Two typed pilots to leave the US?

[Wankel7]

Heard a rumor of this requirment. You would have to have two typed pilots to leave the US.

Anybody heard this?

Wankel

 

[Rogue5]

Hmmm... That would suck for all the SkyWest flights to Canada, or the XJet flights to Mexico.

 

[Donsa320]

It is the requirement for an SIC rating in Europe...since we don't have such a rating in the US I guess a type would do it.

 

[CaSyndrm]

It's not a rumor it is a regulation for many countries but not all.

 

[A Squared]

It's an ICAO thing. Of course, ICAO has no real authority, but the signatory nations have have incorperated ICAO guidelines to varying degrees in thier aviation regulations. Some countries have incorperated the requirement for a type rated SIC into thier regulations.

 

[Wankel7]

Wonder if that will ever make it to the US.

 

[bocefus]

France is enforcing this and has grounded aircraft until a type rated second officer could be arranged. Expect it to increase

 

[IFlyGC]

Some airlines will type their FO's so they can act as IRO on the long range flights....is it this you may be thinking of?

 

[TonyC]

France is enforcing this and has grounded aircraft until a type rated second officer could be arranged. Expect it to increase

This will come as a surprise, I'm sure, to the company that operates more than a few purple and orange wide-body twins and tri-jets through the Paris - Charles DeGaulle hub each day. Not only is there no second officer at all, but the first officers of the twins aren't type rated.

 

[wings421]

Heard a rumor of this requirment. You would have to have two typed pilots to leave the US.

Anybody heard this?

Wankel

I believe Chautauqua is doing this in their 170's. Applicants must have ATP mins and will be typed,.... from what I hear.

 

[bocefus]

Guys, as was posted earlier,it has been an ICAO requirement to have both pilots type rated on any aircraft which requires a type rating and requires 2 pilots.
Ramp checks and enforcement of this policy has been stepped up in some EU countries, mainly France. It also applies to the airlines, but it is a whole lot easier for the bureacrats to screw with a corporate operator than it is for them to screw with an air carrier over things like this. They won't bother the airlines

 

[A Squared]

Some airlines will type their FO's so they can act as IRO on the long range flights....is it this you may be thinking of?

No, we're talking about some countries requiring the f/o to hold a type rating as well as the captain.

 

[iaflyer]

Heard a rumor of this requirment. You would have to have two typed pilots to leave the US.

The FAA just issued a NPRM to create a "SIC type rating". The NPRM is here with more details.

Briefly, it would allow those who have met the requirements of a Part 121 or 135 SIC checkout to then get a SIC type rating on your pilot certificate. The only time they would be necessary is if you did international flying to places that required both pilots to be type rated.

Say you were an FO on a DA-20 - it would be possible to get a SIC type rating - your certificate would read

Airline Transport Pilot
Airplane Multiengine Land
DA20 - SIC Privileges only

If you then met the requirements of the regular type rating at some point later (say, when you upgraded) the FAA would then drop the "SIC Privileges only" then.

iaflyer

 

[Uncle Sparky]

This will come as a surprise......

Flashback 1995/anonymous "Yeah.....those dang Euro's might be doing this...R-V-S-M thing....but it'll never happen here in Am'urca!!"

 

[TonyC]

Flashback 1995/anonymous "Yeah.....those dang Euro's might be doing this...R-V-S-M thing....but it'll never happen here in Am'urca!!"

Perhaps you should go back and read the bocefus post I quoted. Then, pause and ask yourself, "Do I know of any airline that uses, or any country that requires Typed SECOND officers?"

(I'm assuming we know the difference between Captain, First Officer, and Second Officer here. Please inform me if I'm wrong on that point.)

 

[Uncle Sparky]

Perhaps you should go back and read the bocefus post I quoted. Then, pause and ask yourself, "Do I know of any airline that uses, or any country that requires Typed SECOND officers?"

(I'm assuming we know the difference between Captain, First Officer, and Second Officer here. Please inform me if I'm wrong on that point.)
This will come as a surprise, I'm sure, to the company that operates more than a few purple and orange wide-body twins and tri-jets through the Paris - Charles DeGaulle hub each day. Not only is there no second officer at all, but the first officers of the twins aren't type rated.

