I’ve been toying with the idea of getting the FAA CFI/CFII ratings but apart from the fun of training with friends in the US, I’m not sure what use (if any) these would have in Europe/UK now that their authorities are asking based pilots to get local licences even to fly N-reg. Any thoughts?
With an EASA licence, you can’t legally fly N-Reg outside the country of issue of your EASA licence without having an FAA licence
Therefore N-Reg owners in Europe and uk still need to do flight reviews every 24 months with FAA instructor. Potentially also IPC, if they can’t maintain instrument proficiency under the 6/6 rule.
I have personally used FAA instructors in uk for Flight reviews and IPCa and also FAA logbook endorsements for high performance and complex aircraft.
Right. It has to be said though that as a consequence of these rules, the population of N-reg, aircraft has dropped noticeably over the last 6 years or so. At least in Germany, which hosted the most N-Regs in Europe. Britain must have been number 2, but I guess that more or less the same has happened there.
My understanding is that you can fly an N-reg airplane in UK airspace with just UK licence papers. There is at least one used as an ab initio instructional airplane at the local DTO.
All of us with FAA licenses require a FAA Biannual Flight Review even as in many cases, like myself, they hold dual papers.
In our group there are five members all who will need to do a BFR.
Likewise, two of them are keen to start training for an FAA IR, the bulk of which can be done in the U.K. ideally with a CFI.
All of us – at certain times – might need an IPC.
All good work for a person qualified to assist.
are asking based pilots to get local licences even to fly N-reg
Brussels (or the UK CAA in the UK) is demanding local papers for purely political reasons; not in any way related to the aircraft being flown, and indeed European papers have no value for an N-reg (unless you go for the 61.3 concession but that is also meaningless if you possess FAA papers).
It has to be said though that as a consequence of these rules, the population of N-reg, aircraft has dropped noticeably over the last 6 years or so. At least in Germany, which hosted the most N-Regs in Europe. Britain must have been number 2, but I guess that more or less the same has happened there.
Yes; that was the whole point of this “middle finger up to the USA” move.
My understanding is that you can fly an N-reg airplane in UK airspace with just UK licence papers. There is at least one used as an ab initio instructional airplane at the local DTO.
You can, using 61.3, but since you can’t even pop over to Le Touquet, it isn’t very useful 
Likewise, two of them are keen to start training for an FAA IR, the bulk of which can be done in the U.K. ideally with a CFI.
That needs an FAA CFII which is a lot more work than the CFI. The DPE who did my IR checkride, the late John Walkup, said the CFII is harder than the ATP.
All of us – at certain times – might need an IPC
Only, IMHO, if you lost your medical for many months. The UK CAA is planning, IIRC, to allow the use of the IMCR with the PMD, so even this possibility is taken care off, unless you are too ill to not even drive a car.
I know a lot of FAA IR holders lose their 6/6 IR currency (and thus need the IPC) but IMHO that is because they don’t fly very much 
I find that maintaining the 6/6 currency is really easy. But obviously if you live in the farm strip scene then you can’t…
Likewise, two of them are keen to start training for an FAA IR
@Peter_G don’t you need to be a CFII to log instrument training and conduct an IPC?
PG “All of us – at certain times – might need an IPC”
PH “Only, IMHO, if you lost your medical for many months”
Instrument currency may be maintained in an FSTD, or in flight with a safety pilot who acts as PIC. In neither case is a valid medical certificate necessary.
RL “don’t you need to be a CFII to log instrument training and conduct an IPC?”
Instrument training received outside the US from a non-US instrument instructor may be counted in full towards the instrument experience required for a US IR iaw 14 CFR 61.41, though Part 141 courses have credit limitations (14 CFR 141.77(c)(3)). The IPC must be conducted by a CFII, US examiner, or other person listed in 14 CFR 61.57(d)(3).
Also the last 3 hrs within 60 days (?) of the checkride must be with a CFI (if PPL or CPL) or with a CFII (if IR).
So you have to find one of the above for those 3hrs, even if you did all your other PPL or IR training with European FIs. I did this in 2008. There was an FAA CFI working for the long-gone Cabair and I knocked off the 3hrs with him, for the FAA CPL (done with a visiting DPE – another door long ago closed).
In practice, doing the checkride in the US, you will do those 3 hrs over there. Nobody will sign you off as ready for a checkride unless they flew with you…
So, in summary, being an FAA CFI is handy for the BFR business, and being an FAA CFII is handy for the IPC business. I would think the former is 10x bigger than the latter.
Qalupalik wrote:
Instrument currency may be maintained in an FSTD, or in flight with a safety pilot who acts as PIC. In neither case is a valid medical certificate necessary.
A safety pilot does not need to act as PIC, but because they are a required crew member, the safety pilot must have a current medical. For example, a newly minted private pilot who has only flown a C172 and doesn’t have a complex or high performance endorsement and is not current for carrying passengers, may act as a safety pilot in a TBM900. They don’t need to be IFR rated. The only requirement for a safety pilot is that they are rated in the category and class, so to be a safety pilot in a TBM900, they would need to be rated in airplane, single engine, land. If a safety pilot is qualified to be PIC and is acting as PIC, they may log the time as PIC.
