Anyone here did RA-Aus to PPL conversion?

[Ballpoint 246niner]

We're no doubt going to see a lot more questions like these ones posted in this thread as motivated recreational pilots turn the tide on what has been for years a move back to RA. And why not with the new regulatory platform approaching and the additional freedoms available with dual qualifications - but a word of warning. The exemptions that have given rise to simpler recreational access to airspace do not answer the requirements that are considered the minimum standard for PPL and any pilot thinking the 61 jump, or the higher PPL is just a formality should dig deeper to ensure they are "at " the required standard.Apart from the obvious additional syllabus requirements that are required, the disciplines and practices in GA are rigorously adhered to and rightfully so.

 

If you came from a training paradigm that embraced higher standards and procedures then revel in the simplicity but don't be surprised if you sailed through the recreational requirements and underpinning knowledge with the minimum standards then you may be in for a shock to ego and wallet.

 

The next couple of years will be interesting to watch as training standards come home to roost for those spring boarding over to play with the bigger boys and remember the grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence. The views held on both sides will be seen very differently by the uninitiated as the transitional journey unfolds. Let the fun begin!

 

 

[Bandit12]

Does make you wonder how, under CASR Part 61, CASA can recognise RAAus PC as equivalent to the RPL when in my opinion, the theory is not equivalent at this level.happy days,

Perhaps a revision of the training syllabus will be required by CASA when they become aware that the theory is not equivalent. Or the PPL BAK may also become mandatory.

 

 

[frank marriott]

According to one CASA rep a couple of months ago the onus of ensuring the knowledge/standard is up to scratch [RPL standard] will be placed on the issuing CFI - a school doing both RAA and GA training might be the way to go.

 

 

[poteroo]

According to one CASA rep a couple of months ago the onus of ensuring the knowledge/standard is up to scratch [RPL standard] will be placed on the issuing CFI - a school doing both RAA and GA training might be the way to go.

Yes, the CFI doing the PC to RPL conversion will have to ensure the PC has covered everything in BAK up to GA level, and if the PC wants their NAV endorsement also signed over to the RPL - the CFI is going to need to examine that as well. So, when CASR 61 comes in, it won't be quite as easy as everyone might be thinking. And how well it works will depend on the attitude and diligence of the GA CFI's. They will no doubt be extra careful, because, they will also be CASA's delegates as Examiners, and no doubt there will be some random quality assurance checks done by CASA. So it won't necessarily be a walk in - do a BFR - and walk out with a RPL job.

 

I think this is really a great opportunity for RAAus schools to pair up with a close GA school and get their heads around harmonising training - more particularly - the theory. Long term, it's likely that RAAus FTF's will become the ab initio starting point - simply because of the economics. Unless the GA school is flush with money,(how?), then the GA school is unlikely to be competing with new 2 seat aircraft. As most FTF's are in smaller locations, there's probably mutual benefit for GA and RAAus schools to pair up and fight the good fight rather than each other. The market isn't unlimited!

 

happy days,