Independent instructing under Part 61
You Can not conduct flight reviews outside of a 141/142 organisation.
If any grade 1 has, the pilot will be operating illegally , assuming there old review has expired.
All indépendant (private) endorsements and reviews stopped on the 1st Sept.
Jack ....yes the 141/142 will have to have the rating on there AOC
If any grade 1 has, the pilot will be operating illegally , assuming there old review has expired.
All indépendant (private) endorsements and reviews stopped on the 1st Sept.
Jack ....yes the 141/142 will have to have the rating on there AOC
Last edited by ersa; 3rd Oct 2014 at 07:08. Reason: spelling due to age
It's also worth reviewing 61.195, the Part 5 definition of Flight Training doesn't transfer to Part 61.
I'd be interested to learn where in Part 61 it states flight activity and design feature endorsements must be conducted by a Part 141/142 hiolder? (Particularly given the content of 61.195).
I'd be interested to learn where in Part 61 it states flight activity and design feature endorsements must be conducted by a Part 141/142 hiolder? (Particularly given the content of 61.195).
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is everyone having trouble understanding Part 61? Part of the CASA statement today said this about the new rules;
"This makes the rules easier to understand and provides for better safety outcomes.”
I guess CASA must be reading a different Part 61 then the rest of Australia.
Perhaps someone needs to produce a "Part 61 for Dummies".
"This makes the rules easier to understand and provides for better safety outcomes.”
I guess CASA must be reading a different Part 61 then the rest of Australia.
Perhaps someone needs to produce a "Part 61 for Dummies".
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jack, the flight review form has a space for Simulator ID number. Doesn't mean you have to do the review in the sim.
Could it be possible you leave the Part 141/2 part blank if you are doing it independently?
Wonderful stuff from CASA!
Could it be possible you leave the Part 141/2 part blank if you are doing it independently?
Wonderful stuff from CASA!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Oz
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buried in the dim, dark, depths of CASA's website I found this. It's from one of their licensing information sheets, this one specifically addressing flight reviews.
Flight Reviews
Who can conduct a flight review?
A flight instructor with a grade 1 or 2 training endorsement can conduct an aircraft class or type rating flight review for an aircraft they are authorised to fly.
A flight instructor with a training endorsement for a rating can conduct a flight review for that rating.
Simulator instructors can also conduct flight reviews in flight simulation training devices approved for that purpose.
CASA can authorise a person to conduct a flight review. For example, there might be a special situation where there is no flight instructor with the right authorisations available and there is a specific operational need for the review to be undertaken.
A pilot conducting a flight review must be authorised to fly the type of aircraft being used for the flight review. If the review is for an operational rating, the pilot must also be authorised to conduct training for that rating.
....again no mention that the instructor conducting the flight review must be tied to a 141/142 operator.
Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Flight reviews
Flight Reviews
Who can conduct a flight review?
A flight instructor with a grade 1 or 2 training endorsement can conduct an aircraft class or type rating flight review for an aircraft they are authorised to fly.
A flight instructor with a training endorsement for a rating can conduct a flight review for that rating.
Simulator instructors can also conduct flight reviews in flight simulation training devices approved for that purpose.
CASA can authorise a person to conduct a flight review. For example, there might be a special situation where there is no flight instructor with the right authorisations available and there is a specific operational need for the review to be undertaken.
A pilot conducting a flight review must be authorised to fly the type of aircraft being used for the flight review. If the review is for an operational rating, the pilot must also be authorised to conduct training for that rating.
....again no mention that the instructor conducting the flight review must be tied to a 141/142 operator.
Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Flight reviews
Read this..........
As a free-lance instructor, there is very little that you can teach now without being employed by a Part 141/142 school. There is a loop hole (not sure if it was intentional or not) that means that currently you can conduct a flight review as an independent instructor for something that you can teach, but you must not conduct training during the flight review. So if the FR appears to be straight forward, then go for it. But as soon as the pilot is not making the grade, then you have to call it a fail and send them to a Part 141 school for revision/training and then a flight review.
