A37575,
Very interesting reply ---- no wonder Australian aviation is in so much trouble. You are obviously FOI material, if not one already.
Oh!, and by the way, as a former airline check pilot/CASA delegate/CP/CFI, I do have some understanding of these matters.
I strongly dispute the assertion that it is up to the ATO/FOI to demand that all sequences have be flown, at the whim/direction/demand of the testing officer, particularly on a B737, which was the subject of the original post. It is certainly not what the relevant CAO says, when the principle of
aspices juris non sunt jura is applied, as it should be, to the interpretation of the CAO.
I am fascinated there is now, apparently, what sounds like a separate assessment and, presumably competency, for :
Skill at watching the automatic pilot is a separate subject...
Perhaps I should seek your views on when an pilot can log IF time ?? The ICAO/rest of the world criteria and pilot qualifications for logging AICUS.
Loss of control in IMC is now recognized as the major cause of hull losses.
Getting a bit carried away, aren't you. Certainly, there have been several recent major hull losses due to loss of control, much publicized, but
THE major cause, I think ( I know) not.
I could comment further on some of your assertions, but I don't think I will bother, and I imagine it would be lost on you, anyway.
In reply to Dick, correct for many pilots, they are subject to a flight review every two years, which will include some IF, but any pilot working for a Part 121/125/135 (referring to fixed wing) will do a minimum of one annual check, similar to a base check here.
Tootle pip!!