Minimium Duration of CIR flight test
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minimium Duration of CIR flight test
Request information on the CASA recommended minimum flight time for initial issue and also renewal of a command instrument rating (multi-engine aeroplane). Are these different for a CIR helicopter? Unable find legislative reference to this.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are no recommended minimum flight times for a CIR test that I ever heard of. Some examiners do a CIR flight test from Bankstwn to Richmond (about 25 NM away), you would do the ILS at Richmond then NDB at Richmond and if you were also doing the VOR you would go up to Maitland VOR. It's not about time when doing a CIR test, it's whether you can do the approaches or not. Renewals are also done from Bankstown to Richmond for ILS then you go back to Bankstown and do the NDB in the simulator. Don't know anything about helicopters though.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Down a dark hole
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't know anything about minimum times for initial issue CIR or for renewals.
My initial issue was about an hour and a half in a Baron. Archerfield (EFATO) to Brisbane (ILS - appr and missed appr on one engine) to Redland Bay (NDB - engine failure in the turn inbound with missed appr on one) to Coolangatta (VOR/DME) to Archerfield (partial panel and recovery from unusual attitudes enroute). In those days you did a DME homing and approach as well which could be done in a stimulator for initial issue (15 min?).
You can do most of a renewal in a stimulator if that's your thing - but you have to fly one appr in the aeroplane. I prefer to do the whole thing in an aeroplane, which I find easier than the stimulator cause it stays where I put it. My typical renewal is YIFL - YMBA (GPS with partial panel and recovery from unusual attitudes etc enroute) - YBCS (ILS which covers you for the VOR as well) - YIFL (NDB). About an hour in the Fork-tailed Dr Killer.
I would have thought the requirements for a whirlygig would be similar but would maybe take a bit longer - cause they're a bit slower!
Cheers
R
My initial issue was about an hour and a half in a Baron. Archerfield (EFATO) to Brisbane (ILS - appr and missed appr on one engine) to Redland Bay (NDB - engine failure in the turn inbound with missed appr on one) to Coolangatta (VOR/DME) to Archerfield (partial panel and recovery from unusual attitudes enroute). In those days you did a DME homing and approach as well which could be done in a stimulator for initial issue (15 min?).
You can do most of a renewal in a stimulator if that's your thing - but you have to fly one appr in the aeroplane. I prefer to do the whole thing in an aeroplane, which I find easier than the stimulator cause it stays where I put it. My typical renewal is YIFL - YMBA (GPS with partial panel and recovery from unusual attitudes etc enroute) - YBCS (ILS which covers you for the VOR as well) - YIFL (NDB). About an hour in the Fork-tailed Dr Killer.
I would have thought the requirements for a whirlygig would be similar but would maybe take a bit longer - cause they're a bit slower!
Cheers
R
which includes -
The duration of the test depends on whether it is for an initial issue or renewal of a rating.
For initial issues, the ground component usually takes an hour, while the flight
component takes 2½ to 3 hours.
For renewals, the ground component averages 20 minutes and the test 1½ to 2 hours.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Down a dark hole
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The duration of the test depends on whether it is for an initial issue or renewal of a rating.
For initial issues, the ground component usually takes an hour, while the flight
component takes 2½ to 3 hours.
For renewals, the ground component averages 20 minutes and the test 1½ to 2 hours."
I am not sure how you could spend 3 hrs in the air on an initial issue or 2 hours in the air for a renewal, unless you have a chunk of enroute time between aerodromes/aids/approaches.
Having a bunch of approaches close by certainly maxes out the workload for the victim - but does minimise the "wasted" time between approaches. Although I sometimes curse it when up-to-my-eyeballs-in-it, on later reflection it seems to me to be a good test of one's ability to keep it together under pressue - and that has to be a good test for the aspiring IFR pilot - cause being single pilot IFR in the sh*t can certainly get the adrenaline flowing.
Don't you just love it when, rattling down the ILS on one engine (of two), and about as you get to the middle marker the guy in the tower gives you a non-standard long-winded missed approach clearance?
If you were on one engine for real, you would just say "shut the f*ck up and let me fly this thing!"
At least the days are a thing of the past when a renewal meant that you most likely ended up on partial panel with only the DME left to find your way home and get down.
R
For initial issues, the ground component usually takes an hour, while the flight
component takes 2½ to 3 hours.
For renewals, the ground component averages 20 minutes and the test 1½ to 2 hours."
I am not sure how you could spend 3 hrs in the air on an initial issue or 2 hours in the air for a renewal, unless you have a chunk of enroute time between aerodromes/aids/approaches.