NOTE there are very strict rules for paperwork keeping as an independent instructor. I believe that this loophole may be withdrawn at some stage and CASA have already changed the FR form so that they can see how many FR's are conducted by independents.
As a free-lance instructor, there is very little that you can teach now without being employed by a Part 141/142 school. There is a loop hole (not sure if it was intentional or not) that means that currently you can conduct a flight review as an independent instructor for something that you can teach, but you must not conduct training during the flight review. So if the FR appears to be straight forward, then go for it. But as soon as the pilot is not making the grade, then you have to call it a fail and send them to a Part 141 school for revision/training and then a flight review.
NOTE there are very strict rules for paperwork keeping as an independent instructor. I believe that this loophole may be withdrawn at some stage and CASA have already changed the FR form so that they can see how many FR's are conducted by independents.
Thread Starter
ersa, you are now saying your post at #26 is incorrect?
How about supplying references to the bits of Part 61 applicable to what you say?
So what can you teach? (with part 61 references please)
How about supplying references to the bits of Part 61 applicable to what you say?
As a free-lance instructor, there is very little that you can teach now without being employed by a Part 141/142 school.
I've spoke to 3 different FOI , one told me you can not train anyone unless working for a 141/142 school
The other 2 said no training this includes HFR , yes you can go and check them out for a review , no training just checking , the minute they need training on a failed component , pass to a flight school.
The other 2 said no training this includes HFR , yes you can go and check them out for a review , no training just checking , the minute they need training on a failed component , pass to a flight school.
Thread Starter
I recently spoke to an FOI and he is looking at the flight review bit but stated that the legislation was written by CASA pilots then handed to the lawyers who messed totally with it to make it legal speak.
His opinion was that while it may be legal to do a flight review currently, that was never the intent, hence the Part 61 operator box on the form.
All the other stuff I wrote in #1 is not permitted (as Captain and ersa and others pointed out). Ref 61.195
In answer to "what can an independent instructor do", it would appear very little except design feature endorsements. Form 61-3DF has no box for the Part 61 operator. Ref 61.195 again.
At least that's my interpretation so far .....
His opinion was that while it may be legal to do a flight review currently, that was never the intent, hence the Part 61 operator box on the form.
All the other stuff I wrote in #1 is not permitted (as Captain and ersa and others pointed out). Ref 61.195
In answer to "what can an independent instructor do", it would appear very little except design feature endorsements. Form 61-3DF has no box for the Part 61 operator. Ref 61.195 again.
At least that's my interpretation so far .....
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with you Aussie Bob.
To add a little more, Part 61.745 states that your flight review is taken to have been successfully done if (amongst other things) you have completed training for a design feature endorsement. Which can be done independently.
Part 61.745
(3) For sub regulation (1A), the holder is taken to have successfully completed a flight review for the rating if the holder:
(c) completes flight training for a design feature endorsement in an aircraft of the class covered by the aircraft class rating;
To add a little more, Part 61.745 states that your flight review is taken to have been successfully done if (amongst other things) you have completed training for a design feature endorsement. Which can be done independently.
Part 61.745
(3) For sub regulation (1A), the holder is taken to have successfully completed a flight review for the rating if the holder:
(c) completes flight training for a design feature endorsement in an aircraft of the class covered by the aircraft class rating;
Thread Starter
So, we do a design feature endorsement and it is also a flight review, should form 61-3DF be accompanied by form 61-9FR? Or will form 61-3DF trigger a flight review update automatically on the CASA database? (Given they now want notification of flight reviews)
Its getting too hard for me, retirement from instruction is looking pretty good.
Its getting too hard for me, retirement from instruction is looking pretty good.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote from Aussie Bob
"So, we do a design feature endorsement and it is also a flight review, should form 61-3DF be accompanied by form 61-9FR? Or will form 61-3DF trigger a flight review update automatically on the CASA database? (Given they now want notification of flight reviews)"
Common sense would say just the DF form especially as the wording in 61.745 says "taken to have successfully completed a flight review" if you have complete design feature endoresment.
RAAus do it this way. CASA?????
Yes, roundsounds was spot on.
"So, we do a design feature endorsement and it is also a flight review, should form 61-3DF be accompanied by form 61-9FR? Or will form 61-3DF trigger a flight review update automatically on the CASA database? (Given they now want notification of flight reviews)"
Common sense would say just the DF form especially as the wording in 61.745 says "taken to have successfully completed a flight review" if you have complete design feature endoresment.
RAAus do it this way. CASA?????
Yes, roundsounds was spot on.
Does anyone know if on part 61 CASA has conducted either:
a) A cost benefit analysis,
or
b) A safety case.
a) A cost benefit analysis,
or
b) A safety case.
Yes, I do, and the answers were: a) NO and b) NO.
This despite the fact that CASA, in its submission to the Forsyth inquiry, specifically states that CASA had implemented ALL the recommendations of the Hawke (Hawke as in Dr. A. Hawke, Chairman of CASA) Report had been implemented.
One of the Hawke Report recommendations was the comprehensive implementation of the Byron directive 01/2007, which required CASA to comply with the Office of Best Practice Regulation procedures.
So, as Chairman of CASA, what is the position of Dr. Hawke, whose organisation has advised a Ministerial inquiry that certain actions have been taken (the implementation of his own recommendations), when this is not true. Indeed, I cannot find 01/2007 on the CASA web site any longer, and I can see nothing the equivalent, and I know from personal knowledge that the above NO and NO answers are correct.
In fact, the policy position as stated by the former DAS/CEO was that all such OBPR procedures were incompatible with S.9A of the Act, so that any claimed safety benefit, however small, had to be implemented, regardless of the cost.
If the OBPR "mandatory guidelines" had been followed, the rotten mess that is Part 61 would be very different.
A word of warning, anything short of a letter of interpretation, signed by CASA Principal Legal Counsel, ie: opinions of CASA FOIs or other employees of CASA, are a waste of time, and even an interpretation of OLC may be overturned by the AAT or the Federal Court.
Such clear and unambiguous regulation, ain't life grand.
Tootle pip!!
Part 141.015 and 142.015 define the the types of flight training permitted by the respective authorisations. Gotta stop thinking the way things used to be done under Part 5.
Part 141.015 and 142.015 define the the types of flight training permitted by the respective authorisations. Gotta stop thinking the way things used to be done under Part 5.
True if you are operating under under Parts 141/142, but Part 61 is "stand alone", the only incontrovertible fact here is that the matter, ( and many more) is very unclear, with conflicting regulations, one of the things that resulted in the delayed implementation, but about which CASA did nothing.
What might have been the policy intent (reflected in some of the training material, and some of the MOS) and what is in the final regulations are two very different horses.
Tootle pip!!
Independent instructing under Part 61
Just had a chat with my local CASA Aviation Safety Advisor who confirms the following:
1/ Training towards the issue of a licence, rating or addition to a rating must be completed by a Part 141 / 142 authorisation holder. (Generally anything requiring the services of a Flight Examiner to test the applicant as competent)
2/ Training towards, and issuing of, flight activity or design feature endorsements does not require Part 141 / 142 coverage. Same story for flight reviews. There are requirements for the Flight Instructor to hold appropriate quals, to notify CASA of the issue of said endorsement or flight review and to maintain records.
If in doubt give your local CASA Aviation Safety Advisor a call.
http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD:
c=PC_91317
1/ Training towards the issue of a licence, rating or addition to a rating must be completed by a Part 141 / 142 authorisation holder. (Generally anything requiring the services of a Flight Examiner to test the applicant as competent)
2/ Training towards, and issuing of, flight activity or design feature endorsements does not require Part 141 / 142 coverage. Same story for flight reviews. There are requirements for the Flight Instructor to hold appropriate quals, to notify CASA of the issue of said endorsement or flight review and to maintain records.
If in doubt give your local CASA Aviation Safety Advisor a call.
http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD:
c=PC_91317