Ted wrote:
Are you eligible for an FAA ATP? If so I would the make the checkride for ATP and the TR.
Requires ATP-CTP course (1 week, 6k usd) and written ATM exam. Unless it’s a SF50 vision jet, then no ATP-CTP requirement, and ATS exam.
Ted wrote:
Most probably has an foreign IR, but hasn’t passed the FAA IR written required for the piggyback.
Bingo, correct!
Peter wrote:
For example most of them will not train anything in a customer aircraft, and this happens to be a huge problem for the adoption of the Euro IR, because an IR is almost worthless unless you own or part-own a decent plane.
At “jet rating level”, especially when sims aren’t “accessible” there is a good ecosystem for in-aircraft training. And no, the ATO’s do not own those planes. So if someone is lucky, owns an exotic jet and there is no sim available, there will be an ATO that happily puts the plane on the books.
It is an interesting situation, especially for initial rating entry. It is becoming increasingly difficult to justify in aircraft training and checking, authority stance is to do everything in a SIM (makes sense especially for abnormals). If there is a sim somewhere, it has to be used, no matter the distance or cost. Operators even have to prove to the authority that an existing sim is not accessible (e.g. no slots provided to street customers). Despite this, there’s no ZFTT for small jets I am aware of and thus the typerating for a single pilot jet has to be completed by touch and goes in the aircraft, after the sim skill test. An ATO might own a sim, but they don’t keep a jet parked somewhere for this. So there is an exception [(EU) 2018/1139 Art 71 Para 1] by which an AOC operator can perform the touch and goes to conclude the rating outside of an ATO. For someone with experience this doesn’t provide a lot of educational value. It also adds substantial costs to the rating.
For basic ratings e.g. IR it is true that ATOs prefer to use their internal aircraft, however there are now plenty good options of ATOs that will happily train with customer planes for CB IR and recenly B IR.
I agree about delayed/blocked adoption of Euro IR… though I believe the situation is also due to small market issues based on the ever lasting circle we have discussed here many times. Not a lot of GA, not a lot of owner flown touring planes, high costs, hostile airports etc..
Snoopy wrote:
You can.
Thank you Snoopy for the confirmation. 
Can someone explain to me the following.
I would like to fly an N-Reg aircraft in Europe.
I have EASA PPL, NQ, IR and complex rating.
I also have a FAA 61.75 piggyback.
My EASA PPL is Swedish.
If I understand it correctly:
I can fly an N-Reg in Sweden with my EASA PPL + IR.
I can’t fly an N-Reg outside Sweden with my EASA papers.
I can fly an N-Reg outside Sweden with my FAA 61.75 piggyback, but only VFR, since I need to do the FAA written test to get FAA IR.
Lets say that I want to fly an Turbo Mooney (Turbo and +200HP)
In FAA there is Turbo endorsement and HP endorsement?
In EASA there is only Turbo endorsement?
If I take the EASA Turbo endorsement, will that be recognized on my FAA 61.75?
Since EASA don’t have HP, is Turbo enough then?
Or I need both EASA Turbo + FAA Turbo and HP?
Do I need to keep both EASA PPL/IR valid and also FAA PPL with an BFR and the FAA IR current?
I can fly an N-Reg in Sweden with my EASA PPL + IR.
I can’t fly an N-Reg outside Sweden with my EASA papers.
I can fly an N-Reg outside Sweden with my FAA 61.75 piggyback, but only VFR, since I need to do the FAA written test to get FAA IR.
For #3 you need an “FAA IR”, however obtained. It can be a Foreign Pilot Exam FAA IR (which now needs a trip to the US) or it can be a real FAA IR (whose written exam needs a trip to the US, and so does the checkride, apparently).
The rest I don’t know but AFAIK where you need FAA papers you also need FAA endorsements. These can be done by an FAA CFI – typically after a BFR. The 61.3 concession does not cover endorsements.
@Darkfixer for your hypothetical Mooney you would need two endorsements:
- complex
- high power
Both are a sign off by a CFI and involve some ground and air training. IMHO they would need to be done by a FAA CFI.
And Turbo too, since it’s a turbo?
FAA parts is quite clear, if I had a stand alone certificate.
Now I have a EASA PPL and a FAA 61.75 piggyback.
But if I have those endorsements on my EASA part, are they also valid on the FAA part?
