CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
- hand in pants
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Sep 2006
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
I notice that one of the proficiency checks is for Instrument Rating - Co-Pilot only.
I thought they got rid of the co-pilot rating.
I thought they got rid of the co-pilot rating.
Hand in Pants, I'm thinking, my god, that IS huge!!!!!!!!
- Capt Hollywood
- 3rd Dan
- Posts: 841
- Joined: Sep 2006
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
You seem to be the only person that has a relatively comprehensive understanding of these new rules CY! Do you happen to know why there is a desire to align ourselves with a European system of aviation regulation, we're a long way from Europe!
Am I the only one finding it harder and harder these days to promote this career choice to those that want to be pilots?
CH
Am I the only one finding it harder and harder these days to promote this career choice to those that want to be pilots?
CH
-
- Gold Wings
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Nov 2013
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
hand in pants wrote:I notice that one of the proficiency checks is for Instrument Rating - Co-Pilot only.
I thought they got rid of the co-pilot rating.
Everyone now has a IR....not called command or co pilot anymore....it will be endorsed non PIC duties
- CYHeli
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Jun 2006
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
Capt Hollywood, no sorry I'm not sure of the entire history. There is some rumour that it was part of the Anti D ick Smith crowd when he left office.
I can say that the move to align ourselves with ICAO started some 14 years ago. While D ick was in the role at CASA he looked at the American standards which is why we have the class D that came in under the NAS, we directly took the US numbers for it. There is a bit of 'why are we blindly following them..?' feeling around and if you discount the US then Europe was the other answer. The funny thing is that Europe uses a different numbering system for their parts, so we have taken the European rules and used the American numbering system.
There is not one ICAO compliant country in the world. And even Australia will not out do other countries after the change.
I can say that the move to align ourselves with ICAO started some 14 years ago. While D ick was in the role at CASA he looked at the American standards which is why we have the class D that came in under the NAS, we directly took the US numbers for it. There is a bit of 'why are we blindly following them..?' feeling around and if you discount the US then Europe was the other answer. The funny thing is that Europe uses a different numbering system for their parts, so we have taken the European rules and used the American numbering system.
There is not one ICAO compliant country in the world. And even Australia will not out do other countries after the change.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
- CYHeli
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Jun 2006
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
For those trying to keep abreast of the changes, there are more info sheets that were released in September.
As the web page doesn't have the date on it, I'm not sure when the info sheets were actually added to the website. I'm on the mailing list, but didn't receive an email to say that there were new ones there.
There is supposed to be a new one coming regarding the transition from CAR 5 to CASR 61 licences, but not sure how far off it is.
The transition sheet should cover things like the low level and when you need to do a flight review, since low level rating is both new and the FR needed every 12 months.
Link to the CASA info sheets.
As the web page doesn't have the date on it, I'm not sure when the info sheets were actually added to the website. I'm on the mailing list, but didn't receive an email to say that there were new ones there.
There is supposed to be a new one coming regarding the transition from CAR 5 to CASR 61 licences, but not sure how far off it is.
The transition sheet should cover things like the low level and when you need to do a flight review, since low level rating is both new and the FR needed every 12 months.
Link to the CASA info sheets.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
- hand in pants
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Sep 2006
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
This from casa.
"CASR 61.800 (4)(b) permits you to use the 407 type rating as a flight review as well.
So no extra flight review is needed.
Also the 3.0 hour requirement for the endorsement is no longer a CASA requirement. The training is competency based now, but having said that , 3.0 hours minimum is not unreasonable. Especially for a 407. Refer CASR 61.810(3)"
Not the same from another part of casa.
"CASR 61.800 (4)(b) permits you to use the 407 type rating as a flight review as well.
So no extra flight review is needed.
Also the 3.0 hour requirement for the endorsement is no longer a CASA requirement. The training is competency based now, but having said that , 3.0 hours minimum is not unreasonable. Especially for a 407. Refer CASR 61.810(3)"
Not the same from another part of casa.
Hand in Pants, I'm thinking, my god, that IS huge!!!!!!!!
- CYHeli
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Jun 2006
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
Because flight crew licensing includes training, make sure those that need to know are across this one!
Draft CAAP 217
Draft CAAP 217
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
- froginasock
- 1st Dan
- Posts: 202
- Joined: Aug 2008
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
Flight Review - Single Engine Helicopter
2.1 (e) Perform missed approach .... (I'm sure they mean a 'go-around' - this isn't an IF renewal)
2.6 (e) perform recovery from the following (if applicable)
(i) vortex ring condition .... (won't be getting anyone to deliberately enter full vortex ring condition for them to recover from .. happy to recover from 'incipient vortex ring' ... or perhaps lets 'discuss this' rather than put the machine into a dangerous condition).
