Simulators - SFEs requiring OPC

[Steak&Kidney_Pie]

I am just about to get our company on to Simulators for LPC and OPCs. However, I need some clarification as I am finding the answer difficult to find, and the CAA as clear as a muddy puddle!

We are using a well known providers SFEs to carryout out OPCs, however I am being told that the SFEs must be OPC'd by our aircraft TRE to allow them to do OPCs on other crewmembers, which is

Does this mean therefore that an SFE has to hold an OPC with each operator and renew it every 6 months?

Having mentioned the requirement to the well known sim provider, they seem a little shocked at the requirement for them to do an OPC!

Help....

[DFC]

I have not previously come across a requirement for the SFE to have completed an OPC for a specific company. Some SFEs would spend all their time sitting OPC's and never doing any training / testing if that was a requirement.

However, have a think about what you are doing.

If you are going to get SFE's at "a well known simulator providor" to conduct your company's OPC's then they need to know your SOPs etc and you will need to satisfy yourself that they do.

The sim provider will have told you how they maintain standards among their staff.

The biggest complaint about sim training / testing when outsourced is that the SFI / SFE does not know the specific company SOP. This usually means that while the LPC elements will be conducted to the required standard, often the OPC elements are not so well covered due to a lack of knowledge of specific company SOPs. This gets worse when you have very specific procedures for places like say Innsbruck. Do you really want your crews being trained by someone whp has seen your escape procedure for the first time just before they fire up the sim?

What you need to do is have something appropriate in your part D and clear agreement on what SOPs etc will be taught and examined in the sim.

Sit back and wait for reports from several line trainers telling you that the sdim provider is not pushing the required SOPs in the sim and make sure you get a report from the candidates on every course so that you have evidence of what is being done.

It is a royal pain in the proverbials and if you ever get them doing everything exactly as per your SOPs then you will have done something that very few operators have acheived without using their own SFI / SFEs.

If I have missed something and anyone can give a reference to the SFI/SFE needing to have a company specific OPC every 6 months then I would love to have it and how they apply it to Authority examiners. :)

[DQ4]

You will need to have the TRE / SFE gain a OPC, however should the TRE / SFE have a OPC with another operator then this requirement would not apply. See the UK CAA reference below, if you need any further information you can PM me.


EU-OPS Commercial Air Transport (Aeroplanes) also specifies the requirement for recurrent
training and checking for companies involved in public transport operations. The Operator
Proficiency Checks (OPCs) must be conducted by an SFE/TRE. However, the privilege of the
SFE/TRE is normally only extended to include the OPC for those examiners who operate in
accordance with commercial air transport requirements and are sponsored by such an
operator.
3.12 In order to conduct an OPC (for examiners not covered by paragraph 3.11 above), an
examiner must:
a) hold a valid JAR SFE or TRE authorisation, as applicable;
b) hold UK Crew Resource Manager Instructor (CRMI) accreditation; and
c) hold a valid JAR-FCL LPC or LST on the relevant type and a valid UK Air Operator’s
Certificate (AOC) operator’s OPC.
(The operator referred to need not be the operator for whom they are conducting the check.)
Most importantly, the activity must be subject to the scrutiny of the AOC Operator’s quality
system to ensure compliance with their standards. This scrutiny should include periodic
observations of the conduct of OPCs by the third party examiners, and arrangements for
ensuring each is in possession of, and has an adequate working knowledge of, the current
Operations Manual (OM) Part D.

[DFC]

See the EASA reference below, if you need any further information you can PM me.




You have not provided an EASA reference. What you have provided is some local UK notes (from the CAA?)

The EU-Ops requirements can be found in OPS 1.965

[DQ4]

Your correct its straight from the CAA Document 24, Instructions and Procedures for Examiners: Multi-Pilot Aeroplanes (MPA) Type Rating Skill Tests and Proficiency Checks.

I'm a UK TRE and this is the document we refer to for any guidance regarding these matters.

[DFC]

The issue with EU-OPS is that it is not something that the UK CAA can chop and change locally. - Unlike JAR-OPS and JAR-FCL

Provided that operators comply with EU-OPS then the CAA can not make the requirements any different.

If local operators volunteer to do more and spend more then that is up to them.

I do wonder how long it is going to take the CAA post 2012 to adapt to simply being a stakeholder in the big scheme of things.

[Bullybeefer]

I work for a well known simulator operator in West Sussex teaching and examining on the Citation II and XLS.
I can describe how my company has chosen to comply with the regulation.
I am able to conduct OPCs on all European operators but undertook a Citation XLS OPC with an Oxford based UK operator before I could conduct UK OPCs. They raised form SRG 1187 and paid the CAA £51 admin charge and the authority then issued me with a rating endorsed with the Oxford operator. The paperwork took a month.
I will have to do the same thing again to conduct UK OPCs on the Citation II because it’s a different type rating.
The practical solution for S & K is to OPC two of the Simulator training providers SFEs.
Then witness the SFEs conducting an OPC on his pilots but sign his pilot’s paperwork as the SFEs will have to wait for the CAA to issue the new endorsed rating. Once they receive their paperwork the SFEs will be able to check S&Ks plus other UK operators and keep themselves in check.
I agree this is an extra level of burocracy added by the CAA. :bored: Their intent is good. Making examiners aware of the individual company SOPs. I find it bizarre that once I have an OPC with one UK operator on type you can examine others with just a letter of agreement.
My company always requests the SOPs of all operators 5 days before check so that we can familiarise ourselves with them. With the Citations I have not seen a vast amount of difference between them. We have established a good working relationship with customers based on feedback. Most say they benefit from ‘crosspollination’ training with us as we have seen ‘different ways to skin the cat’. Some have modified their SOP as a result. Our aim is to make it safer for all.:)

[Bullybeefer]

I've just been talking to a German TRE who works for a Swiss company. He said that the Germans are going to use the same procedure as the Brits from next year and It looks likely that EASA will also implement it, europe wide, when their regs come in.

Deep joy;)