Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

A Part 61 conundrum for Australian ATPL applicants

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

A Part 61 conundrum for Australian ATPL applicants

Old 27th Nov 2015, 22:14
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Read and digest post 56
I'm probably (and hopefully) missing something

The exemption states

6 Exemption – ATPL – other applicants
The holder of a multi-crew pilot licence with an aircraft category rating (the applicant) who applies for the grant of an ATPL is exempt from the requirement under paragraph 61.700 (3) (e) of CASR 1998 to complete an approved course of training in MCC.
(my bold)

and

8 Exemption – CPL – exercise of privileges in multi-crew operation
The holder of a CPL (the holder) is exempt from the requirement under subregulation 61.575 (1) of CASR 1998 that to exercise the privileges of the licence in a multi-crew operation, the holder must have completed an approved course of training in MCC.

Charter
gettin' there is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2015, 01:37
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 67
These 2 paragraphs are the relevant ones gettin there.

- Holding a type rating and, within the last three years, having at least 50 hours experience as a pilot in multi-crew, regular public transport operations conducted by an Australian air operator’s certificate holder under Civil Aviation Orders (CAOs) 82.3 or 82.5.

- Holding a type rating and, within the last three years, having at least 100 hours experience as a pilot in multi-crew, charter operations conducted by an Australian air operator’s certificate holder under CAO 82.1 and successful completion of two operator proficiency checks which included assessment of human factors and non-technical skills.

If you're on a CPL like me operating a multi crew aircraft, one of those should cover you.

If it does, you don't have to do the MCC course.

Simples.
das Uber Soldat is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2015, 01:42
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All at sea
Posts: 1,807
The way I read it, if you have a type rating and 100 hours of multi crew charter under CAO 82.1 you are now exempt from the MCC.
This would only appear to lock you out if you do not have a type rating on something or your operation was to some lesser CAO requirement. It does not appear to say that you must have the 100 hours in that type.
So...say you did 100 hours multi crew ops in a King Air 200 ( no longer a type rating) what would stop you obtaining a King Air 350 type rating then making a claim for exemption? Or spend up big on something really useful like an A320.
Better than spending money on a canned touchy feely group hug MCC course.
But I was wrong once before......
Mach E Avelli is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2015, 06:20
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Thanks

Now for that type rating
gettin' there is offline  
Old 30th Nov 2015, 21:44
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,207
For the poster who jumped down my throat (in a now-deleted post) because of my comments about the new exemption which provides alternative ways for some pilots to meet the multi-crew cooperation training requirements contained in Part 61 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations...

Who created the problem to which this exemption is the solution?

If you think CASA should be congratulated for putting a temporary patch over a botched job of CASA's own making, you must be in the building game.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2015, 01:16
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,468
What about the crews flying aeromedical, in multi crew airwork operations? Years and years of flying jets around muti-crew, but suddenly that doesn't count?

Who cares if its RPT, Charter, or even fish-spotting? Multi crew is multi crew!
Lasiorhinus is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2015, 02:08
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All at sea
Posts: 1,807
Depends....Some so called multi crew is simply window dressing to meet client or insurance requirements. The pilot in the RHS in these operations reads checklists, entertains the pax with briefings, talks when allowed on the radio, cleans the cabin and if lucky flies empty sectors. Often the pilot in the LHS seat has no idea how true multi crew works. Aeromedical in a light jet may be OK, but fish spotting? Hmmm.....
But it would seem that CASA is willing to assess every application on its merits. If your organisation has properly documented training, checking and procedures with all the human factors and CRM stuff that they want, and hopefully a policy of sharing the flying, you should have no problems.
Although I am guilty as charged when it comes to CASA bashing, I have to say that the three CASA FOIs that I had dealings with setting up ATPL testing have been most reasonable and interestingly, they were all very much on the same page with policy interpretation.
Credit where it's due - CASA listened and acted on this one. The only people who may be pissed off now will be certain purveyors of MCC courses and anyone who paid big bucks for one of their courses when they did not need to.
Mach E Avelli is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2015, 22:00
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 67
I can only only imagine how cranky those are who recently did the MCC testing for big bucks only to find this new exemption.

The whole thing is a farce. Have you seen the ground theory component of the flight test? Its almost the entire ATPL syllabus. Sure, ill just go ahead and memorize that.
das Uber Soldat is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 01:09
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 68
Yes the whole thing is a joke, but if you need an ATPL, then you need to do it.

