Can I Fly the R44 After Completing Licence??

[arron8138]

Hi There

Just passed my Australian CPL licence which obviously gives me the rating to fly the machine I was tested in (R22). But Ive done 22 hours in the R44 and even gone solo in it and I'm being told I now need to do a flight review in the R44 before I can be licensed to fly it. Is this true or false? If so where does it say so and where can i find it.

Much Appreciated

[Saucepan]

Hi mate,

Well done for passing your CPL, now for the fun part. The only restriction you'll have will be the insurance and/or owner's permission. No legal restrictions, or separate flight review needed The R44 and R22 are now in the same single engine class.

Good luck, Saucepan.

[Imout]

Hold on saucepan, may be a bit more to it.

He said he has passed his Australian CPL but by the sounds of it held an overseas licence or perhaps did some training in the R44 during his training here??
Need to get the whole story before we can answer.

Do not have the regs in front of me BUT although most singles are in a SEH Class, when flying them for the first time within the class you are required to do a Flight Review before you are let lose.
Now remember a Flight Review is not a test or a proficiency check so can be done by a qualified instructor and can also form part of the type training if planned that way.

If this was NOT done during the 22 hours he did in the R44 then yes he will need a FR before he can fly it. If he has done it already then it should be written up as a FR in his licence already.

Certainly a bit more info will help here but I am assuming the Flight School will be in the best position to make those calls and give advice.
Otherwise I would suggest getting into Part 61 and actually have a good read is a start. Nothing like educating yourself! Yes can be hard to follow at times and hard to find and cross reference, I found that printing the document helps as I can tag bits that are relevant and find them again.

Will see how this one goes!!

[arron8138]

Thanks for the help, I'm 18 just finished my first ever licence and working full time for the school I trained at, they believe I need to do a flight review even after I did part of my 105 hours in the 44 (22hrs). I've done my part 61 reading and realise there under the single engine helicopter group and from the way I interperate what the regs say is that I don't need to do the flight review. I really just need someone to clarify I'm reading it correctly. Especially if I've gone solo in the 44 then get my licence and have to do a flight reveiw. Doesn't make sense. Cheers

[Zeus1980]

If you have completed your CPL(H) 105hrs, with the 20 hour minimum in a R44, you will have to do a flight review after your flight test. When the new licencing came in the R44 was originally going to be a flight test itself, but cool heads prevailed. So yes you will need to do a flight review even though you have done 22hrs in your training.

Your school that trained you will just need to do a flight review and send that to CASA for it to be added to your licence.

[arron8138]

So if I do have to do a flight reveiw can I do it before CASA send my licence as I'm not acting PIC and because it's training?

[CYHeli]

A student pilot cannot do a flight review, only a licensed pilot. (I'll post the link later), therefore the solo time doesn't count.
So your paperwork needs to be submitted.
Have your licence issued.
THEN do the flight review.
The FR gets written on your new P61 licence.
A FR is not necessarily training and you no longer hold a student licence, they have all gone.
Sorry, no short cuts.

[Imout]

One thing you could possibly have done is half your flight test in the R22 and the other half in the R44, don't think there is anything in there that says you can't do that??
Nav in the R22 and general handling in the R44 (or vice versa)

[ChicoCheco]

Splitting the test (if nothing against it in docs/regs) like this is good idea, actually. One would have to refuel after an hour or so anyway.

The nav portion in R44 would be more fun/smooth, too.

Maybe there should be 'sticky' thread with brief lowdown of the instruments that changed some meanings/requirements of recent Part 61 with quick reference/links. Like the R22, R44 specifics since they're so commonly used.
An instructor at school should also be ready to give regs reference, removing any doubt when checked, in this dynamically changing licensing nowadays.

