Qantas cadet commands?

[jau]

Hi all,
Just a quick question, I have seen a couple of posts saying that the Qantas cadets are going to have to stay on GA and miss out on commands whilst less senior crew get prommoted past them. Whats that all about? I thought after training they went on to Qantas mainline as S/O. Why no commands, is it because they are restricted because of the cadetship contract?
Cheers

[MoFo]

Commands on what?

[Jet_A_Knight]

I think it is more the case of having sufficient COMMAND time to hold an Air Transport Pilot Licence.

In Australia, we do not have P1 or P2: you are either Pilot in Command, Acting In Command Under Supervision or Co Pilot.

You need 250hrs command time, of which only 150 hrs may be AICUS to get the ATPL.

[jau]

Thanks. So the cadets are going straight out of training onto a job were they accumulate only co-pilot time. So no matter how many hours they have, they are never going to get a command because they don't have any command time, which they need to be eligible? They must become captains one day, so were do they pick up the command time?

[*Lancer*]

It is a requirement to have 100 PIC before gaining employment at the completion of the cadet programme. This is so cadets can still meet the requirements for an ATPL by logging ICUS time, when appropriate.

Lancer :D

[neville_nobody]

Lancer

How are they planning to log ICUS time in a 767/747/737 when they can't hold an ATPL?? To log ICUS in these aircraft you have to have an ATPL.

CASA have ruled for our company that in an RPT operation the guy being ICUSed has to meet the requirements to be PIC. So if our CASA guy is correct then cadets are career FO's.

Unless of there is one rule for QANTAS and another for everyone else which I think is what happens in reality.

Or alternatively CASA don't know about any of this yet and QANTAS have just assumed that they can log ICUS time willy nilly
:E

[ExcessData]

There's a bit on the logging of ICUS hours by cadets on on this thread (from page 3 onwards)...

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21856&perpage=15&pagenumber=3

ED

[*Lancer*]

neville,

As I understand it, the Reg requirements to log ICUS are that you have to have the appropriate endorsements and ratings to act as PIC, but there is no licence specification based on what the operation is. So, to log ICUS on a 76/4/3 all you need is a command endorsement and MCIR - not necessarily an ATPL.

If you have to have the the PIC experience to log it in the first place, doesn't that really defeat the purpose of ICUS anyway?

Back to the original question though, jau.

What threads are you referring to? Cadets can get overtaken if they don't meet the hours requirements for promotion, but ultimately it comes out in the wash once they do...

Lancer

[cuban_eights]

i might be missing something here...

are we refering to air north as beign GA for cadets??

if so, are they not in the right hand seat and therefore logging co-pilot hours as do the QANTAS f/o's??

correct me if i'm wrong too, but a cadet (or anyone else for that matter) within QF may be an f/o, as long as they only fly with a captain. ie they cannot be on the flight deck alone with a s/o. so they don't hold a command rating on the a/c type, but a co-pilots rating. thus achieving the hours (slowly) to get a command...

does that clear things up or confuse the issue??? :confused:

[neville_nobody]

Lancer

Your argument is what we put to CASA plus we argued that you were covered by the bloke who was PIC. However they said this isn't good enough and ruled that the ICUSee has to meet all the requirements of being PIC.

So with the same logic applied a QF cadet can not log ICUS time as an FO because they can't hold an ATPL so therefore cannot be PIC on an aircraft >5700kgs on a RPT run multi crew.

If CASA are constistant acroos the country the cadets will have to get their command or ICUS time some other way.

Qantas may have been given a dispen to get around this of course. Be interested to see what the real story is.

[bitter balance]

nev, I suggest your company takes this up with CASA again as there are several airlines in Aus who do ICUS in this manner, not just QF. There is no requirements in the regs for the person under ICUS to hold an ATPL. I know of several people who gained their ATPLs during line training (under ICUS) in regionals.

[Keg]

Neville, CASA certainly didn't have a problem with it when I used 3 ICUS hours accrued on the B767 to get to the 250 required for an ATPL a few years back! Maybe their position has changed since then but I wouldn't bet on it.

[neville_nobody]

Our side of the story came directly from the friendly local CASA FOI so this is isn't 2nd hand information or speculation.

