The real RA Aus to PPL conversion deal

[Markproa]

How about the other way around? I have 150 hours on a UPPL but haven't flown for 20 years. I get no credit for my experience if I go for a RAA pilot certificate so I'm looking at 30 hours minimum. To get my license back I could be looking at 10 - 20 hours at a guess. Anyone else been in this position?

 

If I then wanted my RAA cert. what is the procedure?

 

Mark

 

 

[Cobalt]

How about the other way around? I have 150 hours on a UPPL but haven't flown for 20 years. I get no credit for my experience if I go for a RAA pilot certificate so I'm looking at 30 hours minimum. To get my license back I could be looking at 10 - 20 hours at a guess. Anyone else been in this position?If I then wanted my RAA cert. what is the procedure?

Mark

Yes your GA licence counts toward your raa certificate. You only have to do a minimum of 5 hours to convert to raa.

 

 

[Markproa]

Yes your GA licence counts toward your raa certificate. You only have to do a minimum of 5 hours to convert to raa.

Thanks. I'm trying to work out the advantages/disadvantages of VH or RAA rego on the plane I'm about to build. As it will have a converted car engine I understand I can't fly in controlled airspace so I'm wondering what other advantages come with VH reg.

Mark

 

 

[snarf007]

Yes your GA licence counts toward your raa certificate. You only have to do a minimum of 5 hours to convert to raa.

The above is correct. You will also need to do the RAA theory exams and flight review.

 

Ramjet- I have heard of too many pilots that started PPL training and after many-many hours and $$$$ have not even Solo-ed. Seems like some schools just milk recreational ‘PPL’ students. I am thinking of converting to PPL, but would not even know where to start looking for a GA school. I don’t want to pay for a low time istructor that is building hours, my time and money is too valuable for that!

 

 

[facthunter]

VH experimental may be the way. You have less restrictions. Nev

 

 

[Happyflyer]

The above is correct. You will also need to do the RAA theory exams and flight review.Ramjet- I have heard of too many pilots that started PPL training and after many-many hours and $$$$ have not even Solo-ed. Seems like some schools just milk recreational ‘PPL’ students. I am thinking of converting to PPL, but would not even know where to start looking for a GA school. I don’t want to pay for a low time istructor that is building hours, my time and money is too valuable for that!

If your PPL is current the only RAAus exams you may have to do is human factors and the converting pilot exam. . You do not have to do a BFR, just a check flight with a CFI after you have five hours in an RAAus type aircraft, including one hour solo. (Although this counts for a BFR) Unfortunately they have taken away the discretion to do less hours if the CFI finds the pilot doesn't need them.

 

 

[Camel]

If your PPL is current the only RAAus exams you may have to do is human factors and the converting pilot exam. . You do not have to do a BFR, just a check flight with a CFI after you have five hours in an RAAus type aircraft, including one hour solo. (Although this counts for a BFR) Unfortunately they have taken away the discretion to do less hours if the CFI finds the pilot doesn't need them.

I believe if hours have been done in a light VH reg plane, say a Gazelle or Jabiru then competency is acceptable rather than min 5 hours of which some can be observed solo ! This was my understanding of ops manual ! Correct me if I’m wrong ! Just my understanding !

 

 

[Happyflyer]

I believe if hours have been done in a light VH reg plane, say a Gazelle or Jabiru then competency is acceptable rather than min 5 hours of which some can be observed solo ! This was my understanding of ops manual ! Correct me if I’m wrong ! Just my understanding !

Yep, as long as the pilot has 5 hours in an aircraft that can be RAAus registered with at least one hour solo then just a check tide is required, along with the exams.

 

 

[Yenn]

snarf007.

 

If you are looking for a good GA instructor I would recommend John Mc Evoy. I think he is based at Maryborough, but I may be wrong. He trains at Monduran , which is not far from Hervey Bay and will be there from5 to 8 December. Contact him through Jim Mullett, who is Pres of Monduran Aero Club..

 

John is not a low time instructor building hours, but very experienced. I did my last BFR with him and was impressed.

 

 

[Camel]

Yep, as long as the pilot has 5 hours in an aircraft that can be RAAus registered with at least one hour solo then just a check tide is required, along with the exams.

Only exam is human factors ! If they have a PPL issued before human factors.

