RPL vs PPL

[turboplanner]

On the other hand Planey, country pilots never get all that radio and traffic experience.

 

 

[Parkway]

On the other hand Planey, country pilots never get all that radio and traffic experience.

Yeah that's one of my concerns. I am exactly the same distance from a controlled and a non controlled airport, and am leaning towards the controlled for just that reason, I don't want to be one of those guys that steer clear of controlled airspace because they're not confident on the radio. Although it will no doubt cost more, I think the experience will be invaluable.

 

 

[nickduncs84]

Yeah that's one of my concerns. I am exactly the same distance from a controlled and a non controlled airport, and am leaning towards the controlled for just that reason, I don't want to be one of those guys that steer clear of controlled airspace because they're not confident on the radio. Although it will no doubt cost more, I think the experience will be invaluable.

Seriously mate don't stress about the CTA stuff. Certainly don't go wasting 25% of every training hour on something that will take you a few trips in and out to figure out. It will take you 3 or 4 trips in and out to get comfortable enough to do it yourself. A few more times practicing yourself and you'll be fine to go pretty much anywhere. The visual pilots guide combined with a good gps make it pretty straight forward.

 

 

[Pearo]

I have often wondered what the actual difference between an PPL and an RPL with all the e

 

Yeah that's one of my concerns. I am exactly the same distance from a controlled and a non controlled airport, and am leaning towards the controlled for just that reason, I don't want to be one of those guys that steer clear of controlled airspace because they're not confident on the radio. Although it will no doubt cost more, I think the experience will be invaluable.

I have an uncle, who owns a large cattle property, and owns a plane. He uses the plane for mustering and thats it. The RPL is designed for people like my uncle, flying GA planes around their property. The GFPT was a failure for them, because of the recency requirements. He is not interested in cross country, or CTA, he is only concerned about locating cattle that he can ship off to abattoirs.

 

Me however, I want to fly a GA aircraft, and I am surrounded by delta and charlie airspace, so a PPL makes sense. I could do the RPL with endorsements, or I could do the PPL. Given I am also considering a CPL, the PPL route is the correct option.

 

 

[SDQDI]

In regards to the location quiet or controlled I think it will work either way. Personally I did my cert at a quiet aerodrome and was grateful that I could get the flying skills fairly well down pat without too many radio distractions, I then did my navs from controlled airspace which gave me the talking to tower experience which I could focus on as flying the plane was a bit more automatic.

 

I have heard of people who are 'too used' to controllers and when they go into a non towered aerodrome they feel awkward talking to themselves or just pilot to pilot. So I think a mix is important but the order probably doesn't matter so much.

 

 

[K-man]

You then take your RA-Aus pilot certificate with passenger, radio and navigation endorsement and ask for an RPL. You will have all the flight experience already except you will need to do 2 hours of instrument flight in a VH-XXX registered plane and whatever training is necessary to be proficient in controlled airspace procedures. You also need a medical. You can then fly anywhere in Australia with passengers in a VH-XXX or 24-XXXX aircraft (weight restrictions and aircraft type restrictions apply).

I would be interested to see where you got this information. There is nothing in writing I could find that says this and Casa confirmed to me that this isn't the case. I also checked it with RAA. In the absence of information to the contrary you can do your under the hood training in any aircraft as long as the instructor is certified to supervise that training. RAA doesn't have instrument flying so RA instructors cannot sign off on instruments, but there are many instructors who are rated for both RA and GA. One of those instructors can sign you off in an RA aircraft. Same goes for controlled airspace. To be signed off for the RPL controlled airspace and airport endorsements you need to fly a GA aircraft into and out of controlled airspace but if you are flying in and out training you can fly an RAA aircraft. I think the committee that designed the RPL were descendants of the guys who designed the camel. There's a lot about it that just doesn't make any sense at all.

