Someone could fly Peters N-reg TB20, on his German issued EASA license, within German airspace.
Since the FAA allows that someone to use the German EASA license privileges on an N-reg within Germany I’d assume this would NOT need a FAA complex endorsement, but rather a RG/VP Diff. Training according EASA FCL.
The same applies to N-reg with UK PPL within UK airspace. UK rules for differences training (currently the same as EASA) apply.
If someone has a 61.75 and flies an N-reg using it, an FAA complex endorsement is required.
Snoopy wrote:
Briefing (self study etc..) only applies when the FCL requires only a familiarization across airplanes with similar capabilities.Example (EASA):
A) C150 → PA28-140 = both are SEP „variants“, both fixed gear, fixed prop = self familiarization via POH sufficient.
Note: FCL refers to only a familiarization (not the words familiarization training).B) C150 → TB20 = both are SEP variants but one has RG and VP = differences training required = flight with instructor and logbook entry required.
You are probably right, I can’t see how it works for single seat SEP aircrafts (e.g. Luton Minor, Turbulents, Cri-Cri), I assume you need to get the variants signed off on a two seater?
Same question if FI/CRI does diff training flight and FE can signs diff training in the logbook?
Also relevant when people did upgrad their legacy PPL to FCL but could not grandfather…
Snoopy wrote:
Since the FAA allows that someone to use the German EASA license privileges on an N-reg within Germany I’d assume this would NOT need a FAA complex endorsement, but rather a RG/VP Diff. Training according EASA FCL.The same applies to N-reg with UK PPL within UK airspace. UK rules for differences training (currently the same as EASA) apply.
If someone has a 61.75 and flies an N-reg using it, an FAA complex endorsement is required.
Make sense !
Ibra wrote:
to fly it on FAA he needs an FAA CFI
I looked for FAA chief council interpretation because this covers stuff, like tailwheel, pressurisation, a move to a TBM etc, but could not find one. But perhaps your right…
Ibra wrote:
I assume you need to get the variants signed off on a two seater?
That would be the easiest way.
A diff. training in a PA46 Malibu with EFIS would cover everything (except Single Power Lever Control).
- Turbocharged
- EFIS
- Retractable Undercarriage
- Variable Pitch Propeller
- Pressurization
The good thing about SEP/TMG differences training is it never expires. MEP, however, does.
Perhaps even SE diff training never expires (eg SET) but I don’t have the FCL at hand now.
Snoopy wrote:
The good thing about SEP/TMG differences training is it never expires. MEP, however, does
Yes MEP is 2 years, SEP is for life but there are no variants in TMG class, the point of validity is moot !
If you can find TMG with turbo, variable pitch, tailwheel, retract, G1000 
Snoopy wrote:
Someone could fly Peters N-reg TB20, on his German issued EASA license, within German airspace.
Add also that this person would need Peter’s permission :-)
I looked for FAA chief council interpretation because this covers stuff, like tailwheel, pressurisation, a move to a TBM etc, but could not find one. But perhaps your right…
The interesting point is that to fly an N-reg plane on a UK issued PPL is legal only in UK airspace, but a 61.75 piggyback FAA PPL is not needed.
You need the 61.75 only to fly outside the UK. You also do not need an FAA medical for the 61.75, which many find handy.
But surely, for an FAA CFI to give you the complex signoff, you need the 61.75 license? He can’t sign off somebody who has no FAA license, can he?
I wonder if this is another one of many aviation’s sleeping dogs? Is there somebody in some European country who has a “basic SEP PPL” and then bought an N-reg “complex” (with or without a 61.75) and never got the complex endorsement? If he reads this, he will keep a low profile.
I wonder if @Qalupalik or @bookworm might know. Indeed this is a matter for the FAA Chief Counsel interpretation database
Add also that this person would need Peter’s permission :-)
Of course, although one can log time in the RHS.
Peter wrote:
sleeping dogs
possibly, the existing interpretation all came from accidents, PA-46 and the cirrus.
Peter wrote:
He can’t sign off somebody who has no FAA license, can he?
Can’t see why not, you don’t need a certificate to pilot an aircraft, in FAA land as such, but you can’t do much without one either. This would be consistent with a CFI marking a student pilots logbook as proficient in a complex aircraft before they get their PPL. e.g. teaching someone in their bonanza/C182 from the get go.
Peter wrote:
But surely, for an FAA CFI to give you the complex signoff, you need the 61.75 license? He can’t sign off somebody who has no FAA license, can he?
But isn’t the point that they aren’t flying it on an FAA Airman’s Certificate? Instead they are flying it on their national country’s licence with the privileges of that. Once they want to leave that country then they need the FAA Airman’s Certificate and the endorsements that are required on it/logbook.
I doubt it’s that complicated as people make it (usually because of their financial interests or limited one way view on each FCL/FAR side), first, FAA61.75 is always valid as long as you have a valid EASA medical (unless revoked an EASA PPL is valid lifetime anyway, so you only need an EASA PPL number in FAA61.75 to have a valid FAA PPL), second, you decide which licence Y you are flying on then you will know what ratings & training you need to fly aircraft X using Y
