NZ: ATPL Flight Test
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Someday I will find a place to stop
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
6 Posts
ZK-MYM shows as registered at 5670kgs.
Unless it has had a recent mod to increase the MTOW?, or is any B200 on the "or equivalent as approved by the Director" list, like the Mojave is also?
Unless it has had a recent mod to increase the MTOW?, or is any B200 on the "or equivalent as approved by the Director" list, like the Mojave is also?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: All over the show like a madwomans crap
Posts: 494
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Delta, I can't find the section on the CAA website....surprise...but I remember it as one of 3 requirements, 5600kgs, Turbine or pressurized...that's how the Mojave makes it in, as it's only pressurized.
I had an elderly gentleman, he was a gentleman and I won't name names....as my examiner on my flight test and we had been single engine since the start of the VOR approach and missed approach into Palmy, went SE to the NDB at Wanganui, did a hold there and then into the NDB approach in deteriorating weather conditions and strengthening winds. At about 800 feet on final approach into Wanganui, the examiner had clearly forgotten that we were SE and he did the instructor trick of putting a piece of A4 paper between the throttles and the mixtures so I couldn't see which engine he was going to "fail"....it took me a moment to realize what was going on and I shouted out "we're already single engine!!" and grabbed every lever I could and firewalled them! That was an exciting moment.....
But ever the examiner, as we climbed away, he apologized and then promptly failed an engine again and I had to circle to land SE!
All in, a pretty thorough test!
I had an elderly gentleman, he was a gentleman and I won't name names....as my examiner on my flight test and we had been single engine since the start of the VOR approach and missed approach into Palmy, went SE to the NDB at Wanganui, did a hold there and then into the NDB approach in deteriorating weather conditions and strengthening winds. At about 800 feet on final approach into Wanganui, the examiner had clearly forgotten that we were SE and he did the instructor trick of putting a piece of A4 paper between the throttles and the mixtures so I couldn't see which engine he was going to "fail"....it took me a moment to realize what was going on and I shouted out "we're already single engine!!" and grabbed every lever I could and firewalled them! That was an exciting moment.....
But ever the examiner, as we climbed away, he apologized and then promptly failed an engine again and I had to circle to land SE! All in, a pretty thorough test!
Guest
Posts: n/a
I've noted that flight test and training nz don't seem to have testing officers for the issue of ATPLs
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: nz
Age: 38
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Delta T. Thanks for your concerns but I meet all the above requirements that you listed bar having an approved machine (in which I'm currently looking into a having a 200 approved) and sourcing a CAA examiner
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah I was also considering flying an examiner over.
There is no 10hr requirement. I checked that with CAA and all they said was a rating on type.
Still waiting on hearing about aircraft that are under 5,700kg such as the Mojave....
There is no 10hr requirement. I checked that with CAA and all they said was a rating on type.
Still waiting on hearing about aircraft that are under 5,700kg such as the Mojave....
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: All over the show like a madwomans crap
Posts: 494
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's probably an excellent option guys, and much cheaper than the 10hours on type, which is hard to get and not to mention the hotel plus flights or gas getting to Wanganui. The CAA examiner who did my flight test said he could have done my flight test in the CRJ sim in Aussie, if I'd paid for his flights and hotel. However CRJs aren't on the NZ register and this was contrary to what the CAA told me in correspondence, that it had to be a type registered in NZ...
I still don't know but the flight examiner was adamant and he has been around since the Wright brothers!
I still don't know but the flight examiner was adamant and he has been around since the Wright brothers!
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Someday I will find a place to stop
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
6 Posts
Ok, recall that the old proverb is that CAA stands for Campaign Against Aviation.
And remember from your training long ago:
AC61.10
For a piston multi-engine (non centreline-thrust) aeroplane not exceeding 5700kg MCTOW Initial issue - 5 hours; subsequent types - 1 hour.
This same document has for Helicopters over 5700Kgs 10hrs required.
However has nothing stated for Multi Engine Aeroplanes over 5700kgs in this document, but you can see where I am going, most likely the requirement is for complex aircraft, first type, not done in a simulator...10hrs. -I am still looking.
And remember from your training long ago:
AC61.10
For a piston multi-engine (non centreline-thrust) aeroplane not exceeding 5700kg MCTOW Initial issue - 5 hours; subsequent types - 1 hour.
This same document has for Helicopters over 5700Kgs 10hrs required.
However has nothing stated for Multi Engine Aeroplanes over 5700kgs in this document, but you can see where I am going, most likely the requirement is for complex aircraft, first type, not done in a simulator...10hrs. -I am still looking.
Last edited by DeltaT; 13th Apr 2014 at 13:28.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: NT
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to clear up one point, you cannot do an ATPL flight test with an examiner other than one from CAA unless you work for a company that has an approved examiner and ATPL flight testing on their 119 certificate.
As a flight test NZ examiner with ATPL testing approval I cannot do the test.
Not sure why this is but makes to tough for anyone who does not work for an airline.
We have tried to work with CAA on this one but no luck so far.
Then they wonder why everyone goes to Aussie does it over there then changes the licence via the TTMRA!
As a flight test NZ examiner with ATPL testing approval I cannot do the test.
Not sure why this is but makes to tough for anyone who does not work for an airline.
We have tried to work with CAA on this one but no luck so far.
Then they wonder why everyone goes to Aussie does it over there then changes the licence via the TTMRA!
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Someday I will find a place to stop
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
6 Posts
VH-VIN can you clear up the 10hr requirement?
I've stopped looking, can't find anything on it for fixed wing.
I read a science article recently that had in it, incompetent people cannot recognise their own stupidity and also the intelligence of others.
I've stopped looking, can't find anything on it for fixed wing.
Then they wonder why everyone goes to Aussie does it over there then changes the licence via the TTMRA!
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the fingers of Bill MacGregor at CAA NZ via email.
I asked him directly "There is a rumour that we must have 10hrs on the aircraft before the flight test. Is this true?"
His response was "There are no specified hours on type but you do require a type rating on the type used for the test"
Still no word on aircraft under 5,700kgs that we can use. A kingair 90 would be great...
I asked him directly "There is a rumour that we must have 10hrs on the aircraft before the flight test. Is this true?"
His response was "There are no specified hours on type but you do require a type rating on the type used for the test"
Still no word on aircraft under 5,700kgs that we can use. A kingair 90 would be great...
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Someday I will find a place to stop
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
6 Posts
CTC Hamilton have a Kingair B200 FNPTII Sim, you can but ask if you can hire it.
Re the 10hrs, I think I have found it, it is if you are acting as a crew member for a Company, and have to receive 10hrs Instruction on type.
Part 125.557 d(3). So not applicable.
Re the 10hrs, I think I have found it, it is if you are acting as a crew member for a Company, and have to receive 10hrs Instruction on type.
Part 125.557 d(3). So not applicable.
Part 125/121 training V Part 141 training
If the organisation is a Part 141 then the ten hours may not apply, but if you are completing a type rating for something such as a B737 or A320 the type conversion going to greater than 10 hours anyway.
However if the operation is able to do ATPL issues under its part 119 exposition as a part 125 or 121 operation and do not hold a part 141 then you would have to follow the ten hour requirement, because you would have to become an "employee' temporarily to complete the training as they cannot sell the training to an external.
Part 141 = you can sell training externally.
Part 135/125/121 = you can train your own people only.
So it is likely that Air2There may not have Part 141 for training, I don't know what their approval status is.
However if the operation is able to do ATPL issues under its part 119 exposition as a part 125 or 121 operation and do not hold a part 141 then you would have to follow the ten hour requirement, because you would have to become an "employee' temporarily to complete the training as they cannot sell the training to an external.
Part 141 = you can sell training externally.
Part 135/125/121 = you can train your own people only.
So it is likely that Air2There may not have Part 141 for training, I don't know what their approval status is.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Gypsy
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone had an luck since April in successfully getting their NZ ATPL?
Is there any scope to change the rule to allow licensed examiners to carry out tests on individuals?
At the moment the only options seems to be:
*Pay for rating with Air Wanganui and use their Mojave with a CAA examiner.
*Pay for rating (if not already rated) on an available King Air (250?) in NZ and carry out flight test with CAA examiner.
*Fly a CAA examiner over to aussie and do in a Sim (already rated or initial typed)
Is this seriously the only options available to individuals in NZ at the moment?
Is there any scope to change the rule to allow licensed examiners to carry out tests on individuals?
At the moment the only options seems to be:
*Pay for rating with Air Wanganui and use their Mojave with a CAA examiner.
*Pay for rating (if not already rated) on an available King Air (250?) in NZ and carry out flight test with CAA examiner.
*Fly a CAA examiner over to aussie and do in a Sim (already rated or initial typed)
Is this seriously the only options available to individuals in NZ at the moment?
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Harai Goshi
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZK-MKG (Air Wanganui) has been and still can be used for ATPL flight tests..I know of 2 people, 1 being a current pilot with Air Wanganui who have done their ATPL flight test in the c90
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Someday I will find a place to stop
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
6 Posts
*Fly a CAA examiner over to aussie and do in a Sim (already rated or initial typed)
Does it have to be a full motion sim for the test?
Having an ATPL licence is not the godsend you think it is.
Just because you might not have one you think that obtaining that holy grail will make all the difference to your employability. The reality is similar to a 200hr CPL going for a MEIR, unless you are rated on a popular type and ready for Captaincy it really is not the magic ticket.
I wouldn't bother spending the extra cash.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Pacific
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't bank on NZ CAA recognising the Aus ATPL under the TTMRA either. I have had an Aus ATP since Nov '04 & straight away applied and was issued a NZ ATP licence.
No I have just started arguing with them as they are back-tracking on why i was issued a kiwi ATP in the first place bear in mind I have had this licence for 10 freakin years & have flown for 4 years in New Zealand on it.
Head scratching stuff from the pin heads in Featherstone St.
No I have just started arguing with them as they are back-tracking on why i was issued a kiwi ATP in the first place bear in mind I have had this licence for 10 freakin years & have flown for 4 years in New Zealand on it.
Head scratching stuff from the pin heads in Featherstone St.