CASA EX97/16 - Exemption — CASR Part 61 aircraft flight reviews

Explanatory Statement

Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998

Exemption — CASR Part 61 aircraft flight reviews

Purpose

This legislative instrument exempts the holders of certain aircraft class ratings and pilot type ratings from the requirement to complete particular kinds of flight reviews for each specific class rating and each specific pilot type rating held in order to exercise the privileges of the rating, provided the holder complies with conditions which require completion of a relevant alternative kind of flight review.

Legislation — CASR Part 61

Section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (the Act) empowers the Governor-General to make regulations for the Act and the safety of air navigation. The Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR 1998) were so made. Part 61 of CASR 1998 (CASR Part 61) sets out flight crew licensing requirements. (References below to provisions prefixed by the numerals “61” are to provisions in CASR Part 61.)

Regulation 61.745

Under subregulation 61.745 (1), the holder of an aircraft class rating is authorised to exercise the privileges of the rating only if the holder has a valid flight review for the rating.

Under subregulation 61.745 (1A), the holder has a valid flight review for the rating during the period beginning when the holder successfully completes a flight review for the rating in accordance with subregulation (2) and ending at the end of the 24th month after the month in which the holder completes the review; or at the end of the 24th month after the validity of a relevant previous flight review expires.

Under subregulation 61.745 (2), the flight review must be conducted in an aircraft of the class covered by the rating, or in an approved flight simulator for the flight review.

Under subregulation 61.745 (3), the holder is taken to have successfully completed a flight review for the rating if the holder:

• passes the flight test for the rating; or
• passes the flight test for an operational rating in an aircraft of the class covered by the aircraft class rating; or
• completes flight training for a design feature endorsement in an aircraft of the class covered by the aircraft class rating; or
• successfully completes a flight review for a pilot type rating in an aircraft of a type prescribed in an instrument under regulation 61.061 for the class rating; or
• successfully completes:
  • an operator proficiency check that covers operations in the class; or
  • a proficiency check mentioned in subregulation (3A) in an aircraft of the class or an approved flight simulation training device for the purpose.

Under subregulation 61.745 (3A), the relevant proficiency checks are listed.

Under subregulation 61.745 (3B), the holder is taken to have a valid flight review for the rating if the holder is successfully participating in an approved operator’s training and checking system for an operation in an aircraft of the class covered by the rating.

Under subregulation 61.745 (4), the option under subregulation 61.745 (3) of passing the flight test for the rating does not apply if the holder was taken to have met the requirements for the grant of the rating under subregulation 61.480 (3) (in relation to the effects of holding certain recreational pilot licences).

Regulation 61.800

Under subregulation 61.800 (1), the holder of a pilot type rating is authorised to exercise the privileges of the rating as the pilot in command of an aircraft only if the holder has a valid flight review for the rating.

Under subregulation 61.800 (2), the holder has a valid flight review for the rating during the period beginning when the holder successfully completes a flight review for the rating in accordance with subregulation (3) and ending at the end of the 24th month after the month in which the holder completes the review, or at the end of the 24th month after the validity of a previous relevant flight review expires.

Under subregulation 61.800 (3), if the aircraft covered by the rating is a prescribed type of single‑engine helicopter, the flight review must be conducted in a helicopter of the type covered by the rating; or an approved flight simulator for that type of helicopter; or a type of single‑engine helicopter prescribed as equivalent to the type covered by the rating; or an approved flight simulator for that type of helicopter.

Under subregulation 61.800 (3), if the aircraft covered by the rating is not a prescribed type of single‑engine helicopter, the flight review must be conducted in an aircraft of the type covered by the rating; or in an approved flight simulator for that type of aircraft.

Under subregulation 61.800 (4), the holder is taken to have successfully completed a flight review for the rating if the holder:

• passes the flight test for the rating; or
• passes the flight test for an operational rating in an aircraft of the class covered by the type rating; or
• completes flight training for a design feature endorsement in an aircraft of the class covered by the type rating; or
• successfully completes:
  • an operator proficiency check that covers operations in the type; or
  • a proficiency check mentioned in subregulation (5) in an aircraft of the type or an approved flight simulation training device for the purpose.

Under subregulation 61.800 (5), the proficiency checks are as follows:

• an instrument proficiency check
• a night vision imaging system proficiency check
• an aerial application proficiency check
• an instructor proficiency check
• an examiner proficiency check.

Under subregulation 61.800 (6), the holder is taken to have a valid flight review for the rating if the holder is successfully participating in an approved operator’s training and checking system for an operation in an aircraft of the type covered by the rating.

Legislation — exemptions

Subpart 11.F of CASR 1998 deals with exemptions. Under subregulation 11.160 (1), and for subsection 98 (5A) of the Act, CASA may, by instrument, grant an exemption from a provision of CASR 1998 in relation to a matter mentioned in subsection 98 (5A). Subsection 98 (5A) matters are, in effect, those affecting the safety, airworthiness or design of aircraft.

Under subregulation 11.160 (2), an exemption may be granted to a person or a class of persons. Under subregulation 11.160 (3), CASA may grant an exemption on application, or on its own initiative. For an application for an exemption, CASA must regard as paramount the preservation of an acceptable level of safety.

For making a decision on its own initiative, CASA is guided by the requirement in subsection 9A (1) of the Act that in exercising its powers and functions CASA must regard the safety of air navigation as the most important consideration.

Under regulation 11.205, CASA may impose conditions on an exemption if necessary in the interests of the safety of air navigation. Under regulation 11.210, it is a strict liability offence not to comply with the obligations imposed by a condition. Under regulation 11.225, CASA must, as soon as practicable, publish on the Internet details of all exemptions under Subpart 11.F.

Under subregulation 11.230 (1), an exemption (but not an exceptional circumstances exemption for regulation 11.185 about major emergencies) may remain in force for 3 years or for a shorter period specified in the instrument.

Under subregulation 11.230 (3), an exemption in force in relation to a particular aircraft owned by a particular person, ceases to be in force when the aircraft ceases to be owned by that person. Under regulation 11.235, an exemption is not transferable (as between operators, aircraft etc.).

Background

One of the effects of the changes introduced by CASR Part 61 on and from 1 September 2014, was to increase the number of occasions on which a pilot is required to undergo a flight review, as compared to the pre-1 September 2014 situation under Part 5 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR Part 5). The flight review requirements were expanded to require periodic flight reviews for each aircraft class rating and each pilot type rating the privileges of which a pilot wished to exercise. Previously, a periodic licence-based flight review in an aircraft of the same category was sufficient.

Experience since September 2014, and feedback to CASA from the aviation industry, has identified some unforeseen effects arising from these new requirements. For example, there is a relatively small cohort of pilots in the aviation industry who fly more than 1 type or class of aircraft, although not, individually, of a great variety of aircraft. However, there is a smaller cohort again who operate several different type-rated and class-rated aircraft.

These pilots are most likely completing both flight review and proficiency checks for operational ratings, and together these mitigate the risks that the Part 61 flight review policy was addressing. Even those pilots who may not be completing both flight review and proficiency checks for operational ratings are, in any case, like all pilots, obliged to comply with the general competency rule in CASR 61.385, which also addresses the maintenance of pilot competency.

The effect of the new CASR Part 61 requirements is, to a greater or lesser degree, to oblige pilots in each of these small cohorts to complete additional flight reviews for each class and type of aircraft flown, without any significant gains in aviation safety outcomes from the additional obligations.

Pilots working for holders of air operator certificates (AOCs) are, and will remain, subject to more frequent proficiency checks under other provisions of CASR Part 61 conducted under the auspices of the AOC holder.

Pending amendments to Part 61, CASA has made an exemption to exempt pilots in the relevant cohorts from an unnecessary multiplicity of flight reviews.

The exemption

Who the exemption applies to

Under section 3, the exemption is expressed to apply to a person (the holder) who holds 1 of the following aircraft class ratings or pilot type ratings under CASR Part 61 or under the transitional provisions in Subdivision 202.CB.1.2 of CASR 1998 (which grandfathered pre-1 September 2014 ratings):

(a) a single-engine aeroplane class rating;

(b) a multi-engine aeroplane class rating;

(c) a single-engine aeroplane pilot type rating;

(d) a multi-engine aeroplane pilot type rating;

(e) a single-engine helicopter class rating;

(f) a single-engine helicopter pilot type rating;

(g) a multi-engine helicopter pilot type rating.

Details of the 7 exemptions and the conditions which apply

Section 4 activates the Table in Schedule 1, displaying row by row, the CASR Part 61 provisions from which the holder of particular aircraft class rating or pilot type rating is exempted, the extent of the exemption and the condition for obtaining the benefit of the exemption. Each of the provisions exempted from is a provision requiring 1 or other of a particular kind of flight review to have been completed for a particular period.

