RPL instrument time

[Ada Elle]

I'm looking at the form 61-1RTX, the conversion from RPC to RPL. To get the nav endorsement, you need raa nav, 5 hours solo crosscountry, and 2 hours of instrument time (of which one can be simulator).

 

Does anyone have suggestions for a GA school (around Sydney, or within two hours) to get instrument time on?

 

 

[coljones]

I'm looking at the form 61-1RTX, the conversion from RPC to RPL. To get the nav endorsement, you need raa nav, 5 hours solo crosscountry, and 2 hours of instrument time (of which one can be simulator).Does anyone have suggestions for a GA school (around Sydney, or within two hours) to get instrument time on?

Schofields Flying club at Bankstown 9709 8488 does a full range of training through to CPL. They also have a comprehensive Red Bird Sim. It is expected that you can fly the plane you are doing your instrument in so you might need some extra hours. In order to be allowed to fly with an RPL you must do a "flight review" so you should plan on doing more than just the instrument time in isolation.

 

 

[Birdseye]

In order to be allowed to fly with an RPL you must do a "flight review" so you should plan on doing more than just the instrument time in isolation.

Just make sure a simple 'flight review' is not seen by a school as an easy income generating opportunity.

 

 

[bell47]

I can't recommend Gostner aviation out at Camden enough, I did my ra-Aus to ppl conversion there.

 

 

[coljones]

I can't recommend Gostner aviation out at Camden enough, I did my ra-Aus to ppl conversion there.

Where did you do your RAA Cert? In what plane?

Where did you do your conversion (Gostner, Camden), in what plane?

 

What endos in the conversion?

 

How many hours prep?

 

How long was the Flight Review?

 

What was the total cost of the conversion at the school?

 

 

[bell47]

I did my ra-Aus at Jaspers brush near Nowra in a jabiru which they don't have anymore. Yeah the conversion at Gostner at Camden for a full ppl. They have a vh rego jabiru j-160 which is handy. For the ppl test you have to fly into class c airspace so it was a Nav down to Canberra, so it was a few hours once you go there and back. Hard to say mate about the cost as I haven't added it up full but at a guess well under 5000. But that's including a constant speed and retractable endorsement that I got in that price. Talk to David there very helpful and a very good instructor. Here is his number if you're interested 0414 788 105

 

 

[ayavner]

+1 for Schofields, to answer the OP's original question for getting the hour of instrument sim time.

 

 

[coljones]

Just make sure a simple 'flight review' is not seen by a school as an easy income generating opportunity.

No "Flight Review" should be simple. Every flight review should be a comprehensive review of the competencies under review. You won't lose your PPL or RPL (or whatever) if your review tu does not meet the standard - but you will not be able to fly until you do.

 

 

[Birdseye]

No "Flight Review" should be simple. Every flight review should be a comprehensive review of the competencies under review. You won't lose your PPL or RPL (or whatever) if your review tu does not meet the standard - but you will not be able to fly until you do.

If a pilot is actively flying and is currently competent, then a flight review should be simple.

 

Quote from CASA: A flight review should include training, and an assessment. Training is included to bring you back up to the required standard of competency, if you need it. (My emphasis)

 

My point is don't get taken for a ride (pun intended) by anyone seeing the process as potential for an extended income generating activity. It should judge competency at the level that could reasonably be expected for the purpose.

 

 

[dazza 38]

No "Flight Review" should be simple. Every flight review should be a comprehensive review of the competencies under review. You won't lose your PPL or RPL (or whatever) if your review tu does not meet the standard - but you will not be able to fly until you do.

A flight review shouldn't take anymore than 30 to 40 minutes IMO. That is all mine have ever taken. If it was going to take more than an hour and a half, I would be taking my business elsewhere .

Having said that, if a pilot takes an hour and a half because he/she is hopeless. They would probably be better off taking up knitting as a hobby.

 

 

[Phil Perry]

The flight review in UK which is required by all pilots every 24 months, usually takes one hour. The "One Hour" is specified by the CAA. This is NOT a GST / GFT or any kind of actual "Test" as such, in fact YOU can specify what you would like to do in this flight. I decided that I would like to fly the whole thing on instruments, and asking this, I'd unwittingly thrown a spanner in the works, as they had not got a qualified "Instrument" instructor on site. . .so they had to get one from elsewhere.

 

So I turned up the following week and we did the entire hour on the "clocks". ( in a PA28 R200 Arrow ) As I have already mentioned on this forum recently, the Instructor was a currently flying B737 first officer, with an instructor rating, and he was only too happy to carry out the task, although, since I had more total hours than he did, he was a little gentle to begin with, to his credit. We did a very nice hour, and I learned something from it. I like to learn something, and I don't really care if the bloke showing me has less total hours,. . .it largely depends what we have both been doing for all those flying hours really. . . .you never stop learning something useful. I took him up in a Microlight Aircraft last weekend, something he'd never done (for some ungodly reason) and he found that the Foxbat was a really nice aircraft,. . .he now WANTS ONE ! if he can get the idea past his missus. . . . .

