An update to this thread, I passed the FAA Instrument Foreign Pilots test yesterday. My application to the CAA and FAA was sent about 4 weeks ago now, so just waiting for the FAA letter to take to the FSDO to get my 61.75 issued. I used Aviation Exam as the study question bank solely and it worked out OK. I had two weeks to study and spent a couple of hours a night and a couple of weekends studying. The exam was taken at Flight Safety at Farnborough, and I believe this is the only place in Europe now that this can be taken. The test is multiple choice, 50 questions and 2.5 hours. It took no more than an hour which included a long and tedious flight planning question and a full review of all the questions. I scored 98 Percent 
The FAA IR (Airplane) test is 60 questions, but funnily the question bank has more questions in it for the IFP because there are helicopter questions in there as well.
If you consider it took me 3 months to pass the EASA written’s with about 370 hrs of study, I think the FAA take a far more practical approach to the theory knowledge needed for the GA IR Private pilot. 90 percent of what I had to learn for the EASA theory I have forgotten. Do we really need to know how many degrees of freedom a Gyro has in EASA land? The FAA syllabus seemed to contain all the major items. I see from another thread that EASA are trying to make the IR more achievable for the GA pilot……again!!! I thought that was the idea of the CBM IR. Though it would appear that the take up has been disappointing. I think one thing to look at would be the EASA writtens.
While taking the test at Farnborough, I met a German chap who was taking his FAA IR theory test. He had started his FAA IR training in Germany. He said he had made a conscious decision to go the FAA IR route and then convert it to an EASA IR through the CBM program. Doing it this way, he could bypass the EASA writtens. If this loophole exists, surely its time for EASA to think again.
Rob2701 wrote:
An update to this thread, I passed the FAA Instrument Foreign Pilots test yesterday.
Congratulations!
Rob2701 wrote:
While taking the test at Farnborough, I met a German chap who was taking his FAA IR theory test. He had started his FAA IR training in Germany. He said he had made a conscious decision to go the FAA IR route and then convert it to an EASA IR through the CBM program. Doing it this way, he could bypass the EASA writtens. If this loophole exists, surely its time for EASA to think again.
This loophole exists and will probably not be closed up anytime soon. You will however need 50 hours IFR PIC experience logged in order to do the “conversion” which consists of a full IR skill test, including an oral TK examination in aviation law, weather and performance IIRC. Presently you can acquire this experience in Europe flying N-reg, but that may come to an end in April 2016 unless the postponement to April 2017 is confirmed. You will still have the possibility to build the 50 hours experience flying in the US, but then you will probably need some training in Europe to get accustomed to European IFR idiosynchrasies.
Meanwhile EASA apparently want to provide a more accessible IR for private pilots and if they are clever enough, that may encourage European pilots to go that route instead of the FAA route.
You can also do the 50hrs ifr pic on the UK imcr.
I have it in writing from the FAA that the imcr is valid in an nreg plane. Others of course disagree
This is not a loophole. It is per EASA FCL.
Actually you could do ifr pic time on a PPL in the UK 
Peter wrote:
This is not a loophole. It is per EASA FCL.
Sorry. Yes. You are right. Matter of speech.
What I meant is that there is an effort to nudge European pilots towards European ratings. Unfortunately they are even trying to coerce them into getting European ratings (see the Basic Regulation requiring all pilots begin European residents to have EASA ratings), but at the same time they opened up a migration path from the FAA IR to EASA IR.
Yes, indeed.
The former was not possible without the latter, because the N-reg community in Europe is so big.
But they had to make it unattractive for ATPL students to train in (say) Arizona and come to Europe and just convert. That would kill the European ATPL training business. Hence the 50hrs IFR PIC time which is “impossible” for an ATPL student to have logged.
You can do the EASA PPL and CPL in the USA but the impossibility of doing the IR out there protects the European ATPL business.
I’m sorry to have to ask this question but I have searched and am unable to find a succinct answer to a question I have from anywhere.
I currently have an EASA PPL with SEP rating and a current Class 2 medical. I also have an FAA ‘piggyback’ licence based on my old JAR PPL which I have just upgraded. I have filled out the CAA SRG 2110 form to arrange the revalidation of my licence and eagerly await my new FAA licence based on the new EASA number. I took an FAA BFR last year which is valid until 2017.
This is all fine.
I no longer fly in the UK and do all my flying in the USA, I plan to give this up within a few years when I return to the UK so do not want to go through the trouble of getting a full FAA PPL (TSA, exams, etc).
My question is, in order to keep legal when flying in the USA do I need to maintain my EASA SEP rating, by taking EASA BFRs. Or, as the FAA licence is based on my EASA licence (not ratings) which will not expire, can I just take FAA BFRs and Medicals?
Thanks for any information and that anyone can provide (and your patience )
I’m pretty sure everything on the “master” licence has to be up to date – ratings, medical, the lot. I haven’t got a reference, though.
ColletteS wrote:
My question is, in order to keep legal when flying in the USA do I need to maintain my EASA SEP rating, by taking EASA BFRs. Or, as the FAA licence is based on my EASA licence (not ratings) which will not expire, can I just take FAA BFRs and Medicals?
You don’t need to keep EASA currency. It is sufficient that the underlying EASA licence has not been suspended or revoked or expired, but since EASA PPLs are valid for life, this can only happen if you do something very bad.
I haven’t got a reference either, but I am also pretty sure.
Edit: Here’s a prior reference
That’s amazing!
What about the EASA medical?
There is another possible consideration here, which is that after X years of not revalidating an EASA license, you may have to re-sit the PPL exams. Is this correct? I have no idea, but it would be a real bugger.
On a UK issued JAA/EASA IR, after 7 years of non-revalidation you have to re-sit the IR exams, AFAIK.
Rwy20 wrote:
You don’t need to keep EASA currency. It is sufficient that the underlying EASA licence has not been suspended or revoked or expired, but since EASA PPLs are valid for life, this can only happen if you do something very bad.
I haven’t got a reference either, but I am also pretty sure.
Edit: Here’s a prior reference
Hmmm, this is what I have heard. I guess my worry is whether this is based on interpretation, or solid fact. I would hate to have to argue my interpretation against some FAA officials ‘facts’.
