Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

N-reg aircraft and European / EASA licenses / licences (merged)

A question to the licensing geeks among us:

This is the situation:

A pilot with solely a (german-issued) EASA PPL wants to fly an N-reg. Cirrus SR22, within Germany. AFAICS, this is possible under FAR 61.3 (a) (1). My question is: which country’s licensing rules need to be followed when doing so? I would guess only the german (EASA) licensing rules, since that happens to be the only license held by the pilot.

If this is true, in addition to his PPL, he would merely need EASA differences training (variable pitch prop and electronic flight display).
He would not need an FAA high performance endorsement.

Agree so far?

Now: in order to allow him to obtain the above EASA differences training, I – an EASA FI – would like to fly with him on that N-reg. SR22.

The point is:

In normal circumstances, I would think that I can’t officially act as a flight instructor on such flight (N-reg. aircraft) since I am not an FAA CFI. Agree?
BUT, in the given situation (i.e. the pilot holding solely an EASA license and the flight taking place “under EASA licensing rules”), I guess I am actually allowed to make use of my privileges as EASA FI. In other words: if FAR 61.3 (a) (1) validates license privileges, this also includes flight instructor privileges on these licenses. Can anyone confirm this?

If so, I guess that I (as the instructor) would have to be PIC at least until the pilot receives the necessary differences training sign-offs from me. After that, he may be the PIC (unless insurance has more stringent requirements). Correct?

Would I have to be named as a PIC on the aircraft’s insurance certificate for those first few hours?

Frankfurt (EDFZ, EDFE), Germany

As you correctly say, the FARs require you to have a certificate under FAR 61, which covers everything including instructor certificates, and allows you to use a certificate/licence issued by the country you fly in instead. This includes all certificates and ratings. Hence you can use a UK IMC rating, EASA EIR, etc. rating on an N-Reg. On the other hand, you will need any of the pointless EASA ratings/differences (e.g., an aerobatics rating to fly aerobatics, or EFIS differences).

This is both the letter and the spirit of the law – if you are in a country, you can use either FAA or local licences to fly, but [as is frequently discussed] only in the country that issued the EASA licence.

That means that you can instruct somebody on an N-Reg. You can even train somebody for a [non-FAA] PPL on that aircraft and this would count towards the US PPL, except that you cannot give some specific parts of the instruction which have to be given by an FAA CFI (the three hours before the test, for example, and you cannot give any of the FAA endorsements).

One caveat – the local rules of your country might prohibit that, in the UK, for example, you will need permission by the Department of Transport to undertake “aerial work” on N-Registered aircraft.

As far as insurance is concerned, unless it is an “any authorised pilot” policy, or includes something like “any instructor while instructing…” I would always insist on being named on the insurance certificate before flying with someone other than as a passenger. You don’t want to argue the finer points of who was PIC with the insurers after a prang, even when only mentoring/being along for the ride.

Biggin Hill

One caveat – the local rules of your country might prohibit that, in the UK, for example, you will need permission by the Department of Transport to undertake “aerial work” on N-Registered aircraft.

That issue is avoided by doing it free of charge, or by doing it outside UK airspace. BTW that permission is now sold by the CAA, via a website, reportedly, for about 100 quid, but I know no further details.

I have no idea what anti-foreign-reg regs Germany has (it is an often asked Q but thus far nobody TMK has come up with any national law references) but there must be some regs against it otherwise the whole European flight training business would go N-reg, immediately.

Definitely agree re getting oneself named on the insurance. My insurance for example includes any form of training, and that is usual (in the UK, anyway) but that only covers the aircraft owners, and unless the instructor is a named party on the policy, the insurer could go after him to recover money they paid out.

Some years ago, I was doing the FAA CPL in the UK and I was one hour short of the three hours required within the preceeding 60 days of the checkride, so with the DPE about to return to the USA a couple of days later we quickly found an FAA CFI who at the time was an instructor employed by Cabair (an FTO, gone bust since I believe) and he offered to do the one hour but insisted that Cabair is a named party on the insurance. I got that added with a phone call.

Last Edited by Peter at 19 Apr 10:36
Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

A bit of thread drift – is there any reason why an instructor/school should not be happy with something like

“The following named pilots: Joe Bloggs, Jane Doe. In addition, any instructor giving instruction to and any examiner examining any of the named pilots is covered under this policy”.

And how about “Any pilot authorised by [….], subject to a minimum of [xxx] hours total experience”. (I insist on a piece of paper from [xxx] authorising me).

Biggin Hill

Any pilot authorised by

No problem – just costs money.

I used to pay 6.2k for “club use” (basically what you said, with all pilots named) and now pay 2.5k for just me. An extra named pilot might be somewhere between the two, if he/she is adequately experienced.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
In normal circumstances, I would think that I can’t officially act as a flight instructor on such flight (N-reg. aircraft) since I am not an FAA CFI. Agree?

I don’t agree. There are certain endorsements that may not be made, but instruction will count towards a US rating with some exceptions.

BUT, in the given situation (i.e. the pilot holding solely an EASA license and the flight taking place “under EASA licensing rules”), I guess I am actually allowed to make use of my privileges as EASA FI. In other words: if FAR 61.3 (a) (1) validates license privileges, this also includes flight instructor privileges on these licenses. Can anyone confirm this?

FAR 61.3 (a)(1) states in part:

(a) Required pilot certificate for operating a civil aircraft of the United States. No person may serve as a required pilot flight crewmember of a civil aircraft of the United States, unless that person:
(1) Has in the person’s physical possession or readily accessible in the aircraft when exercising the privileges of that pilot certificate or authorization

(v) When operating an aircraft within a foreign country, a pilot license issued by that country may be used.

