EASA and FAA Training Simultaneously
 

Hi all! New here. Zero hours.

I'm looking to go ATP. I will be getting my Spanish citizenship so I'd like to be licensed on both sides of the pond. My understanding is that you can fly for the airlines in the EU with less hours. Eventually I think I'd come back stateside.

I spoke to the Hillsboro Flight School and it looks like they are almost set to offer training/licensure for both at the same time but I live in South Florida. Is anyone aware of any other schools that offer this?

Thanks!

I can't help with your question, but as a fairly experienced Brit Skipper looking to jump over to the US, just be aware that while your hours will count, you won't be building part 121 hours, of which you need 1000h for command in the US (I think? that's what I seem to have come up against). So yes, you can hop into the RHS of a b738 at 150h (!), but don't plan to stay too long over here. Though, of course, you'll be bonded, normally for 3 years (though read the small print and do your sums, especially with Ryanair - I think theirs actually works out at 7 years, but it could have changed). So you could, for example, get up to 2700h P2 on a b738, but you'll need to do another 1000h in the US before looking at LHS.

Another alternative for you might be to simply convert the JAR licence to FAA; once you have a full ATPL you can skip straight to doing ATP CTP, written exam and flight test. Seems easier than doing the whole thing from scratch twice? Good luck whatever you do anyway.

That depends.
In the EU they don’t have the 1500 rule as they have in the US but that comes with a big caveat, where and with whom you’ve done your training.
Some airlines have preferred suppliers from which they draw and they require less hours.
But don’t think that you’ll easily get hired with 250hrs.

Aviator College in Ft. Pierce has an European program as well.
You still need to do the IR in EASA airspace though but everything else can be done here.
Ask for Ulf if you call and he can explain more.

Hmm; that's theoretically true, but in practice when there has been a downturn it doesn't matter which school you've been to, as there are no jobs; when there is a shortage of pilots it again it doesn't matter too much where you trained, because they need bums on seats. Where modular vs integrated makes a difference (or indeed which school you went to makes a difference) is when there is limited need of cadets. But the industry doesn't do 'steady state'; in my 15 years it's either been expanding or contracting.

My source for this is my having been management at a smallish Euro regional with a cadet programme, and from speaking to FO's at my present outfit who regret the price premium paid for integrated training and bemoan the lack of any meaningful improvement in employment prospects it (didn't) give them.

You seem to say it is one extreme or the other. I remember many times when it was someplace in between.

yeah, more or less! maybe that was a reflection of the slightly crazy operation we had, and perhaps isn't a reflection of the entire industry. But I would say that timing the market is far more important than which school you do your training at.