BFR's

[Louis Moore]

This was coming up in another thread, had some questions so thought I would start a new topic. What is the legality with BFR's in the case of GA/RAA Pilots. Does a GA BFR count as an RAA BFR or are you required to complete two?

 

 

[Doug Evans]

My understanding that they are separate so u have too do both ! But I be leave that casa may be looking at taking the raa side under there wing in the future / 6 to 12 months it will be one ,!

 

 

[Louis Moore]

Thought so, guess I will have to book in for two then!!!

 

 

[REastwood]

Hi,

 

A GA BFR will count for a RAA BFR for a high performance endorsement. All you have to do is send in a copy of your log book showing the completed BFR to RAA. You will have to do a separate BFR for low performance endorsements.

 

 

[Powerin]

My take on the rules is that a PPL BFR will be accepted for RAAus, but only for a high performance endorsed RAAus certificate. You will still need to do an extra BFR in a low performance aircraft for a Low Performance endorsement.

 

This is from the RAAus Ops Manual Section 2.07, 5 (i):

 

If a certificate holder has within a period of two years immediately

 

preceding the flight, has passed a flight check for the renewal or initial

 

issue of a CASA approved Private Pilots Licence, then the pilot is taken

 

to have sufficiently completed a flight review on high performance

 

aircraft only. This will only be accepted upon receipt of a copy of the

 

logbook entry validated by an Instructor.

 

 

[Louis Moore]

What are the species of low performance aircraft?

 

 

[facthunter]

Based on airpeed for normal ops. If they fly slow (normally,)they qualify. You couldn't just fly a Jabiru slow and say you passed. Nev

 

 

[Camel]

Think it's anything with cruise speed below 60 knots.

 

 

[Doug Evans]

80Knots below LP, Hp 80 knots above

 

 

[David Isaac]

80Knots below LP, Hp 80 knots above

And this is what really gets to me ... a bloody DH82 (Tiger Moth) cruises below 80 knots and so does a J3Cub and many others. So by RA Aus definition its a low performance aircraft. CASA don't require a different category of license or separate BFRs to fly a Cessna and then a slow GA aircraft.

In my view this is one of the areas where the RA Aus regs are over the top. 80 knots is a ridiculous speed to delineate between LP and HP. There is a valid reason to have LP and HP, but not at 80 knots IMHO, it should be more like 50 or 60 knots.

 

 

[kaz3g]

My take on the rules is that a PPL BFR will be accepted for RAAus, but only for a high performance endorsed RAAus certificate. You will still need to do an extra BFR in a low performance aircraft for a Low Performance endorsement.This is from the RAAus Ops Manual Section 2.07, 5 (i):

 

If a certificate holder has within a period of two years immediately

 

preceding the flight, has passed a flight check for the renewal or initial

 

issue of a CASA approved Private Pilots Licence, then the pilot is taken

 

to have sufficiently completed a flight review on high performance

 

aircraft only. This will only be accepted upon receipt of a copy of the

 

logbook entry validated by an Instructor.

I have done my last couple of flight reviews in a Tecnam and been signed off for both GA and HP RA

 

It's generally the only chance I get to fly tricycle these days.

 

Kaz

 

 

[David Isaac]

I have done my last couple of flight reviews in a Tecnam and been signed off for both GA and HP RA ....

Kaz,

May I ask why you chose to do your BFR in a Tecnam and not your usual aircraft being the Auster?

 

 

[motzartmerv]

The raa requirement is that the flight is conducted in the aircraft type the pilot has the most hours on in the last 12 months.. Another Curley rule.

 

 

[Camel]

And this is what really gets to me ... a bloody DH82 (Tiger Moth) cruises below 80 knots and so does a J3Cub and many others. So by RA Aus definition its a low performance aircraft. CASA don't require a different category of licence or separate BFRs to fly a Cessna and then a slow GA aircraft.In my view this is one of the areas where the RA Aus regs are over the top. 80 knots is a rediculous speed to delineate between LP and HP. There is a valid reason to have LP and HP, but not at 80 knots IMHO, it should be more like 50 or 60 knots.

The weight is very different and this will influence things, especially under the old weight rules.

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

There is also a requirement to rotate beteen the types flown, but apparently the most often flown overrides?

 

*Edit: RAA requirement.

 

 

[Louis Moore]

Motzartmerv, do you mean type as in HP or LP or type as in make of aircraft?

 

 

[djpacro]

The raa requirement is that the flight is conducted in the aircraft type the pilot has the most hours on in the last 12 months.. Another Curley rule.

That is a specific part of CASA regulations with a little bit of wiggle room - the CAAP on AFRs has good info too.