Perhaps you should be reminded of your own words first........Just off the top of my head.......... Brazil .
"F/O must be typed" thank you for playing........

 

[TonyC]

Perhaps you should be reminded of your own words first........Just off the top of my head.......... Brazil .
"F/O must be typed" thank you for playing........

You should arrange with your health insurance company to use FedEx rather than USPS so you don't have to go so long without your meds.

bocefus said the French were grounding airplanes until a type-rated second officer could be found.

I pointed out we have airplanes - - many, many airplanes - - operate in and out of CDG daily (and nightly) that don't even HAVE second officers, much less type-rated second officers.

I'll spell out the other stuff I put in that post which might have been too cryptic for you. When I said wide-body twin, I was referring to the Airbus 300-600s and A310s we operate with a Type-rated Captain and a NON-type-rated First Officer. The tri-jets to which I referred are MD-11s - - it just so happens, we type rate all MD-11 FOs so they can be RFOs, so it's a non-issue.

I was at the same time poking fun at bocefus's obvious slip of the tongue (either he meant to say first officer, or he doesn't have a clue about what he's saying) and pointing out we don't have a problem operating in Europe with only one type-rated pilot aboard.

Now, where did I make a statement that parallels or evokes a "We'll never get RVSM in the US" remark?

 

[Uncle Sparky]

Aaawww........now.......sounds like you're getting excited again.......

Lets review(for the slower kids and Tony) the question was posed "Is a type rated F/O required under ICAO in Europe?"
Some interesting responses were presented.
Tony, very perceptively, corrected young Mr. Bocephus on his Faux Pas(or Fopa if you've been paying attention around here lately) and I made a small, now obviously, exasperating remark regarding stereotypic American certainty.

Hokay! ......... Can we all just get along now?!

 

[TonyC]

... I made a small, now obviously, exasperating remark regarding stereotypic American certainty.

How does that stereotype relate to the quote you used,

This will come as a surprise......

?

What is exasperating is you don't seem to know or care that you misrepresent another's words. Then, when you get called on your indiscretion, your responsd with condescension. Nice try - - NOT.

Listen, if you want to make a point, give it a try. Do NOT, however, attempt to support your point by misquoting folks, or by taking their words out of context.

Lets review(for the slower kids and Tony) ...

And another thing... If you want to talk down to "slower kids," you need to work on your spelling. "Lets" is NOT the correct way to spell the contraction for "Let us." Ask one of the "slower kids" and they'll help you out. (Well, they might...)

Hokay! ......... Can we all just get along now?!

As long as statements of the "slower kids" variety continue to populate your posts, probably not.

.

 

[Uncle Sparky]

As long as statements of the "slower kids" variety continue to populate your posts, probably not.

.

Gee Tony, all that and you found one missing apostrophe. Give yourself a pat on the back!
I don't know what I must have been thinking late last night with my harsh comments.
Next time I'll try to say more friendly things like: "You should arrange with your health insurance company to use FedEx rather than USPS so you don't have to go so long without your meds." "I'm assuming we know the difference between Captain, First Officer, and Second Officer here. Please inform me if I'm wrong on that point." "I'll spell out the other stuff I put in that post which might have been too cryptic for you.".
I was not finding fault in your statement of fact but merely commenting on your matter of fact statement.
I have heard in RVSM recurrent classes about the F/O type requirement and experienced it when flying to Brazil. I've also heard the same "Oh yeah we fly there all the time and haven't had to do it!" comments, before.
Perhaps the French Government is backlogged. Perhaps they're dragging their feet(France is the Mother of Bureaucracy after all!) with regards to a large, fuel buying, revenue producing, citizen employing company in these tough times.
I don't have a copy of French entry requirements for aircrew. Can you quote, black and white, that a type is not requirement for a FIRST OFFICER in France? Or does degrading the rest of us for spelling, syntax and terminology errors constitute the "fiber" of your abilities?

 

[TonyC]

Can you quote, black and white, that a type is not requirement for a FIRST OFFICER in France? Or does degrading the rest of us for spelling, syntax and terminology errors constitute the "fiber" of your abilities?

Can you find where I said a type is not required for a First Officer in France?


