JAR compliant licences
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are all awaiting for over a month to hear about what the CAA has to say. Even the moderator has been trying for over a month with no official willing to say that ICAO licenses are JAA compliant.
I'm not surprised. :P
Why have a JAA at all if every country in the world can put "JAA Compliant" on their licenses.
As pointed out at the start this is simply a clever marketing trick that 2 of the many US schools are trying.
Does somewhere like Naples use the same line? If not then why not?
Regards,
DFC
For sale - A6 piece of paper with "JAA Compliant" stamp. Costs $50 but I'll give it to the first 20 for $10.
I'm not surprised. :P
Why have a JAA at all if every country in the world can put "JAA Compliant" on their licenses.
As pointed out at the start this is simply a clever marketing trick that 2 of the many US schools are trying.
Does somewhere like Naples use the same line? If not then why not?
Regards,
DFC
For sale - A6 piece of paper with "JAA Compliant" stamp. Costs $50 but I'll give it to the first 20 for $10.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JAR Compliant Licence
I have supplied the contact details for the CAA to the moderator and I have also supplied copies of the paperwork from the CAA to other reliable and authoritative people who are concerned with PPrune. I supplied that information when I said I supplied it. The fact that the moderator has failed to make a posting since is nothing to do with me. I 100% stand by what I have said and I can prove it. I have no interest in sending anything to DFC who would not recognise something if it hit him in the face and who would probably misinterpret the object that hit him in any event.
If anyone genuinely interested in the JAR compliant licence and the written proof would like to PM me I will help them. The information on my company website under the FAQ's is 100% correct and has been confirmed as so, in writing, by the CAA.
Regards,
Chopperpilot47
If anyone genuinely interested in the JAR compliant licence and the written proof would like to PM me I will help them. The information on my company website under the FAQ's is 100% correct and has been confirmed as so, in writing, by the CAA.
Regards,
Chopperpilot47
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does somewhere like Naples use the same line? If not then why not?
I won't be recomending people spend money on a course where there is doubt about the outcome. Plenty of other US schools don't rely on this sales technique.
Buyers beware - if a licence is JAA compliant then it will have a statement to that effect printed on it. No statement - non compliance.
Compliance and acceptance are two different things.
Personal attack shows a lost argument.
Don't think we should give any more advertising to these schools.
Regards,
DFC
I won't be recomending people spend money on a course where there is doubt about the outcome. Plenty of other US schools don't rely on this sales technique.
Buyers beware - if a licence is JAA compliant then it will have a statement to that effect printed on it. No statement - non compliance.
Compliance and acceptance are two different things.
Personal attack shows a lost argument.
Don't think we should give any more advertising to these schools.
Regards,
DFC
I suppose the good thing is that DFC now seems to accept that ICAO licence holders can fly at night and outside the UK in G registered aircraft. That has been my position and the position of the CAA all along.
The UK renders valid any ICAO licence for use on private flights with certain conditions, one of which is that IFR in controlled airspace is not permitted. It is implicit that the licence holder must fly within the restrictions of the licence.
The FAA requires an IR for any flight under IFR, which would include any flight at night in the UK (except that conducted under special VFR in a CTR). Thus I don't see how a pilot with an FAA licence can fly at night in the UK without an IR attached, and even with an IR how they can fly at night in controlled airspace (with the exception already noted).
On the issue of flying overseas, ICAO states are required to allow flights in foreign registered aircraft if the flight crew have licences issued or rendered valid by the state of registry. That does mean that an FAA licence is sufficient for flight in a G-reg outside the UK, with the same restrictions as above, i.e. no IFR in controlled airspace, even if the licence includes an IR, which in most states would mean, in effect, no meaningful IFR at all.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spot on bookworm.
If the CAA were to issue a validation of an FAA IR, it would permit the flight at night under IFR. However, being limited to 1 year means that after 1 year, flight at night outside controlled airspace in the UK would no longer be possible since the IR is no longer validated.
That is why I am not happy with certain US schools tring to disguite the fact that at the end of the day the person spending lots of money will get an FAA licence.
