CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

A place to have your say and ask your questions on anything in the Helicopter learning environment.
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1805
Joined: Jun 2006

CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby CYHeli » Mon Aug 25 2014, 01:04

A Q&A Thread.
Please post the questions here and anyone who has an answer can reply.

Remember that CASA have Safety Advisors who can also help, after all, it is their job. But please re-post the info here for all of us to benefit.

I'll kick the ball off with some that were emailed to the AHIA over the last weekend.

1. If certain items have to be demonstrated can this be done in the classroom. For example retreating blade stall, dynamic roll over, over pitching, can this be demonstrated in the classroom as part of the theory course? And not in the helicopter which is not approved by the OEM? (Background to this is that CASA has put in the MOS in schedule 2 (Low Level) that an instructor has to "...recognise the approach and demonstrate the recovery to retreating blade stall in level flight as follows..."

Yes the CASA thinking came from the SFAR 73 that is relevant to the Robinsons. It states that awareness training is to be conducted (theory) followed by a flight review (flight). The topics that you list are in the awareness training, and unfortunately they also list Low RRPM recovery in the flight component, but CASA has not fully understood the ramifications of this. Also if you check the end of each chapter of competencies in schedule 2, there is a list of ‘Underpinning Knowledge’. The sequences that you refer to appear in that list. There is a meeting with CASA on the 29th Aug to address this issue.
Example here that relates to Low Level, but there are others that include dynamic roll-over, etc.

4 Underpinning knowledge of the following:
(a) the topics mentioned in Section 2.5, Low-level rating in Schedule 3 of this MOS;
(b) maximum rate and minimum rate turn criteria;
(c) the effect of wind velocity in low-level operations;
(d) the effect of aircraft inertia at low level;
(e) effects of illusions;
(f) obstruction avoidance techniques;
(g) critical operational conditions, including retreating blade stall, vortex ring, over pitching loss of anti-torque effectiveness and negative ‘g’ effects;
(h) meteorological factors affecting helicopter performance at low level;
(i) terrain following techniques;
(j) safety hazards and risks of low-level operations and methods of control.

2. Come September 1st are currently approved instrument flight training devices currently used for CIR training able to be utilised for basic instrument training as part of the RPL, PPL and CPL licence requirements


Yes. I'm looking for the appropriate CAO ref, but have been told yes.
[Edit]
From 61.010
flight simulation training device means:
(a) a qualified flight simulator; or
(b) a qualified flight training device; or
(c) a synthetic trainer that is approved under Civil Aviation Order 45.0; or
(d) a device that meets the qualification standards prescribed by a legislative instrument under regulation 61.045; or
(e) a device that is qualified (however described) by the national aviation authority of a recognised foreign State.

Each of the references to flight in an approved simulation device would mean that if the device complies with the above definition, then yes it is approved. So all current IFR approved can be used for VFR.

3. Do flight examiners for Helicopter CPL have to do a 3.5 hour flight test?
Currently the test goes for 1.5 to 2 hours maximum. 3.5 is just a bit overboard.



I agree. This is a discussion for the ATO’s / FTE’s to have with CASA, via the Flight Training Panel. Talk to the FTTO. (I’ll raise it on Friday) The Examiners Handbook is an internal CASA guide and easily reviewed. It is also only in draft format.

If two 90kg pilots in a R22 then already will have reduced fuel to commence the test so it will require 2-4 refuels during the flight.
Will the test be able to be conducted over several days??


Yes. As per now. The test/re-test must be completed within 28 days.

4. What is the process for a Flight Examiner to be able to do an ATPL flight test in a helicopter. It is a new qualification so how do we apply for it and what qualifications does the examiner need.

61.1265 Limitations on exercise of privileges of flight examiner ratings—endorsements
(1) A flight examiner is authorised to conduct a flight test, or grant a rating or endorsement, mentioned in column 2 of an item in Part 1 of table 61.1310 only if the examiner also holds the endorsement mentioned in column 1 of the item.

The table at 61.1310 (endorsement 3) states that to conduct an ATPL flight test, the examiner needs to hold an ATPL and the current approval to conduct an IF flight test.

As part of completing the form 61-9TX, you will list all of your current qualifications and can then either teach them under the Instructor rating if the pilot holds the minimums as per 61.1235 to hold the endorsement OR to examine them if they hold the qualifications for the endorsement under 61.1310. The instructor/examiner would have to have held the appropriate similar qualification prior to the change over. For example if a current instructor only has approval to conduct single engine training, after the change over he/she can’t start teaching Multi engine simply because they have a multi endorsement. They would still need to complete an endorsement flight test on their rating. An examiner would be the same, like for like. The regulation that covers this is 202 sub part CB, continuation of authorisations.
Otherwise, if a pilot does not hold the appropriate qualification, book in a flight test.

There are examiners out there with ATPL/CIR testing approval, but if you are not sure, this would be a good question to confirm at a PDP or checking with the FTTO.

5. Come September 1 if we apply to be a flight examiner are there grandfather clauses so that we get everything that we have now plus all the new ones that currently do not exist? (sling, hoist, type training for multis, low flying, )
Yes, see Part 202 CB,
202.263 Continuation of old authorisations
(1) Despite the amendments, an old authorisation that was in force immediately before 1 September 2014is continued in force on and after September 2014 according to its terms.
(2) Part 61 applies to the continued authorisation as if it were the equivalent new authorisation.

6. What is the process for a pilot to get a type training approval for a multi? If there is no META what qualifications are required for the type training approval and who assess that and how do you apply?

It is covered under item 5 of table 61.1235 which is Type training (aircraft specific). Remember all twin engine helicopters are types. The interesting thing here is that there are no hour minimums or requirements (50 total on multi and 25 on type today). There is a Multi Engine (Aeroplane) endorsement (61.1235 item 6) and I believe that it was an oversight and should have stated aircraft. The intent is still to have a Multi (helicopter) endorsement and the pre-requisites would be the same as today. The type training for us without a minimum hours on type would be more relevant to the Robinsons. But Item 5 covers it.
The process to apply for the training endorsement is either you have it now (Part 202.263) or you do a flight test for the new endorsement.

7. Come September 1 those schools that currently do 105 hour integrated courses are they going to be able to amend their syllabus to meet the new Part 142 integrated requirements and teach basic IF and reduce the hours to 100 hours without being a Part 142 school? If not then at what point are we able to teach basic IF as part of the CPL training cycle within the 105 hour structure?

The current Day VFR syllabus lists the use of nav aids for tracking in section 2, Unit C8.8 so this can be done now already. It just doesn't include the recovery from UAS using full/partial panel.

All current schools will automatically be issued a certificate to operate as a Part 141 school. This certificate allows that school to teach both the old syllabus or the new syllabus. Only a Part 142 school can teach the integrated course. To become a Part 142 school, the operator needs to apply for an AOC as a Part 142 school. IE, an Ops Manual amendment.
A Part 141 school can teach the new intro to basic IF, but is still limited to the 150 hour course (70 hours in helicopter).
For an instructor (new Grade 1 or 2) to teach the new intro to basic IF they need to hold a night rating and the aircraft meets the instruments listed in the CAO for night. (There is a separate issue and concern re the costs of fitting out aircraft for night, especially in light of the project after the ABC AS355 crash, and others, and the expected upgrade to night aircraft requirements!)

Now thinking outside the box, the new hours only state hours, NOT DAY ONLY hours. One plan for my school is to run a PPL course (test), then complete a CPL course and along the way add on low level, sling, and NVFR to make up the 150 hours. All helicopter hours and more useful than doing part fixed wing / part helicopter unless someone really wants a PPL(A). More expensive and more tests, I realise that. But it is an option for the students. It also sets up the pilots for instructing, fire fighting and other roles by providing a NVFR along the way.

