the Europeans are the ones whose communication is "piss poor" at places like ORD, JFK and SFO.

Nothing personal, it is just the nature of life. You will realized this when you grow up.
742 is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2010, 02:48
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: WPDL
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FAA-JAA conversion in Germany

I just read this link and don't understand the problem. I'm in the process of converting my PPL to fly in Germany (where I am a resident) and the current process is exactly that outlined in the press release--exams in human factors and air law, demonstrate that you can actually fly, medical, an additional R/T endorsement (easy). The LFA offers all exams in English, and I found the two theoretical components great additions to what I learned in the US.

I suspect that I'm missing something, but what's going to change? (All from the PPL side, mind you, not CPL/ATP).

Many of my German colleagues have done flight school in the US because it is a lot more fun, cheaper, and faster, and essentially just transfer their hours into the JAA system. It still works out to be a major cost and time advantage.
indaloamman is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2010, 03:48
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Papua New Guinea
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The problem is that N registered aircraft living in Europe will need to be registered in Europe (and therefore will need to be flown by JAA licensed pilots).
...still single is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2010, 07:09
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The problem is that N registered aircraft living in Europe will need to be registered in Europe (and therefore will need to be flown by JAA licensed pilots).
And, for Boofheads information, the US doesn't have a problem with its residents flying foreign-registered aircraft using pilot licenses issued by the country the aircraft is registered in.
KKoran is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2010, 08:45
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: in a hotel
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The difference for an FAA CPL/ATP Indaloman is that EASA through their actions are trying to relieve us of tens of thousands of pounds, just to fly the same non EU registered aircraft that we have flown safely and legally for many years before.
Not to mention the time element and that for nearly all of us it would mean the loss of our jobs, as we couldn’t take the time off to pass their lengthy and pointless conversion process.
Thomascl605 is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2010, 09:05
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Koi

The European training is vastly superior, ask any training school or TRE, the standard of american communication piss poor.
EASA went to vast expense to find a safety arguement and could not find one! infact they all turned pink when the latest A/S showed FAA PART 135 to be safer than our own overregulated and controlled AOC ops.
Burocracy, quangos, pen pushers dont equal safety.
Even more pink turning was the discovery that FAA private jets also had a better safety record than AOC ops

This whole thing is ridiculous EASA should look at why FAA is so prevalent in Europe and make our system so attractive that so many would flock to EASA instead all they do is load our industry with more and more burocracy and expensive regulations to justify their own artificially created jobs.
Pace is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.