 

 

[Bleve97]

If your PPL is current the only RAAus exams you may have to do is human factors and the converting pilot exam. . You do not have to do a BFR, just a check flight with a CFI after you have five hours in an RAAus type aircraft, including one hour solo. (Although this counts for a BFR) Unfortunately they have taken away the discretion to do less hours if the CFI finds the pilot doesn't need them.

The converting exam includes HF, so you don't have to do both

 

 

[ClintonB]

I have done my requirements for issue of RPL, eagerly awaiting my papers so that I can go flying again. Hopefully the weather will be nice to me and I can go out and try my first $100 hamburger (probably $200 or $300 with 182 fuel bill)

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

So back from pre Xmas hols ...didn't quite get to PPL test, now a small step backwards having not flown for about 4 weeks now. Then we'll line up a test time somewhere in January, the stinkiest hottest period of summer to be idling on a runway in a sunny cockpit :)

 

Back to an earlier comment... I need to complete the full test curriculum for PPL certification. Which means both my CFI (to some degree as noted in my posts) and more relevantly, CASA provide nothing for prior learnings or certifications gained in RA, except perhaps BAK.

 

If my reading is correct I need to demonstrate, all over again, flight planning, basic circuits, PSL, NAV, stalls, etc etc, when IMHO all I really needed was a conversion to a bigger heavier GA aircraft and to demonstrate some reliable competency in navigating CTA and submitting SARTIME / flight plans. (The remaining 'missing' components of NAV required for flights in other than G Class)

 

Which really does bring into real question any validity of the commentary that RA Aus is a great pathway to PPL. Neither CFI (mine certainly) or CASA grant any real recognition of prior learning, except some flying hours.

 

If I had more knowledge on the subject and had anticipated I would be seeking PPL at some point, I would most definitely go direct to PPL. With the clarity of hindsight I think it would seem more accurate to say that conversely, PPL is a great pathway to RA Aus for those who cant/ don't want to pay the higher costs and compliance associated with GA anymore.

 

And by the grizzled grey men I come across in the RA space, this would seem to be largely true. :-)

 

And I think we have now come full circle back to my first post on this subject.

 

Merry Xmas all!

 

Fly safe

 

Ramjet

 

 

[SSCBD]

So the RAA system is hog wash, and you really start from scratch. No credit on the money spent or exams done with RAA. If that is the true outcome why have our RAA leaders said nothing, is my slant. This to me sets RAA back in the caves, as it seems from above that CASA wont act on any RAA system put in place to train and be given credit for time and money spent - Correct???

 

My next question is - Why don't we use and teach the full PPL theory instead of the kindergarten books and exams that students pay hard money for now and is a waste if want to get into flying GA. Then at least the standard could be recognised I hope by CASA.

 

Maybe RAA head office can enlighten us on why?

 

 

[ben87r]

There is usually an amount of comment from some experienced folk about the training standards between RA and GA, without re reading this thread this may have been one. I’ll usually say that if you want to fly GA PPL or above then go directly to GA. NONE of my RA flight time contributed to my CPL and realistically nor should it have.

 

PPL standard, whilst still quite low is a reasonable step up from RA.

 

 

[djpacro]

Not much different if you transfer from one GA school to another - instructors at your new school are still required to certify competencies per CASA’s MOS and the only way to do that is for you to demonstrate competency for each line item.

 

Get your RPC and fill in a form to be granted an RPL gives you a stake in the ground but still needing a flight review.

 

 

[ian00798]

There is usually an amount of comment from some experienced folk about the training standards between RA and GA, without re reading this thread this may have been one. I’ll usually say that if you want to fly GA PPL or above then go directly to GA. NONE of my RA flight time contributed to my CPL and realistically nor should it have.PPL standard, whilst still quite low is a reasonable step up from RA.

I don’t entirely agree with you on this one Ben which is pretty rare, I generally see eye to eye with you.

 

RA can and quite often does count towards GA flight time for issue of a CPL, although only certain parts of it count. As for how big a step up the transition from RA to GA is, I think that depends on where you did your training. My biggest criticism of RA is the standard is just so variable. Some people are trained to a point I argue doesn’t even meet the RA competency standards, some are trained every bit as well as their GA counterparts (particularly at dual GA/RA schools). At the end of the day, CPL is competency based. The hours stated are minimums, some people will get the qualification near the minimums, others will take a lot more.

 

 

[frank marriott]

My biggest criticism of RA is the standard is just so variable.

Totally agree and therein lies the problem. "Some" results from RA schools are quite embarrassing.

