AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Got a gripe, suggestion or praise about our regulator? Do it here. Who knows, you might make a difference...
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1813
Joined: Jun 2006

AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby CYHeli » Fri Sep 12 2014, 02:30

The AHIA have been invited by CASA to assist with a review of the Part 61 MOS. (Not the legislation, MOS only - yeah, yeah, I know!)

To enable us to do the best job possible, and because we know that there are some out there that will pick up on stuff we might miss, we are inviting everyone to make submissions on the MOS.
Submissions can be made to casr AT austhia.com and I will collate the information.

Closing date: 30th November! We have been told that the revised MOS will come out in March 2015. To enable us to collate everything and get it to CASA in time for them to have sufficient lead in and review of our findings, we need it by the end of November. Let's face it, not much will happen over the Christmas / New Year period anyway.

What do we need?
We need pilots / instructors / clever people to read through each schedule of the MOS and let us know what doesn't work and even better, what should be in. For example I have already commenced work on the low level section as there is no need for pilots that have already flown air transits to return to 1500' AGL in order to commence low level training.
But there is plenty of stuff to be reviewed in Schedule 3 on aeronautical knowledge. Waste gates on obsolete aircraft should not be required knowledge for every pilot for example. froginasock raised a very good point with me as to what is CASA's definitive text when it comes to their aviation knowledge or information? I know that there is a Bureau of Met for Aviation book, but we need to suggest to CASA what are the best textbooks so that we can guarantee the best information. So what do you feel the definitive texts should be for AGK and Aerodynamics?

Feel free to post on this thread because it will keep it to the top of the screen. But more in-depth arguments should be emailed to us as above.

So finally we are getting our say and helping to develop change. We wont get many opportunities in the future to shape aviation like we will now.

Finally, thanks to helothere for such fantastic support of the AHIA and the industry in general.

Let the games begin.
Col.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
UAT
Silver Wings
Silver Wings
Posts: 23
Joined: Sep 2014

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby UAT » Fri Sep 12 2014, 05:19

Hi Col, I'm pretty flat out at the moment, but if no one else mentions it, the LL-WR section needs a bit of work... It is very light on the winching side of things. Cheers
User avatar
Evil Twin
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 493
Joined: Mar 2007

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby Evil Twin » Fri Sep 12 2014, 07:24

Great idea! Should be worthy of a sticky to keep it at the top, at least for the time being.

Bit of a joke that the revised MOS is coming out 6 months after implementation. Though I am playing a broken record here..... :roll: :roll:
User avatar
hand in pants
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1397
Joined: Sep 2006

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby hand in pants » Fri Sep 12 2014, 10:06

The LL-WR section doesn't need a bit of work, it needs a lot of work, I didn't see anything on winching, only "roping" which I take to mean rappelling.
Hand in Pants, I'm thinking, my god, that IS huge!!!!!!!!
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1813
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: CASR Part 61 Question and Answers

Postby CYHeli » Sun Sep 14 2014, 23:35

From the CASA website.
12 September 2012
Dear Flying School CFI and ATO

Standard Estimates of Fees for Flight Tests

As you are aware the conduct by CASA of flights tests is a regulatory service which is fully cost recoverable, in accordance with the Civil Aviation (Fees) Regulations 1995. Flight tests are charged at the hourly rate of $160.

CASA has developed standard estimates for the regularly conducted flight tests. Following a review of Flight Test Notification System data relating to the actual time taken to conduct flight tests by CASA Flight Training Examiners, along with a cross-comparison of industry ATO’s time spent on flight tests, the basis for the standard estimates to conduct flight tests has been updated.

In addition, CASA is required to charge for travel time from the nearest CASA office to the location (aerodrome) the test will be conducted from. The travel cost is also calculated at the hourly rate of $160 and is included in the estimate as a separate item. For example, a test conducted at Bankstown will incur a total of 1 hour of travel time ($160) for the return trip by a CASA examiner from the CASA office to the aerodrome.

The following are the basis on which industry applicants will receive an estimate for flight tests for the issue of licences and ratings and are effective from 1 November 2012. The estimate must be paid prior to CASA conducting the regulatory service:

GFPT = 3 HOURS = $480
PPL = 4.5 HOURS = $720
NVFR = 4.0 HOURS = $640
CPL = 5.5 HOURS = $880


FIR INITIAL ISSUE = 5.0 HOURS = $800
FIR RENEWAL = 4.0 HOURS = $640
CIR INITIAL ISSUE = 4.5 HOURS = $720
CIR RENEWAL = 3.5 HOURS = $560


META = 6.0 HOURS = $960
IRTA = 5.0 HOURS = $800
The regulatory fee for any other flights tests for the issue of a rating not mentioned above will be calculated at $160 per hour plus any applicable travel time.

As the conduct of a flight test is cost recoverable any variation to the actual time taken to conduct the test will result in an adjustment to the fee charged. For example, where a flight test is cancelled or does not go through to completion, a refund of the unused portion of the fee will be made.

Should you have any queries please contact the Flight Training and Testing Office on 131 757 or via email at flighttesting@casa.gov.au


Based upon the "Flight tests are charged at the hourly rate of $160. " you can do your own sums of what a SE Class rating test (1.2 hours flight time, plus ground time) will cost. Or a low level rating will cost.

