Hi Everyone,
I hold a current Australian ICAO ATPL/IR and 3500 hours total, of which 3000 is command, 2000 Multi engine and 400 SE/ME turboprop.
I have completed the 14 ATPL exams, have an EASA Class 1 and Radio Telephone Licence.
If I do my MEP/CPL/IR all on a twin, is there any way under EASA rules they can just give me an SEP based on the ICAO SEP in my licence and 1800 hours SEP in my logbook? Or will i have to do a separate flight test for that?
Cheers,
Scott
If you do the MEP / CPL / IR on a twin, you will get a CPL, an MEP rating, and a Multi-Engine, Single-Pilot IR, but no single-engine rating.
To add the single-engine rating, it is training as required (no legal minimum) and a skills test. Doesn’t matter if you hold an ICAO licence or not.
The IR is valid on a single without any additional test.
No training is required, providing you have more than 100 hrs flight time as PIC in the relevant class. You just have to complete the SEP Licence Skill Test.
Jonathan wrote:
No training is required, providing you have more than 100 hrs flight time as PIC in the relevant class. You just have to complete the SEP Licence Skill Test.
All good and well, but there is still a requirement to complete ‘a syllabus’. Good news is that the ‘syllabus’ can be as short as one assessment flight to determine that you don’t need extra training 
Your next flight can then be the profcheck.
(SEP (land) is a Class rating that your MEP test won’t give you)
You should also need a language proficiency exam under EASA.
No training is required when applying Annex III conversions to Part FCL. Whist an assessment flight is always sensible, it is not required, providing the candidate has more than 100 hrs p1. In the UK language assessment is completed via the RT licence/examiner assessment.
My flight school seemed to disagree. One of the requirements for issue of a class rating is that you complete a training course at an ATO. In order to complete a ICAO license conversion, you need to meet those requirements.
Reading the regs, it seems FCL.725 states this as well.
My school was flexible in that they allowed the training course to be tailored and very short, allowing for my previous experience.
Or, in other words, an ATO needs to sign you off on the training course, before you can be put up for the profcheck. I understand you did it otherwise Jonathan?
Thanks everyone for all the answers.
This EASA conversion is proving to be far more hassle and overcomplicated than necessary. All I can do is suck it up and try and complete it in the shortest and least expensive way.
I did the ATPL theory course and 14 exams in 10 weeks, now just trying to get the practical out of the way.
Licensing is full of illogical BS like this. Took my IR on a twin and got SE for free. Fine, that’s all well and as expected. But take a multi seaplane ride, and you’re not allowed to fly SE seaplanes? Where’s the logic in that? Or, take a commercial ride on a multi aircraft, and it’s not valid for SE. But an IR is?
It’s madness.
Hi Archie,
FCL 725 applies for initial ratings not conversion from an ICAO rating, e.g. FAA SEL to EASA SEP. The regs state the following:
A valid class or type rating contained in a licence issued by a third country may be inserted in a Part-FCL licence provided that the applicant:
(a) complies with the experience requirements and the prerequisites for the issue of the applicable type or class rating in accordance with Part-FCL;
(b) passes the relevant skill test for the issue of the applicable type or class rating in accordance with Part-FCL;
(c) is in current flying practice;
(d) has no less than:
(i) for aeroplane class ratings, 100 hours of flight experience as a pilot in that class.
(ii) for aeroplane type ratings, 500 hours of flight experience as a pilot in that type;
It depends on how the National Authority and Head of Training interpret the regulations.
Hope this helps.
Jonathan
Isn’t your (a) a form of circular reasoning?
Meaning that (a) basically states that (FCL.725 amongst others) for initial ratings apply.
FCL.725 Requirements for the issue of class and type ratings
(a) An applicant for a class or type rating shall complete a training course at an ATO.
How can an Australian/FAA training provider be an EASA ATO…?
Anyways, I hope you are right and that there is a NAA with common sense, but the ones I have dealt with have interpreted it along the lines of what I wrote.BoomerangAir wrote:
This EASA conversion is proving to be far more hassle and overcomplicated than necessary. All I can do is suck it up and try and complete it in the shortest and least expensive way.
Yes, agreed. Even though I held an ICAO CPL with 1000’s of hours, just getting a EASA PPL cost me much more effort and money than was reasonable! But once you have it, you’re in the system, and it gets a lot easier from then on.
If you look at what needs to be done for a validation (1yr), I cannot understand how anyone would want to do that (validation). Conversion is the only way that has some long term gain.