Having a bunch of approaches close by certainly maxes out the workload for the victim - but does minimise the "wasted" time between approaches. Although I sometimes curse it when up-to-my-eyeballs-in-it, on later reflection it seems to me to be a good test of one's ability to keep it together under pressue - and that has to be a good test for the aspiring IFR pilot - cause being single pilot IFR in the sh*t can certainly get the adrenaline flowing.
Don't you just love it when, rattling down the ILS on one engine (of two), and about as you get to the middle marker the guy in the tower gives you a non-standard long-winded missed approach clearance?
If you were on one engine for real, you would just say "shut the f*ck up and let me fly this thing!"
At least the days are a thing of the past when a renewal meant that you most likely ended up on partial panel with only the DME left to find your way home and get down.
R
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The duration of the test depends on whether it is for an initial issue or renewal of a rating.
For initial issues, the ground component usually takes an hour, while the flight
component takes 2½ to 3 hours.
For renewals, the ground component averages 20 minutes and the test 1½ to 2 hours."
I am not sure how you could spend 3 hrs in the air on an initial issue or 2 hours in the air for a renewal, unless you have a chunk of enroute time between aerodromes/aids/approaches.
Having a bunch of approaches close by certainly maxes out the workload for the victim - but does minimise the "wasted" time between approaches. Although I sometimes curse it when up-to-my-eyeballs-in-it, on later reflection it seems to me to be a good test of one's ability to keep it together under pressue - and that has to be a good test for the aspiring IFR pilot - cause being single pilot IFR in the sh*t can certainly get the adrenaline flowing.
Don't you just love it when, rattling down the ILS on one engine (of two), and about as you get to the middle marker the guy in the tower gives you a non-standard long-winded missed approach clearance?
R
For initial issues, the ground component usually takes an hour, while the flight
component takes 2½ to 3 hours.
For renewals, the ground component averages 20 minutes and the test 1½ to 2 hours."
I am not sure how you could spend 3 hrs in the air on an initial issue or 2 hours in the air for a renewal, unless you have a chunk of enroute time between aerodromes/aids/approaches.
Having a bunch of approaches close by certainly maxes out the workload for the victim - but does minimise the "wasted" time between approaches. Although I sometimes curse it when up-to-my-eyeballs-in-it, on later reflection it seems to me to be a good test of one's ability to keep it together under pressue - and that has to be a good test for the aspiring IFR pilot - cause being single pilot IFR in the sh*t can certainly get the adrenaline flowing.
Don't you just love it when, rattling down the ILS on one engine (of two), and about as you get to the middle marker the guy in the tower gives you a non-standard long-winded missed approach clearance?
R
my initial was a shade under 3.
it involved a sector entry and hold before starting the NDB and ILS approaches.
also a bit of transit time between avalon, essendon, moorabbin and cowes with radar vectoring to stay away from tulla and restricted area doglegging added..
some taxying around after landing off approaches
and a full circling approach
so it all adds up eventually!
approaches close by are fantastic to really get you working and if you can get through a really tough workout given by the instructor, you'll have no problem with the actual test!
i personally found the test easier then some of my training flights.
oh and R, gotta love the amended overshoots from EN when one donk has 'failed'.. if you havnt already, give it a try one day
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: WX at our destination is 32 deg with some bkn cld, but we'll try to have them fixed before we arrive
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My last renewal was 1.3.
My simulated engine failure was during turn onto inbound leg on an NDB approach.
My simulated engine failure was during turn onto inbound leg on an NDB approach.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Don't you just love it when, rattling down the ILS on one engine (of two), and about as you get to the middle marker the guy in the tower gives you a non-standard long-winded missed approach clearance?
If you were on one engine for real, you would just say "shut the f*ck up and let me fly this thing!"
R
If you were on one engine for real, you would just say "shut the f*ck up and let me fly this thing!"
R
Quite often the non standard missed approach is used so that a PILS can be fitted into a slot that may not have worked with a standard MAP, the idea being to save holding for the aircraft. Also, a non standard MAP is often used at CS so that we can keep departing aircraft, not having them wait for a slower aircraft (no offence to Bo's) to clear the path.
I understand that ATC comms can be annoying at times, however you must also understand also that we have rules and requirements that we must follow, under threat of stand down or dismissal. If our requests are being distracting, or you are unable to comply, just tell us and we will endeavour to sort something else out.
If ATC comms have been distracting to a real point of concern, I would strongly recommend that you put in an incident report, ATC's don't take them personally, just as pilots shouldn't either. They are designed to help improve the system.