(ii) loss of tail rotor effectiveness ... (should I enter this via overpitching .. unless the review is in a jetbox .. otherwise it's pretty hard to get into that state to recover from it ... how about recover from loss of tail rotor 'efficiency' or malfunction).
(iii) low 'g' and mast bumping ... (won't be 'performing' that one either).
I guess they did say 'if applicable'
Interestingly - Slopes and Confined Areas are only conducted in flight reviews 'where possible' (2.1(g)) - I though this would be mandatory given that's where helicopters operate into and out of and where most accidents actually occur. Assuming flight reviews are conducted from schools they will always have slopes and CA's 'possible'.
... & No jammed pedals/controls (pedals being a common actually occurring control malfunction - particularly in the most common SE helicopters out there) - just 'loss of tail rotor control'.
p.s. from schedule 7 of the MOS .. PPL Flight reviews in a 'type-rated helicopter' (i.e. R22/R44) are to be performed to 'Helicopter general flight tolerances - professional level' (Schedule 8 - table 4) .. Private pilots in Class rated (i.e. non Robinson or twins) only need to be at a 'private level' of tolerance (Schedule 8 - table 3).
good stuff CA(we understand helicopters)SA
Frog
2.1 (e) Perform missed approach .... (I'm sure they mean a 'go-around' - this isn't an IF renewal)
2.6 (e) perform recovery from the following (if applicable)
(i) vortex ring condition .... (won't be getting anyone to deliberately enter full vortex ring condition for them to recover from .. happy to recover from 'incipient vortex ring' ... or perhaps lets 'discuss this' rather than put the machine into a dangerous condition).
(ii) loss of tail rotor effectiveness ... (should I enter this via overpitching .. unless the review is in a jetbox .. otherwise it's pretty hard to get into that state to recover from it ... how about recover from loss of tail rotor 'efficiency' or malfunction).
(iii) low 'g' and mast bumping ... (won't be 'performing' that one either).
I guess they did say 'if applicable'
Interestingly - Slopes and Confined Areas are only conducted in flight reviews 'where possible' (2.1(g)) - I though this would be mandatory given that's where helicopters operate into and out of and where most accidents actually occur. Assuming flight reviews are conducted from schools they will always have slopes and CA's 'possible'.
... & No jammed pedals/controls (pedals being a common actually occurring control malfunction - particularly in the most common SE helicopters out there) - just 'loss of tail rotor control'.
p.s. from schedule 7 of the MOS .. PPL Flight reviews in a 'type-rated helicopter' (i.e. R22/R44) are to be performed to 'Helicopter general flight tolerances - professional level' (Schedule 8 - table 4) .. Private pilots in Class rated (i.e. non Robinson or twins) only need to be at a 'private level' of tolerance (Schedule 8 - table 3).
good stuff CA(we understand helicopters)SA
Frog
- hand in pants
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Sep 2006
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
If a risk assessment as required by the company SMS was carried out prior to doing a flight review, most of what is required in the emergencies section wouldn't be done.....................
Hand in Pants, I'm thinking, my god, that IS huge!!!!!!!!
- froginasock
- 1st Dan
- Posts: 202
- Joined: Aug 2008
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
For you CY - in your discussions with CASA.
Just off the phone and I will email to get a written response from them ..
There is NO METHOD for CASA to record the helicopters on Class ratings (i.e. SEH) ... so if you have a SEH rating (lets say a B206) and do competency training for a AS350 there is NO CASA RECORD of this .. no form, nothing on the licence document ... nothing but a few lines in a logbook and hopefully the school has stamped and signed saying competency training has been completed .. or who'd know.
Imagine if someone loses their logbook (remember no more sticky labels either) .. and rely on people to TRUST that training in the AS350 was COMPLETED ... not just SEH .. because I can do a Flight review in an R22 that covers SEH!
Trouble brewing
Just off the phone and I will email to get a written response from them ..
There is NO METHOD for CASA to record the helicopters on Class ratings (i.e. SEH) ... so if you have a SEH rating (lets say a B206) and do competency training for a AS350 there is NO CASA RECORD of this .. no form, nothing on the licence document ... nothing but a few lines in a logbook and hopefully the school has stamped and signed saying competency training has been completed .. or who'd know.
Imagine if someone loses their logbook (remember no more sticky labels either) .. and rely on people to TRUST that training in the AS350 was COMPLETED ... not just SEH .. because I can do a Flight review in an R22 that covers SEH!
Trouble brewing
- CYHeli
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Jun 2006
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
Fully agree Frog and the matter has been raised.
It is one reason why schools must keep all records for 7 years.
Can you imagine how a ramp check will go in the future?
It is one reason why schools must keep all records for 7 years.
Can you imagine how a ramp check will go in the future?