For example, under item 1, the holder of a single-engine aeroplane class rating is exempted from the requirements under subregulations 61.745 (1A), (2), (3), (3A), (3B) and (4) to have a prescribed valid flight review for that specific rating, on condition that the holder has a valid flight review under regulation 61.800 for any aeroplane type rating (and not specifically the flight review for the single-engine aeroplane class rating). A Note (applicable for items 1 and 3 for single-engine aeroplane class ratings and pilot type ratings) takes the reader to an explanation of how a pilot may operate a class-rated single-engine aeroplane under the privileges of a multi-engine aeroplane class rating.

Each of items 1 to 7 of the Table (set out in Appendix 1) is applied in the same way for the various class or type rating holders mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (g) above as follows:

Under item 2, the holder of a multi-engine aeroplane class rating is exempted from the requirement under subregulations 61.745 (1A), (2), (3), (3A), (3B) and (4) to have a prescribed valid flight review for that specific rating, on condition that the holder has a valid flight review under regulation 61.800 for any multi-engine aeroplane pilot type rating (and not specifically the flight review for the multi-engine aeroplane class rating).

Under item 3, the holder of a single-engine aeroplane pilot type rating is exempted from the requirement under subregulations 61.800 (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) to have a prescribed valid flight review for that specific rating, on condition that the holder has a valid flight review under regulation 61.800 for any aeroplane pilot type rating, or under regulation 61.745 for any aeroplane class rating.

Under item 4, the holder of a multi-engine aeroplane pilot type rating is exempted from the requirement under subregulations 61.800 (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) to have a prescribed valid flight review for that specific rating, on condition that the holder has a valid flight review under regulation 61.800 for any multi-engine aeroplane pilot type rating, or under regulation 61.745 for the multi-engine aeroplane class rating.

Under item 5, the holder of a single-engine helicopter class rating is exempted from the requirement under subregulations 61.745 (1A), (2), (3), (3A), (3B) and (4) to have a prescribed valid flight review for that specific rating, on condition that the holder has a valid flight review under regulation 61.800 for any helicopter pilot type rating.

Under item 6, the holder of a single-engine helicopter pilot type rating is exempted from the requirement under subregulations 61.800 (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) to have a prescribed valid flight review for that specific rating, on condition that the holder has a valid flight review under regulation 61.800 for any helicopter pilot type rating, or under regulation 61.745 for the single-engine helicopter class rating.

Under item 7, the holder of a multi-engine helicopter pilot type rating is exempted from the requirement under subregulations 61.800 (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) to have a prescribed valid flight review for that specific rating, on condition that the holder has a valid flight review under regulation 61.800 for any multi-engine helicopter pilot type rating.

The effect of the exemption

The effect of the exemption is that a pilot who complies with the relevant conditions of the exemption for completing a flight review, rather than with the requirements of subregulations 61.745 (1A), (2), (3), (3A), (3B) and (4), or subregulations 61.800 (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) (as the case requires under the terms of the instrument) would be authorised to exercise the privileges of the relevant aircraft class rating or pilot type rating under regulation 61.745 or 61.800 (as the case requires) during the relevant period.

How the exemptions affect flight reviews for grandfathered licence holders

As mentioned above, 2 Notes are referenced to explain how the exemption might affect grandfathered rating holders.

Note 1 explains that under transitional regulation 202.267 of CASR 1998, a holder who at a particular time before 1 September 2014 would have met the flight review requirements for a continued authorisation before Part 61 was made, is taken to meet the flight review requirements for the continued (grandfathered) authorisation.

When the period of duration of that flight review expires, the holder is subject to applicable requirements under Part 61 to complete a valid flight review. However, those requirements would then be subject to the terms of the exemption, if it relevantly applied.

Note 2 explains that under transitional regulation 202.276 of CASR 1998, when at a particular time the holder of a continued (grandfathered) authorisation is actually granted the equivalent new authorisation under regulation 202.272 of CASR 1998, and the new authorisation has flight review requirements that the holder would have met for the equivalent continued (grandfathered) authorisation if it were still in force, the holder is taken to meet the flight review requirements for the continued authorisation at that time.

When the period of duration of that flight review expires, the holder is subject to applicable requirements under Part 61 to complete a valid flight review. However, those requirements would then be subject to the terms of the exemption, if it relevantly applied.

A third Note explains how, under subregulation 61.375 (3), the holder of a multi-engine aeroplane class rating who has a valid flight review for that rating is authorised to operate aeroplanes covered by the single-engine aeroplane class rating.

Additional conditions — record keeping

Section 5 imposes additional conditions on the exemptions. Thus, under subsection 5 (1), relevant holders’ pilot licences must include a record that the holder has completed the applicable flight review required under the Table as the condition of the exemption.

Additional conditions — MU-2 single pilot multi-engine aeroplane

The MU-2 single pilot multi-engine aeroplane is recognised as an aircraft which has critical performance and handling characteristics that warrant type-specific and recent checks of competency.

Under CASA instrument titled Conditions on authorisations — flight crew licences and aircraft endorsements (Edition 1) (as in force on 1 July 2016, and at Attachment 1 (the Conditions on authorisations instrument), the holder of the MU-2 single pilot multi‑engine aeroplane type rating must not exercise the privileges of the rating as a pilot in command unless (among other things) he or she has, within the previous 12 months, satisfactorily completed a flight review or a proficiency check specifically in an MU-2 aircraft.

Under subsection 5 (2), for aviation safety, the exemptions are expressly stated as not to affect this particular flight review requirement.

Additional conditions — R22 and R44 helicopters

Also, R22 and R44 helicopters are recognised as having critical performance and handling characteristics that warrant specific and recent checks of competency.

Under the Conditions on authorisations instrument, the holder of a single-engine helicopter class rating must not conduct operations in an R22 or R44 helicopter unless (among other things) he or she has completed a flight review, in accordance with regulation 61.745; and the flight review was conducted in an R22 or R44 helicopter.

Once again, for aviation safety, under subsection 5 (3), the exemptions are expressly stated as not to affect this particular flight review requirement.

Duration

The exemption is expressed to commence on 1 July 2016 (incorporating a short administrative lead time). The instrument will operate until repealed at the end of 31 August 2018, being the final date by which pre-Part 61 licences will, as continued authorisations under regulation 202.263 of CASR 1998, be physically converted to Part 61 licences. (See also below under Making and commencement).

Legislation Act 2003 (the LA)

As noted above, exemptions under Subpart 11.F of CASR 1998 are “for subsection 98 (5A)” of the Act, that is, for regulations which empower the issue of certain instruments, like exemptions, in relation to “(a) matters affecting the safe navigation and operation, or the maintenance, of aircraft”, and “(b) the airworthiness of, or design standards for, aircraft”.

The exemption is clearly one in relation to matters affecting the safe navigation and operation of aircraft. Under subsection 98 (5AA) of the Act, an exemption issued under paragraph 98 (5A) (a), for such matters, is a legislative instrument if expressed to apply in relation to a class of persons, a class of aircraft or a class of aeronautical products (as distinct from a particular person, aircraft or product).

The exemption applies to classes of persons (aircraft rating holders) and is, therefore, a legislative instrument subject to registration, and tabling and disallowance in the Parliament, under sections 15G, and 38 and 42, of the LA.

Consultation

Exemptions from regulatory requirements are considered to be beneficial for those to whom they apply, who voluntarily elect to take advantage of them, and who comply with their conditions. It is, therefore, rarely necessary to engage in extensive public consultation on a proposed exemption. However, except in urgent circumstances, it is CASA’s policy to consult in an appropriate way with those parts of the aviation industry most likely to avail themselves of, or be affected by, an exemption so that they may have the opportunity to comment on the possible or likely terms, scope and appropriateness of the exemption.

Since September 2014, CASA has received periodic feedback from the aviation industry critical of some of the flight review requirements in CASR Part 61. The issue was specifically discussed in December 2015 at the Part 61 Taskforce Industry Advisory Panel (a joint CASA/industry consultation forum for Part 61). At this meeting there was agreement to the proposal to simplify the flight review requirements along the lines of the exemption instrument.

The specific proposal to change flight review requirements was posted to the Industry Advisory Panel website and the Standards Consultative Committee website on 9 May 2016 for members of those forums to provide review and comments (the Standards Consultative Committee is another, broader-based, joint CASA/industry consultation forum). The feedback received supported the proposal. A supplementary change to the proposal was posted to both forums on 19 May 2016 and again the proposal was supported.

Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR)

A Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) is not required because the exemption instrument is covered by a standing agreement between CASA and OBPR under which a RIS is not required for an exemption (OBPR id: 14507).

Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights

The Statement in Appendix 1 is prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011. The instrument does not engage any of the applicable rights or freedoms, and is compatible with human rights, as it does not raise any human rights issues.

Making and commencement

The exemption instrument has been made by the Acting Director of Aviation Safety, on behalf of CASA, in accordance with subsection 73 (2) of the Act.

