No More KingAir Endorsements
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No More KingAir Endorsements
Well guys the it's official. If you wish to get endorsed on a KingAir B200 or B350 after April 1st it will have to be done in a Sim. Refer CAO 82.0 and CAO 40.1.0. In addition any training in one of the above, for an organisation with CAR 217 approval, that requires the use of Abnormal or Emergency procedures has to be done in a Sim. Before I get shot down let me assure you I have done the research. The criteria are that the B200 and B350 have approval to seat 10 or more pax on their Type Data Certificate and there is a Sim available for both types in Australia.
There is no B1900 Sim in Australia and therefore endorsements and 217 T&C can be done in the aircraft. To me this is CASA lunacy at its best. I understand the intent but once again they have completely stuffed it up. Surely The intent, after the tragic accident in Darwin, was to make things safer in aircraft over 5700KG in the CAR 217 training environment. The B200 KingAir is the modern day Piper Chieftain and this new regulation will cause untold expense and heartache in the GA sector.
Please keep in mind that there is a 50 hour ICUS requirement for the first time Multi Turbine pilot before he can conduct a charter so will the above really make it any safer ??????
Groggy
There is no B1900 Sim in Australia and therefore endorsements and 217 T&C can be done in the aircraft. To me this is CASA lunacy at its best. I understand the intent but once again they have completely stuffed it up. Surely The intent, after the tragic accident in Darwin, was to make things safer in aircraft over 5700KG in the CAR 217 training environment. The B200 KingAir is the modern day Piper Chieftain and this new regulation will cause untold expense and heartache in the GA sector.
Please keep in mind that there is a 50 hour ICUS requirement for the first time Multi Turbine pilot before he can conduct a charter so will the above really make it any safer ??????
Groggy
Erm groggy, where is the reqt for 50 ICUS?
(yes I need to know, no I am not being a smart arse)
(yes I need to know, no I am not being a smart arse)
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The criteria are that the B200 and B350 have approval to seat 10 or more pax on their Type Data Certificate and there is a Sim available for both types in Australia.
The B200 KingAir is the modern day Piper Chieftain
PS:At present an endorsement can not be 'completed' on the B200 sim in Australia, as some of the flight sequences still need to be completed in the aircraft.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about the Conquest? Mine has 10 pax seats? So if a C441 sim shows up that's it. No more abnormal training ops in the Aircraft? What if the sim breaks........and let's face it they NEVER break, cough cough, f$&k me. The whole country is shut down from doing any kind of useful training?
CAO 82.0.7 only applies to AOC holders who have a CAR 217 T&C organisation.
Therefore training on a B200 or C441 or any aircraft >5700kg MTOW would not be required to be done in a QSTD. How many AOC holders in Oz who operate King Airs, other than the 350, would have CAR 217 approval?
The 9 pax in a King Air only applies to aircraft modded for FAR 135 operations in the USA.
Therefore training on a B200 or C441 or any aircraft >5700kg MTOW would not be required to be done in a QSTD. How many AOC holders in Oz who operate King Airs, other than the 350, would have CAR 217 approval?
Certificates of later model Kingairs have been amended to show 9 Pax,
CASR 61 I think has the relevant gen.
61.205 When training must not be conducted in aircraft
(1) For paragraphs 61.195 (2) (d) and 61.200 (d), the training must not be conducted in an aircraft with a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity of more than 9 if:
(a) there is an approved flight simulator for the training available in Australia; or
(b) for a rating that applies only to an aircraft with a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity of more than 19 or a maximum certificated take-off weight of more than 8 618 kg—there is an approved flight simulator for the training available outside Australia.
(2) In this regulation:
available, for training, means able to be used for the training.
(1) For paragraphs 61.195 (2) (d) and 61.200 (d), the training must not be conducted in an aircraft with a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity of more than 9 if:
(a) there is an approved flight simulator for the training available in Australia; or
(b) for a rating that applies only to an aircraft with a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity of more than 19 or a maximum certificated take-off weight of more than 8 618 kg—there is an approved flight simulator for the training available outside Australia.
(2) In this regulation:
available, for training, means able to be used for the training.
Horatio;
Groggy may have been referring to CAO 40.1.0
Wouldn't apply to B200.
Groggy may have been referring to CAO 40.1.0
8A
8A.1 Conditions on aircraft endorsements For the purposes of regulation 5.25, it is a condition of each command endorsement that authorises the holder of the endorsement to fly an aeroplane with a maximum take-off weight of more than 5 700 kg that the holder of the endorsement must not act as pilot in command of such an aeroplane if:
(a) the aeroplane is engaged in charter operations, or regular public transport operations; and
(b) the aeroplane’s flight manual specifies that it may be flown under the I.F.R.; unless the holder satisfies the aeronautical experience requirements set out in paragraph 8A.2.
8A.2 Unless CASA otherwise approves, the endorsement holder’s aeronautical experience must consist of:
(a) at least 50 hours of flight time as pilot acting in command under supervision in the type of aeroplane concerned; or
(b) at least:
(i) 25 hours of flight time as pilot acting in command under supervision in the type of aeroplane concerned; and
(ii) the successful completion of an approved training course conducted in an approved synthetic flight trainer.
8A.1 Conditions on aircraft endorsements For the purposes of regulation 5.25, it is a condition of each command endorsement that authorises the holder of the endorsement to fly an aeroplane with a maximum take-off weight of more than 5 700 kg that the holder of the endorsement must not act as pilot in command of such an aeroplane if:
(a) the aeroplane is engaged in charter operations, or regular public transport operations; and
(b) the aeroplane’s flight manual specifies that it may be flown under the I.F.R.; unless the holder satisfies the aeronautical experience requirements set out in paragraph 8A.2.
8A.2 Unless CASA otherwise approves, the endorsement holder’s aeronautical experience must consist of:
(a) at least 50 hours of flight time as pilot acting in command under supervision in the type of aeroplane concerned; or
(b) at least:
(i) 25 hours of flight time as pilot acting in command under supervision in the type of aeroplane concerned; and
(ii) the successful completion of an approved training course conducted in an approved synthetic flight trainer.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Zoo
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZOMG the sky is falling!
5 hours x $2000/hr in the plane... $10k
5 hours x $400/hr in the sim $2k, Flights for two people from Broome (about the worst case scenario with the sim in Melbourne?) <$2k, accommodation and allowances for two nights in Melbourne for two people $1k (cheaper options available, but lets keep it at round numbers).... so $5k.
Resulting in an extra expense of... -$5k. Might even be able to do better if you send two people down for the endo at the same time. Heck they can sit in the right seat while their sim buddy is doing their training and might learn more from others mistakes. Not to mention being able to give real engine fires at V1 in the sim, or any one of a number of system failures. Deal with a real event under pressure rather than casually talk about what would you do if...? Can't afford to lose your C&T staff for three days... might have to question your truck number there if you're CAR217, but if you're comfortable with it, can get the Sim centre to do the training and only lose the pilot you're getting endorsed.
Oh I get it... "What do you mean I can't train the pilot on the dead leg of a charter any more and get the customer to pay my expenses while still bonding the pilot for $12k?"
I disagree with a lot about CASA at the moment, but not this particular point. I've done endo's with and without the Sim.. the Sim was definitely a better endorsement despite being run by a less capable instructor. Those I've seen object to having to do endo's in the Sim, generally have never done one.
5 hours x $2000/hr in the plane... $10k
5 hours x $400/hr in the sim $2k, Flights for two people from Broome (about the worst case scenario with the sim in Melbourne?) <$2k, accommodation and allowances for two nights in Melbourne for two people $1k (cheaper options available, but lets keep it at round numbers).... so $5k.
Resulting in an extra expense of... -$5k. Might even be able to do better if you send two people down for the endo at the same time. Heck they can sit in the right seat while their sim buddy is doing their training and might learn more from others mistakes. Not to mention being able to give real engine fires at V1 in the sim, or any one of a number of system failures. Deal with a real event under pressure rather than casually talk about what would you do if...? Can't afford to lose your C&T staff for three days... might have to question your truck number there if you're CAR217, but if you're comfortable with it, can get the Sim centre to do the training and only lose the pilot you're getting endorsed.
Oh I get it... "What do you mean I can't train the pilot on the dead leg of a charter any more and get the customer to pay my expenses while still bonding the pilot for $12k?"
I disagree with a lot about CASA at the moment, but not this particular point. I've done endo's with and without the Sim.. the Sim was definitely a better endorsement despite being run by a less capable instructor. Those I've seen object to having to do endo's in the Sim, generally have never done one.
I lost track of the regulatory reform process last century, but aren't the CAOs and CARs being replaced by CASRs?
Thus CAO 40.1 will be extinct, replaced by part 61 above?
And yes, as per previous poster, I am personally struggling to see the problem with it.
Thus CAO 40.1 will be extinct, replaced by part 61 above?
And yes, as per previous poster, I am personally struggling to see the problem with it.
Last edited by compressor stall; 6th Mar 2013 at 23:04.
Leave the CARs CASRs and CAOs for the boffins at CASA.
No one in industry looks at them (except manualsexuals).
Everything you need to know is your Jepps or the company operations manuals.
No one in industry looks at them (except manualsexuals).
Everything you need to know is your Jepps or the company operations manuals.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many AOC holders in Oz who operate King Airs, other than the 350, would have CAR 217 approval?
All of which already use the Ansett sim in Melbourne.
All of which already use the Ansett sim in Melbourne
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: melb
Posts: 2,162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am led to believe that the Beech Sim in ML is not currently avail as a 350.
Flash lookin' contraption though, had a peek in it the udder day, huge space inside but man was the drivers seat environment cramp, I guess old age means I 4got what it was like:-)
Wmk2
Flash lookin' contraption though, had a peek in it the udder day, huge space inside but man was the drivers seat environment cramp, I guess old age means I 4got what it was like:-)
Wmk2
Let me see:----throw the real Aircraft around the sky learning to fly it and risk killing yourself........or do it in a Flight Sim ?????? I choose the Sim...
Besides its a much cheaper and better training environment.
What's the problem????
Besides its a much cheaper and better training environment.
What's the problem????