• NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.
  • Logbook Pro for Apple iOS version 8.1 is now available on the App Store. Major update including signature endorsements and dark/light theme support. Click here to install now.

Flight Safety Hong Kong G550 type

Adios

Active member
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Posts
36
Ok...I signed a (second) contract with a company in Shanghai, China. On the second contract, they offered me the G550/450 type, but was required to give a $30,000 USD deposit check. [if] I failed the initial training at FSI, then they keep the check. I wrote the check, I then attended flight safety in Hong Kong in June, and successfully passed the check ride with a TCE from FSI, along with the CAAC in the simulator. In China you have to do "touch and go's" in the aircraft, then they give the license. Anyway, the SAME CAAC POI who gave me the FSI sim check...FAILED me for "touch and go's!" I now have no CAAC/FAA license. Someone please tell me how an FAA Part 142 school can take money and NOT provide a license to an FAA Pilot who just went through the G550 month long type school.

Chime in everyone...

Thanks.
 
Last edited:

kingairyahoo

my old job...
Joined
Sep 13, 2004
Posts
515
Total Time
41yrs
Subscribed...
 

CaptSeth

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2004
Posts
510
Total Time
?
I don't understand why you wouldn't have the FAA license, the CAAC examiner has no authority and it should have been issued. If you passed the training and did all of the appropriate paperwork, a discussion with FSI is in order, along with the reminder that they ARE still regulated by FAA and can and will be contacted regarding this matter.

As for the CAAC examiner, well, this is why china is not a reliable place to seek employment.
 

Adios

Active member
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Posts
36
Capt, I received my training documents, along with my G550 diploma from flight safety. However, FSI says, I was the "client" and the Chinese company is the "customer." that being said, I guess that means that my parents name should be on my college diploma and my ATP license since they are the ones who paid...And yes, I did send a lengthy email to the HK FSI manager and asked him politely, if we can resolve this without legal actions.

thanks CS
 

GlorifiedCabbie

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Posts
1,220
Total Time
15+
The Chinese company may be the "customer", and FSI has to train you to their standards. They probably have to train using the "customer's" syllabus.
 

Adios

Active member
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Posts
36
LR45, nothing went wrong with the "touch and go's," and how can someone who just took a G550 practical test at flight safety with a TCE and the same CAAC fail touch and go's? Not only that, the CAAC said I passed, but when I went home to the U.S. for vacation, the company then said i failed and tried to cash the 30,000 usd check. But, the check was only good for the initial G550 training at fight safety HK. My .2 cents is the CAAC does not like Americans and the company wanted the check.

Flight Safety does not have a training syllabus from the Chinese company. FSI uses a standard ATP practical test syllabus. As for the Chinese pilots, they may use China airports for their approaches, but even that I'm not 100 percent certain.
 
Last edited:

Pickle

grumpy puppy
Joined
May 8, 2002
Posts
381
Total Time
no mas
What was your objective during training? If it was 61.157(TR) then you were enrolled in the adding a type rating to your existing US ATP.

If your objective was listed as *, or non-FAA, then there would be no certificate action (adding a type rating) and you would not receive anything on your US ATP.
 

Pickle

grumpy puppy
Joined
May 8, 2002
Posts
381
Total Time
no mas
Unfortunately, that means you were never set up to receive a US type rating from the get go. Had you been 61.157(TR) you'd have received your new temp certificate with the type rating on it from the TCE at the conclusion of your checkride.
 

Coool Hand Luke

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2006
Posts
857
Total Time
5,600
It always amazes me at the number of pilots that show up at a 142 schoolhouse and have no idea what their actual "objective" is. Usually the program manager visits the class on the first day just to confirm what the pilot is seeking relative to FAA FARs or NAA regulation. As others have stated, if your "objective" wasn't an added type rating IAW 61.157 then you would not have received the type on your FAA certificate.
 

Adios

Active member
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Posts
36
Coool..you're NOT in China!!!

