Left field question
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: London
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Left field question
Morning
Does anyone know if there are any Australian CASA recognised FI's or ATO's in the UK? I need to do a PC and CASA are saying I can only do that in Australia is I want the type validated on my licence.
Any one help?
Does anyone know if there are any Australian CASA recognised FI's or ATO's in the UK? I need to do a PC and CASA are saying I can only do that in Australia is I want the type validated on my licence.
Any one help?
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have got to stop this protectionist bull****.
Any county's 'validation' should be good enough.... this is just employment expansion by bureaucrats, stop it NOW !
Pilots have got to wake up and stop being 'taken from behind' by these idiots ! (Nigel !?)
Any county's 'validation' should be good enough.... this is just employment expansion by bureaucrats, stop it NOW !
Pilots have got to wake up and stop being 'taken from behind' by these idiots ! (Nigel !?)
Madmatt,
No one will do it, if you have put a type on your casa licence , you will need a flight review for that type , with the part 61 licence out, you have no choice but to fly back to OZ
Out of interest is it a type rating (multi) or single (class) you want doing
If you can convince CASA i will be over in the UK in July/August time ( Have both EASA and CASA licence)
No one will do it, if you have put a type on your casa licence , you will need a flight review for that type , with the part 61 licence out, you have no choice but to fly back to OZ
Out of interest is it a type rating (multi) or single (class) you want doing
If you can convince CASA i will be over in the UK in July/August time ( Have both EASA and CASA licence)
Last edited by ersa; 19th Apr 2016 at 22:22.
A few years back I went to Flight Safety in Florida for the annual sim ride, emergencies check and instrument refresher. On return I asked CA$A if this would satisfy the requirement for the biennial flight review. They said NO, because the ride wasn't done by a CA$A examiner.
I replied that no examiner in Oz was qualified in the S76-B, and their response was to tell me to pay for their man to go to West Palm and check the FS checkers to see if they were doing the right thing, and to make them follow a suitable CA$A syllabus for the ride. Of course, the meter would start ticking when his @rse left the padded seat in Canberra, and we would also have to pay for his airfares, accommodation, and the $15,000 course at West Palm.
Instead, I drove to Newcastle and did a BFR in a B206 (hadn't flown one for 5 years) to satisfy these obstructionist dills.
I replied that no examiner in Oz was qualified in the S76-B, and their response was to tell me to pay for their man to go to West Palm and check the FS checkers to see if they were doing the right thing, and to make them follow a suitable CA$A syllabus for the ride. Of course, the meter would start ticking when his @rse left the padded seat in Canberra, and we would also have to pay for his airfares, accommodation, and the $15,000 course at West Palm.
Instead, I drove to Newcastle and did a BFR in a B206 (hadn't flown one for 5 years) to satisfy these obstructionist dills.
Madmatt,
Talk to CASA - the procedure is still in place in general to do a PC overseas.
You just need to do the paperwork as per their method.
Look up the CAAP for doing an instrument renewal overseas and the method is pretty much the same requirements AFAIK.
Then again - results may vary! One day these people will get over themselves - or maybe not.
The new CASA policy statement applies of course -
Talk to CASA - the procedure is still in place in general to do a PC overseas.
You just need to do the paperwork as per their method.
Look up the CAAP for doing an instrument renewal overseas and the method is pretty much the same requirements AFAIK.
Then again - results may vary! One day these people will get over themselves - or maybe not.
The new CASA policy statement applies of course -
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: London
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the replies, apparently my request to CASA is with their technical licensing team, not sure what that actually means!
I find the whole validation stuff ridiculous, any ICAO member country should be able to validate another ICAO members pilots.
All I am trying to do is get a R44 validated and added to my SEH Class on my licence, it would be done by a suitably qualified TRE/CFI so I cant see what the issue is, will be interested to see what CASA say.
I find the whole validation stuff ridiculous, any ICAO member country should be able to validate another ICAO members pilots.
All I am trying to do is get a R44 validated and added to my SEH Class on my licence, it would be done by a suitably qualified TRE/CFI so I cant see what the issue is, will be interested to see what CASA say.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: London
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Basically yes, but there is also the validation to keep in mind. I am waiting for a response from CASA Technical Licensing, so will post on here as soon as I hear.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: On the move...
Age: 58
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a form on the CASA website for doing this in NZ due to the trans Tasman agreement. I'm not sure if there is another form for other OS countries.
As an aside, a flight review can be carried out by an instructor who does not have to be conducting it under a Part 141/142 school. CASA's attitude is that some training would normally occur so therefore the FR would be conducted by a school, but it's not a legal requirement.
I'm not sure what rego you would write on the form....
As has been said, the whole intent of introducing Part 61 is to be ICAO compliant, so any ICAO instructor should be able to carry out this role.
As an aside, a flight review can be carried out by an instructor who does not have to be conducting it under a Part 141/142 school. CASA's attitude is that some training would normally occur so therefore the FR would be conducted by a school, but it's not a legal requirement.
I'm not sure what rego you would write on the form....
As has been said, the whole intent of introducing Part 61 is to be ICAO compliant, so any ICAO instructor should be able to carry out this role.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: London
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reply from CASA, "flight reviews and proficiency checks can only be carried out by Australian Qualified examiners" - which quite frankly is ridiculous, I need to see how far they have got in regards to Part 61 but I am not holding my breathe...
Second part is correct , proficiency check - flight examiner
1st part wrong.....
What can a flight instructor do?
Provided they hold the appropriate training endorsement, a flight instructor can conduct flight training for pilot licences, ratings (except for flight examiner ratings) and endorsements (except for flight examiner endorsements).
Flight instructors can also:
grant design feature and flight activity endorsements to pilot licence holders
conduct multi-crew cooperation training
conduct differences training for variants of types of aircraft
conduct training for general pilot competency
conduct flight reviews
approve someone to fly solo
approve someone to fly an aircraft while receiving flight training for a pilot licence, rating or endorsement.
1st part wrong.....
What can a flight instructor do?
Provided they hold the appropriate training endorsement, a flight instructor can conduct flight training for pilot licences, ratings (except for flight examiner ratings) and endorsements (except for flight examiner endorsements).
Flight instructors can also:
grant design feature and flight activity endorsements to pilot licence holders
conduct multi-crew cooperation training
conduct differences training for variants of types of aircraft
conduct training for general pilot competency
conduct flight reviews
approve someone to fly solo
approve someone to fly an aircraft while receiving flight training for a pilot licence, rating or endorsement.
