JAA: Requirements for ratings

[mortennb]

"JAA" B206 type rating

Hi.

Anyone know where you can get the type rating for the B206 for a decent price?
I am still in the US, and was hoping i could get it there before i head back for Europe.

I am not sure what the requierment to get the type rating in Europe is, but is it possible for me to get a certain amount of hours in the 206 in the US. And that will be good enough?

[B Sousa]

You can certainly get hours cheaper in the states. Obviously you know there is no such "rating" with an FAA license.
Check with folks back home and see if PIC time is all they need with a sign off from an approved instructor.
Call the folks at www.heli.com They should be able to give you some advice.

[mongoose237]

In a word, no. There are no FAA type ratings for that size helicopter.

Individual CAAs have the right to reduce training below 5hrs + LST for initial Single Engine Turbine, but unless you have considerable experience they are unlikely to.

Helicopter Adventures, Florida do have a JAA TRTO I believe, however some time ago they quoted more per hour than it cost in the UK!

You are looking at around £450/hr + VAT in the UK

You can get it cheaper in Scandinavia and probably other European Countries

[mortennb]

Originally Posted by mongoose237

In a word, no. There are no FAA type ratings for that size helicopter.

Individual CAAs have the right to reduce training below 5hrs + LST for initial Single Engine Turbine, but unless you have considerable experience they are unlikely to.

Helicopter Adventures, Florida do have a JAA TRTO I believe, however some time ago they quoted more per hour than it cost in the UK!

You are looking at around £450/hr + VAT in the UK

You can get it cheaper in Scandinavia and probably other European Countries

Hmm.. Thats to bad.. Because i could have bought myself some B206 time for 165 $/hour in the US. Because I need to get 6 hours for the type rating before I can take the JAA IR conversion in it. It costs me about 750 $/hour in Scandinavia.

[mongoose237]

Check your PMs

[mongoose237]

Yes you can get SE IR in the UK (Bristows, as you said) and also elsewhere in Europe - there is a longranger floating around Scandinavia in the same context.

[206av8]

What a joke JAR are. I guess while the industry puts up with these ridiculous, revenue raising requirements with regard to flight crew licencing then nothing will change. I suppose I should be thankful I am flying in Australia. It worries me though, because I have been trained over here I must be no where near as good a pilot as all the British or JAA pilots. Ha ha.

[mongoose237]

I believe 5 hours for initial issue, 3 hours for subsequent types is standard ICAO

I haven't read the CARs for several years, but would CASA issue a type rating to someone without a type rating but 10 hours B206 obtained through a strange loop in the FAA system that allows both instructor and student to log P1?

[206av8]

Mongoose

Sorry, i was not really referring to that particular requirement for a type rating but I am just generally annoyed with what I hear about experienced pilots trying to add ratings to an existing JAR licence or to convert to one or something similar. Where do they get off, the rest of the ICAO world seems to get by very well with less restrictive but more sensible requirements. What's the go? I guess I should have started a new thread about this. And I wasn't having a go at pilots with these licences, although it may have looked like that.

With regard to your question, if you could prove to CASA that you had flown 3 (or 5 if first turbine) hours with an appropriate person and covered the type rating syllabus then they may accept this. This may have changed.

[B Sousa]

strange loop in the FAA system that allows both instructor and student to log P1?]

As long as the student is at the controls in the proper seat, he can log PIC. Hes flying??
JAR sucks......bottom line

[mongoose237]

And I wasn't having a go at pilots with these licences, although it may have looked like that.

Not at all, and no offence was taken. I have several ICAO licences so I guess I have the luxury of being able to stand back and look at the various systems' pros and cons.

What I can say is I think the JAA system is less than perfect, but it does get some unwarranted criticism.

For example, I don't think anyone would expect to convert their licence to another country's licence without a check ride. No JAA difference here.

Most people would expect their hours obtained abroad to be counted. No JAA difference here.

Slightly aside, I feel people often interpret "JAA" as synonymous with "British". JAA / EASA is the result of up to 40 autonomous countries collectively deciding what they feel best suits their needs. That is a far cry from Britain perceiving itself as a cut above the rest and imposing ridiculous rules to that effect.