If schools could keep a log for the next few months of the extra costs of these changes we will take them back to the minister and see what can be done. Both of the above are examples of new ratings that have become a test and therefore free prior to the changes. Or at least only had aircraft hire rate/lesson costs attached.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
User avatar
Skeeter
1st Dan
1st Dan
Posts: 202
Joined: Jun 2008

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby Skeeter » Mon Sep 15 2014, 02:08

Something students should also consider from now on when they choose the school.
If the school is far away from the next CASA office and doesn't have an ATO this could sum up.
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1813
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby CYHeli » Tue Sep 16 2014, 05:29

We are aware of some issues regarding the number of ATO/FTE's for conducting flight tests. So as part of our review, and in order to influence CASA, we need some real world examples of pain. So if you fall into the following categories, please email me at casr(@)Austhia.com.

~ Backlog / delays of flight tests waiting for a suitable ATO/FTE
~ Unavailability of ATO/FTE due to the Type.
~ Totally unreasonable costs of obtaining an ATO/FTE for a test. For example getting an ATO from Melbourne to go to Queensland to conduct a B412 test?
~ Delays that have caused an impact on the flying roster at a company (including Government and the NFP/Charity types) due to the new system.
~ Anything else that you can think of that we haven't!

The other list that we are compiling is the number of endorsements on twins in the last couple of years. This would be an indicator of the potential number in the future. The AHIA are making an FOI request of CASA to seek the number of endorsements issued in the last two years, but this could take time. If any Chief Pilots or Heads of Check and Training would like to drop us an email, we can start the ball rolling. A list by actual type would be useful because we can see the difference between someone getting endorsed on an AS355 or A109 compared to someone doing a B412 endorsement.

Col.
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: 1813
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby CYHeli » Wed Sep 17 2014, 00:30

Further to the above info about ATO/FTE availability.
Part 61.1295 lists various offences for FTE's. Sub-para (2) states (in plain language) that the person who recommends a student for a CPL/ATPL/Multi crew flight test MUST NOT be the same person who conducts the flight test.

Sooo the CFI's out there who also hold approval to conduct flight tests under CAR 5, BUT are only permitted to conduct flight tests on students from their own organisation are no longer allowed to conduct CPL flight tests. Does this reduce the number of ATO/FTE's available to conduct flight tests?

There are no issues with conducting PPL, Type rating or Operational Rating flight tests if their instrument of approval contained that, the ATO's will always be limited to the conditions of their approval.

Just be aware that the person recommending a student for a test (normally the CFI - they are the best person to nominate the student for a test and probably listed in the AOC to do so) MUST NOT conduct the test.


Secondly, I would expect schools will be very busy soon, assisting CASA personnel to become current on Low Level, sling and other activities that are now a flight test. There are not enough industry ATO's to conduct these. How many CASA people are current on an R44/B206/AS350 and sling to conduct a flight test? How much is it going to cost CASA to bring staff up to speed on these skills and aircraft prior to flight tests?

There is an easy fix here, remove the need for some of the flight tests until industry has enough FTE's to conduct the tests, by current and experienced personnel. Surely a delay of two years will not cause a safety issue when it hasn't been unsafe up to now!
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
arrrj
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 327
Joined: Jul 2012

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby arrrj » Wed Sep 17 2014, 00:58

Col,

I would much rather do a "test" for LL or sling (noting for most pilots they trained for this because it is a new skill) with someone that knows HOW to fly the machine in this test, and (as happened to me once) can fix it, if I make a mistake ! (As I did many years ago with LL training).

I can see a huge level of risk being introduced into the testing program, and I will be really sure that anything I have "tested" in the future is done with someone that is experienced and can fly FOR REAL. That might be some years away.

What a mess.

All the best,
Arrrj
County
Gold Wings
Gold Wings
Posts: 126
Joined: Dec 2011

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby County » Wed Sep 17 2014, 02:34

The pilots who can teach you low level, sling, mustering Ag are generally on the coal face of the industry. Maybe they will issue approved pilot approvals so that this training can be done in company.
User avatar
CYHeli
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1813
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby CYHeli » Sun Sep 21 2014, 01:29

I guess we would all like to see this,

Uninstall P61.jpg


But more than likely, we have to wait for this...

Install P61v2.jpg



Thanks to Dan.
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: 1813
Joined: Jun 2006

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby CYHeli » Fri Sep 26 2014, 04:32

HELP!
It got mentioned in conversation yesterday with someone from CASA that the first review of the MOS will now be released in November.
If anyone has anything (MOS only - not the regs yet) that is ready to go in the next two weeks, please pass it on. A couple of people have mentioned the winching section, good. CAO 29.11 no longer exists so it would be good to have something to put into the MOS.

Has anyone got any suggestions re NVFR, NVIS, etc, (low level is one that I am looking at) Let me know.

The important message that I got yesterday was this is a change to address the major issues but there will still be further 'massaging' later. An example of the massaging will be the theoretical knowledge in Schedule 3.

Again consultation is an issue. I rang the CASA Part 61 team leader to confirm a smaller item and it was mentioned in passing. If I had not rung, there would be no consultation. We will make sure that the fixed wing schools get the message as well.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
User avatar
hand in pants
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1397
Joined: Sep 2006

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby hand in pants » Fri Sep 26 2014, 08:37

I hope that any school that is training or bringing casa people up to speed so they can conduct tests on LL, sling etc is charging them at least $160.00 per hour from the time they leave home till they are home again.

I for one will not be happy to be "tested" by a casa person on low level, sling, fire fighting, or anything for that matter when they have only just been through the training themselves. How is that safe.
Hand in Pants, I'm thinking, my god, that IS huge!!!!!!!!
arrrj
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 327
Joined: Jul 2012

Re: AHIA: Review of Part 61 MOS

Postby arrrj » Fri Sep 26 2014, 08:41

HIP,

Exactly as I said above. The blind teaching the blind ?

Arrrj

Return to “CASA”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest