BFRs and regulators?

[NT5224]

Hey folks

 

Another question from me. I think Ive seen this discussed previously but -Id like to raise the issue again for any fresh perspectives.

 

For those holding pilots certificates under both RAAus (RAA cert) and CASA (RPL, PPL), does it matter which organisation you conduct BFRs with? Or do you need to do a BFR twice , once in each category of aircraft?

 

I think I read RAA accept a CASA BFR. Seems reasonable. But how does that work? Does the instructor who does the check ride send in the paperwork to RAA on your behalf? Or only to CASA?

 

And what about checking out on a RAA aircraft for a BFR for your RPL or PPL?

 

Anybody done a BFR in a C172 to remain current in RAA?

 

I appreciate in the longer term we might see a convergence in training and administrative streams but whats happening now? Anybody already navigating these murky waters who can explain what happens in practice?

 

Cheers

 

Alan

[M61A1]

Section 2.07-4 of the ops manual says this.....

 

e. If a Pilot Certificate holder has within a period of two years immediately preceding the proposed flight, passed a flight test for the issue of a CASA Recreational Pilot Licence or higher, or the initial issue of a single engine CASA licence, rating or endorsement, then the pilot is taken to have satisfactorily completed a recreational aeroplane flight review on the date of the flight test.

Evidence of logbook or Licence entries detailing successful completion of training must be provided to RAAus.

 

f. CASA issued endorsements accepted as meeting the requirements of Paragraph 5 (e) are:

(i) MPPC propeller (formally CSU),

(ii) Tail wheel undercarriage,

(iii) Retractable undercarriage,

(iv) Float alighting gear,

(v) Floating hull,

(vi) Controlled airspace

 

g. A flight review or flight instructor review conducted in a single engine aeroplane with a MTOW less than 1500 KG under Day VFR, is accepted as meeting the requirements of paragraph 5 (e).

A copy of the flight review statement from the pilot’s logbook or Part 61 Licence is to be provided to RAAus. The statement should include the pilot’s name, type of flight conducted, name and signature of the examiner and the date of the flight review.

[Downunder]

Got a friend with RAA cert and rpl. Says just do the rpl bfr and that's good enough for RAA as well.

RAA bfr will not cover RPL though....

So he just does the one.

[SplitS]

I only do the RPL bfr. You do not have to do both.

[NT5224]

Hi SplitS

 

Thanks for your response.

 

Out of curiosity, what aircraft do you do the BFR in? A VH registered aircraft that can also be registered with RAA such as a Jabiru or a Foxbat? Or on a larger, more stable aircraft that your RPL permits you to fly such as a C172, a PA 32 or a M20?

 

Alan

[SplitS]

Hi SplitS

 

Thanks for your response.

 

Out of curiosity, what aircraft do you do the BFR in? A VH registered aircraft that can also be registered with RAA such as a Jabiru or a Foxbat? Or on a larger, more stable aircraft that your RPL permits you to fly such as a C172, a PA 32 or a M20?

 

Alan

My last BFR was done in a SportStar VH registered. I fly an experimental which fly's nothing like a sportstar but the rule's say I have to do a BFR so I simply shop around for the cheapest aircraft. My aircraft does not have dual controls so I cannot do a BRF in my own aircraft. The whole RAA vs GA is all a bit odd but you only have to do 1 BFR at the highest level and that will cover your RAA.

[Yenn]

I have the same experience as SplitS and no problems with RAAus. I did all instrument flying last time and my Corby has absolutely no instrument ability, nor in fact is my GA RV4 much better.

[Bennyboy320]

I did my BFR in a C172 in September last year, emailed a copy of the completed form to RAAus, that’s it, can’t be simpler, your currency record then updated.

[facthunter]

How does an aeroplane know it's in cloud? The Autopilot doesn't. Nev

[poteroo]

g. A flight review or flight instructor review conducted in a single engine aeroplane with a MTOW less than 1500 KG under Day VFR, is accepted as meeting the requirements of paragraph 5 (e).

A copy of the flight review statement from the pilot’s logbook or Part 61 Licence is to be provided to RAAus. The statement should include the pilot’s name, type of flight conducted, name and signature of the examiner and the date of the flight review.

 

A BFR in a 1500kgMTOW GA aircraft, probably with CSU & RG, is as relevant to flying a J120 as is my RV to a SAAB 340. I don't know how they have rationalised things to reach this statement. The original intention of GA BFRs was that they be conducted in an aircraft the same, or very similar, to that which you had been flying the majority of the last 2 years. I thought this would, sensibly, be the case with GA-RAAus renewals, but it has changed to fit the regs as they are now interpreted.

 

I don't send RAAus anything: it is up to the reviewed pilot to make a copy of the CASR Part 61 licence entry on p13, and email it to RAAus. That entry alone doesn't satisfy CASA however, and I then have to complete CASA form 61-9fr - the applicant pilot can scan/email it to CASA. CASA then enter it into the pilots file, a job which seems to me to be one of 'make work for the troops'. Why can't they trust us, and allow the reviewing instructor to enter the details directly into the pilots file. It's not as though there are 'state' secrets in pilots files! Come to think about all this 'make work' bs: why can't RAAus allow CFIs to access pilots files and enter the BFR, and other endorsement or test details, directly, without us requiring an in between person to do it? It doesn't make sense, but no doubt there will be a very defensive objection to my suggestions. Always is, when bureaucratic featherbedding is challenged!

 

happy days,

 

I never send RAAus a

[M61A1]

A BFR in a 1500kgMTOW GA aircraft, probably with CSU & RG, is as relevant to flying a J120 as is my RV to a SAAB 340. I don't know how they have rationalised things to reach this statement. The original intention of GA BFRs was that they be conducted in an aircraft the same, or very similar, to that which you had been flying the majority of the last 2 years. I thought this would, sensibly, be the case with GA-RAAus renewals, but it has changed to fit the regs as they are now interpreted.

 

I don't send RAAus anything: it is up to the reviewed pilot to make a copy of the CASR Part 61 licence entry on p13, and email it to RAAus. That entry alone doesn't satisfy CASA however, and I then have to complete CASA form 61-9fr - the applicant pilot can scan/email it to CASA. CASA then enter it into the pilots file, a job which seems to me to be one of 'make work for the troops'. Why can't they trust us, and allow the reviewing instructor to enter the details directly into the pilots file. It's not as though there are 'state' secrets in pilots files! Come to think about all this 'make work' bs: why can't RAAus allow CFIs to access pilots files and enter the BFR, and other endorsement or test details, directly, without us requiring an in between person to do it? It doesn't make sense, but no doubt there will be a very defensive objection to my suggestions. Always is, when bureaucratic featherbedding is challenged!

 

happy days,

 

I never send RAAus a

One would expect that the pilot might just copy the page/s that has the necessary details on it and forward it to RAAus. I don't think it says it's the instructors job anywhere.

 

In regards to your other point about access to pilot files......I have had an instructor in the past that I wouldn't let near my data. While most may do the right thing, as unfortunate as it may be, there will always be some making problems.

[poteroo]

One would expect that the pilot might just copy the page/s that has the necessary details on it and forward it to RAAus. I don't think it says it's the instructors job anywhere.

 

It doesn't - but many applicants have that expectation, together with one of no theory competency thanks, $60/hr and then only from wheels off to wheels on, and no charge for briefings. Just sayin'

 

In regards to your other point about access to pilot files......I have had an instructor in the past that I wouldn't let near my data. While most may do the right thing, as unfortunate as it may be, there will always be some making problems.

 

same argument as the one supporting RAAus keeping our rego's confidential to avoid paying landing charges?

[Guest Machtuk]

I thought they where labelled AFR these days? Fortunetly I don't have to do one for sometime yet as I had a RH seat Prof check just before retiring.

[Downunder]

same argument as the one supporting RAAus keeping our rego's confidential to avoid paying landing charges

It's about IDENTITY THEFT and maintaining the integrity and security of MY personal and private information.

The first line in the link below says it all......

 

https://www.afp.gov.au/what-we-do/crime-types/fraud/identity-crime

[M61A1]

It's about IDENTITY THEFT and maintaining the integrity and security of MY personal and private information.

The first line in the link below says it all......

 

https://www.afp.gov.au/what-we-do/crime-types/fraud/identity-crime

Exactly....From the moment I used my work email address to send stuff to RAAus, I started receiving all manner of spam/scam emails. Something I hadn't had previously.

[M61A1]

same argument as the one supporting RAAus keeping our rego's confidential to avoid paying landing charges?

No...It's a completely different set of circumstances.

I have no problem with paying landing fees, but I do have a problem with RAAus's inability to safely handle my personal details.

Letting anyone have access to my data just because they are an instructor is a different kettle of fish.....what could go wrong you ask?

Just because you are nice , well balanced character doesn't mean that all instructors are I have met more than one with a serious god complex and at least one that was the holy trinity. He not only had the god complex , but also the saviour complex and thought he was everywhere at once.

These people shouldn't have access to much at all, they take it upon themselves to rewrite histories and make themselves the hero.

To add to that, most students have no idea of what's going on with that instructor type until they go to a different one and even then may not realise what was going on until much later in their flying life.

 

Do your BFR, charge what you like, assess them as necessary, advise them as necessary, fill out the logbook, send them on their way and let them manage their details, they aren't children.

[Roscoe]

I did my BFR in a C172 in September last year, emailed a copy of the completed form to RAAus, that’s it, can’t be simpler, your currency record then updated.

Thats correct!

[M61A1]

Thats correct!

Not difficult is it......

[aro]

I then have to complete CASA form 61-9fr - the applicant pilot can scan/email it to CASA.

 

By my reading, the instructor is required to send the notification to CASA, with 50 penalty unit/strict liability offence if they do not.

 

I think the pilot is legal to fly as soon as the flight review is completed, if CASA don't receive the notification it's the instructor's problem. It would probably be wise for the instructor to make sure it is done.

[M61A1]

By my reading, the instructor is required to send the notification to CASA, with 50 penalty unit/strict liability offence if they do not.

 

I think the pilot is legal to fly as soon as the flight review is completed, if CASA don't receive the notification it's the instructor's problem. It would probably be wise for the instructor to make sure it is done.

Then all you (the pilot) have to do is send a copy of the flight review page in the logbook to RAA and then you've covered RAA as well if you have a pilot cert too.