And of course we are all awaiting the BASA from the FAA,
A BASA was done a year or two ago. It contained little of concrete value but it has an annex which can have new stuff put into it in the future, without having to go through the extensive negotiation process all over again.
Some observers have said that this could lead to a straight mutual license acceptance. I don’t believe that at all because what’s in it for the FAA? They already trivially easily validate all ICAO licenses for private use (e.g. the 61.75 PPL and the Foreign Pilot IR exam route) and this is valid for an N-reg worldwide. In the current “security” climate, especially…
however if there are no large concessions for FAA to EASA conversion for high time corporate jet pilots already working in the EU then it will likely be worthless
Search here for “part 25” and you will find something, but it’s no use to a normal private pilot or a bizjet pilot in single crew aircraft. I wrote that up but have no more info.
I had a meeting with the soon-to-retire Director of Aviation at the IOM about a year ago. It was not encouraging. The talk was mostly in a bureaucratic language. He viewed Part 91 as basically worthless, saying it works in the USA but not here (nonsense, obviously). They don’t allow Part 91 anyway; it’s all full Part M. (IMHO the UK CAA, whose ICAO seat they are making use of for M-reg, screwed them into that). They validate ICAO pilot papers for a specific M-reg aircraft. So the main real use of M-reg is the financial side of the package. It does mean the pilot can avoid the 14 ATPL exams but in return has to submit the plane to full Part M which could be the usual can of worms, though probably less so on a jet on some official maintenance programme (which admittedly isn’t Part 91 anyway). The M-reg nowadays does only 5700kg+ with a few rare exceptions where the owner spends a lot of money locally. M-reg can also be directly owned; no trust needed.
These things tend to start well and then go backwards. The Jersey and Guernsey registries originally boasted they will accept even small N-regs, but this was soon retracted. The IOM used to do anything if you lived there or had an IOM company and a few SEPs sneaked in under the wire.
That’s really interesting. Wonder what the owners / operators of multi million dollar private jets would think if they knew that they were classified as worthless by the IOM. A mass exodus I would think. Interestingly enough they are charging around £400 a pop to discuss part NCC with them at the Aeropodium.
Maybe there’s something in it for the FAA for the BASA though. Aircraft Manufacturers such as Cessna, Gulfstream etc give support pilots as part of the sales package, these pilots don’t have EASA papers so the entire support pilot teams for these manufactures would then be rendered useless for flying in Europe for Operators based there. Also, private sales of small Bizjets / Turboprops / Piston single etc to wealthy owner pilots in Europe, of which there are many who fly with FAA Commercial / Private Certs. Maybe, just maybe the FAA will push for a better deal
Peter wrote:
I think that language is way over the top.
But it’s the truth nonetheless. The Norwegian government, or any government except the US government has no jurisdiction over the FAA whatsoever.
Wonder what the owners / operators of multi million dollar private jets would think
I doubt many jets are on Part 91 in the sense of ignoring all life limits unless mandatory in the MM, etc. Most run some kind of 3rd party computer-managed programme. I am sure any bizjet pilot here can post the details.
What the issues are with transferring to Part M I don’t know. Obviously still any FAA STC mods cannot be transferred, unless there is a fairly economic recertification route, or the inspector turns a blind eye to it.
Maybe there’s something in it for the FAA for the BASA though. Aircraft Manufacturers such as Cessna, Gulfstream etc give support pilots as part of the sales package, these pilots don’t have EASA papers so the entire support pilot teams for these manufactures would then be rendered useless for flying in Europe for Operators based there
Yes, that’s really funny, isn’t it 
There are loads of things like that which would break. But as I’ve said, it depends on whether the operator is based in the EU. That language in EASA FCL is either the work of a genius or the work of an idiot in some Cologne bar. I don’t know which, but one aviation barrister I know reckons the latter. But then any UK barrister will say how much more robust the UK law drafting process is than the European one.
But it’s the truth nonetheless. The Norwegian government, or any government except the US government has no jurisdiction over the FAA whatsoever.
The above statement is completely different from your earlier one, LeSving
because the safety and efficiency of domestic transportation is not something you let some cowboys on the other side of the globe to decide
Phobos wrote:
And of course we are all awaiting the BASA from the FAA, however if there are no large concessions for FAA to EASA conversion for high time corporate jet pilots already working in the EU then it will likely be worthless
I can’t tell you when the BASA IPL will finally enter force, nor very much detail of its contents compared to what has already been published by the FAA. I can tell you that it is limited to PPLs, SEP/MEPs, night ratings and IRs. There is nothing in it for professional pilots.
Thanks Bookworm, but I and many others thought that ATPL/CPL would be included next as per the document already issued below. I think a lot of others will be disappointed if the next documentation doesn’t include it. Are you certain this is the case ?
“Priority was given to private pilot licenses (PPL) and instrument ratings (IR) with the expectation that the annex would eventually include commercial/corporate pilot licenses (CPL), and airline transport pilot licenses (ATP). It was commonly agreed that medical ratings would not be included.”
Thanks, I had a read of the treaty thread but no mention of ATP/CPL licence conversion requirements by anyone, I think perhaps they will be issued next year. Has anyone been in contact with the FAA person listed on the treaty to find out any more ?
I would be amazed if there was a CPL/ATPL license swap. Even for private pilots they haven’t done that.
There is a massive emotional attachment here in Europe to the 14 ATPL exams. They separate the men from the goats, after all Only the most obscessive will do them, which keeps the goats out of the cockpit, so things like AF447 simply cannot happen to anybody who has passed them 
Hi Peter,
I think it would be worthwhile to start a thread on FAA to EASA license conversion as this affects about 1,000 planes in the UK alone and a lot of pilots.
My person view is that EASA will work out something much simpler for FAA PPL and IR holders to convert to the EASA equivalent but most importantly, I think the deadline is going to be moved by at least two more years. Just based on math, it is impossible for the european training organisations to provide the training to convert all the N reg pilots to EASA between now and April 2016 and I think this will be the case for quite a long time.
Personally I am hoping for a simple paper exchange for the conversion of my FAA IR to the EASA IR but lets see.
Has the legislation for the delay to April 2016 even been passed yet?
