FAA Proposal to Revise GA CPL Training....
Thread Starter
FAA Proposal to Revise GA CPL Training....
The following from AvWeb, USA.....
Apols as to the length but this time just the link would not copy for me...
Basically a proposal to use glass-cockpit, fixed gear aircraft for commercial training instead of traditional complex aircraft with retractable gear - mostly because they are becoming too costly to maintain 'cause they are all OLD...
Could this happen here...???
" FAA Proposes Changes To GA Flight Training
By Elaine Kauh
The FAA has opened comments until Aug.10 for changes to GA flight training rules that would affect a broad spectrum of pilots, including those pursuing private and commercial certificates. Its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking includes a long-anticipated proposal to use glass-cockpit, fixed-gear aircraft for commercial flight training instead of traditional complex aircraft with retractable gear. The FAA states in the NPRM it plans to update the definition of a technically advanced airplane to include those with primary and multi-function flight displays and integrated two-axis autopilots, which would encompass the features that are now standard in most new single-engine piston airplanes. The agency cited comments from the flight training industry that legacy complex airplanes have become outdated and difficult to maintain. It also pointed to reports from the General Aviation Manufacturers Association, noting that "Cessna has not produced a piston engine retractable gear airplane since 1985 and Piper has produced only 28 piston engine airplanes with retractable gear since 2008 (16 being the Piper Arrow model)."
Other proposed changes would lift restrictions on flight instructing. Light sport pilots would be able to use training hours provided by a sport pilot-only instructor toward a private pilot certificate. In addition, instrument-only flight instructors would not need category and class ratings on their CFI certificates to provide instrument training, which would clarify legal questions that have been brought to the FAA. Adding to recent changes in flight simulator time allowed for instrument training, the proposed rules also include instrument currency, and would allow rated pilots to more easily use FAA-approved simulators for maintaining their currency, while not requiring that an instructor is present to provide dual training. Organizations including AOPA have pushed for the updates to training regs, saying they would make training less costly while accommodating new technology. "AOPA has long advocated for many of the changes in the NPRM, and we believe they will benefit the general aviation community," the association stated Thursday. "Many of the proposals in the NPRM will save pilots time and money while making it easier for them to maintain or expand their skills." AOPA plans to submit detailed comments on the proposed changes."
Apols as to the length but this time just the link would not copy for me...
Basically a proposal to use glass-cockpit, fixed gear aircraft for commercial training instead of traditional complex aircraft with retractable gear - mostly because they are becoming too costly to maintain 'cause they are all OLD...
Could this happen here...???
" FAA Proposes Changes To GA Flight Training
By Elaine Kauh
The FAA has opened comments until Aug.10 for changes to GA flight training rules that would affect a broad spectrum of pilots, including those pursuing private and commercial certificates. Its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking includes a long-anticipated proposal to use glass-cockpit, fixed-gear aircraft for commercial flight training instead of traditional complex aircraft with retractable gear. The FAA states in the NPRM it plans to update the definition of a technically advanced airplane to include those with primary and multi-function flight displays and integrated two-axis autopilots, which would encompass the features that are now standard in most new single-engine piston airplanes. The agency cited comments from the flight training industry that legacy complex airplanes have become outdated and difficult to maintain. It also pointed to reports from the General Aviation Manufacturers Association, noting that "Cessna has not produced a piston engine retractable gear airplane since 1985 and Piper has produced only 28 piston engine airplanes with retractable gear since 2008 (16 being the Piper Arrow model)."
Other proposed changes would lift restrictions on flight instructing. Light sport pilots would be able to use training hours provided by a sport pilot-only instructor toward a private pilot certificate. In addition, instrument-only flight instructors would not need category and class ratings on their CFI certificates to provide instrument training, which would clarify legal questions that have been brought to the FAA. Adding to recent changes in flight simulator time allowed for instrument training, the proposed rules also include instrument currency, and would allow rated pilots to more easily use FAA-approved simulators for maintaining their currency, while not requiring that an instructor is present to provide dual training. Organizations including AOPA have pushed for the updates to training regs, saying they would make training less costly while accommodating new technology. "AOPA has long advocated for many of the changes in the NPRM, and we believe they will benefit the general aviation community," the association stated Thursday. "Many of the proposals in the NPRM will save pilots time and money while making it easier for them to maintain or expand their skills." AOPA plans to submit detailed comments on the proposed changes."
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Griffo,
only way it could happen here in the next 25 years or so would depend on how to engineer cost savings for government that could be traslated into "directors bonuses".
We led the world, at great expense and no benefit for industry but nice little earners for ASA directors with ADSB, maybe if we could engineer a nice little earner for CASA exec's it could introduce it next week.
only way it could happen here in the next 25 years or so would depend on how to engineer cost savings for government that could be traslated into "directors bonuses".
We led the world, at great expense and no benefit for industry but nice little earners for ASA directors with ADSB, maybe if we could engineer a nice little earner for CASA exec's it could introduce it next week.
We don't have a requirement here for a retractable under carriage for cpl licenses or even an fir rating, so guess that one area we're ahead of the curve.
Lets hope the glass cockpit requirement doesn't get picked up as there's not many of those available in the training space (I can think of only 4 g1000's in the Sydney area available for hire, a bunch more aspens)
Lets hope the glass cockpit requirement doesn't get picked up as there's not many of those available in the training space (I can think of only 4 g1000's in the Sydney area available for hire, a bunch more aspens)
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,980
Received 109 Likes
on
62 Posts
I did my CPL in 1985. Most of the training was in a Seneca 1 (VH-MEP if anyone is interested
) and every second Navex was 'you will assume that all navaids and the autopilot have failed!' So it was handflying, navigating via WACs, time intervals and Jeppesen 'prayer wheels.'
As I taxied out for my CPL Flight test the Examiner said,
"For the purpose of this flight you will assume that all navaids and the autopilot are unserviceable.'
Was it not the normal state of things then?
How are they training CPLs these days?
) and every second Navex was 'you will assume that all navaids and the autopilot have failed!' So it was handflying, navigating via WACs, time intervals and Jeppesen 'prayer wheels.'As I taxied out for my CPL Flight test the Examiner said,
"For the purpose of this flight you will assume that all navaids and the autopilot are unserviceable.'
Was it not the normal state of things then?
How are they training CPLs these days?