I would interpret this to mean that if your pilot certificate or authorization includes Flight Instructor on your pilot license issued by the country in which the flight takes place, you are covered. There are no limitations specified that would restrict this.

If so, I guess that I (as the instructor) would have to be PIC at least until the pilot receives the necessary differences training sign-offs from me. After that, he may be the PIC (unless insurance has more stringent requirements). Correct?

61.3 (e)(1) Additional training required for operating complex airplanes reads as follows:

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of a complex airplane, unless the person has—
(i) Received and logged ground and flight training from an authorized instructor in a complex airplane, or in a flight simulator or flight training device that is representative of a complex airplane, and has been found proficient in the operation and systems of the airplane; and
(ii) Received a one-time endorsement in the pilot’s logbook from an authorized instructor who certifies the person is proficient to operate a complex airplane.

This is distinct from the pilot certificate or licence and is required for any rated pilot to act as PIC of a complex aircraft. My opinion is that to act as PIC, this is required of all licence or certificate holders, including you. The same is true for the Hi Performance endorsement. The only exception to this that is permitted is the grandfather clause (about 17 years ago):


2) The training and endorsement required by paragraph (e)(1) of this section is not required if the person has logged flight time as pilot in command of a complex airplane, or in a flight simulator or flight training device that is representative of a complex airplane prior to August 4, 1997.

Would I have to be named as a PIC on the aircraft’s insurance certificate for those first few hours?

This is not a consideration of the regulations. If you are going to act as PIC, you must meet the requirements to act as PIC. If you want to be covered by insurance, this is an issue between you, the insurance company, and the customer.

KUZA

Basically german rules apply however it is withun Germany only, and only if the German CAA allows for it.

As you are EASA FI you cannot give him the high performance endorsment.

I do not believe you may charge money .. For that you would need a FAA cpl or atp.

Ultimately your friend will want to get a 61.75 and all the required endorsments or a full ppl or straight cpl ..it is good training and good fun. If he is wise he gets his ir rating as well and makes sure that he does 50 hrs on an ifr flightplan there after.

In UK airspace you always needed a JAR-FCL (now EASA) CPL before you could charge for flight instruction in any aircraft. This was used to bust some N-reg training operations where the instructors had only FAA CFI/CFII papers. Of course this goes on all over the place but normally with a low profile, or the instructor doesn’t charge for the flight (I get my BFRs done free of charge).

EASA recently reduced this CPL requirement to just the CPL theory exam passes but something I recall reading recently said that this is not applicable to training in non EASA reg aircraft and they still require the full CPL. Tumbleweed here will know…

And yes an FAA instructor cannot charge for flight training unless he has an FAA CPL, but an FAA CFI/CFII will always have an FAA CPL, so this is moot.

I suspect most/all European countries somehow prohibit paid training by instructors who have only FAA papers. But that is digressing from the OP’s question.

Last Edited by Peter at 20 Apr 08:08
Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

This is not a consideration of the regulations. If you are going to act as PIC, you must meet the requirements to act as PIC. If you want to be covered by insurance, this is an issue between you, the insurance company, and the customer.

In the US, yes…in the EU, no….unlike US law where insurance is not mandatory, EU law requires that the aircraft be insured….,

Ref: http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?pageid=4510

Last Edited by AnthonyQ at 20 Apr 09:22
EGPD / OMDW / YPJT, United Kingdom

In normal circumstances, I would think that I can’t officially act as a flight instructor on such flight (N-reg. aircraft) since I am not an FAA CFI. Agree?

Actually no. I think 61.41 permits it. See below.

I checked John Lynch’s (now long withdrawn) Part 61 FAQ. There’s lots of comment on the interaction between 61.75 and other parts (and the view is that a 61.75 holder must satisfy 61.31) but there doesn’t appear to be any comment on the interaction between 61.3(a)(1)(e) and 61.31(e-g).

I would say that 61.3(a)(1)(v) should be interpreted broadly, and that provided the pilot satisfies the foreign requirements for flying that category, class or type, they should not have to satisfy 61.31 nor 61.56, both of which are built around the FAA system of licensing. By analogy, there is nothing, for example, explicit in 61.3(a)(1)(v) that says that you can use a foreign class or type rating, but this must surely be the intention otherwise the “licence” on its own is useless.

But you might want to ask the FAA.

§61.3 Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.
(a) Required pilot certificate for operating a civil aircraft of the United States. No person may serve as a required pilot flight crewmember of a civil aircraft of the United States, unless that person:
(1) Has in the person’s physical possession or readily accessible in the aircraft when exercising the privileges of that pilot certificate or authorization—

(v) When operating an aircraft within a foreign country, a pilot license issued by that country may be used.

§61.31 Type rating requirements, additional training, and authorization requirements.

(e) Additional training required for operating complex airplanes. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of a complex airplane, unless the person has—
(i) Received and logged ground and flight training from an authorized instructor in a complex airplane, or in a flight simulator or flight training device that is representative of a complex airplane, and has been found proficient in the operation and systems of the airplane; and
(ii) Received a one-time endorsement in the pilot’s logbook from an authorized instructor who certifies the person is proficient to operate a complex airplane.

§61.41 Flight training received from flight instructors not certificated by the FAA.
(a) A person may credit flight training toward the requirements of a pilot certificate or rating issued under this part, if that person received the training from:
(1) A flight instructor of an Armed Force in a program for training military pilots of either—
(i) The United States;
(ii) A foreign contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation.
(2) A flight instructor who is authorized to give such training by the licensing authority of a foreign contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, and the flight training is given outside the United States.
(b) A flight instructor described in paragraph (a) of this section is only authorized to give endorsements to show training given.
118 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top