They are absolutley issued in accordance with ICAO.
ICAO was set up as a result of the Chicago Convention.
The USA hosted the beginnings of the whole thing and are a fully signed up member of ICAO, if not the dominant member.
With a permanent representative on the board.
Some 80-90% of all aviation activity world wide takes place under the provisions of the FAR's.
The USA is in conformity with All the Annexes of the Chicago convention and as is their right, indeed duty under the convention, the US has notified ICAO of differences between the FAR's and ICAO, Such notified differences do not affect conformity with ICAO.
Almost every state has noted differences with ICAO including the JAA member states.
FAR 61.101 Rereational pilot privilages and limitations.
(g)A recreational pilot certificate issued under this subpart carries the notation, "Holder does not meet ICAO requirements"
This is the only such restriction in the FAR's, related to pilot certification.
'the Sport pilot rule has not been promulgated yet'
All the other pilot certifcates, private, commercial and atp do not contain this restriction.
If for the sake of argument to be in conformity with ICAO the certificates had to have such an endorsment recorded on them, immediatley the IAA would be duty bound to redirect all overflights of US registered aircraft around Irish airspace and cancel all US flights into and out of Ireland. until all US pilot certificates were ammended with the required form of words. Even in this extreme example, if it ever came to pass the IAA would be laughed out of court.
SI 333 of the year 2000
The relevant bit.
(10) For the purposes of this Article, a valid and subsisting licence, other than a JAA licence, issued by any other state which is a member of the International Civil Aviation Organisation in conformity with Annex I (Personnel Licensing) to the Chicago Convention purporting to authorise the holder thereof to act as a flight crew member of an aircraft, not being a licence purporting to authorise that holder to act as a student pilot only, shall be deemed to be a licence validated by the Authority under the provisions of this Order entitling the holder thereof to fly as a member of the flight crew of a private aircraft3 insofar as the holder is permitted to do so by the terms of the licence and by the law of the state by which it was issued:
3 i.e. an aircraft used in the private category as permitted by the certificate of airworthiness issued by its state of registry.
Reading carefully the state of issue is required to be in conformity with ICAO, it says nothing about the licence or certificate.
Again the USA is in conformity with ANNEX 1, regardless of the noted differences.
Furthermore it is quite possible that the IAA is acting ultra vires, that is beyond their powers in respect of this part of the SI by prohibiting FAA PPL's from flying using a Class 3 medical, this is just a technical point because a further paragraph gives them the power to do so.
(ii) if the Authority sees fit to do so, it may at any time prohibit the holder of such a licence from exercising the privileges conferred by this sub-paragraph and, in that event, such licence shall cease to be deemed to be a licence validated by the Authority under the provisions of this Order.
However if any FAA PPL was to fall foul of the 'Authority' for flying with a class 3 medical the outcome in court would be far from certain as far as the authority is concerned.
Currently as it stands the best course of action for any FAA PPL to take is to remain current as far as the FAR's are concerned ie BFR etc and to hold at least an FAA Class 2 medical.
This satisfies the requirements of SI 333 (2000)
insofar as the holder is permitted to do so by the terms of the licence and by the law of the state by which it was issued:
and the requirements of AIC Nr 11/04 paragraph 3.1
If you can also hold a JAR Class 2 medical it will certainly cover your ass in the event of any trouble from the IAA.
Your case would be simple.
You are in full compliance with the provisins of the FAR's and in addition have satisfied the medical requirements of the JAR's.
Would that it find an echo at 800 Independence Avenue!
No time to analyse right now
(Chicago 1944 was a great step - most of the crunching was done in Dublin 1945)
P.S. I'm not an FAA detractor, quite the reverse, and have been privileged to serve on an ARAC - FAR 91
There seems to be a view that a 2nd class medical "lapses" into a third class medical after 1 year and therefore needs to be renewed then for private flying in Ireland. However FAR part 61.23 (c) says:
"(2) A second-class medical certificate expires at the end of the last day of--
(i) The 12th month after the month of the date of examination shown on the certificate for operations requiring a commercial pilot certificate or an air traffic control tower operator certificate; and
(ii) The period specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section for operations requiring a recreational pilot certificate, a private pilot certificate, a flight instructor certificate ......., or a student pilot certificate."
Paragraph (c)(3) deals with the expiry of third-class medical certificates, i.e. 24 months or 36 months after the medical examination.
These words convey to me the following:
1. A second-class medical certificate for commercial or ATC use expires after 12 months.
2. A second-class medical certificate for private pilot operations expires after 24 or 36 months, at the same time that it would have expired, if it had been a third-class medical certificate.
3. The second-class certificate does not, after 12 months, become a third-class certificate, it is still a second-class certificate. It just has the same expiry as a third class certificate, and may only be used for non-commercial operations.
Confusingly the back of the Certificate states that for Second Class, the expiry "in accordance with ss61.23" is "12 calendar months for those operations requiring a Second-Class Medical Certificate". There is a conflict here.
The wording above says that under US law the Class 2 medical is valid for 24 months, but after 12 months it cannot be used for any flying which requires (under US law) a Class 2 medical. But it is still a Class 2 medical, in months 13-24.
The practical question is whether FAA licence holders in Ireland will need to renew Class 2 medicals after 12 months, or 24.
- Unverified User
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 9:54 pm
- Location: peoples republic of Cork
FAA Class II Medical also in trouble for automatic recognition via ICAO for that it contains
Continued flight privileges for those pregnant
Lack of requirement for those carrying long-distance spectacles to carry a second pair
(Lawyers scratching themselves in multiple ICAO languages to determine if a non pregnant person has an ICAO compliant Medical)
N.B. These problems are not specifically Irish - they occur in any State requiriing Annex 1 as part of recognition
Note how the UK, for instance, neatly sidesteps by not requiring Annex 1 as part of their recognition)
I think that Bluebeard in "These word convey".....has it right
on the form you fill in to apply for your checkride you are required to fill in what class of medical you have.
I started off with a class 1 medical/student pilot certificate.
Naturally flight training took more than six months to complete and when the time came I believed that I now possesed a 3rd class medical and filled in the form accordingly, the form was sent back to me because as far as the FAA were concerned I had a first class medical that was still valid for private pilot privilages only.
My current FAA mdical has the limitations
'Holder to wear Glasses for distant and intermediate vision'
'May wear Contact lenses'
My current JAR medical has the limitation
'Shall wear corrective lenses'
No reqirement to keep a spare set to hand is on EITHER medical.
The pregnancy bit is covered on the back of the JAR medical alright, but does this mean that because the requirement for a second set of specs is not in the limitations then the JAR medical is not ICAO compliant?
Your infor on JAR/MED for lenses interesting
Mine says "shall have available corrective lenses for near vision" - = ICAO
ICAO does still the retain the spare pair requirement - for distant vision
(I will make a point of looking at the distant vision endorsement on the next few JAR licensed pilots I happen to have dealing with : the endorsements are normally hand written by an AME who may not always appreciate the subtleties - mine wasa writen in IAA HQ)
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests