Recreational Pilot Permit

[fleet16b]

Comparing the Rec Permit to the Light Sport Permit in the US , I wonder if and when at some point our two Aviation Authorities will come together and allow the holders of these permits to c/out cross border flying .
In reality there is absolutely no reason why TC should not agree to Rec Pilots being allowed to fly into the US .
Now from the FAA side , I don't know their stance.
This Rec Permit has at this point proved itself to be very successful with none of the increase in fatalities accidents etc that many anticipated.
Comments

[The Forbidden Fruit]

I wish they would change it. I wouldn't have to work on my PPL anymore lol

[Taiser]

The RPP has been a great option to get into flying. If we could toss the medicals for 3rd class like the states will soon be doing, I'd be happy as well! Don't think I'll see it in my lifetime though, transport likes it's rules too much and can't wait to make more, not less of them...

[HiFlyChick]

What are the restrictions on a Rec Pilot Permit - isn't there some kind of limit on cross country distances?
(which would mean that only folks very near the border would benefit from an expansion in cross-border flying)

[fleet16b]

There are no distance restrictions to the Rec Permit
In a nutshell present rules state
- one passenger only
- VFR and daylight only
- Canada only

[photofly]

What are the restrictions on a Rec Pilot Permit - isn't there some kind of limit on cross country distances?
(which would mean that only folks very near the border would benefit from an expansion in cross-border flying)

The Recreational PIlot qualification in the US has a distance limit: 50nm, or else you need an endorsement from an instructor for each flight beyond that (if continuing training to a PPL, for instance.)

[HiFlyChick]

Doesn't the Rec Permit cut out the cross country requirements of the PPL, though? That's why I thought that there was a restriction...

Forgive me - I should just search through the CARs until I find it, but I'm lazy today (actually recovering from being sick yesterday) and hoped that someone may know it off the top of their head

[photofly]

2 hours dual cross-country required.

[The Forbidden Fruit]

You mean I can skip the cross country portion of my PPL training because I already have a Rec? That would be nice, and I would save a ton of money.

[photofly]

No; for a PP-R you need 2hrs dual x-c. To get a PPL after you still have to meet all the PPL requirements, including the cross country time. There's no specific credit for having obtaine a PP-R first.

[vanNostrum]

What are the restrictions for someone that holds a PPL but has a Cat 4 medical?

[7ECA]

What are the restrictions for someone that holds a PPL but has a Cat 4 medical?

Is that even possible?

As far as I am aware, to hold a PPL, you need a Class 3 or 1 medical. Unless you have received some sort of an exemption...?

[photofly]

PPL does require the Class 3 as a minimum. If you need an exemption from the standards then you're still issued a Class 3, maybe with restrictions. A class 4 medical won't do.

So if you have a PPL and only a class 4 medical you can't exercise any of the privileges of the license at all.

[AirFrame]

No; for a PP-R you need 2hrs dual x-c. To get a PPL after you still have to meet all the PPL requirements, including the cross country time. There's no specific credit for having obtaine a PP-R first.

I was fairly sure the requirements weren't "consumed" by each license as you got it... The Dual and Solo time you did for your PPL, for example, is applicable to the Dual and Solo time requirements for a CPL, you don't start over from scratch.

[photofly]

That's correct: you don't start from scratch, and any time you flew towards a previous license counts towards the next. But there's no extra credit towards a PPL purely for the act of gaining a PP-R, you can still only count the hours you flew and nothing more.

So having a rec doesn't excuse you any requirements of the PPL, which was in question.

[fleet16b]

My original query is with regards to being able to fly into the US with a RPP.
There really is no reason that the FAA should hold back on this

[Panama Jack]

I do know, for a fact, that the FAA does allow Canadian-registered Basic Ultra-Light Aeroplanes (BULA) and Advanced Ultra-Light Aeroplanes (AULA) to operate in the United States under a Special Flight Authority. The pilot-in-command may operate this category of aircraft in the USA if he holds a valid Canadian Recreational Pilot Permit.

The equivalent of many Canadian BULA and AULA in the USA is the Light-Sport Aircraft (LSA) Category. The Sport Pilot Certificate in the USA is slightly more stringent than Canada's Ultralight Pilot Permit and more equivalent to the Canadian Recreational Permit. The regulatory approaches taken by Canada and the USA with respect to small, light single-seat and two-seat aircraft is quite different. The intent behind the SFA is reciprocity as US LSA's pilot by Sport Pilots are also allowed to operate in certain foreign countries including Canada and the Bahamas.

This provision only applies to Canadian BULAs and AULA's, and not to other aircraft categories.

http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/ultralights/sfa/

[fleet16b]

I do know, for a fact, that the FAA does allow Canadian-registered Basic Ultra-Light Aeroplanes (BULA) and Advanced Ultra-Light Aeroplanes (AULA) to operate in the United States under a Special Flight Authority. The pilot-in-command may operate this category of aircraft in the USA if he holds a valid Canadian Recreational Pilot Permit.

The equivalent of many Canadian BULA and AULA in the USA is the Light-Sport Aircraft (LSA) Category. The Sport Pilot Certificate in the USA is slightly more stringent than Canada's Ultralight Pilot Permit and more similar to the Canadian Recreational Permit. The regulatory approaches taken by Canada and the USA with respect to small, light single-seat and two-seat aircraft is quite different. The intent behind the SFA is reciprocity as US LSA's pilot by Sport Pilots are also allowed to operate in certain foreign countries including Canada and the Bahamas.

This provision only applies to Canadian BULAs and AULA's, and not to other aircraft categories.

http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/ultralights/sfa/

Yes I am aware of the above and it fortifies my case that the FAA / TC should allow RPP Pilots to c/out cross border flying
There really is no reason why they should not.

[LousyFisherman]

The biggest constraint with the RPL is renting planes after you have your license. Most places (and many partnerships) require a PPL as the minimum.

YMMV
LF

[fleet16b]

The biggest constraint with the RPL is renting planes after you have your license. Most places (and many partnerships) require a PPL as the minimum.

YMMV
LF

Yes this is very true
The Flying Schools will teach you the RPP program but not rent you an aircraft when completed
Not sure why as the RPP has been around long enough to provide proof that the RPP pilots and the RPP program are safe.
Many schools try to talk people out of the RPP saying its unsafe etc which is a huge load of B.S.
Plus they wont make as much money off the RPP student .
Pretty shitty attitude considering one of the purposes of the RPP was to make aviation more affordable to the public thus give the schools added business.
I know many RPP pilots and they are just as safe and as skilled as any other PPL pilot
With GPS etc , there really is no reason why the FAA and TC could not work out the border issue.

[Panama Jack]

These things usually work based on reciprocity.

Having said that, I don't believe Transport Canada places much of an emphasis on recreational aviation and the FAA usually thinks of Contiguous 48 states, sometimes seemingly oblivious to that there is a world beyond its borders. The result, particularly when it comes to non-ICAO certificates and permits (ie. Sport Pilot, Ultralight Pilot, Recreational Pilot) is that the rails don't always align.

Now, if we are talking a phylosophical "should," then you have entered a topic which gets me wound up. There should be no border controls, we should have a Schengen Area/EU style arrangement which includes free movement of labour, etc. Driving from B.C. to Washington should be no different than driving from Washington to Oregon, or Germany to France. No two countries in the World have more in common. However, I have been dreaming of and advocating closer ties for decades- unfortunately, it goes at a snail's pace because neither Ottawa nor Washington are interested.

[Big Pistons Forever]

The biggest constraint with the RPL is renting planes after you have your license. Most places (and many partnerships) require a PPL as the minimum.

YMMV
LF

Yes this is very true
The Flying Schools will teach you the RPP program but not rent you an aircraft when completed
Not sure why as the RPP has been around long enough to provide proof that the RPP pilots and the RPP program are safe.
Many schools try to talk people out of the RPP saying its unsafe etc which is a huge load of B.S.
Plus they wont make as much money off the RPP student .
Pretty shitty attitude considering one of the purposes of the RPP was to make aviation more affordable to the public thus give the schools added business.
I know many RPP pilots and they are just as safe and as skilled as any other PPL pilot
With GPS etc , there really is no reason why the FAA and TC could not work out the border issue.

I think the lack of take up on the RPP is because by the time you get all the RPP requirements and are at flight test standards the remaining time and money required to just keep going to the PPL is not that great. Students that have enough money to get an RPP, probably have enough to get a PPL, and do so to get the greater privileges.

You can fly as an RPP with a Class 4 Medical

CAR 404.10

(4) A Category 1, 3 or 4 medical certificate is required for the following permits and licences:
(a) student pilot permit - aeroplane;
(b) pilot permit — recreational;
(c) student pilot permit or pilot permit — ultra-light aeroplane;
(d) student pilot permit — glider; and
(e) pilot licence — glider.

My bet is most new RPP's are being issued to older PPL's who are downgrading so they only have to have a Class 4 Medical

[fleet16b]

Big Pistons

Another good point/observation .
Al the more reason to allow RPP border crossing

[Big Pistons Forever]

Big Pistons

Another good point/observation .
Al the more reason to allow RPP border crossing

The Medical requirement is what is stopping cross board ops as the US does not recognize the Class 4 Medical. However there is Congressional action to remove the requirement for US PPL's to hold what is equivalent to a Canadian Class 3 Medical. When this happens I expect the cross border restrictions will go away.

[photofly]

Isn't the Class 3 medical standard for a PPL an ICAO requirement?