I have attended many "schoolhouses" in America/China and not once have I ever had the opportunity to fill out the flight safety/CAE paper work to say what I wanted on my FAA/CAAC license.

In (China) the schoolhouse FSI manager does NOT come into the classroom to advise the Chinese pilots what they will receive on their licenses, not to mention the sole FAA American pilot who is paying for his G550 type through a bond with the Chinese company.

And, I wasn't aware that an FAA Part 142 school could say...well today we will operate "equiventley" but tomorrow we will operate as a full Part 142 school. Either they're a 142 school or NOT!!

That being said, can you imagine if your college institution said, " well, when you graduated, we were accredited, but today, we are not accredited....sorry if you/parents paid 200K for you BS degree.

The attorney's will have a field day when flight safety says, well "we operated at "equivalent" to a Part 142 school on this day, and we're in the business of giving diplomas on how to fly G550 airplanes, but NOT really accredited or governed by any agency when we so feel like it. LOL

Chime in when ready
 

Coool Hand Luke

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2006
Posts
857
Total Time
5,600
Coool..you're NOT in China!!!

I have attended many "schoolhouses" in America/China and not once have I ever had the opportunity to fill out the flight safety/CAE paper work to say what I wanted on my FAA/CAAC license.

In (China) the schoolhouse FSI manager does NOT come into the classroom to advise the Chinese pilots what they will receive on their licenses, not to mention the sole FAA American pilot who is paying for his G550 type through a bond with the Chinese company.

And, I wasn't aware that an FAA Part 142 school could say...well today we will operate "equiventley" but tomorrow we will operate as a full Part 142 school. Either they're a 142 school or NOT!!

That being said, can you imagine if your college institution said, " well, when you graduated, we were accredited, but today, we are not accredited....sorry if you/parents paid 200K for you BS degree.

The attorney's will have a field day when flight safety says, well "we operated at "equivalent" to a Part 142 school on this day, and we're in the business of giving diplomas on how to fly G550 airplanes, but NOT really accredited or governed by any agency when we so feel like it. LOL

Chime in when ready

Grasshopper, its best not to tear the rice paper when you walk on it.

I (as in me) started a satellite FAA 142 training center in both Shanghai and Zuhai (and a few other hot spots around the globe), so I know China very well, and I know the CAAC very well.

Seems I need to start a consulting business for pilots who sign training contracts.

In the 142 world, you have two kinds of participants: Clients. Those are the pilots that will actually be completing the training course. Then you have customers. Those are the people who sign the training agreement and pay for the training. Sometimes a person is both the client amd the customer (self-funded). Also, 142 folks often aren't aware that the client has entered into a side agreement with the customer relative to the clients successful completion of the training program. Nor do they care. They have a valid contract with the customer, and that contract spells out the training objectives for the client.

Now, as to your predicament, you didn't get to go to training at FSI without someone signing a training agreement with FSI. That would be a document I'd be interested in seeing.
 

Pickle

grumpy puppy
Joined
May 8, 2002
Posts
381
Total Time
no mas
And, I wasn't aware that an FAA Part 142 school could say...well today we will operate "equiventley" but tomorrow we will operate as a full Part 142 school. Either they're a 142 school or NOT!!

Adios:

The "equivalent" applies to 61.157, not 142.

What I mean is, the course is done under FSI's 142 training program. It meets (is equivalent to) the requirements of 61.157 to obtain a type rating on a US ATP although holding a US ATP is not required.

This objective is for foreign (non-US is what I mean by foreign in this case) authorities who want to see that a course is in some way stringent - the foreign authority will be able to look at this and say "oh, he passed a course that would have led to a type rating on a US ATP. OK, based upon that I will put the G450/500 type rating on his (fill in foreign authority and nationality here) license and he may now exercise said privileges under our national authority rules etc."

Hopefully that makes it a little more clear, albeit I know it isn't any more palatable.
 

X-rated

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
498
Total Time
8000+
Did you sign an 8710 before the check ride?
 
