Adding ASEL to ATP-AMEL

Kritchlow said:
That said, I stand by my earlier post... How is it possible to go direct to ASEL ATP without a ASEL CPL?
Click to expand...


Same way I went from being a single engine CPL with no multi rating, to a ATP multi and single CPL, meet the FAR requirements and take the ride.
 
Kritchlow said:
That said, I stand by my earlier post... How is it possible to go direct to ASEL ATP without a ASEL CPL?
Click to expand...

If you are talking about the original poster in this thread, here is a partial quote from his first post.


tinygiant said:
All,

. . .

I currently hold an ATP-AMEL, but have no single engine ratings.
Click to expand...

I realize the original question got a bit muddied in the subsequent post in this thread, but I am now responding to Kritchlow's post quoted above.

Now if you will reference FAR 61.153, specifically(d)(1), it says hold at least a commercial pilot certificate and an instrument rating. Notice it says nothing about category and class. He holds an ATP Multi Engine. That meets the requirement.

To support my argument, I offer the following. I am an Multi Engine ATP with commercial privileges for SE. I am about to take my commercial Glider ride. But I don't have a private glider rating. 61.121(h) says hold at least a private certificate. I meet that requirement by virtue of my ATP powered rating.

So, it is in fact possible for the OP to get a commercial, or even an ATP for SE aircraft without having the lower category certificates first.

That is, of course, I am miss interpreting the scenario.
 
So, it is possible to circumnavigate the requirements and get a SE CPL without doing any commercial maneuvers...
 
James331 said:
Same way I went from being a single engine CPL with no multi rating, to a ATP multi and single CPL, meet the FAR requirements and take the ride.
Click to expand...

Did you ever have to demonstrate a lazy right and chandelle on a checkride? If the answer is yes, the scenarios are not a match.
 
Kritchlow said:
Did you ever have to demonstrate a lazy right and chandelle on a checkride? If the answer is yes, the scenarios are not a match.
Click to expand...

Never had to do a VMC demo, or any of that stuff, just a straight ATP instrument type ride, including the single engine work, it's a give and take.
 
Kritchlow said:
So, it is possible to circumnavigate the requirements and get a SE CPL without doing any commercial maneuvers...
Click to expand...

If you are asking me, that isn't the question I was addressing. The question I was addressing was the one you asked in post #26.
 
James331 said:
Never had to do a VMC demo, or any of that stuff, just a straight ATP instrument type ride, including the single engine work, it's a give and take.
Click to expand...

VMC demo is not a commercial maneuver. Did you demonstrate a chandelle?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
If you are asking me, that isn't the question I was addressing. The question I was addressing was the one you asked in post #26.
Click to expand...
No, I wasn't asking you directly. My point is the way that is being explained can give the OP a CPL ASEL without Ever doing the commercial maneuvers in the ASEL CPL PTS.
 
box_of_rocks.jpg
 
Anymouse said:
box_of_rocks.jpg
Click to expand...

Is this some sort of childish dig? I'm not really sure, as I've been out of seventh grade for quite some time.

That said, do you have anything of value to add? I believe I have a point. If you don't, by all means please state your position.
 
The Additional Rating Task Table in the Practical Test Standards spells out the requirements necessary for those who already have a Commercial or higher certificate in something else.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
The Additional Rating Task Table in the Practical Test Standards spells out the requirements necessary for those who already have a Commercial or higher certificate in something else.
Click to expand...

Greg, I admit I'm not the sharpest at this stuff, but I would think the additional requirements would include commercial maneuvers seeing as though those maneuvers are not required for a AMEL CPL.
 
Kritchlow said:
Greg, I admit I'm not the sharpest at this stuff, but I would think the additional requirements would include commercial maneuvers seeing as though those maneuvers are not required for a AMEL CPL.
Click to expand...

They do.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
They do.
Click to expand...

Thank you ... It got tricky because the OP was saying he would go directly to SE ATP. If that was true, he could surrender that down to SE CPL and never have demonstrated commercial maneuvers. So, apparently one way or another they will test him on those maneuvers.

Again, thanks for clarifying.
 
Henning said:
It is an initial Multi Engine maneuver though. To have an ATP/ME without ever having demonstrated one is improper.
Click to expand...

