Guest Nanks Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Hi, I was wondering if anybody new the requirements of the number and type of hours to gain your commercial licence.I understand that if you want to do it yourself and not threw a commercial licence course then it takes 200 hours of PIC flight time. Does this 200 hours include RA-Aus hours in a recreational registered aircraft and GA aircraft or does only GA hours count towards this 200 hours. Looking forward to any help. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultralights Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Sadly RAAus hours wont count towards the 200 hr CPL course, but if you go for CPL via the old route, and not the special 200 hr course, then they do. well, thats what casa told me on the pone when i asked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Its a bit of a thing. There is no 200 cpl course. The course is 150 hours, if you don't do the course then you need a minimum of 200 hours. And its not all command time,its total time. I wont quotes the figures because im not sure of them, but one of our RAA pilots just got her CPL, counting some of her RAA time. No doubt someone will quote the CAO's and give you a reference. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nanks Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Sadly RAAus hours wont count towards the 200 hr CPL course, but if you go for CPL via the old route, and not the special 200 hr course, then they do. well, thats what casa told me on the pone when i asked Thanks. What is involved in the "old route"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 From CASA's Flight Crew Licensing Procedures Manual you may do 100 hrs PIC in "registered or recognised aeroplanes"of the 200 hrs TT required for that option. For the 150 hr option - nil in RAA as all of it is done thru a CPL school to an approved syllabus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sseeker Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 I've attached a letter from CASA to the AUF (old RA-Aus) that states that hours will count towards a 200hr syllabus. Note: Command only. -Andrew CivilAviationRegulation5115.pdf CivilAviationRegulation5115.pdf CivilAviationRegulation5115.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultralights Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 thanks for reminding me Motz, its a 150 hr course, the old route is basically just training to CPL standard, doing exams, passing obviously, but Raaus hours count, not sure exactly how many though. but they dont towards the dedicated 150hr CPL course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 yea, its crazy. If you do it in a VH rego'd jabiru they count. But if there's numbers on tail, apparently it doesnt count. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Its not just the numbers on the tail - it follows from the requirement for following an approved CPL syllabus with a CASA approved CPL school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Yes DJ, but the difference in the aircraft is the numbers on the tail. A Vh rego'd jab as apposed to an RAA rego'd jab is what exactly?.. I am talking about the SAME school. A school in camden has both VH and RAA rego'd jabs. And lots of guys are racking up hours for the CPL course (150) in the VH jabs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poteroo Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Hours are only part of your requirement. Yes, 100 hrs RAA are acceptable, (out of the 200 minimum),but there is a competency requirement as well. Read up the CPL syllabus and you'll see that you need to be competent in more navigation and flight manoeuvres than those you did for the RAAus PC, and for the PPL test. The tolerances are also closer on everything...even straight & level. You also need competency in CTA operations, and you just don't, (usually), get that in RAAus. happy days, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 :oh yeah:speak for yaself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Haha..heaven forbid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Yes DJ, but the difference in the aircraft is the numbers on the tail. ... I don't care, sorry. If I was CASA then I might say that I don't know that the aeroplanes and equipment are the same, don't know if they meet CASA rules for training and being a CASA AOC running that approved syllabus then CASA is unable to put anything other than VH aeroplanes on the AOC. It could have all be done much better with forethought but perhaps RAA wanted to stay well away from that? I look forward to the discussion on the draft Part 91 to appear soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 yes, but just because you (or casa)don't know, doesn't make it not so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 As above, I don't care but if I was CASA I might say that if not VH then cannot be in Aerial Work category so cannot be used for GA training. Choose to operate your airplane to exemptions then simply accept that there are limitations associated with it. As I said, it could've been set up differently but it wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Acro, you are on the essence of the matter. It's not the individual standard that a certain school achieves/expects, it is ICAO internationally accepted standards that apply. We cannot expect relaxation of requirements and then want high accreditation. If we go this way we will be worse off. We have our own niche in aviation and I hope we keep it as simple as possible commensurate with safety. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now