Or I need all endorsements both on EASA side and FAA side?
Do I need to keep both my EASA and FAA “alive” or is it just enough with EASA and then FAA automatically is valid?
I get different answers when I’m asking around.
Worst is that some are flight schools in USA that don’t have a clue.
My DPE when I got my Piggyback said, now you just need to do a flight review and then you are good to go. (On the PPL rating)
Sounds resonable, but when my friends was flying in USA this autumn they asked and got informed that long as their EASA was valid they didn’t need to have any flight review etc. They rented some Cessna and flow around 2 weeks.
Peter wrote:
For #3 you need an “FAA IR”, however obtained. It can be a Foreign Pilot Exam FAA IR (which now needs a trip to the US) or it can be a real FAA IR (whose written exam needs a trip to the US, and so does the checkride, apparently).
This FAA Advisory Circular may be of interest to @Darkfixer in defining the requirements for conversion of an EASA IR to a standalone FAA IR under the so-called BASA agreement. A friend is coming to the US tomorrow to finish up the process. He has taken and passed the written test specific to this procedure (which is a limited subset of the normal written IR exam) and as I understand it will be completing an IPC with an CFII, followed by a $150 paperwork certification meeting with a DPE but with no checkride required. He already has 10 hrs instrument time in the US and has a 3rd Class FAA medical. He’s doing the private certificate and IR at the same time, although you can private first and then IR later, and the information in the link explains the requirements for both.
This process is not applicable to UK, Swiss, Norwegian, Icelandic or Liechtensteiner pilots which I guess might lead to some confusion.
Darkfixer wrote:
And Turbo too, since it’s a turbo?FAA parts is quite clear, if I had a stand alone certificate.
Now I have a EASA PPL and a FAA 61.75 piggyback.But if I have those endorsements on my EASA part, are they also valid on the FAA part?
Or I need all endorsements both on EASA side and FAA side?Do I need to keep both my EASA and FAA “alive” or is it just enough with EASA and then FAA automatically is valid?
I get different answers when I’m asking around.
Worst is that some are flight schools in USA that don’t have a clue.My DPE when I got my Piggyback said, now you just need to do a flight review and then you are good to go. (On the PPL rating)
Sounds resonable, but when my friends was flying in USA this autumn they asked and got informed that long as their EASA was valid they didn’t need to have any flight review etc. They rented some Cessna and flow around 2 weeks.
There is no FAA endorsement requirement for turbocharged aircraft, there are only three that are generally of interest: Complex (meaning flaps AND variable pitch prop AND retractable gear), High Performance (200 HP and up), and Tailwheel if that’s of interest. There is also no FAA aerobatic endorsement nor FAA mountain endorsement nor others that may exist in Europe.
My understanding is that the only thing that matters to FAA for the 61.75 ‘based-on’ license is the validity of the foreign license itself, what is written on the foreign license itself, and subsequently what they write on the back of the FAA license. Once you have the ‘based-on’ FAA pilot certificate it is maintained like any other FAA pilot certificate except that the foreign license number referenced on the back of the credit card sized pilot certificate must be valid and unchanged. Otherwise FAA does not care about foreign law or the details and extra features of foreign pilot licensing regulation, and also FWIW I don’t think anybody in the US would care whether the foreign license lists particular ratings or not once they are on the FAA certificate.
Just like an FAA pilot certificate itself, FAA ratings and endorsements do not ‘expire’ so once you have them you have them forever. My understanding is that you do need to have a valid FAA flight review recorded in your logbook to use any FAA private certificate (with reference to the FAA regulation that describes the requirements) and you do need to be current by FAA regulations to use your FAA IR. This is no different whether its a stand alone pilot certificate or was issued based on a foreign pilots license.
I agree with many others that it would be worthwhile to get a stand alone FAA pilot certificate, ratings and endorsements via the BASA process, if you can. You then have all the FAA ratings and endorsements forever without linkage to a foreign license that may be complex to keep valid.
Darkfixer wrote:
And Turbo too, since it’s a turbo?
Nope, there isn’t a ‘turbo’ one in FAAland. As @Silvaire says, there are only three endorsements that are relevant to the typical SEP. The only additional one would be the high-altitude endorsement if you want to fly a pressurized airplane with a service ceiling of 25k ft or more.
