CASA Part 61 - Private Flying for ATPL pilots under cyclic programs
Join Date: Jun 1996
Location: Check with Ops
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can see the sense in this, especially for those who only fly a 172 around the patch once a year. I fly light aircraft a lot more often and am current as far as PFLs etc are concerned but I think I've been lucky to get away without having a BFR thus far and there's always something you can gain by going up with an instructor who is flying light aircraft all the time....apparently there is no need to wait for a push-back tractor
The question I have is by when do I have to do this proficiency check? Is it 2 years from the start of Part 61? Is it 2 years from my last 'jet' sim check prior to Part 61? I really have no idea. I suppose I could just get on and do the check but I would like to know the official version of 'by when' and so far my searches have come up with not too much
The question I have is by when do I have to do this proficiency check? Is it 2 years from the start of Part 61? Is it 2 years from my last 'jet' sim check prior to Part 61? I really have no idea. I suppose I could just get on and do the check but I would like to know the official version of 'by when' and so far my searches have come up with not too much
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Makes you wonder why, before 1st September, it was ok for those who fly air transport category aircraft to occasionally fly smaller GA aircraft, but now it's deemed to be unsafe and requires a BFR?
I fly overseas but renew my Australian MECIR every year in a PA44, but since this is in the multi-engine land class, to fly a single engine land class requires a separate BFR in a C172?
I fly overseas but renew my Australian MECIR every year in a PA44, but since this is in the multi-engine land class, to fly a single engine land class requires a separate BFR in a C172?
Come on boys and girls, the BFR is a thing of the past. It's now an FR-SEA (or something else for something else) and just having completed the paperwork for someone, it is a time consuming thing indeed. CASA needs to be notified, it commences the process for a new Part 61 license (unless your already have one) and with all the certified logbook pages, flight review form, photo form, photographs and associated bits and pieces this one is an 18 pages affair. Including ground time, flight time and paperwork time around 4 hours.
Free now but I see a charge coming in the future .... Perpetual license perhaps but my guess is in just a few short years all these notifications will come with a CAsA fee.
Free now but I see a charge coming in the future .... Perpetual license perhaps but my guess is in just a few short years all these notifications will come with a CAsA fee.
Last edited by Aussie Bob; 20th Sep 2014 at 07:59. Reason: because
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: On the move...
Age: 58
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MailMan, 61.747. The flight review is linked to the class or type rating. So failing a FR in a 172 wont ground you in a 737.
It is also why operator checks don't cover you for other classes.
To work out when the various checks are due, look at your BFR date before 1 September and add two years to that date. Your flight review will be due when the rating, BFR, etc have its normal birthday / renewal date. CASA have done it this way so that there is a staggered change over to the new licences, otherwise there would have been a rush and plenty of mistakes made.
It is also why operator checks don't cover you for other classes.
To work out when the various checks are due, look at your BFR date before 1 September and add two years to that date. Your flight review will be due when the rating, BFR, etc have its normal birthday / renewal date. CASA have done it this way so that there is a staggered change over to the new licences, otherwise there would have been a rush and plenty of mistakes made.
Last edited by CYHeli; 20th Sep 2014 at 23:26. Reason: Added second paragraph.