As others come up with questions, feel free to post them here.
Anyone who answers them, please include the regulation number and/or quote to assist others with learning.
I encourage everyone to get their heads into the legislation and I will post once I see that the regs are posted on the Comm Law website.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
User avatar
AHIA
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 470
Joined: Feb 2012

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby AHIA » Mon Aug 25 2014, 02:32

CYHeli,

Thanks. This is so helpful. Keep up the good work.

AHIA
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1805
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby CYHeli » Mon Aug 25 2014, 03:19

There is a question that Mike Becker raises on another thread about ATPL.
In regards to the course of training for multi crew co-operation, I was told by a CASA Safety Advisor that the course may be as simple as an approved CRM course. (They failed to say that CASA does not directly approve a CRM course)
But yet to see how that works come test day.
The view of most at the meeting was that the course would include a flight component, not just a CRM book and test.
The flight component wound have to be completed by a Part 142 school (142.015 (2))
Does this also mean that all CRM courses in the future have to be conducted by a Part 142 school? umm... one interpretation is Yes.

One way around this is that if an aviation company lists in their Ops Manual an external company (Civil Aviation Academy Aust for example) as a theory provider, CASA approves the Ops Manual, and therefore approves the content of that course. But if you go to CAAA directly, they will tell you that CASA cannot approve their course in isolation.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
Owen Webb
New Member
New Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Aug 2013

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby Owen Webb » Mon Aug 25 2014, 04:27

I have been looking for the minimum hour requirements for endorsements and ratings such as an Ag rating and haven't yet been able to find any. I have spoken to a few people who think an Ag rating will go from 10hrs dual to 15hrs dual and a Fire Fighting rating is going to be 15hrs dual. If this is true for someone to become an Ag pilot who wishes to fly on fires as well it will require 30hrs dual instruction in at least a 44 in comparison to the current 10hrs dual. I hope this is not the case but I cant find anything to prove or disprove this in the MOS or elsewhere. If someone could point me in the right direction it would be appreciated.
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1805
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby CYHeli » Mon Aug 25 2014, 04:36

Owen, table is 61.1120.
For Aerial application (seeding, spraying) item 2 of the table.
5 hour low level and 15 dual while receiving training in aerial app ops. I believe they over lap, so the 5 hour low level is part of the 15 dual.

The fire fighting is a separate endorsement, item 5 of the table.
5 hours low level and 5 hours fire ops dual. Again this might overlap, but would be dictated by the course that the Part 141 school runs.

Both are a flight test. (61.1115 / 61.1140)
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1805
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby CYHeli » Mon Aug 25 2014, 04:49

More on the ATPL,
For those of you at the Big end of town (Bond, Bristows, CHC), any of the FO's who are upgrading to ATPL, you can count the crew co-op training that you do in the sim, etc as approved training. If you hold licences from overseas, that will go even further. Any Kiwi pilots note, the TTMRA still holds.

61.280 Grant of flight crew licences, ratings or endorsements under bilateral agreements
CASA may grant a flight crew licence, rating or endorsement to the holder of an overseas flight crew licence in accordance with a bilateral agreement between Australia and the Contracting State whose licensing authority granted the overseas licence.
Note The holder of a commercial pilot licence or an airline transport pilot licence granted by the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand is eligible for an equivalent Australian licence and equivalent ratings and other endorsements: see the Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Act 1997.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
User avatar
rotors99
Gold Wings
Gold Wings
Posts: 173
Joined: Oct 2009

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby rotors99 » Mon Aug 25 2014, 05:02

Thanks for the update CYHeli

So what about converting an FAA ATPL(H) to CASA ATPL(H)?

Cheers & many thanks
Mike Becker
Gold Wings
Gold Wings
Posts: 177
Joined: Nov 2005

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby Mike Becker » Mon Aug 25 2014, 06:21

Colin
Re the IFR sim being able to be used for 5 hours of the 10 hours in the CPL licence.
Although the obvious answer should be yes, when you get right down to it the sims that we use (not level D) do not have visual credits so any instrument flying done in them cannot count towards the instrument component for a PPL or CPL only towards the hours for the issue of a CIR or renewal.
The same applies to NVFR and NVG in the sim. No visual credits available so although CASA will allow us to use them as an aid to our training, we cannot count any of the hours.

