A Question of the Speed limit When at and below 10000ft

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Right, but your training here (for an EU carrier) was GA, despite what you might want to classify it as. The academy is operating on a part 141 certificate: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo//sdl/local_more/media/Part141PilotSchools.pdf. GA, being classified as anything other than Part 121 (or whatever reg in the area of the world defines commercial air carriers), and military, I find it hard to believe airlines (EU or otherwise) find their pilots in any other realm.

 

So, that all in mind, what's bad for GA is bad for the airlines. They just don't know how bad it'll hurt them because they think user fees would be the magic bullet to lessen their burden in taxes to the FAA. The problem is that if their actions all but kill the Part 91 flight training environment, and hurt the Part 141 environment, they'll have to revert to the ab-initio training regime and they'll have to pay on that end instead.

[DLH_FRA 0]

As I say within LH we only take pilots from our own school or other airlines. So it would not make one jot of difference to us. We believe it is the only way to control the quality of the pilot on our flightdecks is to train them according to our own standards.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

We believe it is the only way to control the quality of the pilot on our flightdecks is to train them according to our own standards.

 

I'd agree with that statement. The only way to ensure your own quality 100% is to train them from the beginning, but there's a huge cost associated with that, and I don't think the airlines here in the States (where we don't really have ab-initio training any more) realize that, or are ready for it.

[ccarter06 3]

DLH_FRA, scandinavian 13 is correct that if you were flying an actual airplane inside the borders of the United States, and you were not flying under Part 121 or 135, you were flying in the "GA" category under the supervision of the FAA, within the US airspace system.

 

The training system you are describing is ab initio. I have taught those programs to many students for foreign carriers. Any of the training you conducted here was approved by the FAA (again, your plane and it's pilots/occupants were under the supervision of the FAA - it is the only governing body of the US airspace system). In all likelihood, it was done under Part 141 rules. Ab initio programs train very specific material in a very specific way. The information you were given about the US portion of your training was likely VERY tailored because most of the underlying information would've been irrelevant to the goal of training you to fly in Europe.

 

With that being said, it means that your understanding of the US airspace system and it's regulations is also HIGHLY tailored to the training you received. The system works pretty well. We don't put planes together too often, and we have kept that record without enacting user fees, or creating an overly-rigid over-controlled airpace system.

[DLH_FRA 0]

Our training was not conducted under FAR141, because A, we did not do US check rides, B, the examiner flew across from Germany to conduct the checkrides as he is a JAA examiner.

 

If the training was conducted under part 141 then at the very least in addition to the JAA examinations we would of had to complete the FAA written and flight tests... I can assure you I did not.

 

However, on many occasions I have taken part in GA flying in the US, so again to say I don't know how the system works there is just not correct.

 

I have flown coast to coast in a Archer, not for training just for fun.

 

Anyway, my comment was based on a fact in our company we have a higher rate of TCAS RA's in US airspace than anywhere else in the world.

 

Also airports like JFK etc are CAT B airports for many European airlines... Why? Becuase of the non standard RT that is in use.

 

Thats why many of my American pilot friends find it a big transition when they fly outside the US, because in many ways the US does not follow ICAO - RT being a prime example.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Our training was not conducted under FAR141, because A, we did not do US check rides, B, the examiner flew across from Germany to conduct the checkrides as he is a JAA examiner.

 

Yes, it was: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo//sdl/local_more/media/Part141PilotSchools.pdf

 

Seriously, go to that link and tell me that ATCA (the DLH academy) is not listed on there on a Part 141 certificate. You have to be licensed here in the United States to provide training to anyone - US applicants or otherwise.

 

I understand what you're trying to say, in that you took JAA tests and so on, but your training - whether you like this fact or not - was conducted under the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 141. In order to be approved, that school provided the FAA with a training syllabus that mirrored JAA regulations, which satisfied the FAA's requirements for that school to operate in its 141 regs. Had it not, the school would not have operated here.

 

Anyway, my comment was based on a fact in our company we have a higher rate of TCAS RA's in US airspace than anywhere else in the world.

 

Stats to back that up?

[DLH_FRA 0]

Yes I have stats to back it up..

 

The training center also provide training for people outside of the LH group, just because they have a 141 certificate does not mean that is all they do!

 

Hell some of the aircraft are not even N registered.

[ccarter06 3]

Also airports like JFK etc are CAT B airports for many European airlines... Why? Becuase of the non standard RT that is in use.

 

Thats why many of my American pilot friends find it a big transition when they fly outside the US, because in many ways the US does not follow ICAO - RT being a prime example.

 

Am I understanding you correctly? You are saying that because some airports in the US use right-hand traffic patterns for some runways, it will be difficult for a US pilot to fly elsewhere in the world?

[DLH_FRA 0]

No the comment came from an instructor at US Airways, he was the one who mentioned it.

 

As US pilots flying domestically are not exposed to many things, because the US particularly in instances of RT is not the same as ICAO.

 

(this is not to start some kind of argument, as I say these words came from an American)

 

One example, that I am aware of.

 

US Airways came to us as a Star Alliance Member.. Because they were the worst performing airline in UK airspace at CDA and as such were facing fines and slot restrictions.

 

Why? Simply because they are not used to the way things are done...

 

In the US it is very normal to fly level segments, in Europe your airline will face a fine and or slot restrictions.