True, but that really has no bearing on my statement or question.
 
Kritchlow said:
Thank you ... It got tricky because the OP was saying he would go directly to SE ATP. If that was true, he could surrender that down to SE CPL and never have demonstrated commercial maneuvers. So, apparently one way or another they will test him on those maneuvers.

Again, thanks for clarifying.
Click to expand...

Well, now, that is a whole different issue. I didn't address that issue. If one holds an ME ATP, the way I see it, and I could be wrong, one could go from no SE rating at all and go straight to the SE ATP. I have not seen anything in the regs that prohibits it. Could be wrong. But in that case, if I am reading it right, one could in fact go from no SE rating at all to SE ATP and never demonstrate the commercial maneuvers in a SE airplane.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Well, now, that is a whole different issue. I didn't address that issue. If one holds an ME ATP, the way I see it, and I could be wrong, one could go from no SE rating at all and go straight to the SE ATP. I have not seen anything in the regs that prohibits it. Could be wrong. But in that case, if I am reading it right, one could in fact go from no SE rating at all to SE ATP and never demonstrate the commercial maneuvers in a SE airplane.
Click to expand...

And this is the crux of my point. Seeing as though one can go to ATP in a ME without doing commercial maneuvers, this is a big loophole in the system.
I admit the circumstances that would lead to this scenario are rare, but the OP does indeed have such a case.
 
Kritchlow said:
And this is the crux of my point. Seeing as though one can go to ATP in a ME without doing commercial maneuvers, this is a big loophole in the system.
Click to expand...

Well yeah. But if one achieves that level of proficiency in ME and can handle an ATP ride in an SE airplane, I wouldn't personally be to concerned about not demonstrating those maneuvers on a checkride.
 
James331 said:
Gotcha, yeah for my initial CPL (SES)
Click to expand...

Right... Me too.

That's my whole point.. The OP could end up with a SE ATP or CP certificate without demonstrating those maneuvers. That seems odd to me.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Well yeah. But if one achieves that level of proficiency in ME and can handle an ATP ride in an SE airplane, I wouldn't personally be to concerned about not demonstrating those maneuvers on a checkride.
Click to expand...

While that's true, it's not really what the CPL ride is all about. That's why it's a prerequisite for the ATP ride.
 
James331 said:
Never had to do a VMC demo, or any of that stuff, just a straight ATP instrument type ride, including the single engine work, it's a give and take.
Click to expand...

Kritchlow said:
VMC demo is not a commercial maneuver. Did you demonstrate a chandelle?
Click to expand...

You seem very hung up on the SEL Commercial maneuvers and are completely missing the point James was getting at. VMC Demo is a commercial Multi requirement that he skipped by going straight to ATP.

Simplified down, it's a commercial maneuver that was skipped by going straight to ATP.

In his case it was a multi maneuver, but from everything I can see it would be the same for a single. It doesn't seem right, but so far nobody has shown anything in the regs, and I haven't found anything, that says otherwise.
 
Wow, didn't expect this to get so many replies, but I've learned a lot. For those wondering, yes, I have a military background, and I believe this scenario is likely common with military pilots, at least before the advent of the T-6 in pilot training.

I've learned a few things of my own here and by reading Part 61 again (several times) last night. I believe it took a while for my regulation-reading-comprehension to kick in. The FARs are more convoluted than most military regs, which is really saying something.

I've held a CPL-AMEL for a while, though I never exercised the privileges. All military pilot training graduates who want it can test for and receive a CPL-AMEL/Instruments without a PT (61.73).

61.165(e) allows me to get a SE ATP without any prior SE ratings as long as I meet the requirements specified in that paragraph (essentially 50 hrs SE + a PT) because I previously held an airplane commercial certificate.

61.63(c) allows me to add a SE CPL to my current ticket without a knowledge test or meeting specific time/training requirements by completing a PT with the areas of operations as specified in the Commercial PTS additional rating task table.

61.167(a)(1) allows an ATP certificate holder to exercise the same privileges as a person who holds a commercial pilot certificate with an instrument rating.