We would like this changed and most in CASA also believe it is a good idea but the way the regs are around simulation training devices at the moment does not allow for it.

I we can get it changed or the current sims approved for 5 hours of the 10 in the PPL and CPL then what would the process be with CASA. Who do we apply to and what do we ask?
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1805
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby CYHeli » Mon Aug 25 2014, 07:30

Mike, I don't think it is a case of visual credits.
Now I know very little about SIMs, and I understand that your concern is that we can't use the SIM for the current training, but the new training does. But as you know, it is a tool to teach the reliance on the instruments for attitude, etc and to overcome the visual illusions.

So what can we do in a SIM? Think about what the drivers at the heavy end do for IFR training and currency in a SIM. The recovery from unusual attitudes and nav aid tracking can all be done in a SIM. The techniques used to get your wings level and set an attitude are all done by sole use of instruments in either the SIM or the aircraft.

If your SIM is approved for IF initial or re-currency training, then it is approved for NVFR SIM training under the Part 61. I realise that an amendment may be needed for FSD-2 to enable the list to be increased to include NVFR in the appropriate category of trainer.

For those whom haven't seen this document, it is enabled by CAO 45.0. Link here, to FSD-2. Para 1.5 states,
Approved synthetic trainers may be used to accrue aeronautical experience for the
purposes of:...
The issue of pilot licences,

and
Category A Trainers
2.3 Category A synthetic trainers:
● Provide:
❍ Training in instrument flight procedures
❍ Training in limited navigation aid procedures, orientation and homing
❍ With special requirements, training in visual flight procedures


Since I have little SIM experience, I don't know what the last line requires to make it happen.
With the stroke of a pen I'm sure that NVFR can be included. Even as it is written right now, it allows the nav training for the current CPL(H).

Our meeting on Friday will include people from standards. I will add this to the agenda.

Rotors99, check out the forms near the bottom of this page.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
Airbeater
Silver Wings
Silver Wings
Posts: 31
Joined: Apr 2011

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby Airbeater » Mon Aug 25 2014, 23:35

CY,

If I've done around 150 hrs on fire and around 70 bucketing ops am I required to get this new endorsement? I've had mixed responses from others in the know. THANKS
AB
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1805
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby CYHeli » Tue Aug 26 2014, 00:10

Airbeater wrote:CY,

If I've done around 150 hrs on fire and around 70 bucketing ops am I required to get this new endorsement? I've had mixed responses from others in the know. THANKS
AB

You will have this endorsement issued to you under the grandfather clause, 202.263.
The fire fighting is actually an endorsement to an Aerial Application Rating. This rating will have two endorsements which are separate and not one leads to another.
Think of it like an NDB or VOR on an IF rating. They are separate endorsements.

The other endorsement under an Aerial App Rating, is of course, an aerial App endorsement for those who go seeding or spraying.

Now the first part of what you have to do, photocopy some pages of your logbook that show
a) you did a line check with a Chief Pilot for fire / bucketing Ops, and
b) some flights that involve fire work. That will include AAS work, not just bucketing.
These pages need to be certified as true copies, but people I have spoken to in CASA believe that a person with a delegation can sign them; ATO, CP, CFI.
You will then attach these to the form 61-9TX as evidence and submit it when you do your next renewal (now called - proficiency check) or Flight review.

There is talk that since the fire ops is such a new endorsement and there is no like for like, that the above may need to be done prior to the season to cover everyone's butt.

Now an important bit. Because the fire stuff comes under the Aerial Application Rating, it MUST be renewed every 2 years as a proficiency check. If the CP of the company/ies that you fly for is not an ATO/FTE, then the CP will have to get one in to conduct the Prof Cx. Otherwise you will not be current.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
User avatar
Evil Twin
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 485
Joined: Mar 2007

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby Evil Twin » Tue Aug 26 2014, 00:42

Are the exams changing?

I need to sit ATPL law and need to know if the exam is based on the old rules CAO etc or new part 61. Further if it's part 61 is there a syllabus out?

Cheers
User avatar
Heli
3rd Dan
3rd Dan
Posts: 505
Joined: Mar 2006

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby Heli » Tue Aug 26 2014, 00:51

Airbeater wrote:CY,

If I've done around 150 hrs on fire and around 70 bucketing ops am I required to get this new endorsement? I've had mixed responses from others in the know. THANKS
AB


When the low level endorsement came in I did the required logbook viewing, turned up for a stamp in my endorsement page, and got charged a handy $120 for my troubles.

It's probably a higher charge now, with CPI :roll:
Jayrow Pilot
New Member
New Member
Posts: 4
Joined: May 2010

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby Jayrow Pilot » Tue Aug 26 2014, 01:28

Do the new regs not also require you to have undertaken belly tank training. With the large percentage of pilots having AA ,Incendiary ,bucket only ,will they still be required to now go to a flying school with a belly tank aircraft (do the endorsement first if not rated)then apply.
Once again not much cost to the individual/industry ( some schools with this capability will do all right though)
User avatar
rotors99
Gold Wings
Gold Wings
Posts: 173
Joined: Oct 2009

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby rotors99 » Tue Aug 26 2014, 03:21

Hey CYHeli

Thanks Mate.....from I can fathom what's written there Form 61-4A to convert an FAA ATP(H) to Ozzie ATP just fill in & pay.....is this correct?

Cheers
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1805
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby CYHeli » Tue Aug 26 2014, 03:55

Evil Twin wrote:Are the exams changing?

I need to sit ATPL law and need to know if the exam is based on the old rules CAO etc or new part 61. Further if it's part 61 is there a syllabus out?

Cheers

ET, they aren't telling us much re the theory and it frustrates a number of theory providers as well. The syllabus is from the Schedule 3 of the MOS.

The Air law exams, from PPL to ATPL and IREX will change, but we don't know when. CASA has to understand the changes, then get someone to write the new questions. My guess that the exam wont change in the short term. It's a guess only based on the fact that CASA haven't had time to make a change.

The other avenue would be to keep an eye on the CASA exam page. There will be updates as CASA think of them.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1805
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby CYHeli » Tue Aug 26 2014, 04:00

Regarding the fire fighting endorsement. The AHIA has found out, via Ray Cronin, that the CASA legal people are looking at the issue of pilots on fires not holding the appropriate endorsement and the legal consequences of that. (Who would've thought...!)

So stand by re the above suggestions and I believe that a press release is pending to advise possible options. Due to the endorsements being a regulatory change, CASA have stated from the word go, that there would be no charge from their end.

A decision is also coming re the FTE's required to carry out the new proficiency checks and flight tests for type endorsements (especially the twins).

Now, where was that letter from Mr McC re how the AHIA are out of step and don't understand the new part?
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
User avatar
bangequalsbad
1st Dan
1st Dan
Posts: 200
Joined: Mar 2011

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby bangequalsbad » Tue Aug 26 2014, 08:53

Top work CY!

Maybe this AHIA thing is ok after all... :wink:

Bang.
Airbeater
Silver Wings
Silver Wings
Posts: 31
Joined: Apr 2011

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby Airbeater » Tue Aug 26 2014, 09:16

Thanks CY, appreciate the work you're putting in.
AB
User avatar
hand in pants
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1381
Joined: Sep 2006

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby hand in pants » Tue Aug 26 2014, 20:01

Have had a dig around but started to nod off, who can be a FTE???
And where do I find the info...............
Hand in Pants, I'm thinking, my god, that IS huge!!!!!!!!

Return to “Flight Training”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest