RPL Controlled Airspace Endorsement required to fly out of YMMB?

[rpler]

Hi all,

First time poster here, and newly minted RPL pilot. I recently got my RPL at one of the popular Moorabbin schools (let's call this organisation A), and it included a Flight Radio Endorsement (RPFR) and a Controlled Aerodrome Endorsement (RPCT). Unfortunately org A's insurance doesn't allow them to rent aircraft out to RPLs, so I went to rent an aircraft from another Moorabbin school (let's call this organisation B). Org B took a look at my license and said, given that I am familiar and was tested on Moorabbin inbound and outbound procedures, that Org A should've also given me a Controlled Airspace Endorsement (RPCA), and that I would need this to fly out of Moorabbin (essentially saying that a RPCT would allow me to taxi at Moorabbin, but the moment I'm off the ground I'd need a RPCA).

I went back to Org A to enquire, and one of the senior pilots there told me that I can infact operate out of Moorabbin, as Moorabbin is a Class D CTR not CTA, and that my Controlled Aerodrome Endorsment is sufficient. I've tried hard to look through CASA's various regulations, but I've found them a little vague... essentially saying that an RPCT allows me "to operate at controlled aerodromes" without specifying whether that includes the surrounding class D airspace/CTR. To make the matter more confusing, I called around a number of other schools at Moorabbin to ask about their RPL program, and they seem to be evenly split about whether a Controlled Airspace is included in their RPL syllabus, and whether it's required.

1. Do you believe that a Controlled Airspace Endorsement is required to operate out of Moorabbin (flying only into class G); or is a Controlled Aerodrome Endorsement sufficient?
2. Did you get a Controlled Aerodrome Endorsement as part of your RPL? Should this have been included in Org A's syllabus?

Any opinions/thoughts would be highly appreciated. I intend to eventually go on and get my PPL, but at this stage I've got some family visiting from overseas that I'm really hoping to take them for a joy flight next week.

[thunderbird five]

GREAT question, and good on you for asking it - apart from asking for opinions. You want facts, not opinions. Big difference.
Too many people don't bother to check the facts and they rely on bluff and bull****, and then give their opinion.
Best regards for your future flying aspirations - and have fun doing it, always learning.

Your RPCT is all you need, and here is the proof:

CASR 61.470 Limitations on exercise of privileges of recreational pilot licences—endorsements
(1) The holder of a recreational pilot licence is authorised to pilot an aircraft outside the following areas only if the holder also holds a recreational navigation endorsement:
(a) the area within 25 nautical miles of the departure aerodrome;
(b) a flight training area;
(c) the area that is a direct route between the departure aerodrome and a flight training area.
(2) The holder of a recreational pilot licence is authorised to pilot an aircraft in controlled airspace only if the holder also holds a controlled airspace endorsement.
(3) The holder of a recreational pilot licence is authorised to pilot an aircraft at a controlled aerodrome only if the holder also holds a controlled aerodrome endorsement.

[zegnaangelo]

Let's look at this practically and what is done in real life.

RPL with Controlled Aerodrome (and Flight Radio) is all you need. And no, you won't and should not get a Controlled Airspace Endorsement automatically (eg have you filed a flight plan and requested clearance with Melbourne Centre as part of your training?)

I am just stating what is required and done from a practical perspective...worst case just write to CASA to get it in black and white

(I don't want to confuse OP, but the definition of "at" does it only include ground movements or actually include entry and exit 😂)

​​

[Lead Balloon]

OK. Let’s look at what’s done in real life …

When was the last time anyone in ATC asked whether the pilot of a ‘light’ aircraft inbound to, outbound from or operating within controlled airspace had the required licence, rating, endorsement, medical certificate, recency and whatever else is necessary?

When was the last time CASA did any checks of whether the pilot of a ‘light’ aircraft inbound to, outbound from or operating within controlled airspace had the required licence, rating, endorsement, medical certificate, recency and whatever else is necessary?

Get it in black and white from CASA? CASA has a habit of changing its position - explained on the basis of the ever-changing rules - or merely disclaiming what ‘someone’ in CASA said - explained on the basis that it was said without authority.

Only do what you, and your instructor, consider you are practically capable of doing safely.

[Cloudee]

I always assumed (perhaps wrongly now) you needed an RPCA endorsement to fly through class C and D airspace and an RPCT to use the airports in that airspace. I assumed you could have an RPCA without an RPCT but not the reverse because you have to fly through controlled airspace to get to the aerodrome. Class D in the case of Moorabbin.

How very Australian to have two flying schools at the same airport interpreting this so differently, thanks CASA. If you get CASA to answer this please let us know.

Why on earth doesn’t your flying school get insurance to rent to RPL pilots? It’s not hard. Any extra cost is recouped in the rental rate. Weird.

[zegnaangelo]

GREAT question, and good on you for asking it - apart from asking for opinions. You want facts, not opinions. Big difference.
Too many people don't bother to check the facts and they rely on bluff and bull****, and then give their opinion.
Best regards for your future flying aspirations - and have fun doing it, always learning.

Your RPCT is all you need, and here is the proof:

CASR 61.470 Limitations on exercise of privileges of recreational pilot licences—endorsements
(1) The holder of a recreational pilot licence is authorised to pilot an aircraft outside the following areas only if the holder also holds a recreational navigation endorsement:
(a) the area within 25 nautical miles of the departure aerodrome;
(b) a flight training area;
(c) the area that is a direct route between the departure aerodrome and a flight training area.
(2) The holder of a recreational pilot licence is authorised to pilot an aircraft in controlled airspace only if the holder also holds a controlled airspace endorsement.
(3) The holder of a recreational pilot licence is authorised to pilot an aircraft at a controlled aerodrome only if the holder also holds a controlled aerodrome endorsement.

I always assumed (perhaps wrongly now) you needed an RPCA endorsement to fly through class C and D airspace and an RPCT to use the airports in that airspace. I assumed you could have an RPCA without an RPCT but not the reverse because you have to fly through controlled airspace to get to the aerodrome. Class D in the case of Moorabbin.

How very Australian to have two flying schools at the same airport interpreting this so differently, thanks CASA. If you get CASA to answer this please let us know.

Why on earth doesn’t your flying school get insurance to rent to RPL pilots? It’s not hard. Any extra cost is recouped in the rental rate. Weird.


you know dwelving into this and reading it for myself - i thought i could be wrong (e.g. a strict intepretation seemed to be "AT" a controlled aerodrome, implying just ground operations). i.e. OP maybe needed CTA and CTR endorsements.

But then looking again into the Part 61 MOS CTR - it implies that training for a CTR endorsements also involves landing and departing, and operating in Class C and D aerodromes. Hence I stand by my original view that CTR is only what the OP should have been given in his training (and indeed needs) to conduct flight operations into Class G from Moorabin.


https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2021C00449/Html/Volume_2#_Toc71278906

CTR Operate at a controlled aerodrome




1 Unit description

This unit describes the skills and knowledge required to operate an aircraft to and from a controlled aerodrome.

2 Elements and performance criteria

2.1 CTR.1 – Controlled aerodrome pre-flight preparation

(a) using a current ERSA and NOTAM, for the controlled aerodrome, extract all the relevant operational information;

(b) interpret the extracted information;

(c) identify all special aerodrome procedures;

(d) check current weather forecast and local observations;

(e) identify all relevant radio and navigation aid frequencies.

2.2 CTR.2 – Taxi aircraft at a controlled aerodrome

(a) obtain and comply with ATC clearances;

(b) manoeuvre aircraft to holding point as instructed and take appropriate action to avoid other aircraft and obstructions;

(c) recognise ground markings during taxi and take appropriate action;

(d) recognise lighting signals and take appropriate action;

(e) identify airport runway incursion hotspots;

(f) manoeuvre aircraft to avoid jet blast hazard;

(g) request taxi guidance if unsure of position;

(h) use strobes when crossing any runway.

2.3 CTR.3 – Perform departure from controlled aerodrome

(a) receive and correctly read back an airways clearance;

(b) check and ensure runway approach is clear prior to entering a runway;

(c) correctly set transponder code and mode prior to entering runway for take-off;

(d) comply with ATC departure instructions;

(e) advise ATC as soon as possible if unable to comply with clearance;

(f) contact approach with airborne report or give departure call to tower;

(g) maintain lookout;

(h) avoid wake turbulence;

(i) comply with airways clearances within tracking and altitude tolerances and maintain traffic lookout until clear of the aerodrome control zone.

2.4 CTR.4 – Perform arrival and landing at controlled aerodrome

(a) check ERSA and NOTAM prior to entering control area and extract required operational information;

(b) receive ATIS and correctly set the appropriate QNH;

(c) request and receive ATC clearance and set correct transponder code prior to entering control area;

(d) advise ATC as soon as possible if unable to comply with clearance;

(e) maintain lookout at all times;

(f) update QNH as required;

(g) maintain tracking tolerances;

(h) establish aircraft on the correct leg of the circuit in preparation for landing and maintain separation from traffic;

(i) confirm clearance to land;

(j) vacate runway and obtain taxi clearance.

3 Range of variables

(a) activities are performed in accordance with published procedures;3 Range of variables

(a) activities are performed in accordance with published procedures;

(b) Class C or D aerodromes;

(c) day VFR conditions.


(c) day VFR conditions.

4 Underpinning knowledge of the following:

(a) NOTAM decoding;

(b) aerodrome ground markings and lighting;

(c) standard RT phraseology;

(d) radio failure procedures in ERSA;

(e) transponder codes for radio failure and emergency.

[PiperCameron]

As it was explained to me, a Controlled Aerodrome endorsement covers operations within and around a Controlled Aerodrome (eg. YMMB) which includes airspace in the immediate vicinity (eg. 3 miles) for circuit training, arrival and departure.

Since Moorabbin borders on Class G, you don't need anything else to operate to and from Moorabbin to the training area (which is virtually all you can do on an RPL anyway).. but not having an Airspace endorsement would (and AIUI is intended to) discourage RPLs from heading north-bound, doing City Orbits with their mates and mixing with high-density traffic in and around YMEN and YMML without the training to do so. It used to be that you could do a City Orbit on a TIF, but I recently sent the wifey up for a TIF with one of the popular YMMB schools and the only option given was south-bound, so maybe Airservices has been sending them cease-and-desist notices or something??

When was the last time anyone in ATC asked whether the pilot of a ‘light’ aircraft inbound to, outbound from or operating within controlled airspace had the required licence, rating, endorsement, medical certificate, recency and whatever else is necessary? If CASA ask them to.. (or if said pilot is doing an absolute hash-job of trying to get an IFR clearance in-flight using procedures learnt on YT) :suspect:

When was the last time CASA did any checks of whether the pilot of a ‘light’ aircraft inbound to, outbound from or operating within controlled airspace had the required licence, rating, endorsement, medical certificate, recency and whatever else is necessary? If ATSB asks them to! :E

Only do what you, and your instructor, consider you are practically capable of doing safely. 100%!! :ok:


EDIT: To the OP, since an RPL holder does not need to be under the care of an instructor to get signed out on a flight, many aircraft insurance companies require the pilot of said aircraft to have a PPL at least due to the higher risk of damage to the aircraft that comes with reduced training (and subsequent higher premium). This has nothing to do with what endorsements you may or may not have, and I'd encourage you to try elsewhere. Lilydale? Tyabb??

[mikewil]

Another interpretation for you:
I have always assumed that the CTR endorsement meant you can operate (depart/arrive) from a controlled aerodrome where you don't continue into any adjoining CTA (ie you depart/arrive directly into Class G) as you just depart and don't need to make any further calls generally.

However, things get a little complicated when we talk about Class C, as in most cases you are identified and receiving a control service and at the boundary you will be given a "control service terminated" etc. The procedures in a Class C CTR are essentially the same as CTA. Landing at class C, you need to request a clearance well in advance rather than just reporting and heading in via an approach point. Most RPL holders with the CTR training won't have touched class C aerodrome procedures.

So I now take it to mean that CTR endorsement allows you to operate from a class D directly into class G. If you want Class C aerodrome, you need the CTA endorsement.

[PiperCameron]

So I now take it to mean that CTR endorsement allows you to operate from a class D directly into class G. If you want Class C aerodrome, you need the CTA endorsement.

If that were true, flying schools at Class C aerodromes (like YMEN) would not be able to offer a full range of pilot training - from TIF onwards.

I could be wrong (usually am, apparently!) but my understanding is that CTR endorsement allows you to operate within a controlled aerodrome's airspace - just not into controlled airspace beyond.

[djpil]

A casual reading of the Part 61 MOS indicates to me that one would need an RPCA to operate in any controlled airspace and an RPCT to operate to/from a controlled aerodrome.

CASA is very good at answering questions like this, much better than here.

[Bosi72]

2. Did you get a Controlled Aerodrome Endorsement as part of your RPL?
.

Yes, I've got all 3 in my Rpl licence: Radio, Aerodrome and Airspace.

​​​​​They've told me I could hire and fly to and from t/a with Rpl, but to save some $, I continued with Ppl navs instead.

From what I read above, your problem is insurance?

Ps: there is no separate Class D, nor Class C airspace/aerodrome endorsement. However, city orbit is not a training area, so you can't fly there with rpl.

[Clare Prop]

Why not just get a PPL?

[mikewil]

Why not just get a PPL?

Exactly. The RPL is essentially useless and is not recognised as an ICAO licence. The biggest cop out on the planet is the loophole by which RAAus certificate holders can simply have a flight review and suddenly be the holder of an RPL.
There are many extremely sloppy flight reviews out there, and for one of these to actually be sufficient for the grant of a CASA licence is just absurd. A bit of inside info reveals that it was exactly this situation that may have been a contributing factor in the crash near Port Pirie in SA a couple months back with the father and son killed in their recently purchased C172 on a hastily issued RPL conversion. Condolences to all of course.

[Cloudee]

Exactly. The RPL is essentially useless and is not recognised as an ICAO licence. The biggest cop out on the planet is the loophole by which RAAus certificate holders can simply have a flight review and suddenly be the holder of an RPL.
There are many extremely sloppy flight reviews out there, and for one of these to actually be sufficient for the grant of a CASA licence is just absurd. A bit of inside info reveals that it was exactly this situation that may have been a contributing factor in the crash near Port Pirie in SA a couple months back with the father and son killed in their recently purchased C172 on a hastily issued RPL conversion. Condolences to all of course.
What special powers do you require for a “CASA licence”. You are sharing airspace with RAAus certificate holders, as am I. There are poor pilots and good pilots in both camps. What special skill is required to fly an aircraft a few kilos heavier? To progress to an RPL from a Pilot certificate requires the pilot to pass an BFR, not just do one, that may involve a few hours training. Why would a CASA GA CFI go easy on an RAAus pilot? As you’ve got inside info, where did this conversion take place, what RAAus experience did the pilot have, how many hours to get the BFR done?

[mikewil]

What special powers do you require for a “CASA licence”. You are sharing airspace with RAAus certificate holders, as am I. There are poor pilots and good pilots in both camps. What special skill is required to fly an aircraft a few kilos heavier? To progress to an RPL from a Pilot certificate requires the pilot to pass an BFR, not just do one, that may involve a few hours training. Why would a CASA GA CFI go easy on an RAAus pilot? As you’ve got inside info, where did this conversion take place, what RAAus experience did the pilot have, how many hours to get the BFR done?

From that response, I am guessing you haven't had any encounters with the wide variety of training outcomes between both RAAus certificate holders and CASA licence holders. I am not elaborating on the incident as I don't want to identify myself but I will answer your general questions.

Sure, there will be differences. But general observation is that in many cases, an RAAus instructor is less experienced and knowledgeable than a CASA PPL. I have seen many crazy ideas like all normal approaches are conducted by just cutting the power abeam the threshold, lose height on short final by doing a steep turn, a 'nav endorsement' is taught by just following the magenta line on OzRunways. I have never seen any of this by someone trained on the CASA syllabus.

And there are MANY GA flight instructors (all it takes is a Grade 2), who are very sloppy and easy going in a flight review and there are also organisations with the reputation for a quick and easy flight review. I have heard many RAAus converts complain that "so and so converted his to an RPL at organisation X in an hour and it was just a few circuits and a stall, so why are you making me do a PFL and show that I can do a best rate climb". I think it would make for a better outcome if the RAAus conversion was still available, however the flight was to be a proper RPL test, given by a flight examiner. After all, to be issued a licence which is usually awarded at the end of the CASA syllabus, should require a proper test by an examiner who knows how to test to that syllabus. I don't think the average newly minted Grade 2 instructor is yet competent to make the decisions and assessment for the issuing of a licence.

The idea of sharing the airspace with RAAus certificate holders is one we have to accept. Many are taught well and are great pilots, though I have seen more who are not, who refuse to use the radio and who don't even know how to identify themselves and their position. Sure, this goes for GA as well, but nowhere near to the same extent. Have a chat to a handful of regional RPT pilots from Qlink and Rex and ask for some stories of encounters they have had with RAAus holders. Sadly it will of course take a mid air collision with an RPT aircraft before CASA decides to restrict RAAus operating at aerodromes visited by RPT aircraft.

We all take risks every day, but there appear to be several holes in the Swiss cheese that CASA have already decided to line up before the get go.