As I said before the CASA argument was that the ICUS guy had to have PIC qualifications. Therefore an ATPL if required.

Looks like another classic example of CASA not really knowing what they are doing. Our problem is that we can't argue once they making a ruling no matter how stupid it is.

[Ibol]

correct me if i'm wrong too

Happy to. :D

within QF may be an f/o, as long as they only fly with a captain. ie they cannot be on the flight deck alone with a s/o. so they don't hold a command rating on the a/c type, but a co-pilots rating. thus achieving the hours (slowly) to get a command...


Not quite true. :(

To become an F/O a cadet (or direct enrty pilot for that matter) must have logged 1500 hours of aeronautical experience. Only 50% of their co-pilot time counts toward this of course. As a result a cadet who joins with 250 hours total will need to spend 3 to 4 years as a second officer to get the 3000 odd hours total time that breaks down to the 1500 aero-exp.

I.E. the ATPL 1500 hour requirement.

Where it differs from the CAR is that Qf has managed to get a dispo for the 250 hours PIC requirement for the application for an ATPL (CAR 5.172 2a) because of it's cyclic training program. This figure has been reduced to 100 hours through negotiation; and as *Lancer* mentioned, this is required to be had prior to starting a jet course.

As a result the cadet pilots can get their F/O slot after 3 or 4 years without having to do the PIC hours the rest of us do. By this time they've got the night hours, they've got the X-country (duh!) and they've got the IF time.

They then can go onto the 767 (where F/O's get a command endorsement - cadet or not!) and sit up there with an S/O whilst the Skipper snores. :yuk:

It is a company requirement to hold an ATPL if your gonna drive the 76 for a Capt or F/O.

Cheers

[apache]

regarding the "PIC time" ...

(don't know if this helps or not)

CAR 5.111 ( qualifications prior to sitting CPL test under 150 hour CPL course) .... applicant requires 70hrs as PIC.

CAR 5.115 (qualifications prior to sitting CPL test under 200 hour CPL course ) .... applicant requires 100hrs as PIC.


I do not know which course QF put the cadets thru, but I would imagine that if you already have 100hrs as PIC, then you CAN accrue the remaining 150 as ICUS.

With regards ICUS .... ICUS stands for in COMMAND under supervision , therefore must hold a command endorsement on a/c type, and be appropriately licensed for the type of operation.

[*Lancer*]

Apache, my understanding is that the courses are based on the 150 Hour syllabus, but involve 100 Hours of PIC anyway (there's the instrument rating, and aeros to do on top of the CPL).

Ibol, for pilots with 500 Hours in Command (Direct Entry) the requirement is 1000 Hours Aero Exp. For pilots with less than 500 PIC (majority of cadets) its 1250 Hours Aero Exp, rather than 1500. You don't need and ATPL for the 767 - but without one you're restricted to non-S/O ops in the same manner that over 60s are...

Lancer

[Ibol]

I understand that you would be able to conduct ops as an F/O without an ATPL but they don't.

The company issued a flight standing order stating : S/O's can not undergo promotional training unless they hold the required hours to apply for an ATPL. and they must have applied for and received the ATPL within 3 months checked to line.

So I guess for that three months.... sure. No S/O. You're not going to be senior enough for anything but mel - syd returns for about a year anyway. But they don't let you skate along in the right hand seat with just a CPL.

Would be a scheduling nightmare if you had F/O's that were restricted and others not in addition to the over 60 guys (only 3 or 4 of them anyway)

:ok: Cheers

[nzer]

I dunno if this helps but .... Under NZCAA Rules (which are = to/acceptable to CASA under TTMRA) ICUS (called "command Practice) here, does not require the F/O to hold an ATPL, only a CPL, I/R and a Type Rating (note, in NZ no distinction bewteen Command/Sin C ratings). To act as PinC in an 3 pilot crew, ie, supervise an S/O, an F/O DOES require an ATPL.
ATPL eligibilty rules are the same for all operators/pilots, a combo of PinC and ICUS is acceptable to make the 250hrs.

[swh]

Ibol

According to CASA's database there had been no exemptions given to any operator or individual against CAR 172, there have been 5815 exemptions issued against the CARs, but none for that reg.

