IFR & Part 61

[VH-FTS]

I wasn't able to get to the one Part 61 roadshow in my neck of the woods, but I'm hoping someone who has been to one can answer the following. I've started reading through the upcoming CASR 61, but I'm not sure about:

- will the recency requirements mean the existing instrument rating CAO is removed come December 4?

- what is a 2D vs 3D approach? The definition doesn't make sense, is it talking about RNP?

- how do NDB approaches fit into the recency requirements - as an approach using azimuth guidance?

Thanks for the help - the double negatives and lack of a law degree mean I'm not 100% sure how the above affects pilots.

[601]

2D vs 3D approach

Ya need these

[airwolf117]

I think 2D is a Non-precision and 3D is for Precision approach.

[Oktas8]

I'm no lawyer either. But I understand it to mean:

2D means an approach that only provides advisory or step-down information for the vertical profile; e.g. VOR, NDB, basic RNAV.

3D means an approach that provides vertical guidance from the IAF to the DA; e.g. ILS or some of the advanced RNP approaches.

In my personal thinking, if the procedure has a MAPt / MDA, it's the former. If a DA, it's the latter.

Fundamentally I think it's carefully written to provide future-proofing for the system. But, this being Australia, there are many pilots who would love to take CASA to AAT to exploit the slightest loophole, and many at CASA who would... but I need not finish that sentence. So it's been written by lawyers, for lawyers.

[Capt Claret]

RNAV (LNAV)/VNAV?

[OpsNormal]

Clarrie, I think you'll find that many aircraft are unable to use an autopilot coupled VNAV profile to fly an RNAV approach (if that is what you were referring to/asking?).

[VH-FTS]

Wow, only a few weeks from part 61 and there's plenty of confusion. Job well done CASA educating everyone. Your website material is useless too.

Thanks for the 2D and 3D answers guys, can anyone answer the other questions?

[mustafagander]

FTS, AFAIK 2D means azimuth guidance only, ie no vertical guidance, only altitude limits and 3D means the lot, vertical guidance along with the azimuth.

Hence and old fashioned NDB approach to Oodnagalarbie, with a listed start altitude and a listed minimum, is 2D but an ILS or Vnav/Rnav to Modernsberg is 3D.

[OpsNormal]

I am more than just aware of that thanks slam_chick. The FMS in my own work aircraft works out a great 3 degree VNAV all the way from top to bottom and also flies it beautifully all by itself. The point I was getting at (which seems well beyond the brainspace relm of your sarcastic and snide remark to which I am saddened to say has become more and more common around pprune in the last 10-12 years after the first 5-6 being quite enjoyable) is that there are plenty of multi crew turboprop RPT aircraft in this country that cannot fly a 3D approach solution without continual manual input into the autopilot - even for tracking.

Mustafagander, that is also what I take it to mean as I was suggesting to Clarrie.

Regards,

OpsN.

[Capt Claret]

And that's what Clarrie was suggesting in the first place.

Originally Posted by fts

- what is a 2D vs 3D approach? The definition doesn't make sense, is it talking about RNP?

Originally Posted by Clarrie

RNAV (LNAV)/VNAV?

[Turkeyslapper]

Forgive me if it is covered somewhere:

AFAIK 2D means azimuth guidance only, ie no vertical guidance, only altitude
limits and 3D means the lot, vertical guidance along with the azimuth.

Say, when I do my renewal I only do a RNAV and VOR approach for my non precision stuff....what about an NDB? Whats to stop me conducting an NDB approach if I simply have 2D on my renewal? Or does 2D cover everything...surely not?

Turkey

[SOPS]

As a person with an Australian ATPL, who has not flown an Australian registerd aircraft, for 30 years....but drops in a couple of times a month in a 777, is it ok if I do an ILS. things seem to be getting very complicated.

[world traveler]

IFR & Part 61

Turkey,

I asked this very question at one of the Part 61 "info" nights. The reply from the ASA was that "you can get yourself current on that approach type and then perform it in IMC".

[Mach E Avelli]

The latest on Part 61 and a few other parts (like most?) is that the Campaign Against Sensible Aviation continues. All delayed until September 2014.

[training wheels]

Since the new part 61 rules are just a few weeks away now, has there been any clear information from CASA on what they mean by 2D and 3D approaches in terms of recency requirements? In particular, does recency on say, a VOR approach (2D) also mean you meet the recency requirements for an RNAV GNSS (2D) approach?

And will the new licenses actually have printed on it the aids that we're endorsed with eg (NDB, ILS, LLZ etc) or will it just have 3D and 2D? If not, then how else would prospective employers know what aids we're endorsed with (apart from looking at the sticky labels in the logbook I guess).

[Jack Ranga]

VH-FTS, if you know Steve at Bini's he's summarised the recency onto a piece of A4! If you don't know him I'll PM you when I get home. Pretty sure that ILS recency goes to 90 days! yay.

Well done CAsA, you've outdone yourselves on the education front

[Oktas8]

Training wheels:

They're good questions. Google "CASA part 61" revealed a number of results, including FAQs, a sample license, a Part 61 summary booklet and of course the text of the rule itself.

Here's what I learned.

There are no sticky labels. It all goes in your license (ratings & endorsements and proficiency checks.)

It appears that approvals for VOR, NDB etc cease to exist except for pIR holders. The full IR just has 2D & 3D approaches. So, I suppose that an NDB approach covers you for a VOR approach as well, at least for 90 day currency. (I certainly hope so. Reduced regulatory burden.)

How does one get trained & tested for all the different types of navaid? Presumably the traditional way, but I haven't checked. The MOS was in the list of Google results though...

[thorn bird]

Oh course guys, regardless of what we think the new rules mean, or judging by any of the road show guys thought they mean, what the rules actually mean will come down to what the FOI of the day thinks they mean.


For sure they will mean a massive cost to industry.

[auto throttle]

There's also 2 different types of recency for 2D approaches. One is a CDI 2D approach and the other is an azimuth 2D approach.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Here's some good news...

90 day currencies for all approach types and CIRs expired for more than 12 mths can then be done on one approach in the air and the rest in a synthetic trainer.