61.153(d) requires a commercial ticket to be eligible for any ATP. The only exceptions are for military pilots and foreign ATP holders. I interpret this to mean that no matter how hard you try, you can't avoid demonstrating commercial maneuvers on at least one checkride in your flying career. Personally, I've demonstrated energy maneuvers, including all of those required for a CPL, on at least seven different military checkrides in three airframes. Three of these checkrides occurred during pilot training, which (along with an instrument check) I imagine creates the foundation for getting a CPL right out of pilot training without a PT.

I asked AOPA this same question yesterday before all these replies were posted and they suggested simply adding the SE-ATP to avoid additional training/time requirements (though I don't believe those training/time requirements apply based on 61.63(c)).

That being said, I believe the CFI that instigated this post (again, not the CFI I'm currently working with, just another one I met) was incorrect and that I'm currently eligible to take the CPL-ASEL and the ATP-ASEL PTs. Haven't decided which route I'll go with yet, neither one really worries me that much, just want to reduce the pain to a minimum. Any suggestions? Did I misinterpret any of the references?
 
Last edited:
Kritchlow said:
Right... Me too.

That's my whole point.. The OP could end up with a SE ATP or CP certificate without demonstrating those maneuvers. That seems odd to me.
Click to expand...

The military guys(which the OP is) don't even have to take a checkride to get their commercial certificates. He obviously flew the Tweet so he has never flown a single engine airplane in the military. But the guys flying the T-6 II in training get their commercial single, multi, instrument just by taking an abbreviated private/instrument/commercial written test. I don't know what training was like for him when he went through but I remember doing lazy eights and chandelles in training. Never did ground reference maneuvers or VMC demos.
 
Last edited:
Gucci,

We never did ground reference maneuvers during pilot training. They just weren't needed for our mission. We did VMC demos, but they weren't called VMC demos, we were being taught to fly the aircraft safely on one engine, and the maneuvers don't count for FAA certification. We (as military pilots) most certainly take checkrides to get the CPL, just not the FAA PT. I had to pass eight checkrides (2 instrument, 3 contact (energy maneuvers here), 2 formation, 1 navigation) to earn that CPL. I never flew SE in the military and was limited to centerline thrust, so I had to do a VMC demo on my ATP-AMEL PT.
 
StinkBug said:
You seem very hung up on the SEL Commercial maneuvers and are completely missing the point James was getting at. VMC Demo is a commercial Multi requirement that he skipped by going straight to ATP.

Simplified down, it's a commercial maneuver that was skipped by going straight to ATP.

In his case it was a multi maneuver, but from everything I can see it would be the same for a single. It doesn't seem right, but so far nobody has shown anything in the regs, and I haven't found anything, that says otherwise.
Click to expand...

I don't see it either. Maybe someone should write a letter to Chief Counsel for clarification.:rofl::rofl::rofl:
 
tinygiant said:
Wow, didn't expect this to get so many replies, but I've learned a lot. For those wondering, yes, I have a military background, and I believe this scenario is likely common with military pilots, at least before the advent of the T-6 in pilot training.

I've learned a few things of my own here and by reading Part 61 again (several times) last night. I believe it took a while for my regulation-reading-comprehension to kick in. The FARs are more convoluted than most military regs, which is really saying something.

I've held a CPL-AMEL for a while, though I never exercised the privileges. All military pilot training graduates who want it can test for and receive a CPL-AMEL/Instruments without a PT (61.73).

61.165(e) allows me to get a SE ATP without any prior SE ratings as long as I meet the requirements specified in that paragraph (essentially 50 hrs SE + a PT) because I previously held an airplane commercial certificate.

61.63(c) allows me to add a SE CPL to my current ticket without a knowledge test or meeting specific time/training requirements by completing a PT with the areas of operations as specified in the Commercial PTS additional rating task table.

61.167(a)(1) allows an ATP certificate holder to exercise the same privileges as a person who holds a commercial pilot certificate with an instrument rating.

61.153(d) requires a commercial ticket to be eligible for any ATP. The only exceptions are for military pilots and foreign ATP holders. I interpret this to mean that no matter how hard you try, you can't avoid demonstrating commercial maneuvers on at least one checkride in your flying career. Personally, I've demonstrated energy maneuvers, including all of those required for a CPL, on at least seven different military checkrides in three airframes. Three of these checkrides occurred during pilot training, which (along with an instrument check) I imagine creates the foundation for getting a CPL right out of pilot training without a PT.