CAR 5.172 (http://scaleplus.law.gov.au/html/pastereg/0/51/0/PR003960.htm) does not have a provision for CASA to issue an exemption, regs that it can issue an exemption have something like "CASA may ....." (examples CAR 134,CAR 134(1), CAR 134(1)(b), CAR 136, CAR 137, CAR 139, CAR 139(d), CAR 141, CAR 143, CAR 144, CAR 149, 150, 151).

I can see where neville_nobody's is coming from ...
CAR 5.166 (http://scaleplus.law.gov.au/html/pastereg/0/51/0/PR003900.htm) allows the holder of an ATPL to "to fly an aeroplane as pilot in command, or co-pilot, while the aeroplane is engaged in any operation."

For a CPL holder CAR 5.105 (http://scaleplus.law.gov.au/html/pastereg/0/51/0/PR003240.htm) says "to fly a multi-pilot aeroplane as pilot in command while the aeroplane is engaged in any operation other than a charter operation, or a regular public transport operation"

And don't forget the recency provisions in CAR 5.170 (http://scaleplus.law.gov.au/html/pastereg/0/51/0/PR003940.htm) for the PIC of a muti-pilot aeroplane. It is a condition of CAR 5.166 that it is subject to the limitations set out in regulations 5.167, 5.168, 5.169, 5.170 and 5.171.

How does a S/O meet the recency requirements for takeoffs and landings if they are cruise relief pilots only ? If they don't meet the recency requirments, how can they act as PIC ?

CAR 5.40 (http://scaleplus.law.gov.au/html/pastereg/0/51/0/PR002530.htm) does allow a CPL holder to undertake ICUS, but it does not say that a CPL holder may undertake ICUS in a multi-pilot aeroplane.

The hour requirements in the CARs are largely derived from the ICAO requirements, thus CASA's hands are tied, they cannot reduce the PIC hours required.

Hey what would I know, you guys got the gig, enjoy !

:ok:

[*Lancer*]

swh,

That's just it though... The Regs specify that you can't be PIC in a multi-crew operation, but they don't specify that you can't be ICUS in a multi-crew operation. There is no need for an exemption because there is no prohibition!

Clear as mud isn't it ;)

[swh]

Lancer,

The mud is very clear, just thought you might be able to clear up how a S/O with a co-pilot endorsement, and maybe a co-pilot ME-IR satisfies CAR 5.40 (b) & (c)

(b)the person holds an aircraft endorsement that authorises him or her to fly the aircraft as pilot in command; and

(c) if the person proposes to carry out an activity for which a flight crew rating is required — the person holds a flight crew rating, or grade of flight crew rating, that permits him or her to carry out that activity as pilot in command of the aircraft concerned

EDIT :

Forgot to mention that in CA0 40.1.0 only allows a ATPL holder to log ICUS, it does not allow a CPL holder to log ICUS, I know lots do ...10.5 The holder of a commercial pilot (aeroplane) licence may log as time in command the total time elapsed during his or her command, in flight, of an aeroplane. He or she may log as co-pilot the total time during which he or she serves as co-pilot.

10.7 The holder of an air transport pilot (aeroplane) licence must log his or her flight time in accordance with whichever of the following is applicable:

(a) any flight time during which the licence holder acts as pilot in command must be entered in his or her log book as time in command;

(b) any flight time during which the licence holder acts as pilot in command under supervision must be entered in his or her log book as time in command under supervision;

(c) any flight time during which the licence holder acts as co-pilot must be entered in his or her log book as time as co-pilot

[*Lancer*]

swh,

S/Os don't -- F/Os (with command quals) log ICUS in accordance with CAR 5.40... Since you've quoted it already, you already know that part a) says you can log ICUS with a CPL. :D

[swh]

Lancer,

Reading kegs and ibols posts it would seem s/o's are logging ICUS, and I think that is the point everyone is driving at, regionals are not allowed to do it, but QF mainline seems to get away with it.

I used 3 ICUS hours accrued on the B767 to get to the 250 required for an ATPL a few years back

My understanding is that you cannot get a F/O (and the associated command endorsement and CIR) slot without having the quals for an ATPL, no F/O slot, no command endorsement etc, but logging ICUS as a s/o ? .....