JAA qualifications can be placed on a JAA compliant licence. They can't be put on an FAA one.
Regards,
DFC
If the CAA were to issue a validation of an FAA IR, it would permit the flight at night under IFR. However, being limited to 1 year means that after 1 year, flight at night outside controlled airspace in the UK would no longer be possible since the IR is no longer validated.
That is why I am not happy with certain US schools tring to disguite the fact that at the end of the day the person spending lots of money will get an FAA licence.
JAA qualifications can be placed on a JAA compliant licence. They can't be put on an FAA one.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here we go again. DFC has been repeating this 1 year validation nonsense for some time on other forums. Have a look at the Questions in the Flight Crew forum under the title "Flying N Registration aircraft in Europe". It has been pointed out there that FAA PPL's and FAA PPL/IR's are validated without formality and without time limitations. See ANO Article 21 4 (a). An FAA certificate holder may fly G registered aircraft because the CAA recognises the status of an ICAO PPL and it is "rendered valid" by them. The CAA is bound by the Chicago Convention to do this because of the reciprocal agreements contained within it. FAA ICAO licence holders do not need any CAA paperwork attesting to the validity of their licence as it is recognised by the CAA as an ICAO licence therefore there is no time limit placed upon it. You can read the full argument for yourself on the forum I have mentioned above.
The following is a quote from the paperwork I have from the CAA about the other matters mentioned, " The privileges of an FAA PPL (as an ICAO licence) may be exercised in UK registered aircraft for private purposes only but flying in controlled airspace under IFR is prohibited. The UK Air Navigation Order therefore does not prevent you exercising the privileges of an FAA licence, night or instrument rating, outside controlled airspace ( for the IR) The ANO does not place any territorial activity on exercising these privilages since your FAA licence is deemed to be valid in UK registered aircraft, so it does not constrain you to UK airspace. DGAC France has indicated that it is acceptable to fly in that State with an FAA licence on UK registered aircraft".
These are not my words, this came from the CAA. If you want to confirm this for yourself, as I did, write or e-mail the Safety Regulation Group, Personnel Licencing Department, Civil Aviation Authority, Aviation House, GE gatwick Airport South, West Sussex. RH6 OYR
There seems to be some confusion about IFR at night. Whilst I agree that flight at night is IFR it is not necessary to hold an instrument rating to fly IFR. If that were the case there would be no night ratings. See Articles 21 (4) and 21 (10) of the UK ANO 2000 as amended. It is clear that flight at night, in VMC, is permitted. See also Rule 22 of the Rules of Air Regulations 1996 for the requirement to fly IFR and Rule 29 (minimum height rule) and Rule 30 (quadrantal rule). Whilst it is true that the quadrantal rule does not apply under 3,000' amsl, Rule 29 does and the flying is still flying in accordance with the IFR. Holders of a non UK licence with night flying privileges are not precluded from controlled airspace such as Class D at night because the controlling ATC unit can issue a special VFR clearance instead of in accordance with the IFR as long as the weather conditions are suitable. This is in accordance with the exception mentioned in the regulations quoted above.
I have listed the references above so that you can check for yourself rather than relying upon what some people say is accurate information when clearly it is not.
Regards,
Chopperpilot47
The following is a quote from the paperwork I have from the CAA about the other matters mentioned, " The privileges of an FAA PPL (as an ICAO licence) may be exercised in UK registered aircraft for private purposes only but flying in controlled airspace under IFR is prohibited. The UK Air Navigation Order therefore does not prevent you exercising the privileges of an FAA licence, night or instrument rating, outside controlled airspace ( for the IR) The ANO does not place any territorial activity on exercising these privilages since your FAA licence is deemed to be valid in UK registered aircraft, so it does not constrain you to UK airspace. DGAC France has indicated that it is acceptable to fly in that State with an FAA licence on UK registered aircraft".
