Originally Posted by
tail wheel
But the Right seat pilot was "...under assessment for the company training and checking role for Cessna 441 aircraft..." by "...a flying operations inspector from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority."
Was the primary purpose of the flight to undergo a proficiency check of an inductee pilot, or conduct an assessment of the Chief Pilot for the company training and checking role for Cessna 441 aircraft? Was the flight being directed by the pilot in the Right hand seat, or the FOI?
I tend to agree with your response, but I have known of at least one FOI who would disagree with your opinion and his Log Book would prove that.
As I understand it, the CP was being assessed whilst conducting the functions of an Examiner/Check Pilot during a real Prof Check/IPC (ie. candidate in other operating seat was not operating with a valid Prof Check/IPC for the operation type) for the purposes of the CP gaining either a testing endorsement on their Flight Examiner Rating (or 61.040) OR a CAO 82.0 Company Check Pilot approval. The CASA Inspector conducting the assessment was seated in row 1 with no access to flight controls.
This is how the activity being undertaken was described to me; however I have no direct knowledge, and given the bizarre nature of the aforementioned, hope to be corrected.
If it were the case:
1. How can it be argued that either Pilot at the controls were qualified to be conducting the activity being undertaken?
2. If CASA were unable to provide a qualified SME to act as candidate occupying a control seat and assuming PIC responsibilities for the conduct of the assessment, why would you not engage the services of a suitably qualified industry Flight Examiner to occupy the candidate control seat and act as pseudo candidate under test? CASA Inspectorate then safely occupies an observers seat.
This would not only strike me as the only legal option but certainly the safest.