CAR 5.40 DOES NOT say you can LOG ICUS with a CPL

CA0 40.1.0 deals with the LOGGING of flight time for AEROPLANES, CAR 5.40 is a generic reg that applies to helicopters, airships, gyrocopters, and aeroplanes etc. For the helicopter logging go to 40.3.0 para 7.5, Gyroplanes 40.4.0 para 6.8 etc.

If CAR 5.40 was specific to aeroplanes it would read
(1) A person may fly an aeroplane as pilot acting in command under supervision only if:
(a)the person holds:
(i) a commercial pilot (aeroplane) licence or an air transport pilot (aeroplane) licence;

You need to read CAR 5.40 in conjunction with CAR 2 (Interpretation)
air transport pilot licence means:
(a) an air transport pilot (aeroplane) licence; or
(b) an air transport pilot (helicopter) licence.

commercial pilot licence means:
(a) a commercial pilot (aeroplane) licence; or
(b) a commercial pilot (helicopter) licence; or
(c) a commercial pilot (gyroplane) licence; or
(d) a commercial pilot (balloon) licence; or
(e) a commercial pilot (airship) licence.

You need to go to the specific section of the CAO for the type of aircraft endorsement concerned to see when you can log ICUS as depending on what licence you have, for aeroplanes (CAO 40.1.0) an ATP(A)L is required to log ICUS.

I remember an accident not so long ago of a cadet flying for a regional at the time hired a light a/c when he was not flying his regular regional jet to gain command time for his ATPL, he was a Jet F/O, he died in that accident building command time.

If it were possible for a CPL holder to get ICUS time whilst working as a F/O on a regional jet, the coroner and the ATSB would have been highly critical of the steps the pilot took to gain his command time. They were not, as he, and the regional airline, were working within the regularity environment that is in law.

I am not advocating that it is safer for you to get ICUS hours in a 767 as apposed to command time in a C150, but that is the regulatory environment we are in.

Reading between the lines, neville_nobody and myself have had direct contact with CASA GA FOIs that do go to this level in reading the regs to issue RCA/NCN's whatever the bill of the month is called.

I do not think the CASA airline FOI's have a good understanding of the CASA initial issue licensing requirements as they do not get the same exposure to licensing issues as they do not get involved with flying schools. They are a gem on CAR 217 approvals, check approvals etc, areas that come under their radar regularly.

Happy Flying


:ok:

[swh]

DirectAnywhere,

The words "logging of ICUS time" is not in CAR 5.40.

What this means is that a cadet flying as an F/O in an EMB120 cannot log ICUS as they do not have an ATPL, they may meet the requirements of CAR 5.40 (command endorsement, CIR), but they do not meet the requirements of CAO 40.1.10

Same applies to cadets flying the jets.

[Keg]

swh. I held both a command endorsement and a CIR on the 767 with 'just' a CPL. Have to admit I didn't examine it too closely at the time, it was just a piece of paper to carry in the bag. The 3 hours ICUS I was talking about were accrued whilst In Command Under Supervision on a 767 as a First Officer in service with QF- IE, I had 247 hours command and needed the last three to get the ATPL. Interestingly, we only had 'co-pilot' endorsements but command instrument ratings for a number of years and thus couldn't log ICUS times. QF changed that and we have command endorsements(and have had for about three or four(?) years). It was after the change to command endoresements that I could accrue the extra three hours and thus gain the ATPL

Not sure your point though. Are you implying that QF is pulling a dodgy?

[bitter balance]

swh, you do not need an ATPL to log ICUS in a Braz or any other aircraft. You must hold a command endorsement and command instrument rating. There is no swifty, dodgy or exemption in play here.

[swh]

Keg,

I am not suggesting anyone has pulled a dodgy, people are reading CAR 5.40 and making a leap to suggest that paragraph says you can log time as ICUS, the paragraph makes no mention of logging of flight time, that is in the CAO's.

Sounds like a good question for the reading comprehension stage of the QF selection process.

What has happened here is people are changing terms in their head thinking that CAR 5.40 says something is does not, CAR 5.40 talks about aircraft, CPL, and ATPL. CAO 40.1.0 talks about aeroplanes, CP(A)L and ATP(A)L.

Feel free to contact the office of legal council to clarify this.

BB

Please read CAO 40.1.0 paragraph 10 below, and extract from that paragraph where you can log ICUS in an aeroplane without an ATPL.

10 LOGGING OF FLIGHT TIME
10.2 Flight time during which a pilot is under dual instruction shall be entered in his or her log book as “dual” and the pilot giving the instruction shall make entries in the log book of the pilot under instruction showing the nature of the instruction given.
10.3 The holder of a student pilot licence may log as time in command only that time during which he or she is the sole occupant of an aeroplane in flight.
10.4 The holder of a private pilot (aeroplane) licence may log as time in command only that time during which he or she is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aeroplane.
10.5 The holder of a commercial pilot (aeroplane) licence may log as time in command the total time elapsed during his or her command, in flight, of an aeroplane. He or she may log as co-pilot the total time during which he or she serves as co-pilot.
10.7 The holder of an air transport pilot (aeroplane) licence must log his or her flight time in accordance with whichever of the following is applicable:
(a) any flight time during which the licence holder acts as pilot in command must be entered in his or her log book as time in command;
(b) any flight time during which the licence holder acts as pilot in command under supervision must be entered in his or her log book as time in command under supervision;
(c) any flight time during which the licence holder acts as co-pilot must be entered in his or her log book as time as co-pilot.
10.8 The holder of a flight instructor (aeroplane) rating may log as time in command the total flight time during which he or she is acting as an instructor, but log entries shall show that the flight time was as an instructor.
10.9 Instrument flight time may be logged by the pilot monitoring or providing input to the autopilot/auto-stabilisation equipment when it is engaged or by the pilot manually manipulating the controls when the aircraft is flown by reference to instruments under either actual or simulated instrument flight conditions.
Note: Instrument flight time shall only be logged by one pilot at a time.

DirectAnywhere,

Provided they meet the requirements of CAR 5.40 they can fly with a CPL as Pilot ICUS.

Correct, but the CP(A)L holder must log it as co-pilot in accordance with CAO 40.1.0.

[swh]

What if that student pilot's licence is endorsed with a GFPT and that pilot takes passengers on a local flight?

PIC as it is considered to be the same at the old RPPL, that what you used to receive before the GFPT was brought in, sounds like before your time.

The command/ICUS x/country time may be obtained on other aircraft (ie gyroplanes, helicopter, airships), or under a licence from another contracting state, ie not in a VH registered, or not under an Australian licence.

You do not need 100 hours in aeroplanes cross country in Australia, it is to see you can map read, so it can be obtained in any country, in any form of aircraft.

The nub of the problem is people reading things which are not in there.

EDIT : FYI CAO 40.1.0 was last updated on 11/9/2002 .....

Can you tell me what the dispo number is ? Have you actually seen it ?

[bitter balance]

swh, are you seriously suggesting that only ATPL holders can log ICUS in Australia?

[Next Generation]

bitter balance

are you seriously suggesting that only ATPL holders can log ICUS in Australia?

RTFQ

Why do you arm-chair experts continue to just read the bits that you want to read ????????

swh is not suggesting, but stating that in order to do ICUS in "MULTI-PILOT" aircraft engaged in RPT or Charter ops, yes you must hold an ATPL.

If you have the money, you can Private Hire yourself a B-747 and log ICUS all day long.

Simple really isn't it.

[*Lancer*]

DirectAnywhere,

Not adiffering with you.... totally agree with everything you said, and just to clarify, S/Os don't log ICUS - noone ever said they did! With 100 PIC, you can become a L/H F/O... that's exactly why its a requirement for employment of cadets.

SWH,

The CAR is very clear and specific... but the CAO is not. In fact, the CAO is all written with advisory language anyway ('may' this and 'may' that). Perhaps you're reading too much into it? The concept of legally flying in a certain operation without legally 'logging' it is clearly flawed!

Next Generation,

That's exactly what swh is suggesting! The CAO quote implies that CPLs can't log ICUS at all...

Alright, I'm pulling out too before we get into a spiral dive :ugh:

[Keg]

Before Lancer? I reckon we've been in one for about the last 30 posts! ;) :D :ok:

[bitter balance]

Next Gen, re-read swh's post. Armchair expert I may be, but if you really think that only ATPL holders can log ICUS in multi crew aircraft, what does that make you?