 

 

[ayavner]

While learning with your instructor you are logging DUAL hours. It's these that don't count for much later on when getting RPL/PPL. Once you go solo you begin to log hours as Pilot In Command - these count.

It ALL counts - I went straight from RAAus with pax and nav to a PPL, skipped the RPL altogether. Only took an additional 15 hours or so, basically some navs, instrument time, and the pre-test flight. It all counts, don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

 

 

[Fishla]

K-man, I just assumed because RA craft can only be flown VFR but what you say makes sense. They still have instruments!

 

Ayavner, I was meaning that for the more advanced licences the limiting requirement will be your solo time - you'll very likely have had enough dual time by the time you get to them. Yep, every hour in your log book counts as aeronautical experience.

 

 

[ayavner]

Fishla - I had all the solo time i needed before starting my PPL. Never once went solo in the VH plane until after I had the PPL in hand. Makes sense to do as much as you can in RAAus where it is cheaper.

 

where it may come into play is when looking for employment... you wouldn't want most your hours in a CPL to be RAAus, but that is a different subject. Even then they count, its just a matter of the prejudices of the employer then.

 

 

[PommyRick]

Seriously mate don't stress about the CTA stuff. Certainly don't go wasting 25% of every training hour on something that will take you a few trips in and out to figure out. It will take you 3 or 4 trips in and out to get comfortable enough to do it yourself. A few more times practicing yourself and you'll be fine to go pretty much anywhere. The visual pilots guide combined with a good gps make it pretty straight forward.

I agree. I did 60% of my PPL in a small airfield then finished it off intensively at an international airport mixing with the big boys. When I arrived at the school to book the lessons, they gave my a circuit/Comms cheat sheet and told me to learn it over the weekend before my lesson, when I returned the CFI took me up for two circuits then sent me off solo in the circuit for another hour. its just learning the routine and really isn't worth paying a major premium for.

If you can land comfortably on small grass strips, landing on the C/L of a commercial runway at the right position to vacate at you chosen exit/taxiway will be a piece of cake.

 

 

[ben87r]

It doesn't take 50+ hours to learn to keep the blue side up and the brown side down. The 25% on the ground and transiting isn't wasted. It's all stuff that needs to be learned and be comfortable with, but, only if it's something that the student will actually get use out of.

 

If you want a RA style, CASA licence, probably not required, if you want to be a PPL and be able to fly CTA/Busy aerodromes and faster more complex aircraft then its good experience. But I do agree that it does hurt when .3-.4 each flight that you are paying for is on the ground.

 

 

[Parkway]

To throw a spanner in the works, the only place near me that does training in the cheaper light sport planes is out of Jandakot which is a quite busy controlled airport.. The uncontrolled strip I could train at is Murray Field, but I would need to fly a 152. Unless any Perth people can enlighten me on somewhere else I can go for light sport?

 

 

[Birdseye]

To throw a spanner in the works, the only place near me that does training in the cheaper light sport planes is out of Jandakot which is a quite busy controlled airport.. The uncontrolled strip I could train at is Murray Field, but I would need to fly a 152. Unless any Perth people can enlighten me on somewhere else I can go for light sport?

If you avoid weekends Jandakot is pretty quiet these days. Rumour is traffic is more than a third down on previous years.

 

 

[Parkway]

If you avoid weekends Jandakot is pretty quiet these days. Rumour is traffic is more than a third down on previous years.

Unfortunately I'd be a weekend warrior due to work. Ugh unless I can guess those 6 numbers...

 

 

[DrZoos]

To get the RPL CTA endorsement you will also need a level 4 or 6 English test and your medical...do the level 6 it does not expire...

 

Its also questionable as to whether you need 2 hours instrument training???

 

I got half way through my conversion and stopped , because CASA could not answer what was required...so I thought i would wait till some others sorted it all out, rather pay for unnecessary training just in case...

 

 

[Happyflyer]

To get the RPL CTA endorsement you will also need a level 4 or 6 English test and your medical...do the level 6 it does not expire...Its also questionable as to whether you need 2 hours instrument training???