[Powerin]

The raa requirement is that the flight is conducted in the aircraft type the pilot has the most hours on in the last 12 months.. Another Curley rule.

But in this case that shouldn't apply. If you pass a flight review for a PPL it will be accepted as a valid FR for a HP RAAus certificate (according to the rules).

Interestingly the rules say nothing about flight reviews for CPLs (or ATPLs for that matter). I know an ag pilot that's been caught out with that (ie RAAus not accepting it).

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Yea pow. Like I said, it Curley. I'm just looking up the regs ATM.

 

 

[David Isaac]

Its a bit like what was suggested the other day, the Ops manual needs review to clearly spell out (clear up) the exceptions.

 

 

[facthunter]

I think the idea of doing it in the A/C that you have done most flying in, is a concession to the pilot, with the aim of being fair .. In the case of a fairly experienced pilot this would hardly be necessary, in many cases. Perhaps he could request it and likewise opt out of it. If you were regularly flying 5 or more types what would it matter, which one you choose?

 

I personally think much of this might look good on paper, but it is a bit nanny-statish.

 

The LP/ HP thing relates to the inertia behaviour of the aircraft, rather than the cruise speed. The concept being that when the engine fails on a light draggy plane you had better get the nose down pretty quickly or you have got no airspeed. If you want to do a steep turn you had better have all the power on and be prepared to lose some height as well to mauntain a safe speed. That's about it. A technam echo with full flap behaves much the same way but has a max allowable speed of 60 knots, so it might be considered a bit more difficult in some ways. Nev

 

 

[poteroo]

The instructor who does your review must be RAA and GA qualified, and current in both. Then, you can do the review in either a GA or RAA aircraft, but have your logbook signed off for the PPL - which then covers your RAA.

 

If you happen to be an instructor - this sensible arrangement doesn't apply to you. You must do your RAA review with a PE in an RAA rego'd aircraft, then your GA review with a CASA FOI, or ATO - in a VH rego. Just another bureaucratic anomaly!

 

happy days,

 

 

[frank marriott]

The GA BFR must be in an aircraft of "similar performance" to RAA HP aircraft to be accepted [ref. RAA ops manager, Mick Poole at the time]

 

He stated that a BFR in larger high performance GA aircraft would not be accepted. To be realistic the pilot of high performance GA aircraft would more then likely be doing an instrument renewal and not a BFR anyway, but not necessarily in all cases.

 

FrankM

 

 

[David Isaac]

The GA BFR must be in an aircraft of "similar performance" to RAA HP aircraft to be accepted [ref. RAA ops manager, Mick Poole at the time]He stated that a BFR in larger high performance GA aircraft would not be accepted. To be realistic the pilot of high performance GA aircraft would more then likely be doing an instrument renewal and not a BFR anyway, but not necessarily in all cases.

 

FrankM

Frank,

If we extend that RAA logic (Mick Poole statement) to GA and you do your BFR is say some high performance GA aircraft, you shouldn't be allowed to fly an Auster or a Cub or a Tiger Moth or a Cessna in which you are also endorsed, so you should do multiple BFRs???? I don't think so. This would be a clearly unworkable situation and taking it to the extreme. This is just another BS RAA restriction and all this does is complicate the matter.

 

Hell many of the RAA HP types are way more High Performance than some GA, so where does all this BS stop.

 

A BFR should be to establish your base competencies in what ever aircraft is suitable, it is NOT a test on a particular model or performance envelope except in the RAA case of HP and LP and I have already given my thoughts on how inappropriate the 80 knot discrimination figure is. It should be based on weight and lift / drag ratio not speed.

 

 

[Louis Moore]

David: I really agree 80 knots seems a very high figure to be the line for high and low performance aircraft. Makes it hard for me to define if the L2 is a HP or LP type!!!! Power to weight ratio would make more sense, but then we would all have to figure out how the hell to work out what the P/W ratio for aircraft is!!!!!

 

I do not see why there is not a nice hour limitation in the regs somewhere so that if you have done "x" amount of hours in both LP and HP types of aircraft than just one the BFR will suffice, as it has been stated in here already it is just a check up on overall flying capability. If you fall under "x" in a category then you need to get a BFR in whichever category you are low in to fly that type again i.e. go back to needing two BFR's to fly both types.

 

How ever I guess when it comes to writing regs it is hard to define the spot where the line in the sand should be drawn. Once it is I am also certain there will be those it suits perfectly and those that want it moved, just an inch or two, either way! I also think that line is placed hard and fast across the sand they think of a thousand counter arguments that need lots of new little lines drawn around the original one to try and effectively tie up those loose ends. RAA have done an outstanding job all things considered, so I am happy to put up with a few inconveniences that are bound to arise when trying to draw up any legal documentation, especially under CASA.