I asked AOPA this same question yesterday before all these replies were posted and they suggested simply adding the SE-ATP to avoid additional training/time requirements (though I don't believe those training/time requirements apply based on 61.63(c)).

That being said, I believe the CFI that instigated this post (again, not the CFI I'm currently working with, just another one I met) was incorrect and that I'm currently eligible to take the CPL-ASEL and the ATP-ASEL PTs. Haven't decided which route I'll go with yet, neither one really worries me that much, just want to reduce the pain to a minimum. Any suggestions? Did I misinterpret any of the references?
Click to expand...

Yep, they were incorrect, and it sounds like you should have no problem adding C/SEL to your certificate by just brushing up and doing a weekend thing that comes with a ride. I did mine in a Lake LA-4-200 and got C/SEL&SES at the same time.:D If you have all the qualifications and want to just knock it out, a weekend seaplane rating to go with it is a fun and efficient way to do it.
 
I asked my instructor yesterday to make a recommendation to me on Saturday with which way he felt was best and I'll probably go with whatever he and the chief instructor recommend. It's all the same to me, so ... 6 of one, half-dozen of another. Thanks to everyone for the discussion. Still open to recommendations...
 
Last edited:
tinygiant said:
I asked my instructor yesterday to make a recommendation to me on Saturday with which way he felt was best and I'll probably go with whateve he and the chief instructor recommend. It's all the same to me, so ... 6 of one, half-dozen of another. Thanks to everyone for the discussion. Still open to recommendations...
Click to expand...

Anywhere in particular, or are you open to travel? How about Lakeland FL?

http://mobile.tailwheelsetc.com/amphibian.html
 
If I still lived in Valdosta, I'd take you up on that offer. But I'm in Vegas now, so will be taking up one of the many flight schools at VGT to get this done. I'll drop by next time I'm on that side if the country. SES sounds interesting, but not in the cards right now.
 
tinygiant said:
If I still lived in Valdosta, I'd take you up on that offer. But I'm in Vegas now, so will be taking up one of the many flight schools at VGT to get this done. I'll drop by next time I'm on that side if the country. SES sounds interesting, but not in the cards right now.
Click to expand...

Talk to Jojo Sheble, he's out there with a Lake, not sure if his dad is still a designee or not.
 
I don't think either Sheble is a DPE anymore and I've heard that their planes aren't moving much at all. Their website is horribly incomplete. The Sin City Flying Club (which appears to be more of a flight school) has a Lake. I may check them out.
 
tinygiant said:
I don't think either Sheble is a DPE anymore and I've heard that their planes aren't moving much at all. Their website is horribly incomplete. The Sin City Flying Club (which appears to be more of a flight school) has a Lake. I may check them out.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the FAA wanted him 141 and he didn't want to. After he split with Valerie, there went the office side of the business, and from the looks of it, he's pretty much been ****ing off since and enjoying himself. I had thought Sr retired a few years back. When he signed me off to take the MES ride he was saying that might be his last signature. Years ago SR gave me a twofer SES/SEL on my Commercial ride in the Lake because I fixed the prop linkage while floating on Lake Mojave.:D
 
Last edited:
Nice. I finally got a hold of the Vegas DPE list and they're not on it. No answer at the numbers on the website and no response to email. I'd say they're out of the game. But if he's enjoying himself, good on him.
 
tinygiant said:
Nice. I finally got a hold of the Vegas DPE list and they're not on it. No answer at the numbers on the website and no response to email. I'd say they're out of the game. But if he's enjoying himself, good on him.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he was never an office guy, or an FAA conformist for that matter...:lol: We always had a good time though doing my ratings. This was landing 2 in the BE-18 http://youtu.be/xioPZvTpeeE. I've been trying to talk him into coming over here and doing some 135 with it, I have a niche market that pays very well.
 
I've had several people here and, now, 4 different CFIs and multiple airline buddies tell me to get the ATP ASEL over the CPL, so I'm going to explore that route. Thanks for all the guidance. Turned out to be a good first thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top