These are not my words, this came from the CAA. If you want to confirm this for yourself, as I did, write or e-mail the Safety Regulation Group, Personnel Licencing Department, Civil Aviation Authority, Aviation House, GE gatwick Airport South, West Sussex. RH6 OYR
There seems to be some confusion about IFR at night. Whilst I agree that flight at night is IFR it is not necessary to hold an instrument rating to fly IFR. If that were the case there would be no night ratings. See Articles 21 (4) and 21 (10) of the UK ANO 2000 as amended. It is clear that flight at night, in VMC, is permitted. See also Rule 22 of the Rules of Air Regulations 1996 for the requirement to fly IFR and Rule 29 (minimum height rule) and Rule 30 (quadrantal rule). Whilst it is true that the quadrantal rule does not apply under 3,000' amsl, Rule 29 does and the flying is still flying in accordance with the IFR. Holders of a non UK licence with night flying privileges are not precluded from controlled airspace such as Class D at night because the controlling ATC unit can issue a special VFR clearance instead of in accordance with the IFR as long as the weather conditions are suitable. This is in accordance with the exception mentioned in the regulations quoted above.
I have listed the references above so that you can check for yourself rather than relying upon what some people say is accurate information when clearly it is not.
Regards,
Chopperpilot47
An FAA certificate holder may fly G registered aircraft because the CAA recognises the status of an ICAO PPL and it is "rendered valid" by them. The CAA is bound by the Chicago Convention to do this because of the reciprocal agreements contained within it.
On the subject of night flying, the problem is not in the ANO, but rather in FAR 61.3(e)
(e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:
(1) The appropriate aircraft category, class, type (if required), and instrument rating on that person's pilot certificate for any airplane, helicopter, or powered-lift being flown;
(1) The appropriate aircraft category, class, type (if required), and instrument rating on that person's pilot certificate for any airplane, helicopter, or powered-lift being flown;
I'll comment on the 1 year validation point elsewhere, or later, or both!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I am aware, it is not possible to add a night rating to an FAA PPL.
The FAA PPL includes the privilege of being able to fly night VFR.
Thus under FAA rules, to fly IFR an IR is required.
Thus flying IFR outside controlled airspace in the UK on an FAA PPL is not possible unless the holder has an IR.
However, JAR-FCL clearly limits the validation period of an ICAO IR to 1 year.
No matter what the CAA say, they can not alter the FARs which limit what an FAA pilot can do.
Glad to see that we are talking simply FAA or JAA licenses.
If anyone is considering training or simply confused, the Pilot Mag in the UK has published the where to fly guide. In there Dave Calderwood covers what can and can't be done with an FAA PPL on return to the UK. Being published with his name attached, I bet he checked his facts.
Don't rely on what is posted here - have a read of the article and ask a UK flight instructor what they think before parting with cash.
Regards,
DFC
The FAA PPL includes the privilege of being able to fly night VFR.
Thus under FAA rules, to fly IFR an IR is required.
Thus flying IFR outside controlled airspace in the UK on an FAA PPL is not possible unless the holder has an IR.
However, JAR-FCL clearly limits the validation period of an ICAO IR to 1 year.
No matter what the CAA say, they can not alter the FARs which limit what an FAA pilot can do.
Glad to see that we are talking simply FAA or JAA licenses.
If anyone is considering training or simply confused, the Pilot Mag in the UK has published the where to fly guide. In there Dave Calderwood covers what can and can't be done with an FAA PPL on return to the UK. Being published with his name attached, I bet he checked his facts.
Don't rely on what is posted here - have a read of the article and ask a UK flight instructor what they think before parting with cash.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC
Why should what's written by one journo in a magazine be any more reliable than what is posted on Pprune which has a host of genuine experts on every aspect of aviation and is arguably the best source of information on aviation matters?
'ask a UK flight instructor'
Would the average UK FI necessarily know the answer, or indeed need to know? For example -
"My money is on an FAA licence which is indeed OK for flying G reg aircraft in the UK and is indeed accepted in every ICAO country but provided that you are flying an N reg aircraft."
Good thing you didn't put real money on that, eh.
I don't mean this unkindly so please don't take offence, and I can readily understand your reasons, but your contributions to the thread haven't come across (at least to me) as being entirely objective and neutral. For example -
"people will spend money and end up with far less ability to fly ..... then have to come to us for training causing expense for them and hassle for us (undoing much of the rubbish)!"
I'm a UK PPL, but I've flown with FI's here and in the US and have found good, bad and 'OK' on both sides of the Atlantic.
Not directly on topic but, in answer to your US 'rubbish' point: Years ago, I did my twin training in LA and took the CAA flight test with Cabair at Elstree, then the only school with a Cougar on which I'd trained. They kindly (and very strongly) advised me to do some training with them first, but I didn't because I'd used up my budget. I took the test cold with the then CFI, and passed without any criticism of the techniques I'd been taught in California.
Asking the CAA for a definitive answer obviously makes sense.
That's been done, but you say "No matter what the CAA say ......'
So does that bring us back to asking the journo who wrote the 'Pilot' article what he thinks?
By pure coincidence, I flew a few hours at Dutch Country Helicopters last September when I happened to be on holiday in the Washington/Philadelpia area. I was very happy with the school and the quality of instruction; the FI was a Brit with an FAA licence. All every bit as professional as any UK school with whom I've flown, and more professional than some in both the UK and US. The owner was in England at the time, so we didn't meet. I've learned who it is from posts here and in Rotorheads,
In light of his assertions, I asked chopperpilot47 if he'd give me copy correspondence with the CAA and he did so immediately. Having read it, I can't see anything he's posted which is other than correct.
The 'JAR compliant' description is somewhat of a red herring, and may be the cause of some confusion.
An FAA PPL is an ICAO PPL. An ICAO PPL holder can fly in the UK on that licence.
The same apparently applies in France; I haven't checked further afield.
Hope that's some help.
FL
(Edit)
chopperpilot47 sent me the correspondence some weeks ago. I was abroad when it arived, and have been too busy since returning to read it until now. The delay is my fault, not his.
Don't rely on what is posted here - have a read of the article and ask a UK flight instructor what they think before parting with cash.
'ask a UK flight instructor'
Would the average UK FI necessarily know the answer, or indeed need to know? For example -
"My money is on an FAA licence which is indeed OK for flying G reg aircraft in the UK and is indeed accepted in every ICAO country but provided that you are flying an N reg aircraft."
Good thing you didn't put real money on that, eh.
I don't mean this unkindly so please don't take offence, and I can readily understand your reasons, but your contributions to the thread haven't come across (at least to me) as being entirely objective and neutral. For example -
"people will spend money and end up with far less ability to fly ..... then have to come to us for training causing expense for them and hassle for us (undoing much of the rubbish)!"
I'm a UK PPL, but I've flown with FI's here and in the US and have found good, bad and 'OK' on both sides of the Atlantic.
Not directly on topic but, in answer to your US 'rubbish' point: Years ago, I did my twin training in LA and took the CAA flight test with Cabair at Elstree, then the only school with a Cougar on which I'd trained. They kindly (and very strongly) advised me to do some training with them first, but I didn't because I'd used up my budget. I took the test cold with the then CFI, and passed without any criticism of the techniques I'd been taught in California.
Asking the CAA for a definitive answer obviously makes sense.
That's been done, but you say "No matter what the CAA say ......'
So does that bring us back to asking the journo who wrote the 'Pilot' article what he thinks?
By pure coincidence, I flew a few hours at Dutch Country Helicopters last September when I happened to be on holiday in the Washington/Philadelpia area. I was very happy with the school and the quality of instruction; the FI was a Brit with an FAA licence. All every bit as professional as any UK school with whom I've flown, and more professional than some in both the UK and US. The owner was in England at the time, so we didn't meet. I've learned who it is from posts here and in Rotorheads,
In light of his assertions, I asked chopperpilot47 if he'd give me copy correspondence with the CAA and he did so immediately. Having read it, I can't see anything he's posted which is other than correct.
The 'JAR compliant' description is somewhat of a red herring, and may be the cause of some confusion.
An FAA PPL is an ICAO PPL. An ICAO PPL holder can fly in the UK on that licence.
The same apparently applies in France; I haven't checked further afield.
Hope that's some help.
FL
(Edit)
chopperpilot47 sent me the correspondence some weeks ago. I was abroad when it arived, and have been too busy since returning to read it until now. The delay is my fault, not his.
Last edited by Heliport; 3rd Mar 2004 at 22:47.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the sake of completeness only...
The suggestion by DFC that the CAA is bound by JAR-FCL 1.015(b) only to validate an FAA PPL/IR for one year is also incorrect. Listed amongst the JAA-agreed Long Term Exceptions (LTEs) is number 22. This suspends the need for member states to adhere to 1.015(b), the clause from which DFC takes his inspiration on that point.
The CAA is acting entirely within the JAA agreement by "validating" FAA PPL/IRs without time or geographical restriction, so long as the pilot flies a G-registered aircraft, and so long as the underlying licence remains valid.
2D
The suggestion by DFC that the CAA is bound by JAR-FCL 1.015(b) only to validate an FAA PPL/IR for one year is also incorrect. Listed amongst the JAA-agreed Long Term Exceptions (LTEs) is number 22. This suspends the need for member states to adhere to 1.015(b), the clause from which DFC takes his inspiration on that point.
The CAA is acting entirely within the JAA agreement by "validating" FAA PPL/IRs without time or geographical restriction, so long as the pilot flies a G-registered aircraft, and so long as the underlying licence remains valid.
2D
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what about the medical side of this
if a uk national has a faappl/h faa medical class 3 in a n reg helicopter he cannot fly in uk airspace if he has failed a class 2 jar licence or uk old class 3 so
if you went to the states and got a faa ppl ,class 3 medical without first finding out if you could pass the jar medical it could mean you have a licence you cant use in the uk airspace this makes the licence not jar licence "compliant"
steve
uk caa grounded current faa ppl/h class 3 licence holder also opperator of n reg helicopter
if a uk national has a faappl/h faa medical class 3 in a n reg helicopter he cannot fly in uk airspace if he has failed a class 2 jar licence or uk old class 3 so
if you went to the states and got a faa ppl ,class 3 medical without first finding out if you could pass the jar medical it could mean you have a licence you cant use in the uk airspace this makes the licence not jar licence "compliant"
steve
uk caa grounded current faa ppl/h class 3 licence holder also opperator of n reg helicopter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Elsewhere it has been suggested that the FAA Class 3 is only non-compliant by virtue of the number of years validity it has. Renewing the class 3 inside the period of JAA Validity would fix the problem, so it is said.
Failing that, an FAA Class 2 is not unduly onerous.
Failing that, an FAA Class 2 is not unduly onerous.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2D,
Until the lte is renewed, no one can say what the future holds.
Would you recomend your friends purchase a TV set that has no guarantee and may last for 3 months, 1 year or 2 years? I wouldn't.
--
Flying Lawyer,
This thred is about the policy of some US schools to call FAA licenses JAA compliant.
Thank you for your statement saying that such a description is misleading and designed to distract people from the true meaning.
Surely, having made such a clear statement regarding the matter from such a distinguished position, the debate is closed.
regards,
DFC
Until the lte is renewed, no one can say what the future holds.
Would you recomend your friends purchase a TV set that has no guarantee and may last for 3 months, 1 year or 2 years? I wouldn't.
--
Flying Lawyer,
This thred is about the policy of some US schools to call FAA licenses JAA compliant.
Thank you for your statement saying that such a description is misleading and designed to distract people from the true meaning.
Surely, having made such a clear statement regarding the matter from such a distinguished position, the debate is closed.
regards,
DFC
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hang on DFC
FL didn't say the description 'JAA compliant' licence is "misleading", nor did he say it's "designed to distract people from the true meaning."
If that's correct, the position seems to be that an FAA PPL holder in the UK has at least all the same privileges as a JAA PPL licence holder.
Maybe it would be more precise to say that someone who holds a current FAA PPL complies with JAA requirements and can fly in UK airspace without restriction such as G-reg a/c only.
(I appreciate the issue of whether he has more privileges than a JAA licence holder is a matter of dispute, but he seems to have at least the same.)
FL didn't say the description 'JAA compliant' licence is "misleading", nor did he say it's "designed to distract people from the true meaning."
In light of his assertions, I asked chopperpilot47 if he'd give me copy correspondence with the CAA and he did so immediately.
Having read it, I can't see anything he's posted which is other than correct.
The 'JAR compliant' description is somewhat of a red herring, and may be the cause of some confusion.
An FAA PPL is an ICAO PPL. An ICAO PPL holder can fly in the UK on that licence.
The same apparently applies in France; I haven't checked further afield.
Having read it, I can't see anything he's posted which is other than correct.
The 'JAR compliant' description is somewhat of a red herring, and may be the cause of some confusion.
An FAA PPL is an ICAO PPL. An ICAO PPL holder can fly in the UK on that licence.
The same apparently applies in France; I haven't checked further afield.
Maybe it would be more precise to say that someone who holds a current FAA PPL complies with JAA requirements and can fly in UK airspace without restriction such as G-reg a/c only.
(I appreciate the issue of whether he has more privileges than a JAA licence holder is a matter of dispute, but he seems to have at least the same.)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heliport,
Your quote includes the statement from Flying Lawyer that the 'JAR compliant' description is somewhat misleading and designed to draw attention away from the true meaning. In the same sentence he goes on to say that the jar compliant description may be the cause of some confusion.
I agree totally that an FAA PPL can fly a G registered aircraft. That does not make the FAA licence JAR compliant. If you hold a pre JAA UK PPL, you will know that is not JAR compliant either but you can also fly a G registered aircraft.
The thred was about the use of JAR compliant licence in advertising material and not about the privileges of the FAA licence.
I'll rest with FL's description of the use of 'JAR compliant' with regard to FAA licenses because being a lawyer I bet he chose his words very carefully.
Regards,
DFC
Your quote includes the statement from Flying Lawyer that the 'JAR compliant' description is somewhat misleading and designed to draw attention away from the true meaning. In the same sentence he goes on to say that the jar compliant description may be the cause of some confusion.
I agree totally that an FAA PPL can fly a G registered aircraft. That does not make the FAA licence JAR compliant. If you hold a pre JAA UK PPL, you will know that is not JAR compliant either but you can also fly a G registered aircraft.
The thred was about the use of JAR compliant licence in advertising material and not about the privileges of the FAA licence.
I'll rest with FL's description of the use of 'JAR compliant' with regard to FAA licenses because being a lawyer I bet he chose his words very carefully.
Regards,
DFC
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC, with all due respect, Flying Lawyer used the term "red herring" which I take in this context to have a different meaning to "misleading".
In other words, we shouldn't get too hung up on the whole JAR compliant issue. Seems to me the only criticism that could be levelled against chopperpilot47 in this instance would be superior marketing skills to those of most of his competitors!
My original post was more concerned with the practicality or otherwise of obtaining an FAA licence to fly in the UK.
My contention is that if I were a neophyte aviator about to embark on a PPL I can see many advantages in the FAA system - its good value, its transparency, its practicality, and not forgeting that nice little laminated piece of brown card you get at the end of it all. Simplicity itself compared to the bureacratic meanderings of the JAA.
On the fixed wing side of things, the FAA IR compared to the JAA IR is even better reason for the private pilot in the UK to go down the FAA route.
Never mind the terminology, the practicality and value appears to speak for itself.
In other words, we shouldn't get too hung up on the whole JAR compliant issue. Seems to me the only criticism that could be levelled against chopperpilot47 in this instance would be superior marketing skills to those of most of his competitors!
My original post was more concerned with the practicality or otherwise of obtaining an FAA licence to fly in the UK.
My contention is that if I were a neophyte aviator about to embark on a PPL I can see many advantages in the FAA system - its good value, its transparency, its practicality, and not forgeting that nice little laminated piece of brown card you get at the end of it all. Simplicity itself compared to the bureacratic meanderings of the JAA.
On the fixed wing side of things, the FAA IR compared to the JAA IR is even better reason for the private pilot in the UK to go down the FAA route.
Never mind the terminology, the practicality and value appears to speak for itself.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maximum,
You requested comments and if possible a definitive answer regarding the matter.
Flying Lawyer has provided a definitive answer by saying clearly that the 'JAR compliant' description is somewhat misleading and designed to draw attention away from the true meaning. He goes on to say that the jar compliant description may be the cause of some confusion.
Based on FL's experience and knowledge, I'd describe that as definitive.
Now did you start the thred to debate the topic or to advertise the matter?
Regards,
DFC
You requested comments and if possible a definitive answer regarding the matter.
Flying Lawyer has provided a definitive answer by saying clearly that the 'JAR compliant' description is somewhat misleading and designed to draw attention away from the true meaning. He goes on to say that the jar compliant description may be the cause of some confusion.
Based on FL's experience and knowledge, I'd describe that as definitive.
Now did you start the thred to debate the topic or to advertise the matter?
Regards,
DFC
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC, no advertising intended! 
Leaving aside our somewhat different interpretations of Flying Lawyer's use of the term "red herring", I agree my original question has been answered.
So, broadening the discussion, surely the FAA system offers the PPL flyer in the UK many advantages over the JAA?
I ask this as someone who craves simplicity and hates unnecessary bureaucracy, and I feel the JAA has moved us in the wrong direction in this respect. If I have an angle in this, then there it is.
Any arguments for/against? As I see it, the FAA licence for the PPL and IR in the UK wins hands down over the JAA.
Leaving aside our somewhat different interpretations of Flying Lawyer's use of the term "red herring", I agree my original question has been answered.
So, broadening the discussion, surely the FAA system offers the PPL flyer in the UK many advantages over the JAA?
I ask this as someone who craves simplicity and hates unnecessary bureaucracy, and I feel the JAA has moved us in the wrong direction in this respect. If I have an angle in this, then there it is.
Any arguments for/against? As I see it, the FAA licence for the PPL and IR in the UK wins hands down over the JAA.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think that there is any eal difference in the levels of bureaucracy between the FARs or ther JARs.
There is a difference in the method of application and it is quite ironic that while the UK has put much of the increased oversight and costs into JAR flying, it is UK pilots who feel hard done by.
Until recently, it was possible to keep an instructor rating valid forever based on experience and an inexpensive seminar every 3 years. Not content with that, the UK pused for and acheived the situation where we have to complete renewal tests every 6 years at a minimum. The UK may have had that system pre-JAR but much of the rest of Europe didn't.
What drives most UK pilots to the USA is cost and it does not surprise me with having to pay extortionate rates for aircraft hire. The economics are clear to see.
Why does the rest of Europe not have the same mad dash to train 3000 miles away? and why are most if not all the US based training establishements who provide JAA training both approved by the UK authorities and aimed directly at the UK market?
Could it be that the UK is the only real market for such establishements? If that is so then why is it so?
I did my JAA IR more cheaply than I could have completed the FAA one. I didn't do it in the UK though!!
Regards,
DFC
There is a difference in the method of application and it is quite ironic that while the UK has put much of the increased oversight and costs into JAR flying, it is UK pilots who feel hard done by.
Until recently, it was possible to keep an instructor rating valid forever based on experience and an inexpensive seminar every 3 years. Not content with that, the UK pused for and acheived the situation where we have to complete renewal tests every 6 years at a minimum. The UK may have had that system pre-JAR but much of the rest of Europe didn't.
What drives most UK pilots to the USA is cost and it does not surprise me with having to pay extortionate rates for aircraft hire. The economics are clear to see.
Why does the rest of Europe not have the same mad dash to train 3000 miles away? and why are most if not all the US based training establishements who provide JAA training both approved by the UK authorities and aimed directly at the UK market?
Could it be that the UK is the only real market for such establishements? If that is so then why is it so?
I did my JAA IR more cheaply than I could have completed the FAA one. I didn't do it in the UK though!!
Regards,
DFC