For those struggling, let me share how I did it quickly, I won't mention companies but am more than happy to reply to PM's if I haven't made it clear enough.

I was fortunate enough to have some 2crew time so I was exempt from the MCC requirement. I tried to do the flight test on a King Air, as is the minimum requirement, however due to the severe lack of 2crew documentation that I could find, the whole thing was a shambles.

This test is really difficult for an individual to do, as CASA want to see the company documents and ops manuals that you will be using.

In the end, I bit the bullet and went to the Sunshine Coast, and did a Citation Mustang type rating, completely 2crew. It was very very through and gave me excellent knowledge.

We combined the Type Rating with the IPC and the ATPL flight test and knocked it out of the park, bingo bango james fanco I now have an ATPL.

There is an enormous amount of work involved and yes, the study is broad, but not crazy.

Aside from it being a massive burden and hard, not to mention the 30k cost, it has given me good knowledge of jet flight, it was fun and in the end, it would have been more expensive not to do it.
I have a jet gig now, which wouldn't have happened without the ATPL, rightly or wrongly.
UnaMas is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 06:56
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 67
30k, ouch.

How long was the ground component? I'm not excited by the prospect of having to relearn the entire ATPL syllabus.
das Uber Soldat is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 08:48
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 68
The whole thing was 3 weeks start to finish, including a few days on CRM. 20hrs in the sim.
They really are professional and put a lot of work into it.

No need to study the whole lot, just have a good general understanding. More of a focus on the IPC stuff just like any renewal.
UnaMas is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 14:10
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2
I was around 10 night hours short of an ATPL. but was "assured" by casa part 61 team. that casa would recognise previous multi crew experience and wave the test (as well as MCC) in place of a standard check. September rolls along, Casa change their mind. now up for a 10k flight test.

Wheres the cost benefit analysis in this!

It would've costed me around 2k to whip a 152 in a circuit for 10 hours pre September, Or cost me nothing if I just forged my logbook like I know others who were close to the gap have done (despite the moral/ethical implication).

These guys are now working for Tiger/Virgin/Cobham/Emirates. All of whom you dont progress into an interview without holding the golden ticket.

Largest career regret in my life...

Rant over
DashTrash. is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 19:11
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,207
If I had been given that "assurance" and I had acted or refrained from acting, to my detriment, in reliance upon its accuracy, I'd be making a claim for compensation.

There would be an argument that it's unreasonable to rely on the accuracy of anything CASA says, but someone young and naive might prove reasonable reliance.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2015, 23:47
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 68
Mate I forked out 100k to get my licence in the first place. In reality another 30k is worth it if it means that after 3000 hours of bashing around Oz in all of the normal piston and turboprop twins, that I can move onto something safer and bigger that pays several times the amount I was on, then yeah, I would say it is worth it. Ideal, no. Worth it, yes.

Don't get me wrong, it was a 6 month battle with CASA to get it done, and I hope that every soul within CASA stubs their toe daily, but they make the rules, and I play by them, so I had no choice.

Ask me in 6 months time if I would rather be sitting in Meekatharra waiting for some smelly pax or laying on a beach on a layover with my new best friend Shirley.
UnaMas is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2015, 00:38
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,443
Just thinking how you manage two crew procedures in a Citation Mustang?
Its a single pilot certified aircraft and very simple to operate from what I've been told. Sounds a bit farcical to me.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2015, 01:11
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 68
Why make it harder for yourself than it needs to be?
UnaMas is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2015, 03:46
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 67
Not to defend uMas but some of us have little choice.

My company has 2 planes. I could be waiting 15 years for a command here. Its just not going to happen. The only way I'm going anywhere is if I do the test.
das Uber Soldat is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2015, 04:07
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 68
Out of interest, what has banding together against CASA done for us in the past...

Don't for a second think that I am happy about what had to be done, but it had to be done.

I have earned every single hour I have ever flown, and I am ready to move my career in a new direction, the direction that I was aiming for from day one.

So while some idiots like you prefer to flap your gums and moan about new laws, some other people just get it done, and get the job.
GA in Australia is slowly disintegrating, why on earth would I want to stay a day longer than I have to.

I came here to tell people that it can be done, that I did it, and now I can move on and enjoy my career. So frankly you can eat $hit.
UnaMas is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2015, 04:29
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,207
That's the spirit.

All in the name of safety and professionalism, of course.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2015, 04:40
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... It's Permanent!
Posts: 3,570
So frankly you can eat $hit
Must come with the $30k ATPL?
Capt Fathom is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.