Easa Form 21: Fill & Download for Free

First generation:The first jet fighters, developped at the end of WWII. Other than engine type they actually differ little from prop planes. Main factors:Jet enginesStraight wingsSubsonic speedsno avionics / radarExamples: Gloster Meteor, ME 262, P80, MiG-9Second generation:The fighters that dominated the Korean warMain factors:Swept wingsTransonic speedsEarly radar / gun targeting systemsFirst heatseeking missiles.Examples: F-86, MiG-15, Mig-17, F9F8, Hawker HunterThird generation jets:Main factors:More advanced radar systemsFirst radar guided missiles and better heat seeking missiles became the primary weapons, cannons became secondary. Limited BVRAfterburning engines for Mach 2 speedsExamples: Mig-19 and 21, F-4 Phantom, F-8 Crusader, Mirage 3, Electric LightningFourth Generation:Main factors:Better radar systems, including look down shoot downBetter missiles, both radar guided and heat seeking. BVRComputer assisted flight, fly by wire etc for better agility.Examples: Mirage 2000, F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, Mig-29, SU-27Examples of gen 4.5, who push gen 4 even further with EASA radars, radar reflection reducing technology, networking etc: Eurofighter Typhoon , Dassault Rafalle, MiG-35, SU-30, F-18E Super Hornet.Fifth Generation:Main factors:StealthNetworking between different planesExamples: F-35, F-22, SU-57, J-20, J-31The generations are of course a bit blurry, an upgraded gen 3 jet can easily be considered a gen 4. An early gen 4 like a F-16 is no match for the latest Rafale.

On paper it looks really good. Especially the fact that it is using P&W engines.However, there are still two major issues:It must be certified by Both the EASA and the FAA in order to be truly usefulIt must have a logistics and supply chain that is world wideIf it meets both of those requirements, then it will be a fine competitor in the single-aisle market with Airbus and Boeing.Irkut MC-21OPINION: Can MC-21 restore Russian pride?

This is one of those difficult questions to answer, because there are many factors involved.A student pilot whose aim is to fly for airlines in Europe and in most Asian and gulf countries unlike US do not even go for a Private Pilot licence. They have a much more direct route. If you want to fly for airlines, you need a Commercial Pilot licence and fully completed Airline Transport Pilot licence exams (theory). Such a student would join an accredited flight school and pursue his CPL directly. But there is another twist. Tough there exists separate CPL exams, nobody goes for that, because one can sit for Atpl exams while acquiring the CPL. The practical side of CPL is very similar to that in US. You get a CPL checkride, a separate instrument check ride and a multi engine checkride.So, in one way EASA route you can say is in one way much more direct because you do not have to have a PPL to get a CPL.On exams. Well, EASA Atpl exams are a lot tougher than FAA Atpl exams. The course content is very intenive. If you do well in the course you will have sufficient knowledge to ace the theoretical aspect of flying an A380 in the end. The course has many sub subjects, like principles of flight, performance, meteorology etc.As someone already mentioned, a person in Europe and Asia can join an airline right after flight school, with 200 hours. I did the same. I joined my airline at the age of 21, fresh out of flight school. The part I do not agree with him is the fact he points out we are less skilled than US counterparts. You cannot point out one crash to show there is a failure in the system. If the AF447 report is read, you would know quite well, it was not only a simple pilot error that lead to the crash. For me personally, having being gone through EASA exams I knew 90% of airline flying when I finished flight school. I knew aircraft performance parameters, very detailed information on aircraft systems and many other things which were helpful and quite necessary for a successful completion of type rating in the airline.The next thing I do not agree in the US system is 1500 hour rule for a pilot to join an airline. I do not believe flying a single engine Cessna 172 and doing circuit patterns with a student helps you to fly an airliner. That is experience, but that would not help you even a bit to fly a 100 percent more powerful and more faster twin or four engined airplane. EASA route pilots initially as I said before earns a CPL, but they have Atpl theory attached to their licence which only gives you the permission to act as a co pilot in an aircraft. To gain an Atpl you need to collect hours in a multi crew aircraft with certain night and instrument hours up to 1500 hours. Once that is gained you need to go for a checkride to get your Atpl. Then only can you act as a pilot in command of a multi crew airplane.Having a 20 year old first officer is not an issue as long as he is fully qualified to fly. A new coming pilot undergoes a lot of line training in the watchful eyes of line training captains after his type rating. If satisfactory performance is found after 100 hours or so a line check is conducted to check the performace. Even after a successful line check, until he gains 500 or more hours in the air frame he is not allowed to fly with all the captains in the airline. Until then he can only be rostered either with training captains or with one of the senior captains in the airline.I would also like to imply that in Europe and Asia education is very important. The general idea is a pilot should know even aspect of flight theory before he can become a pilot in an airline. The knowledge base of a FAA rated pilot is very different to that of a EASA or a pilot who trained in an Asian academy. The course is much more structured. For example in my school we had a schedule for classes and flights. You miss those classes or flights you have to face the chief flight instructor. We trained in a very strict environment. In US you do the course at your own rate. This is not applicable in most high standard Asian flight schools. The FAA licence is very different to EASA licence that some counties do not even accept it as a licence that can allow a pilot to fly in an airline.