 

 

[Birdseye]

As I have already mentioned on this forum recently, the Instructor was a currently flying B737 first officer, with an instructor rating, and he was only too happy to carry out the task, although, since I had more total hours than he did, he was a little gentle to begin with, to his credit. We did a very nice hour, and I learned something from it. I like to learn something, and I don't really care if the bloke showing me has less total hours,. . .it largely depends what we have both been doing for all those flying hours really. . . .you never stop learning something useful. I took him up in a Microlight Aircraft last weekend, something he'd never done (for some ungodly reason) and he found that the Foxbat was a really nice aircraft,. . .he now WANTS ONE ! if he can get the idea past his missus. . . . .

I hope he's not with Ryanair or he'll be pushed to buy a new bicycle.

 

 

[rhysmcc]

A flight review shouldn't take anymore than 30 to 40 minutes IMO. That is all mine have ever taken. If it was going to take more than an hour and a half, I would be taking my business elsewhere .Having said that, if a pilot takes an hour and a half because he/she is hopeless. They would probably be better off taking up knitting as a hobby.

How do you cover off all that's required in the Flight Review? Do you do any instrument (under the hood) flying? Any sort of Nav activity, or are you just doing a couple of CCTs and maybe a stall?

 

(Assuming it's CASA Flight review)

 

 

[Happyflyer]

CASA have a lot of information on what is required in a flight review ( http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/download/caaps/ops/5_81_1.pdf ). Appendix B on page 23 gives a check list for the reviewer. Recommended flight times are 1 to 1.5 hours and longer if a Nav is included.

 

RAAus gives very little guidance in what is required for a review so there is wide variation between the GA/RAAus type schools to the one man band RAAus only. A lot depends on whether the reviewer regularly sees and hears the pilot in the air or if he is a stranger. In my opinion the smart pilots take advantage of the time with the instructor to push themselves to do those things they don't usually do such as stalling, full and partial engine failures, being asked to change runways after a go around, land in stronger crosswinds or a simulated electrical fire incorporating an emergency descent such as Geoff13 recently had to do for real.

 

If you normally hire and fly it's generally not that much more cost to have the instructor in the plane and it's only once every two years or even less often if you have done an endorsement. Of course there are those that are so good they feel the review is a waste of time for them, but generally if they are given a good work out and taken from their comfort zone, they appreciate that perhaps it was good for them after all. The instructor, in signing the flight review, is saying the pilot is safe and competent so he has to be sure. If you value your life and those of your passengers, don't short change yourself in the flight review.

 

 

[Birdseye]

According to some of the explanation material on the CASA web site, listed below are the sort of things to include.

 

If the review was in a IFR equipped Piper Arrow there could be a fair bit to look at, but if it's in a Drifter or any basic VFR aircraft, how long should it really take to cover all those points?

 

1. operating the aircraft’s navigation and operating systems
    
    
   
2. conducting all normal, abnormal and emergency flight procedures for the aircraft
    
    
   
3. applying operating limitations
    
    
   
4. weight and balance requirements
    
    
   
5. applying aircraft performance data, including take-off and landing performance data, for the aircraft.
    
    
   

 

 

 

 

[djpacro]

Its worth reading the new rules on flight reviews as the CAAP has not been updated from the old rules.

 

 

Remember that "requires demonstration" means "require demonstration" and "each unit of competency mentioned" in the MOS also means exactly what it states.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

Its worth reading the new rules on flight reviews as the CAAP has not been updated from the old rules.[ATTACH=full]36844[/ATTACH]

Remember that "requires demonstration" means "require demonstration" and "each unit of competency mentioned" in the MOS also means exactly what it states.

As with most of Part 61 this was not thought through very well. The CAAP is much more realistic (see para 8.2 below), hopefully it will prevail in the long run.

8.2 In the time available to conduct a flight review, it would be

 

unrealistic to attempt to assess all of a pilot’s skills and knowledge.

 

However, it is possible and important to evaluate and guide a pilot

 

through those safety-critical items of skills and knowledge or

 

elevated risk that, if deficient, could result in ‘damage to aircraft

 

and/or injury to persons’.

 

 

[Pearo]

A flight review shouldn't take anymore than 30 to 40 minutes IMO. That is all mine have ever taken. If it was going to take more than an hour and a half, I would be taking my business elsewhere .Having said that, if a pilot takes an hour and a half because he/she is hopeless. They would probably be better off taking up knitting as a hobby.

