Originally Posted by
Duck Pilot
Is the reg talking about a class rating or type rating? If it's a class rating (which is the case now for most GA aircraft) the pilot only needs to have the class rating in the licence and be satisfied that he/she is confident that they are competitent on the aircraft. Type ratings require specific training on the particular aircraft type.
Example would be that if a pilot had a class rating on a multi engine piston twin, and say had a lot of time in a PA31 and then wanted to fly say a PA34, the pilot could legally fly in the PA34 provided that the pilot was satisfied that he/she were competent enough to fly the PA34. How that competentcy is achieved is up to the pilot/operator to determine. Reading the POH and doing a flight with another pilot experienced on the aircraft might be all that is required, and that other pilot does not have to be an instructor.
I can't see how a syndicate would be drawn into this, they don't hold AOCs.
I agree with your view, pre part 61 is how a relatively inexperienced pilot flying a new type within a class would have been checked out by an operator. Under part 61 you need to hold an instructor rating to be authorised to deliver this training, it's as though CASA have created a pseudo "type rating" for every aircraft and the only relief a class rating gives is for the notification to CASA. I've held CP / ATO roles in the past so understand how things were done versus how CASA see it under Part 61. This has been highlighted to me as the result of a recent incident. The minute you step into an aircraft to fly with a pilot to assist them in becoming competent in a new type you need to hold an instructor rating, holding a CP authorisation alone is not enough. You need to read 61.385, 61.1165(e) and the information sheet (see link below) to understand CASA's view on this.
https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/_assets/main/lib100268/general-competency-pilots.pdf