I got half way through my conversion and stopped , because CASA could not answer what was required...so I thought i would wait till some others sorted it all out, rather pay for unnecessary training just in case...

The English language test is required for the radio endorsement and of course as you need to use radio for CTA you need it for that endorsement. The 2 hours instrument time is required for the Nav endorsement, if flying into CTA requires traveling more than 25nm you need a Nav endorsement. I can't see many people doing the CTA without a Nav endorsement. The rules for Radio and Nav endorsements are below.

61.495 Requirements for grant of recreational pilot licence endorsements

 

(1) This regulation applies to a person other than a person who is eligible to be granted a recreational pilot licence endorsement under regulation 61.500.

 

(2) An applicant for a recreational pilot licence endorsement must:

 

(a) have passed the aeronautical knowledge examination for the endorsement; and

 

(b) have completed flight training for the endorsement; and

 

© if the endorsement is a recreational navigation endorsement—have completed, in addition to the flight time mentioned in paragraph 61.475(2)(d):

 

(i) at least 5 hours of solo cross‑country flight time; and

 

(ii) at least 2 hours of dual instrument time, 1 hour of which is conducted during dual instrument flight time; and

 

(d) if the endorsement is a flight radio endorsement—have a current aviation English language proficiency assessment.

 

Note 1: For paragraph (a), for the conduct of aeronautical knowledge examinations, see Division 61.B.3.

 

Note 2: For paragraph (b), forthe requirements for flight training, see Division 61.B.2.

 

(3) The cross‑country flight time required by paragraph (2)© must include a flight of at least 100 nautical miles, during which a full‑stop landing is made at each of 2 aerodromes or landing areas, other than the one from which the flight began.

 

61.500 Grant of endorsement in recognition of other qualifications

 

(1) An applicant for a recreational pilot licence endorsement is eligible to be granted the endorsement if the applicant:

 

(a) holds a recreational pilot licence; and

 

(b) holds another flight crew licence that authorises the exercise of the privileges of the endorsement.

 

(2) An applicant for a controlled aerodrome endorsement is eligible to be granted the endorsement if:

 

(a) regulation 61.480 applies to the applicant; and

 

(b) the applicant holds an approval from the recreational aviation administration organisation to pilot an aircraft at a controlled aerodrome.

 

(3) An applicant for a controlled airspace endorsement is eligible to be granted the endorsement if:

 

(a) regulation 61.480 applies to the applicant; and

 

(b) the applicant holds an approval from the recreational aviation administration organisation to pilot an aircraft in controlled airspace.

 

(4) An applicant for a flight radio endorsement is eligible to be granted the endorsement if:

 

(a) regulation 61.480 applies to the applicant; and

 

(b) the applicant holds an approval from the recreational aviation administration organisation to operate an aircraft radio; and

 

© the applicant has a current aviation English language proficiency assessment.

 

(5) An applicant for a recreational navigation endorsement is eligible to be granted the endorsement if:

 

(a) regulation 61.480 applies to the applicant; and

 

(b) the applicant holds a cross‑country navigation approval from the recreational aviation administration organisation; and

 

© the applicant has completed the following flight time that complies with subregulation 61.495(3):

 

(i) at least 5 hours of solo cross‑country flight time;

 

(ii) at least 2 hours of dual instrument time, 1 hour of which is conducted during dual instrument flight time.

 

 

[DrZoos]

Roger that...sort of what i was alluding too...however at the time i was doing it CASA itself was extremely unclear about exactly what was expected...

 

So I am happily waiting for some pioneers to make a clearer conversion trail for me..

 

I actually have been granted the RPL, but funnily , I have no medical, no flight test, no instrument time and no English test done....

 

Its a piece of paper not worth anything except the processing fee....

 

 

[Birdseye]

Its also questionable as to whether you need 2 hours instrument training???