I have done nothing to the "rest of us" - - you alone have received my extra attention because you alone attempted to take my quote out of context for your own purpose.


And I have not degraded you - - you have degraded yourself.

 

[Uncle Sparky]

The question is in reference to the original question and topic(once again)not your rediculous, self centered tyrade you egotistical putz!

 

[TonyC]

The question is in reference to the original question and topic(once again)not your rediculous, self centered tyrade you egotistical putz!

Excuse me while I go search for a definition of "tyrade."






.

 

[Uncle Sparky]

You are absolutely correct......your nit-picking of the spelling on my hastily written response has confirmed it, without a doubt, simply calling you a Putz and leaving it at that, would have been sufficient.

 

[AA717driver]

I have also heard that if you are typed you must possess a First Class medical to exercise those privileges. So, that would mean both pilots would have to have a current FC medical.TC

 

[Uncle Sparky]

That was the direction that I was originally headed. I fly 91 and am not
required to have a FC medical. I asked the RVSM instructor at Simuflight
how I would be governed under ICAO and his response was to throw his
hands in the air. What I have been told, so far, is that the "powers that be"
would prefer to group everyone in one herd under ICAO(with respect to crew
and equipment standards), with the idea that
we are all flying somewhat similar equipment and conditions. My last company flew 135 to Brazil for years with just a Typed Capt. until one night one of our F/O's got bored on a late night trip to Rio and started reading the entry requirements for Brazil in the Jepp after the Captain fell asleep. As of right now, I haven't heard, from personal experience, of anyone being fined or even chastised for not being a typed right seater. BUT, two years ago, I was able to "climb through" RVSM airspace in a non-equipped airplane, when flying across the Atlantic. Those days are gone. My only point would be.....how long before they DO enforce the TYPE requirement?

 

[iaflyer]

I have also heard that if you are typed you must possess a First Class medical to exercise those privileges. So, that would mean both pilots would have to have a current FC medical.TC

.

Hmm.. do you have a link to point to?

From what I can make of it, the only time you require a first class medical is when you are exercising the privileges of an airline transport pilot certificate. [61.23 (a) (1)].

It is entirely possible that the SIC would only have a commerical certificate with an instrument rating and the proposed SIC type rating. I can't see a situation where he would be exercising the privileges of an airline transport pilot certificate as an SIC.

Or are you saying that if you are typed as a PIC, and are sitting in the right seat, not being PIC you'd need a 1st class medical anyway?

iaflyer

 

[AA717driver]

iaflyer--My comment is more anecdotal about the current situation. I.E.--some French FAA-type gave someone trouble about being typed but not having a FC medical. They then complained that if you don't have the medical, you can't exercise the ATP or type rating which is required for the PIC(and in the mind of the French FAA, the SIC, too).TC

 

[Uncle Sparky]

That IMO, is the biggest problem. The FAA, if you go to your local FSDO, doesn't know all of the answers to the current and coming RVSM certification "glut". EASA or whoever regulates in Europe isn't consistent with their enforcement(from what I've seen and heard(NOT personally experienced))and meshing the two together into a consistent international program is going to be interesting. The good news(I think), is that the MBAA and IAOPA have a been playing watchdog at all of the ICAO seminars. The airlines and heavy cargo guys have been doing it for awhile, so I think their guidelines are pretty well established, from what I've seen. I really don't know what 121 requirements for aircrew to legally operate in France are?.

To answer the original question.....NO, you are not required to have two typed pilots to leave the US under current 91/135 Regs(check out the FAA site). I would recommend checking the appropriate Jepp(entry requirements for each country at the front of each #1 book), or the IFIM, if you plan on flying to a certain country or countries, because certain countries DO, in fact, require both the Captain and the F/O to be typed.

 

[iaflyer]

iaflyer--My comment is more anecdotal about the current situation. I.E.--some French FAA-type gave someone trouble about being typed but not having a FC medical. They then complained that if you don't have the medical, you can't exercise the ATP or type rating which is required for the PIC(and in the mind of the French FAA, the SIC, too).TC

I see - that presents all sorts of issues to the pilots, because I'm sure they felt they were meeting all the rules... while the French FAA felt otherwise.

Often it doesn't matter what rules you show FAA people- if they think you're wrong, you're wrong.

iaflyer