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
- Evil Twin
- 3rd Dan
- Posts: 696
- Joined: Mar 2007
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
Isn't it about time that this all went public? CASA put out their fairystory, sorry press release, a few weeks back telling the public how the changes were having no impact. We all know the opposite to be true, the industry and regulator alike are struggling to deal with the massive increase in work produced by the Part 61 implementation and yet NOTHING is being done to stop it. As far as the world outside aviation in Australia is concerned there is no change. The transport minister, if he's even interested, is only getting his information from the regulator that is touting a total pack of lies!
Can you imagine if these sweeping changes were put onto fuel transporters for example? The country would be grinding to a halt and the minister would be involved immediately. G.A. nothing..........
Can you imagine if these sweeping changes were put onto fuel transporters for example? The country would be grinding to a halt and the minister would be involved immediately. G.A. nothing..........
- froginasock
- 1st Dan
- Posts: 202
- Joined: Aug 2008
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
CYHeli wrote:Fully agree Frog and the matter has been raised.
It is one reason why schools must keep all records for 7 years.
Can you imagine how a ramp check will go in the future?
.. speaking of the future .. lets say 8 years after a helicopter (endorsement) is completed .. no more record ... a licence reprint tells me nothing except R22 R44 SEH and any Multis (as they are at least all 'types') ... no B206 AS350 R66 B47 EC120 etc etc .. no record except my 10 year old logbook .. a logbook possibly lost in a move between states in the distant past (and lets face it - we move a lot). My flight reviews for SEH were all done in R22 / R44 (to save money - rather than in a jetty or squirrel).
Will a Statutory Declaration be enough for my next boss?
I hope 'Honest John' doesn't s#!t me .. or deliberately lose a logbook!!!!!
- CYHeli
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Jun 2006
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
If Frog and others could sent me either a pm or email (CASR @ AHIA.com.au) will a scan of the new licence so that I have an example to take back to CASA re this one. Feel free to blank out the name, etc.
The first example licence that CASA put on their web site does has the make/model of aircraft within the class listed, but the most recent doesn't. What, the goal posts moving...?
The first example licence that CASA put on their web site does has the make/model of aircraft within the class listed, but the most recent doesn't. What, the goal posts moving...?
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
- froginasock
- 1st Dan
- Posts: 202
- Joined: Aug 2008
- CYHeli
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Jun 2006
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
Okay froginasock (and others) This is the answer from CASA with some padding from me.
When a person completes the training and flight review for a class-rated aircraft (eg Bell 47) the instructor enters the details on the pilot’s licence.
When CASA receives the notification of the flight review, the Form 61-9FR has a section for including the aircraft make/model for the FR, the pilot’s licensing records are updated and the type of aircraft used for the flight review is entered into the licensing system. The pilot will record the flight review in his or her logbook.
Now as we know, If a licence is reissued at any time afterwards, the flight review records will only show the single-engine helicopter class rating flight review and not the Bell 47 training/flight review.
Now this is the main answer to your questions - In the future, the pilot will be able to use the CASA online system to view all licence and ratings details and it will be evident from those records that James has completed the Bell 47 training and flight review. The records will be able to be printed and can therefore show to a new employer, or to the owner of an aircraft that you are hiring, that you have been trained on that aircraft make/model and when you completed the flight review.
As an aside, helicopter pilots see this as a big deal because we are used to seeing endorsements on a licence, the fixed wing guys (CASA) don't care because so much of there stuff falls under the <5700 kg class.
When a person completes the training and flight review for a class-rated aircraft (eg Bell 47) the instructor enters the details on the pilot’s licence.
When CASA receives the notification of the flight review, the Form 61-9FR has a section for including the aircraft make/model for the FR, the pilot’s licensing records are updated and the type of aircraft used for the flight review is entered into the licensing system. The pilot will record the flight review in his or her logbook.
Now as we know, If a licence is reissued at any time afterwards, the flight review records will only show the single-engine helicopter class rating flight review and not the Bell 47 training/flight review.
Now this is the main answer to your questions - In the future, the pilot will be able to use the CASA online system to view all licence and ratings details and it will be evident from those records that James has completed the Bell 47 training and flight review. The records will be able to be printed and can therefore show to a new employer, or to the owner of an aircraft that you are hiring, that you have been trained on that aircraft make/model and when you completed the flight review.
As an aside, helicopter pilots see this as a big deal because we are used to seeing endorsements on a licence, the fixed wing guys (CASA) don't care because so much of there stuff falls under the <5700 kg class.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
-
- Silver Wings
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Mar 2011
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
I have not followed the part 61 change except for 1 CASA presentation about the changes (where they flew staff all over OZ 2 years ago). Some people in CASA have kept themselves employed by these changes aligning OZ with Europe. I wonder what the cost has been so far? I agree with Captain Hollywood about the industry and recommending it as a career, I am finding it very hard to promote it. But back to the changes. We have the same type of bureaucrats arranging this change of aligning OZ with somewhere else that have partially aligned the OZ road rules and still have not got that right. If it aint broken don't try to fix it.