 

When a controller tells you turn right heading 350, 33 miles to touchdown that means CDA is in effect... Due to the differences in the US the US Airways pilots were not aware of that.... it caused a problem which US Airways has now placed into their training program.

 

(maybe not the best example, but one I have to hand here in front of me)

[ccarter06 3]

I gotta tell you DLH_FRA, flying an airplane is flying an airplane. If someone is finding it too difficult to adapt to flying under a different set of guidelines/proceedures, that person probably has some fundamental flying issues. Whether FAA to ICAO, or vice-versa. Procedures might vary from one region of the world to the next, but none of it should be outside the realm of a capable pilot.

 

I would disagree with the US Airways pilot, for what it's worth.

 

If your company is having more TCAS RA's here than elsewhere, it might point to a fundamental training deficiency in the area of US operations.

 

The training center also provide training for people outside of the LH group, just because they have a 141 certificate does not mean that is all they do!

 

Hell some of the aircraft are not even N registered.

 

If you received flight training in the US, you received it under the supervision of the FAA. That training and school had to meet Part 61 or Part 141 basic requirements. You may not have received training based on US required hours, or required areas of instruction, but the school operated (and taught you) under one or both of those sets of rules at least at a core level. The difficulty in explaining this to you is what is making it appear as though you may have misunderstood the US Airways pilot, and that your company's TCAS woes might be related to your company's training. There is a vast world of aviation outside the ab initio program you participated in. I am in NO WAY saying you didn't receive good training for the job you're expected to do, but it is far from likely that you received a thorough education in the many realms of flying (even if only from an academic standpoint).

 

By the way... where an aircraft is registered has nothing to do with the training you received.

[DLH_FRA 0]

Of course where an aircraft is registered has something to do with the training! If it has a D on the back then that means it has to conform to the laws and rule of Germany.

 

Or when an N registered aircraft flys in Europe do they suddenly conform to EU-OPS? No they don't!

 

Of course there are some differences in the US, we also have a part 129 certificate.

 

There are or at least was schools in the US conducting only JAA training with JAA examiners under the guidance of their National Aviation Authority.

 

I know in the past, there had been an issue so the student had to get an FAA medical that would allow him to fly solo (but that was it everything else was conducted under the JAA)

 

As I say I was never issued or tested for any US certificates if I had been in a 141 school then I would of had to complete the FAA exams in addition to those of the JAA

[ccarter06 3]

I need to back up and point out a glaring problem I've found in your position, DLH_FRA...

 

You state that the US airspace system is flawed because your pilots get more TCAS RA's here. By that logic the European system is flawed in the eyes of US Airways pilots because they get more traffic management issues there. But you are saying it's the US pilots' fault for not undestanding the European system... by that logic it is your pilots' fault for getting more TCAS RA's because your pilots don't understand the US system.

 

You seem to be heavily biased to your rules and your way of flying. That's fine, but you do need to be aware of it.

[DLH_FRA 0]

The reasons we get TCAS RA's are because there is GA traffic that ATC are not talking to.

 

Our hotspot airports are mainly in Florida. That is the big difference you have GA traffic in the same airspace as airline traffic and that same GA traffic is not required to talk to ATC.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but there is nothing (other than common sense) stopping a bug smasher flying along a victor airway at +/- 500 feet, VFR and not talking to anyone correct?

 

If you want video evidence of the problem, watch ITVV Airtours International A330 Manchester to Orlando Sanford, they get GA traffic real close to them, and the controller confirms he was not speaking to that traffic.

 

That can't happen in Europe as our airways are controlled and only IFR traffic is in them or crosses them

[ccarter06 3]

Of course where an aircraft is registered has something to do with the training! If it has a D on the back then that means it has to conform to the laws and rule of Germany.

 

Or when an N registered aircraft flys in Europe do they suddenly conform to EU-OPS? No they don't!

 

Where a plane is registered indicates the basic airworthiness directives it must meet. Where the plane is currently located in the world dictates what rules it is flying under. ICAO is an international set of rules that allow pilots to operate in many countries without having to alter the company proceedures too much when moving from one country to the next. In order to do that, the company's proceedures have to conform to the relevant ICAO rules.

 

If an N-registered plane is flying in Europe, it is subject to flying under European rules and/or ICAO rules.

If a European registered plane is flying in the US, it is subject to flying under US rules and/or ICAO rules.

 

There are or at least was schools in the US conducting only JAA training with JAA examiners under the guidance of their National Aviation Authority.

 

Please cite an example, with reference. Until then, I do not believe you.

 

I know in the past, there had been an issue so the student had to get an FAA medical that would allow him to fly solo (but that was it everything else was conducted under the JAA)

 

That is because they were flying under the supervision of the FAA, and the FAA required it. They may have a waiver for that requirement now, but that waiver was signed into effect by the FAA.

 

As I say I was never issued or tested for any US certificates if I had been in a 141 school then I would of had to complete the FAA exams in addition to those of the JAA

 

The only way you would've have to take an FAA exam is if you were applying for a license under FAA rules. You can do whatever flying you want in the US, but the instructors and the school still had to conform to some FAA rules in order to operate a flight school inside the US.

[DLH_FRA 0]

Oh boy how wrong you are!

 

As FedEx what rules they fly under when in Europe - on inter Europe flights.. You got it FAR 121

 

When you fly outside of the US which air operators certificate are you using..l the one issued by the FAA... When I fly to the US we operate on our AOC as issued by the German Authorities... And as such we operate to EU Minima, rest rules etc etc etc