Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Anti N-reg provisions - EASA FCL and post-brexit UK FCL

Sorry – I made a typo. I meant to say

OTOH “everybody” except the CAA thinks that the FAA Class 3 (THREE) is equivalent to ICAO Class 2

The IAA (Irish Aviation Authority) too this view a number of years ago, and haven’t moved from it since. They too believe an FAA Class 2 medical is required, at least for flight in an EI registered aircraft.

The Irish CAA position on the FAA Class 3 has been under dispute AFAIK, with the FAA being definitely unhappy about it. I recall they imposed it for Irish citizens – basically N-regs based in Ireland. They cannot impose it on anybody else.

For EI-reg, the Irish CAA can demand whatever they like… that’s a different situation.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

In which respects does the FAA Class 3 medical fall below the ICAO Class 2 standards?

Glenswinton, SW Scotland, United Kingdom

In fact if you look in ICAO Annex 1 Pilot holding a PPL may hold a class 2 medical and Class 3 medical is for Air Traffic Controller. I think this is creating a confusion with the class 3 of Part 61 that should be viewed as corresponding to the Class 2 such as defined in Annex 1 of the Chicago Convention – ICAO. The US class 2 is not required by the FAA to exercise privileges of any licences if you are not hired and paid for. You need class 2 to be hired and paid as CPL and Class 1 for operation under Part 121 – See CFR 14 Part 61.23

Jay CFI
France

Well, somebody is leaning really hard on the CAA to drive this bizzare proposal forward no matter what.

This [ local copy ] has just come out. It details the Air Law etc knowledge requirements which examiners must check before they sign off the “European knowledge” bit.

Totally bizzare since European based N-reg pilots are the highest-currency and most experienced pilot group flying around Europe. There is also clearly no evidence that aviation procedures knowledge is lacking. Ironically, on this basis, the CAA would shut down the vast majority of the (mostly G-reg) burger run PPL scene…

They have even set up a new department to deal with this initiative, with its very own email address!

Sounds like they got some extra funding for that.

It has all the hallmarks of a private project somewhere up there… time to write to your MP, I would say.

No acceptance of previous Euro air law etc exam passes e.g. EASA PPL holders. This is maximum-harrassment stuff, specifically for pilots of American registered aircraft. Not hard to comply with, but what’s behind it?

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter:
In all this kerfuffle it is important to note that the Documents/Information Notices differentiate between ‘Non-FAA Third Country Licence Holders’ and ‘FAA Licence Holders’.
The requirements for the later are a lot simpler and easier to fulfill.

Rochester, UK, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

No acceptance of previous Euro air law etc exam passes e.g. EASA PPL holders

Peter…where does it say that?

If you have EASA licence you have already demonstrated Air Law and Human Factors etc more so if it is a EASA licence converted from the old UK CAA licence

I suppose if you have an EASA license then this whole thing is moot because (if you also have either the FAA Class 2 or any EASA medical) you meet the EASA FCL requirements for the “EU based operator” anyway.

My comment would apply to people who have in the past held an EASA or some other Euro national PPL but it is no longer valid. I think most European N-reg owners did in fact start off that way. All these people should be exempted from this theory test.

But it is no big deal, especially as there are reports of examiners signing that form on the basis of an Euro air law pass.

What bugs me is the aggressive pattern behind all this. I’d like to know what/who is driving it. Obviously, nobody who knows is talking, not even privately. I am sure it is not the CAA; they were reportedly given a week to implement this by the DfT.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I own a EASA LAPL (missed the German deadline to convert my ICAO-PPL (A)into a Part-FCL) and a stand-alone FAA private certificate. In order to start my EIR and FI training I will convert the US certificate to a Part-FCL. After checking with my local authority all I have to do is a practical skill test (no way around this) and send over copies of the last pages of my logbook. The examiner might ask some questions, but I seriously doubt it will be anywhere close to the oral exam before the US checkride.

EDFE, EDFZ, KMYF, Germany

A lot of this is a case of “who you know”. I know someone who revalidated his years-expired JAA IR, on the back of an FAA IR which was current on the basis of the rolling currency, and an owner of an ATO signed him off as “no training required” on sight of his logbook. He then did a flight with an examiner which was like a normal revalidation flight.

And why not? It makes perfect sense. If he can fly, he will pass the reval flight!

At the same time, the UK CAA refuses to accept the FAA IR rolling currency for the FAA IR to CB IR conversion. Like they are now refusing to accept FAA Class 3 medicals (a move which is almost certainly illegal for a dozen reasons, starting with way insufficient notice given to comply), you have to get an FAA IPC (a flight with an FAA CFII) for your FAA IR to be valid for this purpose. Pure gold plating…

Most people don’t write about this. They get it in the bag and move on

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

you have to get an FAA IPC (a flight with an FAA CFII) for your FAA IR to be valid for this purpose

@Peter, do you have a reference for the UK CAA’s IPC requirement? I’m in the process of choosing a “competent authority” for my FAA to EASA conversion, and leaning toward the UK CAA, but this is a factor that would cause me to reconsider.

EDAZ
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top