tmo wrote:
There never is a physical piece of paper issued by the relevant authority.
Not so. I am looking at my paper FCC issued radio license as I write this.
Thank you @qalupalik
@172driver – yes, I should have written something more along the lines of “there doesn’t have to be a physical piece of paper issued by the relevant authority” – I also have a paper FCC-issued Radio Station Authorization, the difference is that I printed mine out myself from a PDF the trust got from the FCC. My piece of paper even has a grayish “Official Copy” printed diagonally across the A4 format page, while yours is likely letter.
@Qalupalik – apologies, I mixed up several documents in my post:
– the “three year” is the actual FAA plane registration, and it was sent to me as a physical piece of paper, via the trust, so there is a “one and only” original, no doubt;
– the temporary airplane registration (valid for a month) was digital, and I understand this is how the trust got it;
– the radio station license, valid for 10 years, was a PDF (see above) but it doesn’t need to be “original” so it is irrelevant;
– regarding the restricted radiotelephone operator (RR) license, the FCC didn’t necessarily stop issuing paper versions, but they allow the user of their online system to set a preference to receive the documents in either paper or electronic format; I chose the electronic format, paid the $70 or so, printed out the PDF they provided (it even has a “cut here” for a “wallet-sized” version that the FCC suggests I laminate, because laser printouts can deteriorate), signed it, thought I was done; the only thing I did not do is “cut along this”, just chucked the whole A4 page in my flight bag, didn’t even fold it – I figured I have to give the ramp checkers something to find ;)
Since both the Radio Station Authorization and the Restricted Radiotelephone Operator License are issued by the FCC via the same online system I understand they both can exist as either physical dead trees or digital PDF files. Since the FCC provides the PDF, in lieu of a physical paper version, via their online system, I understand it meets all the requirements. It definitely does NOT have any disclaimers about not being an official FCC license.
I very much appreciate you taking the time to provide references if I wanted to pressure the FCC to provide paper copies. Hopefully I will never need to.
My point was that since they can get delivered as a PDF file, there is no way to tell if the printed version I present at a ramp check is indeed truly an “original” or a second copy I printed out. Which is moot anyway, because the only originals that are needed are the airplane certificate of registration (which the trust sent) and airplane certificate of airworthiness (which never leaves the airplane), the radio license doesn’t have that requirement. I should have read the whole list more carefully before posting, making a fool of myself, and wasting your time.
tmo, thanks for clarifying the existence of digital versions marked original copy. Mine came by post many years ago and the only digital version I could find was emblazoned with reference copy and the above health warning. The digital original copy when printed and signed ought to satisfy article 37 or 39 of the ITU Radio Regulations.
tmo wrote:
the only originals that are needed are the airplane certificate of registration (which the trust sent) and airplane certificate of airworthiness (which never leaves the airplane), the radio license doesn’t have that requirement.
The Chicago Convention qualifies none of the documents to be carried as having to be the original. Article 29, in spite of NCO.GEN.135, applies to all internationally operated civil aircraft. The Basic Regulation at article 59 requires third-country aircraft to perform according to Annex V (essential requirements for air operations), effected by Part-NCO among others, only when there is no applicable ICAO standard. Contracting states are not licensed by the lack of an ICAO SARP to dilute the treaty. Applicable terms are instead made in the ITU Radio Regulations. If third-country pilots can expect a shake down by Stakhanovites over logbooks then prudence suggests avoiding a relaxation of article 29. The RRs contemplate both the radiotelephone operator certificate and the aircraft station licence as being available for inspection although the first para in article 39 on the latter is inconclusive:
No. 39.1. The inspectors of governments or appropriate administrations of countries
who visit an aircraft station or aircraft earth station may require the production of the licence for
examination. The operator of the station, or the person responsible for the station, shall facilitate this
examination. The licence shall be kept in such a way that it can be produced upon request.
Under the US regulations the individual station licence, should FCC have issued one, must be kept on-board or with the certificate of aircraft registration which in practice amounts to the same iaw 14 CFR 91.203 or article 29. The exclusion from para (b) of the words “or a photocopy” as presented in para (a) make clear that the original is required, notwithstanding temporary authorizations eg assignments or transfers or new applications.
47 CFR §87.103 Posting station license.
(a) Stations at fixed locations. The license or a photocopy must be posted or retained in the station’s permanent records.
(b) Aircraft radio stations. The license must be either posted in the aircraft or kept with the aircraft registration certificate. If a single authorization covers a fleet of aircraft, a copy of the license must be either posted in each aircraft or kept with each aircraft registration certificate.
(c) Aeronautical mobile stations. The license must be retained as a permanent part of the station records.
For my money I’d say the FCC documents marked original copy accessible on a mobile device should be perfectly satisfactory in private operations in Europe.
tmo wrote:
@172driver – yes, I should have written something more along the lines of “there doesn’t have to be a physical piece of paper issued by the relevant authority” – I also have a paper FCC-issued Radio Station Authorization, the difference is that I printed mine out myself from a PDF the trust got from the FCC. My piece of paper even has a grayish “Official Copy” printed diagonally across the A4 format page, while yours is likely letter.
Same for me. My trust forwarded to me the pdf that they received from the FCC, dated in April 2016 and valid for 10 years. In their email, the trust also mentioned that the FCC no longer sends out hardcopy RSL’s rather they are downloaded from the FCC website.
Snoopy wrote:
How do you interpret the EASA AMC wording „original“ (number 2 & 3)? Is it the „one and only“ initial original document, no copy allowed? Or could it be a copy of the initial document?2) the original certificate of registration;
3) the original certificate of airworthiness (CofA);
Original means the “one and only”. However, at least one EASA country sends you a PDF by email. So “copy” print-out is the best you can do :)
One week ago I flew from Florida to Europe and received ramp check in Germany and I was shocked by actions of inspectors. It was 2 hours before my flight when I came to my airplane from the hotel.
They started to check documents, license, airplane and others. Everything was good untill they represented me a protocol with two claims:
1. Not properly fixed baggage in the airplane
It was 2 hours before the planned flight, so I have just come from the hotel and was in the process of putting my bags into the airplane. So I do not agree with this claim, because I was in the process of preparation to that flight and fixing my staff in the airplane
2. No EASA English
I have CPL, IR and CFI from FAA (USA). So I do not agree with this requirement according to N registered airplane and US pilot. CPL, CFI exams include English profficiency check and it is not clear why US pilot should take English exam in EU.
Could you give me advice how to react if I do not agree with the protocol?
Thank you in advance.
Sounds completely ridiculous. What do you mean by ‘protocol’? Did they fine you or prevent you from taking off? The EASA English bit is totally absurd – in a few months there will be no EASA member country with native English speakers!
First of all, „EASA English“, this term does not exist. Could you post copy of the protocol?
I assume it‘s a matter of ICAO language proficiency. This requirement exists, and it has nothing to do with citizenship or where the aircraft is located. It applies to you, too. Does your FAA license not state, under remarks, „English proficient“?
172driver wrote:
The EASA English bit is totally absurd – in a few months there will be no EASA member country with native English speakers!
Ireland?