Last edited:

Adios

Active member
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Posts
36
Apologize Coool, please understand that this situation is a little frustrating for me.
Well yes, I am sure you know a lot about the 142 schools. Anyway, the thing that is difficult to understand is, how can (I) be the "client" if I am the one who in reality is paying for the G550 type, by being bonded through the company. Yes, I realize the company signed the agreement with FSI, but FSI should NOT be allowed to withhold a temp certificate from someone like me.

On the confirmation report from flight safety, it clearly says "equivalent 142, equivalent 61.157."

Thanks for chiming in...I am learning tons.
 
Last edited:

Coool Hand Luke

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2006
Posts
857
Total Time
5,600
FSI, or any other 142 Training Center, cannot legally withhold your training records...at least your FAA training records. Believe me, the training centers get asked to do this all the time. Usually it's by less-than-honest 135 operators who don't want their pilots walking with a fresh type and a fresh .293/.297. You should know that it is illegal to do this. If you ask for your training records they have to give them to you. If you were enrolled in an initial type course with concurrent CAAC and FAA added type rating objectives then you are certainly entitled to your FAA type rating if it was successfully completed. I'm concerned that your only objective was CAAC. I do know that the FSI center in HK is an FAA approved 142 training center (at least last time I checked). I've also never heard of someone having issues with the three takeoff and landings required by the CAAC.

Knowing China like I do, I could imagine a scenario where the company you were hired by didn't pay off the right official and you paid the price. Probably had nothing to do with you. Ive also heard of instances where pilots were hired, sent to training, and then the deal fell through. A few Yuan's to the right person and you fail your ride and the company gets its money back. No loss to them, nor concern for some "round eye".

China is a very interesting place my friend, and the things that aren't said mean as much or more than what is actually said.
 

Adios

Active member
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Posts
36
I couldn't agree with you more about the "Chinese pay off." I initially thought the same thing when I sat down in the left seat to do the touch and go's and the CAAC guy said this is a check ride. At that point I'm thinking...wow again!!!!!

As for my training records from FSI, I have the records that are posted on their website. I also thoroughly understand why the Chinese companies don't let FSI give the 61.157 to their "clients." As I stated previously about the (objective,) the only thing that is in the objective is: "equivalent" 142, and 61.157.

Right..I have been here in China for 3 years, and I never heard of a pilot failing "touch and go's," especially from the same CAAC who just observed a successful 6 hr G550 practical test from a TCE.
 

rumrnr78

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 16, 2004
Posts
601
Total Time
8,100
Coool..you're NOT in China!!!

I have attended many "schoolhouses" in America/China and not once have I ever had the opportunity to fill out the flight safety/CAE paper work to say what I wanted on my FAA/CAAC license.

In (China) the schoolhouse FSI manager does NOT come into the classroom to advise the Chinese pilots what they will receive on their licenses, not to mention the sole FAA American pilot who is paying for his G550 type through a bond with the Chinese company.

And, I wasn't aware that an FAA Part 142 school could say...well today we will operate "equiventley" but tomorrow we will operate as a full Part 142 school. Either they're a 142 school or NOT!!

That being said, can you imagine if your college institution said, " well, when you graduated, we were accredited, but today, we are not accredited....sorry if you/parents paid 200K for you BS degree.

The attorney's will have a field day when flight safety says, well "we operated at "equivalent" to a Part 142 school on this day, and we're in the business of giving diplomas on how to fly G550 airplanes, but NOT really accredited or governed by any agency when we so feel like it. LOL

Chime in when ready

I had friends graduate from a Uni that went bankrupt. Their degrees are still valid but the school is gone.

Now, I don't mean to flame but I have to ask why someone, in China already, would write a check for a type rating to be put on a CAAC ATP? You do know that your CAAC ATP is tied to your employer and you can't take it with you right?


I worked with one of the most unprofessional pilots on the planet and he somehow got on with a Chinese company. He had to repeat something he busted on his check ride but he got through and is flying the line.

I don't know your situation but maybe you need to look at other employers in the region.

Good Luck!
 
Top