New Zealand feels that its commercial pilots need external load training, because that suits their needs. Australia incorporates low flying training. "JAA" world feels that neither of these are necessary for their pilots, however it does feel that a broader understanding of theory, airspace and procedure is required. I guess that is as much their prerogative as it is any other country to impose additional requirements.

Should someone who has passed their commercial theory through 1 written exam after buying a book with all the questions and right answers in it be afforded an Australian CPL instead of having to undertake the CASA exams? Or a pilot with no low flying or external load training be granted an Australian or New Zealand licence? Should a PPL with a few hours night solo pre-licence issue be allowed to fly night VFR? The answers may be yes, or may be no. Everyone will have their own view.

Many will grumble at the JAA adminstrative fees, few however then grumble at their JAA salaries.

Not a rant; I have no axe to grind. Simply some observations and a little bit of food for thought.

[206av8]

That is an interesting take on JAR, and obviously from one who knows a bit about it with some valid points. If I can sum my thoughts up fairly quickly, I find it hard to see that if someone has gone to the effort of obtaining an Australian ATPL for example, which is no walk in the park, then they have to go through the whole process of passing numerous exams and also completing several flying hours probably in an IFR Twin just to be granted the priveledge of a JAA ATPL. Correct me if I'm wrong but I understand this the case.
However, the majority of other ICAO countries accept valid overseas qualifications with usually just an Air Law exam pass required. What message does this send out to the rest of the International aviation fraternity?

[mongoose237]

I can understand people's frustrations about the theory, however it really is no different to other countries who also impose non ICAO requirements. The lure of European wages attract a lot of pilots (lets face it, its not the flying) so the JAA shortcoming are often lamented.

An FAA PPL includes night privileges. Are CASA going to issue a Night VFR endorsement on the basis of this? The FAA licence is ICAO, the pilot has worked hard on getting their PPL(H) ... I'm not trying to pick holes, I merely want to highlight that JAA is far from being the only authority to impose additional requirements.

A JAA ATPL will allow you to act as commander of a multi-crew helicopter. Therefore you are required to have multi-crew experience before you are given the licence permitting you to carry out such a role. I do not know of any genuine multi-crew helicopters that aren't operating IFR, so an IR is a requirement too.

If you have suitable experience, yes you will have to pay around AU$ 1,800 to take the JAA exams, and undertake a skills test. However you will then command a AU$ 70,000 - AU$ 190,000 salary in a job commensurate to your experience.

Although many overseas pilots feel that JAA requirements are belittling their achievements, the true must be felt by the JAA licence holders if other pilots who weren't subjected to the same onerous rules are given the same licence as themselves.

The JAA system may have its faults in excessive training minima, however it is merely asking all pilots who wish to exercise the privileges of a JAA licence to have done exactly the same amount of training. To exempt overseas pilots would be a slap in the face to JAA-trained pilots.

[206av8]

I can see how JAA licenced pilots may feel a bit ripped off if that were to happen but I don't agree with the way it is. I guess this could be argued for eternity but I still think that a person holding the relevant overseas licence and flight experience should only need to pass an air law exam and a flight test and instrument rating renewal if applicable.
It looks like the major difference between JAR and Australia for example is that in Australia most of the cost involved with becoming a M/E IFR Captain are taken up by the companies pilots work for. It is usually a natural progression from Co-pilot to Captain after appropriate experience has been gained and assuming you have the ability to progress. If a pilot has completed ATPL and IREX exams and gets a job as a Co-Pilot then he will usually not have to spend any more money on flying if he stays there for a while. This of course depends on the career path chosen after that.
Anyway, that is my 2 cents worth.

[mongoose237]

Yes, you are right it can be argued ad infinitum. I only argue for the consistency of licencing, not the standard.

The system is very similar in the UK:
You take the theory at ATPL level, that includes your instrument theory. These are valid for 3 years to get a CPL(H) and to get an IR(H). Then you have 7 years from your last IR expiry to get the minimum hours for ATPL.

When you have done your theory and passed your CPL(H) you may look to the offshore industry. Some are self sponsored, others get picked up and bonded for an IR. If you remain in the company, they will pick up the tab for the rest of your training and currency up to and including ATPL issue.

