Judd
16th Apr 2015, 12:50
Until the introduction of Part 61 it was common practice for pilots undergoing a command type rating in Australia on (say) an A320 or Dash Eight to undergo their training from the RH seat. This was probably because they envisaged being employed in an airline as a co-pilot. The hiring operator may even stipulate all training for the type rating should be conducted in the RH seat. This still happens with all the major domestic airlines today where successful candidates for an airline job as first officer will trained in the RH seat in the simulator and still be granted a command type rating.
Anecdotal evidence from pilots choosing to obtain a command type rating in USA - say on a 737/777/Airbus type - indicates they are trained in the LH seat regardless of their future employment plans.
Somewhere in Part 61 there is a statement that a command endorsement (now called command type rating) must be conducted from the command (LH seat) as distinct from the co-pilot or RH seat. Can any expert on Part 61 verify this requirement?
Anecdotal evidence from pilots choosing to obtain a command type rating in USA - say on a 737/777/Airbus type - indicates they are trained in the LH seat regardless of their future employment plans.
Somewhere in Part 61 there is a statement that a command endorsement (now called command type rating) must be conducted from the command (LH seat) as distinct from the co-pilot or RH seat. Can any expert on Part 61 verify this requirement?