- satisfied the experience requirements by tooling around in a 210 (or 152)
- did not have to do a flight test for the ATPL, and
- now exercise the privileges of the ATPL and meet all the recurrent requirements for doing so,
what would you conclude about the nexus between safety and the test/kind of experience?
Folks,
I think I can speak from personal experience, as the "test" I did was on a single engine aircraft for a SCPL -- it was, in fact, a Group B Instructor renewal.
Given the way CAR 217 operations and training are conducted, doing the test as required by CASR 61 (or any stand alone ATPL test) is irrelevant, and just a bureaucratic box ticking exercise.
Speaking from the point of view of an almost 25,000H pilot, with about 15+ years as PIC (including T+C) on seriously heavy metal, on a variety of ATPL/ALTP/licenses.
Tootle pip!!
The usual suspects on PPRuNe seem to hold the FAA regs and Kiwi regs as some sort of Holy Grail of aviation regulations, and they both require an ATPL flight test.
Wish,
Being a bit disingenuous, are you not.
If candidates could do the test here, as per the US ( in a light twin) or under the slightly more onerous NZ rules, this thread would not exist.