 

 

[facthunter]

I imagine "some" GA shows aren't that special either although they should be better OBVIOUSLY. RAAus was never designed for people to go through to ATPL from (or do aeros ,fly into controlled airspace fly to the moon ,Jupiter Have multi engines Jets. International equivalence. etc You shouldn't send a boy on a man's errand. Flying can be complex and expensive. They USUALLY go together. You pick your horse and put your money on it. Do What you DO well. You don't have to do what others do. IF you want what they have, join them. Nev

 

 

[ian00798]

Frankly the standard is far less variable in GA than RA. Might have something to do with the person issuing the licence being a representative of CASA and having actually gone through training to assess their suitability to conduct flight tests as well as the fact that they generally have several thousand hours (generally more like 10 000 hours), not the minimum 250 needed for an RA CFI endorsement.

 

 

[spacesailor]

FH

 

That was my downfall, to much emphasis on going to a higher qualification, than I thought, The "Basic" test is hard for a rooky, with-out throwing in commercial type questions as well as radio/ flight planning & Law(that changes at the whim of a pollie)

 

Next on the list is getting air-radio off AM vhf band to something without a Heterodyne problem.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[turboplanner]

Frankly the standard is far less variable in GA than RA. Might have something to do with the person issuing the licence being a representative of CASA and having actually gone through training to assess their suitability to conduct flight tests as well as the fact that they generally have several thousand hours (generally more like 10 000 hours), not the minimum 250 needed for an RA CFI endorsement.

I think you're on to it; we recently saw a display from an RAA Instructor, and changing the Instructor rating to approval by the same method that GA instructors are approved, would quickly stabilise the standard, particularly if a retraining requirement for existing instructors was part of the change.

 

 

[ben87r]

I don’t entirely agree with you on this one Ben which is pretty rare, I generally see eye to eye with you.RA can and quite often does count towards GA flight time for issue of a CPL, although only certain parts of it count. As for how big a step up the transition from RA to GA is, I think that depends on where you did your training. My biggest criticism of RA is the standard is just so variable. Some people are trained to a point I argue doesn’t even meet the RA competency standards, some are trained every bit as well as their GA counterparts (particularly at dual GA/RA schools). At the end of the day, CPL is competency based. The hours stated are minimums, some people will get the qualification near the minimums, others will take a lot more.

Well it wouldn't be aviation if we all agreed all the time, what we we be able to drink beer over!

 

I wasn't suggesting that it can't, just that mine didn't. I do believe in starting In GA if that's what's planned, but if like me you start RA not knowing how far you will end up, it's not waisted experience, just doesn't necessarily fit what you're training towards at the time.

 

I should add that I ended up doing the 150hr course which the hours couldn't be used for, but either way they weren't happy to count them for me. My RA hours got me over the 'golden' 200hr mark which may have helped getting a job, who knows.

 

 

[aro]

Frankly the standard is far less variable in GA than RA. Might have something to do with the person issuing the licence being a representative of CASA and having actually gone through training to assess their suitability to conduct flight tests as well as the fact that they generally have several thousand hours (generally more like 10 000 hours), not the minimum 250 needed for an RA CFI endorsement.

Maybe I've been lucky, but I would have said the average quality of RA instructors I have had is much higher than the GA instructors. I have never encountered a RA instructor with these minimum qualifications.

 

The school where I did my PPL was terrible (it doesn't exist anymore). Schools that hire their own graduates as instructors end up terminally inbred. Instructors with very little real world experience, who have done a minimum of flying away from their home airport and are just building hours. The ATO owned the school, and for the flight test the instructors warned me: "He's a screamer, but don't worry, he does that to everyone." If I was a bit older and wiser I would probably have got out at the first landing, left him to take the aircraft home and complained to CASA.

 

On the other hand most of the RA instructors I have flown with have come back to instructing after working elsewhere in aviation. Most or all have also had GA instruction qualifications, some as CFI of a GA school. Vastly more (and more varied) experience than the GA instructors I have had. Mostly they either got out of GA because they got sick of the CASA paperwork and expense, or instruct RA and GA side by side.

 

Personally I think it is a warning sign if a school doesn't instruct both RA and GA. Even more of a warning if they badmouth RA.

 

 

[spacesailor]

In my instance, The flying instructor Is/was a GA instructor at a different airport, & I was happy with him & my progress, But when assessed by the senior instructor was put off, was told in different words (to these),

 

I'm wasting his time and my money.That's when the big blue set in,never flew since.

 

spacesailor