Taking ATP checkride with expired written

[JAFI]

The problem I see here is that if you take a practical exam with an expired written (outside of the approved way to use expired written) and it some how does get through OK City, then during any records check later shows you took the exam out side of the Regulations. You can expect an Order of Revocation or a 44709 to review your qualifications.

It has happened in the past. I have heard of an entire group of graduates of certain schools loosing their certificates because of such - irregularities...


This is when you ask your self ... How lucky do I feel today, tommorrow, 10 years from now...etc.....

JAFI

 

[vclean]

...and where is your head, Man?
Where, on the 8710, or the Examiners report, or any other documents of pilot certification, do you put down where you work and what you do?

8710 (II) (E), Completion of Air Carrier's Training Program. Otherwise (II) (A) would be used for pt 61, (II) (C) for a pt 142 (ie. Higher Power) course.

 

[jimpilot]

sORRY

I deal with this kind of thing often in my job. The sorce of answers is the FAA's FAQ file maintained here:

www.faa.gov/AVR/AFS/AFS800/DOCS/pt61FAQ.doc

Here is the closest question I could find:

QUESTION: Ref. § 61.39(b)(1)(i) and (2); I serve as a Navigator “flight crewmember” in the United States Air Force Reserves on a KC-135 Tanker. I’ve also completed an approved air carrier First Officer training program for a Part 121 operator that I work for as a First Officer. I also hold a Commercial Pilot Certificate with an Airplane Single-engine Land and Airplane Multiengine Land and Instrument‑Airplane ratings. And I also meet the ATP aeronautical experience requirements of § 61.159. My question is, am I qualified to make application for the ATP‑Airplane Multiengine Land practical test with an EXPIRED ATP-Airplane knowledge test?



ANSWER: Ref. § 61.39(b)(1)(i) and (2); You are not qualified to take the ATP practical test with an expired ATP‑Airplane knowledge test. Your qualifications do not comply with § 61.39(b)(1)(i) because you have not accomplished your air carrier employer’s “Pilot in command aircraft qualification training program . . .” Nor are you qualified in accordance with § 61.39(b)(2), since you are not a military pilot nor have you “. . . accomplished the pilot in command aircraft qualification training program . . .” Even though you’ve pointed out that as a Navigator in your U.S. Air Force Reserve unit you are a “flight crewmember” (i.e., Navigator), the rule requires you to be a military pilot and you must have “. . . accomplished the pilot in command aircraft qualification training program . . .” of that U.S. Air Force reserve unit.


They added this thought a few questions down:

But the reason we proposed it this way, is because it was determined that completion of an air carrier SIC training program does not meet the requirements for permitting a person to be eligible to apply for a type rating. Never did! The old rule was not correct, so we changed it. Most likely the old rule made a lot of air carrier SIC's happy that they became eligible to apply for a type rating by only completing an air carrier SIC training program! However, the old rule made the general aviation pilot complete all the training of the old Appendix A of Part 61 to become eligible to apply for a type rating.

So it looks like you're out of luck.

 

[beechscum]

ya, pretty much figured that, going to take it again at all atps next fri.

fun, fun, fun!!

thanks

 

[jimpilot]

Good Luck!

 

[414Flyer]

Heck,,, be a man! Take the written over. It's not like your studying the Fundamentals of Instruction!

And, you do miss Martha King, doncha????

Oh the joy of watching those King tapes. Found out the "examiner" in the King CFI Checkride practice tapes from the 90s, is now a "woman", as least as much as a sex change will do.