If you have a question next time you get a non standard missed approach out of CS, please call the TWR when you land and we are always more than happy to explain why (well, try to explain, it is approach that gives the MAP, we are normally just the messenger
).
I am not sure how you could spend 3 hrs in the air on an initial issue or 2 hours in the air for a renewal, unless you have a chunk of enroute time between aerodromes/aids/approaches.
The objective is to access your ability in planning and executing an IFR flight from A to B to C etc. Flying around the terminal area from aid to aid will show your ability to do approaches.
But the enroute stuff can be tricky. Changing wx, turbulence, icing, lots of traffic and comms to deal with, and 'your passenger' suddenly deciding they want to bypass C and go to D instead!
As an example, one of the planned stops on my test was to a dirt strip without a navaid (some examiners had a warped sense of humour). No GPS, and no GRID LSALTS on the RNCs in those days! You had to get it from the wac.
Most people will use the test to get endorsed on as many navaids as possible, therefore a bit of aid-hopping will be involved. Once you're through the initial, and have a couple of renewals behind you, most examiners will keep it practical and brief!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an example, one of the planned stops on my test was to a dirt strip without a navaid
The so called "no-aid" leg was a common feature of CIR tests conducted in the Vic/Tas region of CASA even though the CASA Form 645 Instrument Rating Application did not have a requirement for this sequence. A complaint was made to CASA head Office Canberra who quite correctly advised that a "no-aid" testing requirement was not CASA policy.
It's ok A37575.
We didn't actually go to the dirt strip. I did say it was planned. Once inflight, it became part of the enroute diversion!
As an aside, most of the places we went to didn't have navaids, so the plan for my IR test seemed reasonable to me.
We didn't actually go to the dirt strip. I did say it was planned. Once inflight, it became part of the enroute diversion!
As an aside, most of the places we went to didn't have navaids, so the plan for my IR test seemed reasonable to me.
Last edited by Capt Fathom; 5th Jan 2007 at 20:42.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 23
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rat****, if you were on one engine for real, and had told us (don't laugh, I've had aircraft land and first I've known about it was seeing it feathered on the runway), we won't be giving you long winded anything.
Quite often the non standard missed approach is used so that a PILS can be fitted into a slot that may not have worked with a standard MAP, the idea being to save holding for the aircraft. Also, a non standard MAP is often used at CS so that we can keep departing aircraft, not having them wait for a slower aircraft (no offence to Bo's) to clear the path.
I understand that ATC comms can be annoying at times, however you must also understand also that we have rules and requirements that we must follow, under threat of stand down or dismissal. If our requests are being distracting, or you are unable to comply, just tell us and we will endeavour to sort something else out.
If ATC comms have been distracting to a real point of concern, I would strongly recommend that you put in an incident report, ATC's don't take them personally, just as pilots shouldn't either. They are designed to help improve the system.
If you have a question next time you get a non standard missed approach out of CS, please call the TWR when you land and we are always more than happy to explain why (well, try to explain, it is approach that gives the MAP, we are normally just the messenger ).
Quite often the non standard missed approach is used so that a PILS can be fitted into a slot that may not have worked with a standard MAP, the idea being to save holding for the aircraft. Also, a non standard MAP is often used at CS so that we can keep departing aircraft, not having them wait for a slower aircraft (no offence to Bo's) to clear the path.
I understand that ATC comms can be annoying at times, however you must also understand also that we have rules and requirements that we must follow, under threat of stand down or dismissal. If our requests are being distracting, or you are unable to comply, just tell us and we will endeavour to sort something else out.
If ATC comms have been distracting to a real point of concern, I would strongly recommend that you put in an incident report, ATC's don't take them personally, just as pilots shouldn't either. They are designed to help improve the system.
If you have a question next time you get a non standard missed approach out of CS, please call the TWR when you land and we are always more than happy to explain why (well, try to explain, it is approach that gives the MAP, we are normally just the messenger
).
Rat****
That's impressive performance that you have in your Bo. My last renewal with Side Show Bob at YIFL in his Dutchess was about 0.9 for the NDB only and 0.4 to do the ILS in the synthetic trainer.
My typical renewal is YIFL - YMBA (GPS with partial panel and recovery from unusual attitudes etc enroute) - YBCS (ILS which covers you for the VOR as well) - YIFL (NDB). About an hour in the Fork-tailed Dr Killer.
Last renewal = 1.1 hr
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Down a dark hole
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The YIFL NDB Appr is somewhat prolonged by the time you make a sector entry, reversal turn, 3.5 min outbound, base turn, and 3.5 min inbound!
R
