Gidday 43"
I've read CAR 5.40 over quite a few times, and I think it's as clear as Mud! Your bolding highlights the type of aircraft endorsement required (REX do give "command" endorsements), but the definition of the catagory of licence I think is less clear.
CAR 5.40(2) (2 a i)
"The person holds:
A commercial pilots licence, or an Air Transport Pilots Licence that authorises him or her to fly the aircraft..."
So what does this mean?
What is the intent?
I believe, although poorly written, CASA know's exactly what it means and so do the operators! The licence required to Fly in command as well as ICUS on RPT aircraft with a MTOW > 5700kg is an ATPL. The reg also applies to ICUS on aircraft below 5700kg and that is where the minimum of a CPL applies.
If Cadets or Low time DE F/O's have insufficient command hours to qualify for an ATPL, then the logging of ICUS would only be permitted to satisfy that requirement. And may I say, only on an aircraft for which the candidate's current licence authorises him or her to fly in command!
The ATOG proposal attempts to circumvent this reg by envoking the ICAO annex 1, which permits the logging of ICUS to attain a higher Grade of licence! Unfortunately the logging of ICUS for the purpose of attaining a higher grade of licence (ATPL) has nothing to do with the 500 Multi-IFR requirement of the LCAOC!
The entire proposal is fundamentally flawed.
The lunatics have certainly taken over the assylum on this one!