Jujupilote wrote:
From all the training i watched on youtube, and many flight school websites, the IR is always done before and described as a prerequisite for the CPL.
It is usually done before but it is no prerequisite for the commercial. I would even say the other way round would be better, as the commercial teaches you much better airplane control. I write this as I’m about to drive to the airport – for by commercial checkride !
Jujupilote wrote:
From all the training i watched on youtube, and many flight school websites, the IR is always done before and described as a prerequisite for the CPL.A exemple here : https://www.learntoflysmart.com/
That’s interesting. I’d guess the reasons that schools like to do it that way are that (1) the additional hours required prior to the Commercial have to be used for something – might as well be getting an IR unless you fly (e.g. own) an non-IFR plane, and (2) New flight Instructors today need an IR, and flight instruction is what a school tends to see as the purpose of a Commercial Certificate. However, there are actually a lot of other paid flying possibilities and I think the Commercial Certificate was probably a prerequisite for paid flying before the IR even existed… so the FAA structure is Private to Commercial to ATP certificates, with the IR added before the ATP.
Peter wrote:
An FAA ATP is a CPL/IR with one more written exam (each FAA license or rating has just one written exam), more hours requirements (1500hrs with 100hrs night) and a very tight checkride. This is different from the Euro ATPL which is “given” to a CPL/IR after logging 500hrs in a multi pilot cockpit.
It also now requires the CTP course if you want the ME ATP which is really the only one with any purpose.
This is different from the Euro ATPL which is “given” to a CPL/IR after logging 500hrs in a multi pilot cockpit.
Isn’t it 1500 hours tt for the atpl? And it requires a practical exam like anything else (skill test), I think, even (30% chance) by a SEN (highest category examiner). And you need to get your airline to do that (eg you are upgrading to the left seat). I flew 7 years and a lot more than 1500hrs before I got my ATPL.
Many airlines don’t want to facilitate the atpl skill test and so many end up flying a long time on the CPL/IR before getting their ATPL.
More here on the ATP.
Yes you need 1500hrs TT for the EASA ATPL too, plus a checkride (some form of LPC?)
However I am not sure of the relevance to this accident.
I read somewhere that apart from mechanical failures (like the tail rotor failure on the fairly recent high profile UK football team owner crash) most helicopter crashes involve pressing into bad weather. “Pressing” being the operative word because – on reasonable ground – a heli can always land. I am not sure if there are any exceptions.
Not relevant but you brought it up ;)
Silvaire wrote:
so the FAA structure is Private to Commercial to ATP certificates, with the IR added before the ATP.
No, it is usually for those on a track, PPL, IR, CPL.
FAA structure, not typical student practice.
The FAA structure for pilot certificates does not include ratings, so in complete detail the progression is Student to Private (which requires a Student) to Commercial (which requires a Private) to ATP (which requires a Commercial). The ATP also requires an IR, which is a rating applied to a pilot certificate, not an FAA pilot certificate in itself.
My question above was whether other worldwide (e.g. EASA) practice for pilot licencing requires an IR at a lower level than ATP, or somehow combines it with the pilot licence, which might lead to the misconception that an IR is required for an FAA Commercial Pilot certificate, which it is not. Many FAA certificated Commercial pilots do not have an IR.
Yes but I am talking about the usual progression of private pilots.
Peter wrote:
I read somewhere that apart from mechanical failures (like the tail rotor failure on the fairly recent high profile UK football team owner crash) most helicopter crashes involve pressing into bad weather. “Pressing” being the operative word because – on reasonable ground – a heli can always land.
Yes, it certainly appears to me and probably everybody else that this flight pushed on until being forced to enter (climb into?) cloud, with subsequent loss of control. Its really not that far to drive from Van Nuys airport to Thousand Oaks, 30 miles on the 101 freeway versus 10 miles from Camarillo, so why not land and drive? Its not like there is a shortage of limos at VNY and it was Sunday morning.
(It so happens that I had a 225 mile fixed wing VFR flight planned that morning routing through basically the same system of fog. I waited on the ground and cancelled at noon, by which time the helicopter had unbeknownst to me already crashed)