So we aren't that different after all

[mortennb]

Well, if it will become's like the rumors and statistics say. Europe and USA will have a lack of pilots within the next 5-10 years.

I picked the US way due to the experience you can get there on your visa. Correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I know its not easy to get a job in Europe with 160 hours.
Today the US is hard on theyr working visa's, but If it becomes a lack of pilots it might be more easy to obtain one.

And what is than most suitable for a person who wants to become a pilot. Use lots of money to obtain a JAA CPL-H and lick asses to get either a ground crew job for 2-3 years or something else who will give you a ****ty job to get into the industry? Someone mentioned that the salary is much better in JAA countries... When..? Thats not the first 6-10 years.

You can get CPL, IR, CFI and CFII and GOOD chances of getting experience in the US for the same amount of money you use in Europe for the 160 hours and a CPL-H.
Its interesting to see how many people from Europe that take theyr pilot education in the US instead of back home. Most because its so hard to get into the industry. But only a few is realy interested in going back due to the system JAA has today.
I have two friends from Europe who are flying in the US. (greencard)
They both have been playing with the idea of going back. But they just skip it due to the conversion that are required to obtain those licenses.
It will be funny to see what the conversion will exsist of in 5 years if more people choose to stay outside Europe.

And some might say that they have a higher level of education in Europe. Well, thats funny. Its not long since the JAA was made. And I have spoken to alot of people who has converted who say FAA teaches you what you need to know, what you should now and where to look if you need to know more.
JAA is just that you have to know all before you are allowed to fly. And most people say they forget about 50% of what they learn in ATPL theory due to the fact that they never use it.
When you want to convert your ICAO license to JAA, and they give you ATPL-A theory for helicopters. It shows how stupid the whole system is.

[mongoose237]

Well, Mortennb, although that mythical 5-10 years never seems to arise and that I disagree with some of what you say, I hope you are right as it will make a lot of people happy. Good luck

[mortennb]

Originally Posted by mongoose237

Well, Mortennb, although that mythical 5-10 years never seems to arise and that I disagree with some of what you say, I hope you are right as it will make a lot of people happy. Good luck

Its allowed to have hope and dreams....Even though I realy think it will never happend...

[Heliport]

mongoose237

but 10 hours B206 obtained through a strange loop in the FAA system that allows both instructor and student to log P1

If the FAA doesn't have/require a type rating to fly a B206, surely a qualified pilot is entitled to log the time he's the handling pilot as P1?



mortennb
If you've got some money to spare, I'd say spend some of it on a few hours at $165.
Whether or not the hours count towards your type rating back home, you'll have the experience and the turbine time.
I've spoken to a few people who flew the traffic watch helicopters when hours building and they've all thought it was well worth every cent.



IMHO, the sooner ICAO licences/ratings are accepted by all ICAO countries provided a pilot passes the local air law exam, the better.
If countries wish to protect their employment position, they should do it by other means, not by using licensing requirements.

H.

[SASless]

Mongoose,

I hate to take issue with you however I feel a comment is necessary based upon your post earlier....that being:

Although many overseas pilots feel that JAA requirements are belittling their achievements, the true must be felt by the JAA licence holders if other pilots who weren't subjected to the same onerous rules are given the same licence as themselves.

The JAA system may have its faults in excessive training minima, however it is merely asking all pilots who wish to exercise the privileges of a JAA licence to have done exactly the same amount of training. To exempt overseas pilots would be a slap in the face to JAA-trained pilots.

You admit the JAA system is onerous and places an uneccessary burden on the pilot. Then you go on to accept such a propostion suggesting that it only fair then to force yet more folks to endure such expense and distress.

Which side of this situation are you on? Why can you and other JAA sufferers not stand up and start protesting such a system and effect positive and needed change?

Heliport states it very succinctly.....guarding one's turf at other's great harm and expense is wrong. What Heliport forgot is the wound is inflicted upon their very own constituents. No one but the bureaucrats benefit from the JAR's routine.

I just hope after the UK and Europe bin JARS and adopt EASA and everyone jumps through those hoops...the FAA and other Non-EASA nations assume a similar attitude and throws roadblocks of the same sort in front of anyone from an EASA bloc nation trying to get a Non-EASA license. I would love to hear the whining then!