JasonC,
Does an Australian Ir rating actually expire (as in is no longer a validate rating and must be replaced with a newly issued rating - like a JAA 5 year licence) or is it just that it is not valid without an annual formal check ride?
Also, having re-read 61.75, I can't actually find any statement about the continuing validity of the foreign licence. All of the paragraphs are about what must be true on the day the US licence is issued, with the exception of g (which requires the foreign licence to be physically with you when flying on the 61.75 licence).
Point e seems to explicitly, determine that only US law applies to the issued 61.75 - so if your Australian IR says ILS approach only, then this is a permanent restriction on your 61.75 licence, but FAA only rather than CAA+FAA currency requirements apply to keeping the licence valid and current. As a note the ILSs only restriction can only be removed by having the Aus. licence changed and the 61.75 reissued based on the new licence (from the FAA example on having night flight restriction removed)
Why do you draw the conclusion your Australian IR needs to be current for a 61.75 PPL IR issued on paragraph b? IANAL but understand the 61.75 is valid or not in an N-reg in the US based solely on FAA currency and a requirement the underlying licence has not expired, been renumbered, suspended or revoked.
I agree somewhat. If the IR is expired on the Australian licence due to a lack of an annual IR check ride, I don't think it is valid on the FAA. But Australian currency rules probably don't matter to the FAA. For example, they don't care about a BFR not having taken place on the local licence so long as the licence itself remains valid and their own BFR has occured.
In other words, whether you could exercise the privileges in Australia are not their concern, just that it remains valid.
ANTEK,
Why do you draw the conclusion your Australian IR needs to be current for a 61.75 PPL IR issued on paragraph b? IANAL but understand the 61.75 is valid or not in an N-reg in the US based solely on FAA currency and a requirement the underlying licence has not expired, been renumbered, suspended or revoked.
Thus, you must have gained your instrument rating on your “61.75” FAA pilot certificate after passing the FAA’s “Instrument – Aircaft” knowledge test, followed by a practical flight test with an FAA examiner (as per (c) above).
Well, yes, of course. Which I think is a cleaner way to fly IR on a 61.75 if you are able to get it done.
Quoting from VOLUME 5 AIRMAN CERTIFICATION CHAPTER 2 TITLE 14 CFR PART 61 CERTIFICATION OF PILOTS AND FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS Section 14 Issue a Title 14 CFR Part 61 U.S. Pilot Certificate on the Basis of a Foreign Pilot License
….A person may be issued a § 61.75 private pilot certificate based on a foreign pilot license as follows: a) With no instrument privileges, for which neither a knowledge nor a practical test is required. b) With instrument privileges, provided the applicant has passed the Instrument Foreign Pilot knowledge test and the applicant’s foreign pilot license has the equivalent Instrument [Aircraft] rating. The applicant is required to pass the Instrument Foreign Pilot knowledge test versus the Instrument [Aircraft: Airplane, Helicopter, or Powered-lift, as appropriate] knowledge test because the Instrument Foreign Pilot knowledge test’s focus on 14 CFR part 91, subpart B that relates to instrument flight rules (IFR)/operational procedures tests the applicant’s knowledge on operating safely in the National Airspace System. c) With a standard instrument rating, provided the applicant has passed the Instrument[Aircraft: Airplane, Helicopter, or Powered lift, as appropriate] knowledge test and practical test. The U.S. pilot certificate will be issued with the notation “U.S. TEST PASSED”…
My “61.75” FAA certificate has been issued on the basis of my Australian (CASA) licence and my Australian instrument rating (as per (b) above). Thus, I am unable to fly under IMC using this FAA licence unless my Australian instrument rating (CID) is valid (to be renewed every 12 months) and I satisfy both Australian and American recency/currency requirements.
JasonC said: This is why I got US test passed on my 61.75 to avoid the interactions with the Australian IR regime. Too messy. The basic PPL is fine but beyond that I think it is easier to rely on a US IR.
Thus, you must have gained your instrument rating on your “61.75” FAA pilot certificate after passing the FAA’s “Instrument – Aircaft” knowledge test, followed by a practical flight test with an FAA examiner (as per (c) above).
Cheers, A
My view of these points is below:
While piloting N-registered aircraft in the US under the authority of my "piggy-back" FAA certificate, that includes "instrument airplane" privileges, ......
...... I am not authorised to conduct an ILS approach unless I had performed at least one such approach during the last 35 days (in flight under actual or simulated IMC, or in an approved flight simulator). This currency requirement is imposed by Australian regulations that, in this case, also restrict exercising instrument privileges of my "FAR 61.75" Pilot Certificate.
I think that for an N-registered aircraft, the FAA doesn't care about the Australian currency regime. All they care about is the normal FAA IA currency. Of course Australia could care (but probably not in an N-reg unless it was operated in Australia)
As in my first example, any restriction on the use of a particular approach procedure would also apply to me while flying under the authority of my "FAR 61.75" certificate (but not when flying under the authority of my other, "stand-alone" FAA Pilot Certificate that I could only use after obtaining a separate medical certification from an FAA-accredited medical examiner).
This is a problem as the specific approach approvals are on the face of your Australian licence (well they are on mine). If you are not approved for GPS approaches in Australia, I do not think you could do them under your 61.75.
This is why I got US test passed on my 61.75 to avoid the interactions with the Australian IR regime. Too messy. The basic PPL is fine but beyond that I think it is easier to rely on a US IR.
I am not familiar with professional pilot logging requirements, but "IFR time" would most easily be logged in daylight (safest) and, to make it unquestionable, on a formally filed IFR flight plan.
You don't need to touch IMC (cloud) to log IFR time.
MM_flynn, when I said it was loosing time flying night in the USA I meant that unfortunately, I won't be able to see the country by air, only dark. And IFR hours do count for finding a job, sometimes requirements ask for a number of IFR flight hours, but I've never seen a job offer asking to have XXX hours of night visual. That's why, if possible, I would prefer to do those night hours IFR instead of visual. But as I would have to pay them from my pocket, I would like, if possible, that those hours can serve me as to find a job.
Thank you everybody for your help, my doubts are no more. The conversation has become a little too tecnical for me, as I'm not an english speaker. So I read everything carefully but excuse me if I do not enter to participate in it.
The PIFR is like the IMCR only in that it is retricted to Australian airspace. However there is no distinction in terms of training standards or privileges...unlike the IMCR...(Although I am not denegrating the IMCr...I find it very useful! AQ
Many thanks for that post, NC-Yankee. I agree, of course. Now that I see this, I remember it well from years ago 
One issue we get here in Europe is that the foreign training dispensation in 61.41 (which is very clear on the acceptance by the FAA of all foreign training, done by non US rated instructors) often gets joined up with the "authorised instructor" bit, to achieve a "business enhancing" result that an "authorised instructor" is required for all training required for a particular FAA license or a rating.
