Differences training 365 to 155

[capt tosspot]

We want to employ AS365 pilots who have 365/155 on their licences but have only flown the 365 and never sat in a 155. Can we train them in house using our Training Capt. or do we have to use an external ATO? Its obviously cheaper to use in house resources. All EASA. As I understand it at the moment there is no need for differences training to be done in an ATO as long as the course complies with the OSD for the 155. If so, we could do it using our TRI.

I believe that this may change soon though with an amendment to Part-FCL, mandating differences training only within an ATO.

Can anyone help me get a definite answer on this?
Thanks,

[FloaterNorthWest]

Hi,

It will depend who the National Authority of the licence holder is.

The UK CAA policy is that difference training is completed by an ATO.

FNW

[capt tosspot]

H155B1

Due to winning an 8 year O+G contract, H155 (not 365N3!) Captains and copilots needed.
Outline:
Black Sea - LRCM and LRCK
28/28 rotation
Apartment
Car
return flights (capped at 300 Eur)
decent salary range
Start Autumn.

Requirements:
Total hrs .2500 Captain, >250 copilot
PIC . 1500
PIC Multi >500
Offshore >50
Command on H155 >100 (Captain)
On type >10 hrs Copilot

Please PM if you meet or exceed these requirements. We are not looking to put anyone through a differences course at the moment, so need pilots with actual 155 time in the last 2 years.
Thanks.

[hueyracer]

Its quiet a lot of training-so hell of expensive, and needs to be done iaw https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/def...2-08022012.pdf


(Minimum of 4:30 Differences training for VFR only).

[212man]

Approved training organisation will manage duration and sufficient numbers of flight necessary to cover the flight training syllabus content.

OSD/OEB seems to imply ATO:

[gulliBell]

This bit might get interesting....

"The autorotation is only demonstrated with power off and never with engines at idle"

[hueyracer]

Autorotations to the ground are not a requirement for multi-engine helicopter.

This is what simulators are made for...

The risk of damaging something during a full down training autorotation on a fully OGP commercially rigged machine is way too high to risk it.....


But the Thread opener should tell his company that they should start responding to those pilots applying for these jobs (fulfilling all requirements)..

[[email protected]]

Perhaps it is just something lost in translation since other types specify not bringing engines to idle for autos but they mean practice autos not EOLs - the 'power off' is probably meant in the same way as some aircraft specify a power-off VNE - could just be at very low power but with the engines at FLT not IDLE.

[Same again]

But the Thread opener should tell his company that they should start responding to those pilots applying for these jobs (fulfilling all requirements)..

I had a reply. Problem is that if (like me) you meet all the requirements and have extensive 155 experience but have not flown it for a few years then EASA judge that I am in the same position as someone who has never flown it.

[capt tosspot]

I would indeed reply promptly had I not been offshore in the Black Sea for the last 4 days auditing platforms and hanging over the side of small supply vessels trying not to lose my lunch. Don't worry all applicants that meet the minima will and have been answered. If you do not hear by the 12th, we have filled the posts.
Thanks

[hueyracer]

then EASA judge that I am in the same position as someone who has never flown it.

That would be incorrect......
As long as you keep the rating valid, the "differences training" has no expiry date.......Thats why its differences training, not additional type rating...

[212man]

Originally Posted by Same again

I had a reply. Problem is that if (like me) you meet all the requirements and have extensive 155 experience but have not flown it for a few years then EASA judge that I am in the same position as someone who has never flown it.

Yes the joys of the rating renewal process! In a previous role we recruited an experienced S-92 SAR pilot and had to send him back to WPB for the whole Type Rating course. Had our HR been a bit quicker we would have dodged the implementation deadline and done it ourselves during his operator conversion process (which we had to do anyway).

In connection with the job above, I also have several thousand hours on type, was responsible for the operational and training aspects of introducing the first O&G machines in service, was the first customer of the HeliSim simulator (literally they were pulling off the wrappers as we started the IOS course) and the second UK CAA Licensed TRE, but would also be treated as if I'd never seen one before! Hey ho......

[Same again]

That would be incorrect......
As long as you keep the rating valid, the "differences training" has no expiry date.......Thats why its differences training, not additional type rating...