[oldrotorhead]

I'm not sure I agree with you Mike. For starters so far as I can tell, there is no way to notify more than one type on the FTTN for the test (not that I've actually tried to do that). Secondly, where do you draw the line? How about a guy who has learnt on several types and for his test wants to do all his GF (except slopes and autos) in the R22, all the Nav on the R44, and Slopes and Autos in a B47 or H269? Starting to look silly now isn't it especially if he is actually s#!t on Slopes and Autos in the R22 which maybe we'll never now find out until he crashes....
I for one as an ATO wouldn't entertain more than one type for the test, but that's my view. A LLR done on the same day as a licence test is of course a different story.
Just sayin...
Cheers,
ORH

[Imout]

You may be right. I was just saying that I don't think there is anything in there that says you can't. Have been wrong in the past.
If it is an integrated course then the syllabus may be able to take care of this issue if the school has an option to do it.
Both integrated and non integrated training in the future then it may be best to do a PPL on the way to CPL and sort this out as part of the training post PPL but Pre CPL!

Either way it is just a matter of rejigging the mind to how the new rules work and at this stage a lot of us (me included) are still working through them and how to interpret and apply.
Good questions like the initial post helps us find these issues and get clarification from CASA if needed so keep asking.

[CYHeli]

References regarding my must hold a licence comments,

61.747 Limitations on exercise of privileges of class ratings in certain aircraft—flight review
(1) The holder of an aircraft class rating is authorised to exercise the privileges of the rating in an aircraft of a type...

Please read the bits that follow in 61.747. This paragraph is for a new type, training and a flight review.

61.400 Limitations on exercise of privileges of pilot licences—flight review
(1) For this Part, successful completion of a flight review for a rating on a pilot licence requires ...

The way it reads is that a flight review is for a licence holder.
Every formal assessment prior to holding a licence is a test, after the pilot has proven basic skills (flight test), a lot of the subsequent assessments are reviews, not tests.

[Zeus1980]

References regarding my must hold a licence comments,

61.747 Limitations on exercise of privileges of class ratings in certain aircraft—flight review
(1) The holder of an aircraft class rating is authorised to exercise the privileges of the rating in an aircraft of a type...

Please read the bits that follow in 61.747. This paragraph is for a new type, training and a flight review.

61.400 Limitations on exercise of privileges of pilot licences—flight review
(1) For this Part, successful completion of a flight review for a rating on a pilot licence requires ...

The way it reads is that a flight review is for a licence holder.
Every formal assessment prior to holding a licence is a test, after the pilot has proven basic skills (flight test), a lot of the subsequent assessments are reviews, not tests.

CY, if your a student pilot and you have passed your flight test is it correct that you can't fly as a CPL(H) until you receive the bit of paper (licence) from CASA? It takes up to 6 weeks doesn't it?

[CYHeli]

is it correct that you can't fly as a CPL(H) until you receive the bit of paper (licence) from CASA? It takes up to 6 weeks doesn't it?

Correct.

[ChicoCheco]

So, in the end, getting foreign conversion PPL in this new mess, oops, system, will indeed be essential not just for NVFR or LL, but even for specific type training/'review'.
Fee well coughed up, indeed.

Mine's being processed 2.5 months already, despite quick/simple verification, so I assume the ASIC 'processing' (holding up getting all sent over) or simply being low priority case nowadays at CASA.

Sorry to drag out other countries again, but even in EASA countries, if one doesn't have patience for postal licence application, they can show up at 'counter' with all paperwork and get the licence issued same day.

OR, a la FAA, Temp Airman Cert after flight test, giving rights and privileges right away - printed off online system by examiner and signed or 'receipt'. FAA then simply mails permanent/plastic within statutory 120 days, normally a month. Why can't it be like this in Australia? Well over a month wait is just ridiculous if meeting requirements and having passed flight test with appointed/approved ATO/FE.

Or same mentality/approach like the initial medicals? Only by CASA almighty?

pick and match type to avoid being 'found substandard' is moot point against splitting longer test (as required by regs).

Even according to the test vs licence+review logic, one doesn't have licence right after first flight test flight, so why limit second type by not 'testing' review? Having to check two sets of docs and two preflights can't be reason not to, right?

How about AHIA etc push for mandatory inclusion of actual helicopter pilots being involved with licensing system changes affecting helicopter pilots? Wishful thinking, huh?

I take it the current/processed Class 1 is still also requirement for CPL test (as reminded by CY etc) and common sense not prevailing. Flight test isn't aerial work/commercial activity for applicant. Then they are stuck with processing times. Medical, ASIC, all months paid for and no ability to actually use it without piece of paper in hand (or job needing Class 1).

[Imout]

Just had a thought and will ask CASA if this is correct but......
The R22 and R44 are now within the SEH Class.
When flying any helicopter within the Class for the first time you are required to do a Flight Review however a FR in either the R22 or the R44 is meant to cover the other for subsequent FRs after the initial.
I am wondering that because you have done 20 plus hours in the R44 and done a Flight Test (FR) in the R22 that this may be acceptable to CASA. The best thing to do in this case is to ask them and see what they say.
May set a precedent!

[oldrotorhead]

No wonder it's confusing? The info below is straight out of the latest info sheet CASA published yesterday on the General Competency Rule. By my reading of it, if you do not have to have any 'interaction" with CASA after becoming "qualified" to operate an aircraft in the same class (ie SEH), why is a Flight Review necessary. Perhaps its not? The R22 and R44 are different of course because of the requirement to have to do a FR on at least one of them rather than both if you wish to fly either of them.

Following is from the CASA Web Site -
Why is a general competency rule included in the regulations?
The general competency rule has been included for two reasons. The first is to ensure that all pilots consider whether they are competent to conduct a flight. This is about good practice.

The second relates to the licensing system. Under new flight crew licensing rules that started on 1 September 2014, class ratings for many aircraft were introduced. Under the old regulations, type-specific endorsements were required.

The rule recognises that even when a pilot is appropriately authorised to operate an aircraft, similar aircraft—such as those within a class—can be different to operate. They might have different avionics and technology (like electronic flight information system or analogue displays) or variations in models originating from the manufacturer (resulting in different performance and handling characteristics).

They may also have different fuel systems, maximum and minimum operating weights, centre of gravity envelopes and critical operating speeds. A pilot can only operate an aircraft if they are competent to do so. Regardless of your authorisations, this may mean you need to undertake additional training to learn different systems, procedures or processes.

Pilots should also consider how familiar they are with a particular kind of operation, especially if they have not conducted that kind of operation recently.

Case 1
Carol has experience on a single-engine, normally aspirated, class-rated aeroplane with analogue instrumentation, and wants to operate a Cirrus SR22T. Although Carol is authorised to fly the Cirrus (a single-engine, class-rated aeroplane), the general competency rule requires her to be competent operating the Cirrus electronic flight instrument system, turbocharging and operating specific equipment such as the oxygen system and ballistic parachute system. While Carol undertakes this training with her flight instructor, it does not result in a flight crew licence authorisation being granted or a transaction with CASA. This is because Carol has not changed her authorisations – she has simply adapted her competence to operate the SR22T safely.

Who can provide training to satisfy the general competency rule?
Training for the purpose of satisfying the general competency rule can only be given by a pilot who holds a flight instructor rating and appropriate training endorsements. The pilot undertaking the training must also be authorised to fly the class or type of aircraft and conduct the operation.

Because general competency flight training does not require regulatory approval, it can be conducted by any appropriately authorised flight instructor and does not need to be completed through a Part 141 or Part 142 flight training organisation.

How do I record my general competency training?
All flight time must be recorded in a pilot’s log book. However, because general competency training does not directly result in the issue of an authorisation under CASR Part 61, there is no need to notify CASA when you complete it. However, you still need to record your flight time and training activities. You can do this by listing it in your log book as training for the purpose of satisfying the general competency rule.

While it is not a regulatory requirement, flying training organisations may also consider issuing a certificate to individuals that records the successful completion of the training activity.

Cheers,
ORH

[hoverthrust]

Could they be asking for a line or route check? This is standard practice to check a pilot to line in any company you start with?
Even if you did you licence with the same company you would still need the CP or check and training guy to check you to line??