JAA: Requirements for ratings
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,166
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
Interesting thread. I've not been through the US system, but I have been through the Canadian and JAA systems and feel I can make a few comments.
When I left the military, I heard all the usual stuff about how the British (now JAA) system was the best, etc.
The JAA philosophy is to ensure that you know as much as you can before you start, since they have no way of knowing where you are going to end up during your career. In Canada (and the US), they don't expect you to be an expert at that point, but appreciate that you will get the same knowledge through ground school and type ratings.
The Canadian written exams can be taken at any Transport Canada office at any time, and are more straightforward than the JAA exams, but they are not "easier". What critics seem to forget, or not know about their system, is that the flight test is the killer. Mine was almost a whole day in the company of an examiner, with 4 hours spent before the flight discussing maps, their equivalent of Pooley's, what you would do with drunk passengers, etc. As a previous poster said, you'd better know your stuff! Also, when I did my UK skills tests, if the examiner was checking cross-country, for example, and you did nothing completely stupid in other areas, that was all he was interested in. In Canada and the US, every aspect of your flying is checked. Considering that the Canadian syllabus is only 100 hours, which includes some slinging, they produce some very good pilots. (On the subject of examiners, I might add that I have always had a standard ride from Transport Canada inspectors - they have unfailingly been poilite and straight down the line, which is not always the case with JAA).
Back to the JAA exams. Yes, they are over the top in some areas - unless I was going to repair my own radio in the jungle, which I might have done 50 years ago, I fail to see why I need to know about AND gates or the inner workings of a CRT (although being a PC technician I happen to know that anyway). However, the majority of the Radio stuff is there because it is part of the amateur radio syllabus, which you need because you have a radio licence. Also, the Human Factors stuff is there as an ICAO requirement.
Believe it or not, I've even used a lot of the stuff in Nav gen, which most people promptly forget!
As for type ratings, the original subject of this thread, In Canada, any Canadian CPL with the same type rating can take you through whatever minimum hours you need before your skills test. If I'm not mistaken their signature will also qualify for that, but don't quote me (It was certainly the case for my last one). The other good thing they do is that the examiner's signature is good for thirty days until your new licence appears in the post so you can go to work straight away - no going all the way to Ottawa (Gatport Airwick) to get it done like you have to do in UK.
Please don't slag off systems if you don't know what you are talking about!
Phil
When I left the military, I heard all the usual stuff about how the British (now JAA) system was the best, etc.
The JAA philosophy is to ensure that you know as much as you can before you start, since they have no way of knowing where you are going to end up during your career. In Canada (and the US), they don't expect you to be an expert at that point, but appreciate that you will get the same knowledge through ground school and type ratings.
The Canadian written exams can be taken at any Transport Canada office at any time, and are more straightforward than the JAA exams, but they are not "easier". What critics seem to forget, or not know about their system, is that the flight test is the killer. Mine was almost a whole day in the company of an examiner, with 4 hours spent before the flight discussing maps, their equivalent of Pooley's, what you would do with drunk passengers, etc. As a previous poster said, you'd better know your stuff! Also, when I did my UK skills tests, if the examiner was checking cross-country, for example, and you did nothing completely stupid in other areas, that was all he was interested in. In Canada and the US, every aspect of your flying is checked. Considering that the Canadian syllabus is only 100 hours, which includes some slinging, they produce some very good pilots. (On the subject of examiners, I might add that I have always had a standard ride from Transport Canada inspectors - they have unfailingly been poilite and straight down the line, which is not always the case with JAA).
Back to the JAA exams. Yes, they are over the top in some areas - unless I was going to repair my own radio in the jungle, which I might have done 50 years ago, I fail to see why I need to know about AND gates or the inner workings of a CRT (although being a PC technician I happen to know that anyway). However, the majority of the Radio stuff is there because it is part of the amateur radio syllabus, which you need because you have a radio licence. Also, the Human Factors stuff is there as an ICAO requirement.
Believe it or not, I've even used a lot of the stuff in Nav gen, which most people promptly forget!
As for type ratings, the original subject of this thread, In Canada, any Canadian CPL with the same type rating can take you through whatever minimum hours you need before your skills test. If I'm not mistaken their signature will also qualify for that, but don't quote me (It was certainly the case for my last one). The other good thing they do is that the examiner's signature is good for thirty days until your new licence appears in the post so you can go to work straight away - no going all the way to Ottawa (Gatport Airwick) to get it done like you have to do in UK.
Please don't slag off systems if you don't know what you are talking about!
Phil