- froginasock
- 1st Dan
- Posts: 202
- Joined: Aug 2008
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
CYHeli wrote:Okay froginasock (and others) This is the answer from CASA with some padding from me.
When a person completes the training and flight review for a class-rated aircraft (eg Bell 47) the instructor enters the details on the pilot’s licence.
When CASA receives the notification of the flight review, the Form 61-9FR has a section for including the aircraft make/model for the FR, the pilot’s licensing records are updated and the type of aircraft used for the flight review is entered into the licensing system. The pilot will record the flight review in his or her logbook.
Now as we know, If a licence is reissued at any time afterwards, the flight review records will only show the single-engine helicopter class rating flight review and not the Bell 47 training/flight review.
Now this is the main answer to your questions - In the future, the pilot will be able to use the CASA online system to view all licence and ratings details and it will be evident from those records that James has completed the Bell 47 training and flight review. The records will be able to be printed and can therefore show to a new employer, or to the owner of an aircraft that you are hiring, that you have been trained on that aircraft make/model and when you completed the flight review.
As an aside, helicopter pilots see this as a big deal because we are used to seeing endorsements on a licence, the fixed wing guys (CASA) don't care because so much of there stuff falls under the <5700 kg class.
CY has set me right over the phone .. a flight review is required as part of any new helicopter training (endorsement) for a Class rating for just about all SEH - so a record should be kept by CASA (100% contrary to the information CLARC provided to me over the phone a few days ago - see above). A flight TEST is required for any new 'type' or the first 'class' rating conducted.
Of further note the CASR regs that are part of my subscription service (paper copy) don't have any of the recent amendments and some Paragraph numbers don't exist (or align) in the paper version ... kind of makes it hard to follow at times .. it also might make it hard for someone sitting a law exam if the 'up to date' paper amendments are well behind the 'on-line' amendments ... this sucks in simple day to day operations as well - i.e. the FR form refers you to 61.747 .. and 61.747 doesn't exist in the up to date paper version yet .. and I'm a paper man. .. no wonder my little brain gets confused.
- hand in pants
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Sep 2006
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
I agree with Evil Twin, why isn't any of this in the media.
We have been left to fend for ourselves with little or no coherent information. An authority that still isn't sure what is required for a simple thing like an endorsement (yes, I know, it's a rating now).
Something has to be done to clear this up or we are going to end up in court because we didn't understand the drivel they call Part 61.
We have been left to fend for ourselves with little or no coherent information. An authority that still isn't sure what is required for a simple thing like an endorsement (yes, I know, it's a rating now).
Something has to be done to clear this up or we are going to end up in court because we didn't understand the drivel they call Part 61.
Hand in Pants, I'm thinking, my god, that IS huge!!!!!!!!
-
- New Member
- Posts: 3
- Joined: May 2013
Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers
This hasn't been raised yet - slipped quietly onto the CASA website a couple of days ago. Seems they are starting to realise the gaping holes.
Operations > Flight Training > Notices for Flight Training and ATO's
23 October 2014
A legislative instrument has been published approving people who held flight instructor testing delegations under Civil Aviation Regulation (CAR) Part 5 or Part 40 of the Civil Aviation Orders (pilot licences and ratings) immediately before 1 September to conduct flight tests for a corresponding Part 61 instructor rating training endorsement(s) mentioned in table 61.1235 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.
The approval is subject to a number of conditions, including that on the day of the flight test the approved person must meet experience requirements for the relevant endorsement, as well as have clear records in their pilot log book for each relevant operation showing the date, pilot in command and total flight time.
The instrument expires on 30 June 2016.
To find out more, read the full instrument:
Approval to conduct flight tests for a training endorsement mentioned in table 61.1235 of CASR 1998 (Instrument number CASA 255/14).
Operations > Flight Training > Notices for Flight Training and ATO's
23 October 2014
A legislative instrument has been published approving people who held flight instructor testing delegations under Civil Aviation Regulation (CAR) Part 5 or Part 40 of the Civil Aviation Orders (pilot licences and ratings) immediately before 1 September to conduct flight tests for a corresponding Part 61 instructor rating training endorsement(s) mentioned in table 61.1235 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.
The approval is subject to a number of conditions, including that on the day of the flight test the approved person must meet experience requirements for the relevant endorsement, as well as have clear records in their pilot log book for each relevant operation showing the date, pilot in command and total flight time.
The instrument expires on 30 June 2016.
To find out more, read the full instrument:
Approval to conduct flight tests for a training endorsement mentioned in table 61.1235 of CASR 1998 (Instrument number CASA 255/14).
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests