PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Is Competency Based Training a big Con?
View Single Post
Old 3rd Apr 2015, 01:04
  #15 (permalink)  
Centaurus
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,189
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes on 6 Posts
I asked a recent student about a 'limit turn' and he had never heard of it, and the "steep" turns that he was shown were nothing of the sort.
Most of today's flying instructors only know about Rate One turns. Ask then about Rate 2,3, and Rate 4 turns and it is probable they have never heard of them.

I suggest they visit the RAAF Point Cook museum and ask the curator to show them the museum Tiger Moth. First aircraft on the left (after the Link Trainer) after leaving the reception area. There, one can see the Turn and Bank Indicator and graduations showing Rate One to Rate four. Same with the Mustang instrument panel in the museum. Rate 4 is mighty close to a limit turn in most aircraft.

On a similar subject to that of the OP (mind-boggling ever-increasing CASA bureaucracy), think about this:

Pre Part 61, the experience requirements for issue of an Australian ATPL was 1500 hours and completion of "The subjects." No flight test needed. It is a good bet that almost every airline pilot in Australia was granted an ATPL on application as soon as they met these minimum conditions.
Part 61 changes all that with a vengeance. Read below from CASA document:.

Edited quote: CASR 61.700 describes the general requirements for the grant of an air transport pilot licence, that is, you must meet all the requirements mentioned, or have alternative but equivalent experience/qualifications. If you can provide evidence that you have either;

1. Completed a CRM/Human Factors course which complies with NTS 1, NTS 2 and MCO competencies as described in the MOS. Or:
2. Been operating within a CAR 217, CAO 82.3 or 82.5 multi-crew, regular public transport operator in Australia which may have “MCC-like” elements embedded within its first officer/co-pilot induction/training or aircraft type rating program;

Then (1) above satisfies the MCC requirement, and, under the transition regulations, these training courses ((2) above) are deemed to be “MCC equivalent” training courses and these operators may issue the MCC course completion certificates to pilots. (For purpose of MCC courses, overseas flying experience with foreign airlines is unacceptable to CASA)

CASA needs to sight evidence of either (1) or (2) above, and would review the MCC-equivalent course content (2 above) to confirm compliance with the MOS.

Once all the requirements are met, contact CASA to arrange an ATPL flight test. The ATPL candidate must provide the following for the test;

1. The simulator; and
2. Support pilot; and
3. An instructor/IOS operator; and
4. A set of SOPs and the company Ops Manual which the CASA examiner can review prior to the test (say 1 week before the test date) to confirm compliance during the test; and
5. The flight test profile in accordance with the Part 61 MOS for the ATPL flight test (the flight test profile can be provided by CASA if required)
............................................................ ................................

Can you just imagine the cost to the candidate to meet all these requirements starting with a rough quote of at least $8000 for a CASA approved MCC course at a CASA approved flying school. Plus paying for the CASA examiner time, at current cost recovery rates. Plus cost of hiring full flight simulator and qualified on type copilot. Plus, plus,plus...
Centaurus is offline