I reckon more like an hour an a half for a SEP. It should involve Stalls, forced land, steep turns, precatiounary search and land, then in the circuit there should be glide approach, flapless approach, shortfield and probably a normal circuit as well. You may be able to squeeze all that in in one hour, but I reckon you would be getting closer to 1.5.

 

Where I am, 20 minutes is burned up just getting to and from the training area.

 

 

[dazza 38]

How do you cover off all that's required in the Flight Review? Do you do any instrument (under the hood) flying? Any sort of Nav activity, or are you just doing a couple of CCTs and maybe a stall?(Assuming it's CASA Flight review)

Raa flight review

 

 

[dazza 38]

I reckon more like an hour an a half for a SEP. It should involve Stalls, forced land, steep turns, precatiounary search and land, then in the circuit there should be glide approach, flapless approach, shortfield and probably a normal circuit as well. You may be able to squeeze all that in in one hour, but I reckon you would be getting closer to 1.5.Where I am, 20 minutes is burned up just getting to and from the training area.

All that is doable as long as you dont stuff up any of the sequences. Obviously if your training area is 20 minutes away then you would add the transit time.

 

 

[coljones]

As with most of Part 61 this was not thought through very well. The CAAP is much more realistic (see para 8.2 below), hopefully it will prevail in the long run.

8.2 In the time available to conduct a flight review, it would be

 

unrealistic to attempt to assess all of a pilot’s skills and knowledge.

 

However, it is possible and important to evaluate and guide a pilot

 

through those safety-critical items of skills and knowledge or

 

elevated risk that, if deficient, could result in ‘damage to aircraft

 

and/or injury to persons’.

A CAAP is just an "advisory" and should follow the underlying law.

 

 

[SDQDI]

My last BFR was an hour, I thought it was sufficient.

 

Having said that we went through all my books on the ground beforehand (was doing it in my plane so needed photocopies of maintence log ect) and I learnt a bit from that. Actually learnt more from my time talking on the ground than I did in the air:thumb up:.

 

I had been flying roughly once a week so was fairly current with the flying side of things (ok so I did bounce the landing though:fear:). it was refreshing having a simulated efato that wasn't talked about beforehand (I was told we would have a simulated failure just not where of course) and I was happy that I didn't have to think about it and still did the right things:thumb up: (Gotta love training!). We also did a couple of mush's, a bit of rolling on the point, some balanced turns, some unbalanced turns/skids and some sideslipping.

 

All that was fitted in an hour without being rushed. Maybe less current would need a little more but I think most instructors will be able to pick up on shortcomings pretty quickly.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

A CAAP is just an "advisory" and should follow the underlying law.

I'm not lawyer, so if CASA give me advice 0n how to follow their own regulations via a CAAP, I'll follow that until the CAAP is rescinded or amended.

 

 

[Birdseye]

I reckon more like an hour an a half for a SEP. It should involve Stalls, forced land, steep turns, precatiounary search and land, then in the circuit there should be glide approach, flapless approach, shortfield and probably a normal circuit as well. You may be able to squeeze all that in in one hour, but I reckon you would be getting closer to 1.5..

I reckon a list like that would fall into the 'income generating' category. Its a review, not a revisit of the entire flying syllabus.

 

 

[Aldo]

I can't imagine any GA school signing off on a review from RPC to RPL in anything less than what is required for a GA BFR (AFR)

 

I've just picked up the paperwork as I have a flight review (BFR) in the next couple of weeks the following is a list from that paperwork, my nav alone will be a minimum 1 hour and I bet there will be a diversion thrown in just for good measure as well as a GPS failure so it will be charts and wiz wheel.

 

Performed the following air exercises

 

• Performed pre flight actions
   
   
  
• Executed normal take off's and landings
   
   
  
• Executed cross wind take off's and landings
   
   
  
• Executed short field take off's and landings
   
   
  
• Recovered from stall in clean and landing configurations
   
   
  
• executed forced landings
   
   
  
• Handled simulated engine failure after take off
   
   
  
• Handled simulated electrical failure - emergency gear extension (if applicable) flapless landing
   
   
  
• Executed low level manoeuvres in spotting configuration
   
   
  
• Controlled aircraft by reference to instruments
   
   
  
• Controlled aircraft in circuit at night (if applicable)
   
   
  
• Demonstrated sound engine and aircraft handling
   
   
  
• Demonstrated sound navigation technique
   
   
  
• Demonstrated correct CTA procedures
   
   
  
• Demonstrated adequate situational awareness and sound airmanship
   
   
  
• VFR maintained at all times
   
   
  

 

 

 

Aldo