I think the answer is probably No to both.
The FAA IR needs 6 approaches/holds in last 6 months.
The FAA PPL needs a BFR every 2 years.
Provided you maintain those, you should be OK, unless the local CAA has terminated the actual PPL itself.
Is this correct?
That is my understanding too. Plus i) any required FAA endorsements (HPA, complex) signed off in your logbook by a CFI and ii) a valid medical (either FAA or third country).
Only the third country licence must be valid, in other words not under suspension, withdrawn or expired. The expiration of privileges on the licence, such as SEP or IR, does not taint the 61.75.
The Collins opinion confirms the Flight Review is required.
I keep both current as my UK IRE is also an FAA CFII.
Is this correct?
In the USA yes (numerous sources), but if your were crash in the channel, then maybe not… As at least one side in the Sala case seemed to think.
The FAA counsel have explicitly said that nothing stops another jurisdiction making there own requirements beyond there own.
As at least one side in the Sala case seemed to think.
However, Ibbotson never got the NQ in the first place. And if he had it, it would have never expired. It would have expired for passenger carriage – unless he also held a Euro IR, which he didn’t, so that isn’t applicable either.
I am not looking for an answer to the old Q of whether an FAA 61.75 gives you a PA46 / TBM / etc privilege when the European one it is based on, didn’t have those. Or whether you can fly at night without a European NQ. I was asking about the 61.75 PPL, or the US “foreign pilot exam” IR, becoming invalid if your European class rating, or the european IR, have dropped out of the 2 year or the 1 year revalidation, respectively.
If your Euro medical becomes invalid then IMHO your based-on privileges also cease – unless you also hold a valid FAA medical.
From my reading of the transcript it was not just night, it was also his SEP that had expired. The defence did not challenge it perhaps for other reasons. But one side simply ignored the 61.75.
For what it’s worth, I once in the exact situation, expired IR, asked the FSDO, was told to just carry on and meet the FAA requirements. Its a while but the rules haven’t changed.
The medical, is specifically required, the only reason you can use a foreign one is because the FARs say so. FAR 61.3
So with a valid ICAO license on which ratings or medical have expired, a FAA 61.75 with valid class 3 FAA medical, a current FAA BFR and an IPC for the IR, I can fly a N registered plane everywhere in the world, even in the country where the ICAO license was granted. Is that correct?
and an IPC for the IR
You just need the 6/6 rolling currency to keep the IR valid. No need for an IPC, ever.
BQ. even in the country where the ICAO license was granted
I think some will debate that one
But otherwise I think you are correct. The main reason for us Europeans for keeping our locally issued papers is to comply with the EASA FCL attack on N-regs or, for Brits, the UK version of it in the ANO.