AHIA - Multi-crew cooperation training

[robsrich]

Australian Multi-crew cooperation training

MCC - Multi-crew cooperation training requirements are in a transition from 1 Sep ’14 and become mandatory on 1 Sep ’15 in Australia.

Some AHIA members and CASA staff members have indicated no training facilities are yet approved in Australia by CASA? Can any MCC trainers help us here?

Just Google ‘Multi-crew cooperation training’ and have a look at the CASA brochure. Seems to depend a lot on yet to be launched Part 61 142 type flying schools.

In the mean time, the ATPL system may be on hold. No doubt teething problems with new CASR legislation.

Any updates much appreciated.

AHIA Regulatory Review Coordinator.

[robsrich]

MCC required for ATPL

CASA now needs a MCC Certificate for issue of the ATPL. The AHIA Technical Conference at Avalon Airshow 2015 on 26 Feb '15 was told that no ATPLs have been issued since November, with one exception. One candidate, needing an ATPL urgently, was allowed to go to the USA and obtain a Certificate.

Problem in Australia seems to be the need for this to be done at a Part 142 school. Although, larger companies are able to include the course in their CAR 217 check and training system; the availability to the industry at large seems to be a problem.

It is believed CASA is working with one organisation to develop a course; in particular, there is a need for an instructors' course to teach the MCC.

Any updates about this current restriction on ATPL? If so much appreciated.

AHIA

[robsrich]

AHIA claims the CASR Part 142 School is the problem!

CASA in good faith tried to make the training industry more efficient by allowing a school conducting basic VFR, single engine helicopter courses to go without some of the required administrative and regulatory overheads. The idea of not requiring an AOC; but rather a Certificate seemed a good decision at the time.

But the jury is still out on a few contentious issues such as the cost differences between the 150 hour course at a 141 school with fewer CASA required overheads; or a shorter 100 hour course at an organisation which requires substantial funds to meet the AOC requirements, including extra staff and equipment.

In the past, it has been a night mare trying to calculate costs of running either type of school. However, CASA have just released their updated list of costs and fees for industry. The shortages of ATO/FE seems a dark cloud on the horizon, now being ignored by most; but getting a testing officer from Hobart to do a test in Darwin has obvious downsides – and how do we communicate this possible test blowout cost to a student who only has a limited and fixed budget?

Experts agree that when the integrated theory is moulded into the practical training as per the proposed 142 model, there will be problems. According to CASA there are no Part 142 helicopter schools in Australia as the application process is very complex and final guidance on running parallel ground and flight training for helicopters courses is yet to be written. As an aside, it appears this model has never been a success anywhere in global civilian communities.

Helicopter schools are usually small, with varied entry standards for their clients.

At present CASA’s concept is a Part 141 school can run basic courses up to commercial license standard; all other advanced training must be done in a Part 142 school which will have an AOC, with more detailed and complex exposition and extra staff for the AOC needs.

Part 142 schools provide essential resources to feed all the higher level training activities, including MCC providers.

If no 142 schools exist, a collapse of the testing capability of our industry will occur, creating a need for overseas courses – bankrupting local trainers.

AHIA has brought this to the attention of CASA staff; now very busy designing, drafting and seeking approval for their numerous EASA focussed CASRs. However, there are three serious examples of this problem:

You get a job flying a heavy helicopter. You will need to attend a multi-crew cooperation training (MCC) course for multi-crew helicopters which is effective 1 September 2015. CASA has advised few (if any) MCC training facilities exist at present. No applications to run an MCC can be processed as there is a lack of Part 142 schools needed for MCC administration and staff training processes. Should we be seeking overseas staff?

You need an ATPL license. A major concern is the MCC Certificate it is needed for the issue of an ATPL(H), it is alleged none have been issued since November 2014. One expert in this field thought it would take at least 18 month for CASA to fix this problem. What will the international community think about our inability to issue ATPLs for both aeroplanes and helicopters for [B]around two years?

Testing officers’ approvals. The CASA Flight Examiners Handbook was authorised on 28 November 2014. The approval and renewal of helicopter ATO, FTE and FOI qualifications rely on the resources of a Part 142 school. (None at present?) However, CASA, to ease this legislative problem, has issued instruments to allow existing testing officers to continue until 30 June 2016.

And then who tests the ‘testers’; if ‘testers’ cannot use a 142 school to become qualified and current?

AHIA

[spinwing]

Mmmmmm .....

Idiots ... asylum .... running .... the ...

..... make a sentence using these words ...

NB ... the sentence does not need to be approved by a person from the authority.