RPL Instructors GA RAAus or both???

[DrZoos]

Does anyone know whats happening in relation to GA and RAAus instructors under the NEW RPL in relation to the following.

 

A person who wanted both GA and RAAus instructors ratings previously had to do two seperate courses at a cost of say $11,000 GA and $6000 RAA

 

Since RPL is effectively the same qualification and entitles the holder to fly any aircraft under 1500kg etc etc...

 

Does this now mean a person who wants to be an instructor up to RPL level will only need one of these qualifications. Not two???

 

And that anyone wanting to be a RAAus instructor but with feet in the GA camp would be better off just doing the GA course as it will cover both???

 

Example my son an aspiring young pilot was going to do both instructors . But given his career will lay in GA he should just do GA instructor rating and this will also qualify him to teach RPL in RAAus aircraft . (he is licenced in RAA already)

 

 

[dodo]

RPL is a CASA license, so you would need some CASA qualification - presumably just a normal instructors rating, as it should be no different to PPL instruction.

 

However, to fly an RA aircraft from a PPL or RPL, you need and RA certificate, so you do an RA conversion, instructed by an RA instructor, to get the RA certificate.

 

dodo

 

 

[djpacro]

Yep, a normal instructors rating although it is being rejigged with the new Part 61 later in the year.

 

http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:PWA::pc=PARTS061

 

 

[Guest manymak]

Part 61 will see numerous changes with the Flight Instructor Rating. No minimum hour requirements, all competency based so possibly and avenue for recognition of prior learning for current RA-AUS instructors who wish to migrate across.

 

 

[poteroo]

Does anyone know whats happening in relation to GA and RAAus instructors under the NEW RPL in relation to the following.A person who wanted both GA and RAAus instructors ratings previously had to do two seperate courses at a cost of say $11,000 GA and $6000 RAA

 

Since RPL is effectively the same qualification and entitles the holder to fly any aircraft under 1500kg etc etc...

 

Does this now mean a person who wants to be an instructor up to RPL level will only need one of these qualifications. Not two???

 

And that anyone wanting to be a RAAus instructor but with feet in the GA camp would be better off just doing the GA course as it will cover both???

 

Example my son an aspiring young pilot was going to do both instructors . But given his career will lay in GA he should just do GA instructor rating and this will also qualify him to teach RPL in RAAus aircraft . (he is licenced in RAA already)

Recognition of instructor qualifications from GA to RAA and the reverse is likely to be a well debated topic. The short answer for your son is to do GA initially, and then convert over as per RAAus Ops Manual. $11,000? - you're dreaming - plan on $16,000.

 

Interestingly though, once an instructor converts from GA to RAAus - they continue to require parallel BFR's. Difficult to understand why, because an Instructor 1 Flight Review done by an ATO should trump an RAAus SI Flight Review.

 

Have heard that some 'dual' GA+RAAus FTF's offer pilots a RAAus Instructor Rating first up, and then progression onto the GA rating with credit for the RAAus times. Sensible, but seems a very loose arrangement.

 

 

 

As to Part 61......remains to be seen how this all works. I'm not convinced that CASA know either.

 

 

 

happy days,

 

 

[DrZoos]

Thanks all for your responses. Im particularly interested in post Part 61 introduction later this year. Seems no one really knows. We recently had a CASA seminar and even the CASA staff had no idea on this topic??

 

 

[kgwilson]

Im particularly interested in post Part 61 introduction later this year. Seems no one really knows. We recently had a CASA seminar and even the CASA staff had no idea on this topic??

Now why doesn't this surprise me?

 

 

[djpacro]

There is some easing of flying school requirements per the new Part 141 but wrt training the new RPL simply replaces the GFPT. Part 61 requirements to get a flight instructor rating seem fairly straightforward to me, I suggest you read those few paragraphs of the new reg. A PPL with a flight instructor rating cannot teach ab initio.

 

 

[poteroo]

There is some easing of flying school requirements per the new Part 141 but wrt training the new RPL simply replaces the GFPT. Part 61 requirements to get a flight instructor rating seem fairly straightforward to me, I suggest you read those few paragraphs of the new reg. A PPL with a flight instructor rating cannot teach ab initio.

Yes - much has been made of the opportunity for a PPL to become an instructor without requirement for a CPL. From the many opinions I've heard, it seems that this will only require them to do the PMI Course/test, and probably a flight test to demonstrate instructing and flying competency from the right hand seat. Whether these competencies will have to be equivalent to those of a Class 3 issue instructor rating isn't detailed - but I hope so.

 

Just what limitations will apply is unclear. Opinion has it that the PPL instructor will:

 

 

 

1. not be able to do ab initio, certainly not pre-solo

 

2. not be able to do Flight Reviews

 

3. not be able to do ratings, eg low level, ag, NVFR, IR

 

4. will be able to do endorsements such as t/w, aeros, formation.

 

4. will require bi-ennial reviews of their instructor rating

 

5. will be able to do type transition training - perhaps under an SAAA 'Part 141' umbrella

 

 

 

happy days,

 

 

[djpacro]

A PPL is limited to private operations (but can be paid) and only a limited scope of endorsement training will fit into that definition, although a broader scope than the current definition of private ops (hopefully a much clearer definition).

 

 

[DrZoos]

Thanks guys... wow seems like its a dogs breakfast ... Not sure how one person can take you from TIFF to RPL in one aircraft but not in another, when the student that gets the qualification has the same RPL and can then fly both???.

 

Maybe im not getting it, although given the CASA staff had no idea either i dont feel bad...

 

 

[rhysmcc]

Thanks guys... wow seems like its a dogs breakfast ... Not sure how one person can take you from TIFF to RPL in one aircraft but not in another, when the student that gets the qualification has the same RPL and can then fly both???.

Maybe I'm not getting it, although given the CASA staff had no idea either i don't feel bad...

You can't fly a RA-AUS registered aircraft with a RPL (post Sept), unless you also have a RPC (issued by RA-AUS).

 

The RPL will only apply to VH registered aircraft, no different to the PPL or CPL.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Reference Part 61....

 

The holder of an RAAus pilot certificate can produce their qual's to CASA and will be issued with a CASA RPL. Before they can exercise the privileges of the RPL they must complete a Flight Review with an appropriately qualified GA instructor and hold a medical certificate. They will be limited to MTOW of 1500kg and 4 PoB (if they hold a Class 2 or higher medical or 2 PoB if they go the "car licence" medical) cross country rating carries over and airspace endorsements can be added. With class 2 medical can do aeros endorsement. No IFR or NVFR allowed, further upgrade to a full PPLA shouldn't involve too much effort by ethical flying schools, assuming the RAA instruction was of a reasonable standard.

 

Re PPL instructors, they can deliver instruction for things other than gaining a licence or rating for topics in which they have demonstrated proficiency. That leaves things such as design features, formation and aerobatics.

 

Under Part 61 appropriately qualified instructors will be permitted to undertake flight reviews independently (ie they don't need to operate under an AOC)

 

This is all covered in CASR Part 61 and the relevant MOSs, it will be easier than the current regs once you get used to the layout, I found starting with the list of contents made things a bit easier.

 

In summary, things will be better under Part 61!

 

 

[djpacro]

.........Under Part 61 appropriately qualified instructors will be permitted to undertake flight reviews independently (ie they don't need to operate under an AOC)

My interpretation of the text of para 61.1230 is that flight reviews must be conducted "on behalf of a Part 141 or 142 operator;"

 

In summary, things will be better under Part 61!

Many things will be better, some things things look like they'll be worse. I believe that CASA is currently rewriting the MOS and there will be further amendment to Part 61 soon.

[Roundsounds]

I

 

My interpretation of the text of para 61.1230 is that flight reviews must be conducted "on behalf of a Part 141 or 142 operator;"Many things will be better, some things things look like they'll be worse. I believe that CASA is currently rewriting the MOS and there will be further amendment to Part 61 soon.

I think you'll find 61.1230 says it's an offence not to tell CASA about the flight review if it's not being conducted under a 141/142 organisation. If conducted under a 141/142 organisation they hold the responsibility to report the AFR to CASA. CASR 61.1220 requires the instructor to notify CASA of a flight review and maintain records of such. The key is in the title of the reg'.

 

61.1230 Obligations of pilot instructors—records of activities conducted independently of Part 141 or 142 operator

 

Time will tell if things are better or worse, I reckon it's down to how the industry accepts the new regs.

 

 

[djpacro]

Of course, thanks, I was holding my mouth the wrong way as I read it.

 

 

[poteroo]

I

I think you'll find 61.1230 says it's an offence not to tell CASA about the flight review if it's not being conducted under a 141/142 organisation. If conducted under a 141/142 organisation they hold the responsibility to report the AFR to CASA. CASR 61.1220 requires the instructor to notify CASA of a flight review and maintain records of such. The key is in the title of the reg'.

 

61.1230 Obligations of pilot instructors—records of activities conducted independently of Part 141 or 142 operator

 

Time will tell if things are better or worse, I reckon it's down to how the industry accepts the new regs.

And all this is going to make things simpler and more efficient....according to the outgoing Director of CASA!

 

They just can't bring themselves to adopt the FAA (US) model - as has NZ. The only 'record' of importance should be the pilots' logbook - the to and fro of paperwork with CASA is one of the things strangling flying schools in OZ. But the air is different here, and somehow or other, OZ conditions require more restrictive rules!

 

The industry is still trying to 2nd guess CASA on the Part 61 regs and MOS because it's often what isn't stated that will trip us up later.

 

Call me a cynic, but after 51 years dealing with the many iterations of 'CASA' - I always look for the 'gotcha's' in new legislation.

 

happy days,