Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

EASA-FAA bilateral pilot licensing treaty (BASA)

Some updated info on this treaty is here.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Maybe this is relevant now, it’s gone live today, FAA/EASA pilot licensing and conversions under BASA, it’s really about private pilots for now (SEP&MEP, no TR)

Can’t find the technical implementation doc but this caught my eyes
‘PPL(A) / IR issued on the basis of the EU-US Agreement’

The requirements for PPL+IR looks easy exams, or 50h IFR worldwide or 10h IFR in the right place

https://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/air/news/2020-11-19-eu-expands-bilateral-aviation-safety-agreement-with-united-states_en
local copy

https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-11004-2019-INIT/en/pdf
local copy

Last Edited by Ibra at 19 Nov 23:16
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

Interesting… needs very careful reading!

I wonder what this will mean for the various derogations? They were continuing each year because, supposedly, the BASA was delayed. It might mean we N-reg people will all be forced to run the EASA papers as well.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Well, except the UK people – what happens to them, given the UK is out of EASA at the end of December?

Andreas IOM

Indeed, although the DfT/CAA have been using the same reason for the SRG2140/2142 derogation route, and brexit has been a known factor for years.

I wonder who will be the first to produce an executive summary of that doc?

And if it really is a direct conversion, then why not convert every year?

You will still need the EASA medical, BTW.

Maybe @bookworm knows.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Ibra wrote:

The requirements for PPL+IR looks easy exams, or 50h IFR worldwide or 10h IFR in the right place

To be honest, unless the skill test is significantly abbreviated, I am not sure how different it would be from an ICAO IR conversion which requires the following:

which has already made the conversion process pretty simple, i.e. standard IR skill test + demonstrating to the examiner in an oral section that one is familiar with the relevant EU air law, meteorology and flight planning and performance rules. I have gone through that two years ago and when someone is proficient with IR flying in Europe, it is actually quite straightforward.

The BASA annex special conditions don’t read that different:

The main simplifications I see are more the following:

  • US→EU PPL: No requirement for minimum 100 hours of flight time as a pilot and sitting the Air Law and Human Performance exams
  • US→EU IR: Not sure there is really any improvement and conditions under 2.2.7 and 2.2.8 (IR for a higher-grade licence or different category of aricraft) are actually worse(?) than the ICAO conversion requirements
  • EU→US PPL: Potential simplification of requirements as “The applicant shall complete a flight review with an FAA certified flight instructor who
    holds appropriate FAA examining authority, as detailed in the TIP-L.” Not sure what a “certified flight instructor who holds appropriate FAA examining authority” exactly means though. And also apparently no prior training/endorsement requirements – would that mean that this would eliminate the visa and TSA requirements?
  • EU→US PPL IR: No endorsement/training required (see 3.2.3 for details), in particular with minimum 50h IFR PIC time or minimum 10h IFR PIC time flying in the US. “Instrument proficiency check with examiner” – this reads as being different from a full flight test but it needs to be done with an examiner rather than a CFII (who normally do IPCs)
Last Edited by wbardorf at 20 Nov 10:03
EGTF, EGLK, United Kingdom

Indeed it looks very similar. There have been many noises in recent years that when the BASA is concluded it won’t bring anything new.

The EASA IR skills test is a whole-day thing and costs a fair bundle – £500 in my case, plus the cost of the flying. This is every year.

And saving the EASA medical is another few hundred (yes I know some get it for much less). That is also every year (for most IR pilots).

That is why the FAA PPL/CPL+IR plus “whatever derogation” is attractive. The BFR is just a 1hr flight with an FAA CFI and the FAA IR is on the 6/6 rolling currency.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

Interesting… needs very careful reading!
. . .which I haven’t yet fully done – so am awaiting comments from the more astute and knowledgeable.

On a quick read though, I would be interested to know/clarify the following:

  • It refers to PPL pilots only, with the implication that others will be dealt with later. Are those of us who fly on Stand-Alone Commercial licenses exempt/not covered by this?
  • Is there a Start Date for this, since presumably ATO’s etc. will have to be informed/get there act together?
  • But, perhaps more importantly, is there a FINISH DATE i.e. a point where PPL pilots will no longer be able to fly IFR in EASA land without having done the conversion?
  • It seems to imply that one can convert if one has done 50 hours total IFR, or 10 hours IFR within EASAland. If this is a right reading, that is a great gain for many. It would make “Going the FAA IR route to convert to an EASA IR”, quite attractive again. If, though, there is a Terminus date after which you CANNOT fly IFR in EASAland without having done the conversion, then the only eligibility after that will be those who have done their 50 hours IFR outside Europe.
Last Edited by Peter_G at 20 Nov 10:01
Rochester, UK, United Kingdom

Peter_G wrote:

It refers to PPL pilots only, with the implication that others will be dealt with later. Are those of us who fly on Stand-Alone Commercial licenses exempt/not covered by this?

It doesn’t cover ATPL/CPL conversions, however it does cover conversions of ATPL/CPL to PPL as 1.2 states that standalone ATPL/CPL do include private pilot privileges which are in scope for the conversion to a PPL.

Peter_G wrote:

It seems to imply that one can convert if one has done 50 hours total IFR, or 10 hours IFR within EASAland. If this is a right reading, that is a great gain for many. It would make “Going the FAA IR route to convert to an EASA IR”, quite attractive again. If, though, there is a Terminus date after which you CANNOT fly IFR in EASAland without having done the conversion, then the only eligibility after that will be those who have done their 50 hours IFR outside Europe.

I don’t think it would be too much of an issue as by the time you have completed your FAA IR, you would have completed the minimum requirement of 40 hrs of simulated/actual IMC flying. Under FAA rules, you would log all that time as PIC as long as you were the sole operator of the flight controls. However, as IFR time != IR/IMC time so it is important that most of those flights (the ones that would be hard to do would be the slow flight/maneuvering/unusual attitude training flights that are better conducted in simulated IMC under VFR) be conducted under an IFR flight plan. Therefore, many pilots will end up with 30-40 hours of IFR PIC time by the time they have done the FAA IR – reaching 50 IFR PIC time is therefore not that difficult.

Last Edited by wbardorf at 20 Nov 10:12
EGTF, EGLK, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

And saving the EASA medical is another few hundred (yes I know some get it for much less). That is also every year (for most IR pilots).

That is why the FAA PPL/CPL+IR plus “whatever derogation” is attractive. The BFR is just a 1hr flight with an FAA CFI and the FAA IR is on the 6/6 rolling currency.

Agreed, the additional medical and licence admin adds to the complication. In particular the annual IR revalidation flight with an examiner. Anyone proficient in IFR flying should have no difficulty passing the annual IR revalidation flight but it’s the additional admin, time spent etc which is the additional burden.

EGTF, EGLK, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top