I really cannot comprehend what this is trying to achieve. When I did my UK PPL there was a requirement for an hours 'instrument appreciation", at least I think that was the term used. The aim was to scare you stupid from going into IMC and show how quickly you could die. Two hours isn't going to do much more.

 

I had quite a number of hours of real I/F experience before I did my PPL, but as they weren't with instructors I couldn't log them. It annoyed the hell out of the instructor that tried to trip me on on my 'appreciation' session!

 

As for : (ii) at least 2 hours of dual instrument time, 1 hour of which is conducted during dual instrument flight time;

 

I'm assuming that means one of the hours can be on a sim.

 

 

[K-man]

Roger that...sort of what i was alluding too...however at the time i was doing it CASA itself was extremely unclear about exactly what was expected...So I am happily waiting for some pioneers to make a clearer conversion trail for me..

 

I actually have been granted the RPL, but funnily , I have no medical, no flight test, no instrument time and no English test done....

 

Its a piece of paper not worth anything except the processing fee....

Actually, that is what was originally meant to happen. For RA pilots we were meant to apply for and receive our RPL. To use it was a whole lot more. You do need a valid medical. Then you need to do a flight review in a GA aircraft. The English language test is just crazy, having to interpret some guy impersonating a foreign pilot who is attempting to speak English.

Then it gets more confusing. I have flown our aircraft (RA) all around Australia with my RPC without any instrument flying but with my RPL to fly the same aircraft around Australia, I have to do 2 hours instrument flying to activate the Nav endorsement. How does that work when all endorsements were meant to carry over?

 

The simple 'apply for the RPL then undertake a flight review' ended up costing me more than $3,000 (including CTA and CTX).

 

 

[rhysmcc]

Actually, that is what was originally meant to happen. For RA pilots we were meant to apply for and receive our RPL. To use it was a whole lot more. You do need a valid medical. Then you need to do a flight review in a GA aircraft. The English language test is just crazy, having to interpret some guy impersonating a foreign pilot who is attempting to speak English.Then it gets more confusing. I have flown our aircraft (RA) all around Australia with my RPC without any instrument flying but with my RPL to fly the same aircraft around Australia, I have to do 2 hours instrument flying to activate the Nav endorsement. How does that work when all endorsements were meant to carry over?

 

The simple 'apply for the RPL then undertake a flight review' ended up costing me more than $3,000 (including CTA and CTX).

Maybe that's a flaw in RPC training (not including IF), clearly CASA believe it's required for VH aircraft. How much of the $3000 was spent "learning" a new aircraft type? It's still my opinion that RA should do away with the RPC and work on transferring all members to RPL, keeping the exceptions for operating UL aircraft and medical requirements.

 

 

[facthunter]

Sorry but I can't see that as the way to go. That would be the tail wagging the dog in my view. This RPL has been bastardised. It's a watered down PPL gone wrong.. Why should it's introduction (botched or otherwise) have the risk of disadvantaging the RAAus people who had nothing to do with it's introduction. It was mainly worked on by the SAAA who tried for many years to bring it in. Nev

 

 

[rhysmcc]

Forget the medical issue for a minute, what disadvantage does the RPL have?

 

 

[facthunter]

The medical IS the issue. It's still related to the PPL. Not the RPC. The RPC is the child of the RAAus and if it isn't right it's the RAAUS domain. The RPL was designed to allow pilots to keep their older VH planes in the air, with restrictions , rather than sell them and convert and maybe purchase. U/L's....Nev

 

 

[coljones]

RPC is also a way of CASA giving Controlled access. "If you wanna play on my beach you gotta play by my rules".

 

 

[facthunter]

The consideration that took the medical into unchartered territory was the access to controlled airspace issue. Just to be a bit more specific, there had to be NO medical issues if flight allowed in CTA. so GP tick ALL boxes or go to the class 2 with DAME and avmed involved.. Nev