Why would I go to the expense of keeping an EC155 type rating current for 3 years if I was flying an AW139 just in case one day there might be a job advert for an EC155 pilot that I would be interested in? In more enlightened parts of the world it would be recognised that (as I had a factory EC155 type rating and years of EC155 flying experience) that I might just not need to complete a full type rating course again and a simple check flight with a company TRE might be adequate.

[212man]

Originally Posted by hueyracer

That would be incorrect......
As long as you keep the rating valid, the "differences training" has no expiry date.......Thats why its differences training, not additional type rating...

Why incorrect? Same Again is obviously an experienced EC155 pilot that has not used his rating for several years and to do so would require Renewal and not Revalidation. Under Part FCL rules, after 3 years since a rating has lost its validity it effectively requires a full type rating course again to Renew. He was not talking about differences training.

[hueyracer]

It sounded like his CAA wanted to make him do the differences training course again (when i implied he was still flying an AS365)....in which case i would have been correct.

That is one of the many big problems the aviation industry is suffering from with EASA........at least for the "medium/light" types we should have implemented a similar system like in the US....(or at least give a pilot a rating ONCE, then leave it up to the operator to do a recurrency check no matter how many years the rating has expired)...

[rotarywise]

Under Part FCL rules, after 3 years since a rating has lost its validity it effectively requires a full type rating course again to Renew.

No, it doesn't, and never has. The requirement of FCL.740 is that, prior to the proficiency check to renew the rating, the pilot must "take refresher training at an ATO, where necessary to reach the level of proficiency to safely operate the relevant class or type of aircraft". (my emphasis). The associated AMC states that, "The amount of refresher training needed should be determined on a case-by-case basis by the ATO". The widely discredited tables implying that a specific amount of training was required according to the time since the rating expired have been removed from the AMC and replaced by a list of factors that the ATO should take into account when determining if and how much refresher training will be required.

For the removal of doubt: The decision as to whether and how much refresher training is required prior to taking the proficiency check for the renewal of an expired type rating is entirely that of the ATO. (or DTO in the case of single-engine helicopters certified with 5 seats or less).

[212man]

Originally Posted by rotarywise

No, it doesn't, and never has. The requirement of FCL.740 is that, prior to the proficiency check to renew the rating, the pilot must "take refresher training at an ATO, where necessary to reach the level of proficiency to safely operate the relevant class or type of aircraft". (my emphasis). The associated AMC states that, "The amount of refresher training needed should be determined on a case-by-case basis by the ATO". The widely discredited tables implying that a specific amount of training was required according to the time since the rating expired have been removed from the AMC and replaced by a list of factors that the ATO should take into account when determining if and how much refresher training will be required.

For the removal of doubt: The decision as to whether and how much refresher training is required prior to taking the proficiency check for the renewal of an expired type rating is entirely that of the ATO. (or DTO in the case of single-engine helicopters certified with 5 seats or less).

With respect, you can't really say that "it never has". The wording has indeed changed, I now see on further research, but it previously contradicted itself by listing the items to take into consideration on a "case-by-case basis" and then tabling specific requirements (that you refer to):

expiry longer than 3 years: the applicant should again undergo the training required for the initial issue of the rating or, in case of helicopter, the training required for the ‘additional type issue’, according to other valid ratings held

That part was latched onto by the UK CAA, when Part FCL came into force, and was what I battled with in the case of the S92 pilot I mention earlier. I tried to make the case that we would conduct 25 hours of operator conversion training and then conduct an OPC/LPC (as was) using a TRE that would be having his Examiner approval and TRI rating revalidated by a CAA FOTI in the simulator. But, that wasn't good enough and we had to send him back to FSI in WPB, having waited with him idle for 5 months due to the demand in S92 training courses resulting from the first EC225 grounding!

Anyway, good to see that common sense seems to be prevailing now and thanks for the update - I haven't looked at Part FCL for two or three years.

[Same again]

Best wishes to those 155 pilots who get offered a position. Captain Tosspot is anything but and you will be lucky to have him as your boss :-)

[capt tosspot]

Thanks, here the CAA have just OK'd us to train in house.

[capt tosspot]

Haha - Same Again - I shall send your cash in a plain envelope!