Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Icao Atpl

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

pilotboy76

Active member
Joined
Dec 19, 2003
Posts
29
Hey Fellas. Does anyone know what the difference is between this license and a plain old American ATP? Are they one in the same, or is it a conversion license? If an overseas based company requires this license, would it be a simple paper work step to convert my ATP to a ATPL? Thanks in advance!
GB
 
Just finished reading the Cathay Pacific profile in Air Inc?
 
I think your FAA ticket is an ICAO license. I think ICAO license means a license from a country that is a member of ICAO...which the USA is.


It won't take long to get corrected if that's not right.
 
No, your certificate is a certificate. Other countries issue licenses.

What's the difference? Not much. Most ATP "licenses" expire if they're not renewed, but certificates don't.

Could mean the difference between getting the job. I've heard stories that many employers interpret their "ATPL" requirement to exclude the good old American ATP. Your mileage may vary.
 
Not really correct. Australia's *licences* are permanently valid. And doesn't the US instructor certificate lapse if not renewed? As far as ICAO is concerned it matters not a jot whether a country chooses to call their qualification a 'licence' or a 'certificate'. The point is that an ICAO member nation's licences/certificates are ICAO qualifications if they conform to ICAO's SARPS.
 
ackattacker said:
No, your certificate is a certificate. Other countries issue licenses.

What's the difference? Not much. Most ATP "licenses" expire if they're not renewed, but certificates don't.

Could mean the difference between getting the job. I've heard stories that many employers interpret their "ATPL" requirement to exclude the good old American ATP. Your mileage may vary.

Usually a company that requires something other than a straight ICAO ATPL ( which the U.S. ATP is ) will specify what they require. Generally speaking the European airlines will require a JAA member state license, such as a U.K. CAA ATPL. In my latest edition of FI two ads illustrate this point: One for Royal Brunei specifies "Pilots must have a UK CAA issued JAA/ATPL", another one for a cargo airline in Shanghai specifies "Current A300B4 JAA, ICAO or FAA Licenses ( JAA license is preferred )".

I personally believe that Dragonair in Hong Kong looks down on the FAA certificate. While they don't specifically say so, they prefer the UK or Australian/New Zealand licenses.

The problem is one of perception. There are some who perceive the US FAA ATP as easy to obtain. This is primarily the result of our easy written tests and not so much the flying skills portion. In Europe a candidate must pass 14 (or so) written exams, none of which have the questions and answers published like ours.


Typhoonpilot
 
Tinstaafl said:
Not really correct. Australia's *licences* are permanently valid. And doesn't the US instructor certificate lapse if not renewed? As far as ICAO is concerned it matters not a jot whether a country chooses to call their qualification a 'licence' or a 'certificate'. The point is that an ICAO member nation's licences/certificates are ICAO qualifications if they conform to ICAO's SARPS.

I did say "most".

You are correct... but the point is that some companies do advertise for "ICAO ATPL" but won't take the FAA ATP. If you are trying to get a foreign flying job it is helpful to have an "ATPL" in the European sense. Most countries around the world base their CAA on the European model and the FAA certificates are looked down upon. It varies quite a bit from country to country and company to company. For example, generally you can't fly in Europe with an FAA certificate, but I know someone who is flying in Switzerland on a Luxembourg endorsement of his FAA certificate... all kinds of things can be done, but it's more difficult.
 
Whilst individual companies may choose not to accept FAA certificates that is not the case at the regulatory level. If you hold an FAA qualification that falls under the auspices of ICAO then you will gain the same level recognition as would the holder of any other ICAO licence.

Your right in at least one aspect though: The FAA licence can be viewed as a bit 'light' in other countries compared to their own licences.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top