The exemption commences on 1 July 2016 and is repealed at the end of 31 August 2018.

The exemption instrument is an interim measure, pending substantive amendments to Part 61 which will remove the need for the exemption. These amendments will be part of a larger set of amendments to Part 61 for which drafting instructions are being prepared. It is expected that, subject to the capacity of OPC to produce them in the context of competing priorities arising from government drafting demands, the amendments will be made and in force within the next 18 months to 2 years.

[Instrument number CASA EX97/16]

Appendix 1

Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights

Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the
Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011

Exemption — CASR Part 61 aircraft flight reviews

This legislative instrument is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

Overview of the legislative instrument

This legislative instrument exempts the holders of certain aircraft class ratings and pilot type ratings from the requirement to complete flight reviews for each specific class rating and each specific pilot type rating held in order to exercise the privileges of the rating, provided the holder complies with conditions which require completion of a relevant alternative flight review.

Human rights implications

The legislative instrument is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011. The instrument does not engage any of the applicable rights or freedoms.

Conclusion

This legislative instrument is compatible with human rights as it does not raise any human rights issues.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority

I, JONATHAN ALECK, Acting Director of Aviation Safety, on behalf of CASA, make this instrument under regulation 11.068 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR 1998) and subsection 33 (3) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901.

[Signed Jonathan Aleck]

Jonathan AleckActing Director of Aviation Safety

23 December 2014

Conditions on authorisations — flight crew licences and aircraft endorsements (Edition 1)

1 Commencement

 This instrument commences on the day of registration.

2 Repeal

 Instrument CASA 244/14 is repealed.

3 Definitions

 For these directions, the following expressions are defined:

Note   For active participation see participation.

hold short line means a line on a hold short runway beyond which the pilot in command of a landing aircraft, following his or her active participation, is instructed not to proceed.

hold short runway means a runway used for LAHSO, being a runway that has aerodrome signs, runway markings and lighting requirements in accordance with the applicable standards.

instrument flying means controlling an aircraft’s attitude during flight solely by reference to the aircraft’s flight instruments.

LAHSO means a Land and Hold Short Operation, being an operation in which the pilot in command of an aircraft has accepted a requirement to land on a hold short runway and hold short of the hold short line.

participation, in relation to LAHSO, has the following meanings:

(a) active participation means accepting a requirement to hold short of a hold short line, after receiving an alert about aircraft on a crossing runway.

(b) passive participation means having unrestricted use of a full runway but acknowledging an alert about a LAHSO on a crossing runway.

visual flying means controlling an aircraft’s attitude during flight by reference to features outside the aircraft.

4 Practising instrument flying

It is a condition on an aeroplane pilot licence that the holder of the aeroplane pilot licence must not practice instrument flying in an aeroplane while the aeroplane is flying under the V.F.R. unless:

(a) all the following requirements are satisfied:

 (i) the aeroplane is equipped with fully functioning dual controls;

 (ii)  the other control seat is occupied by a person who is authorised under Part 61 of CASR 1998 to conduct a flight in the aircraft;

 (iii) the person has sufficient vision from the aeroplane to enable him or her to safely fly the aeroplane in visual flying; or

(b) both the following requirements are satisfied:

 (i) the aeroplane is equipped with fully functioning dual controls;

 (ii) the holder is accompanied by an authorised flight instructor.

Note:   It is an offence under the Civil Aviation Act 1988 for a person to fly an aeroplane under the I.F.R. unless he or she is authorised to do so under Part 61 of CASR 1998.

5 Active participation in LAHSO

 5.1It is a condition on an aeroplane pilot licence that the holder of the aeroplane pilot licence must not, while operating an aeroplane, actively participate in LAHSO unless the holder:

(a) is authorised by the operator of the aeroplane who has a training and checking organisation approved under regulation 217 of CASR 1998 and has assessed the holder as competent in those matters specified in Appendixes 1 and 2; or

(b) has been certified in the holder’s personal log book by a LAHSO instructor as being competent to the standards specified in Appendixes 1 and 2 and able to actively participate in LAHSO; or

(c) is receiving training or being instructed or assessed for competency to the standards specified in Appendixes 1 and 2 by a person authorised under Part 61 of CASR 1998 to conduct flight training in that aircraft and actively participate in LAHSO.

 5.2 A log book certification referred to in paragraph 5.1 (b) must be in the following form:

 (Name of pilot and ARN) has been instructed in, and found competent to actively participate in, Land and Hold Short Operations (LAHSO) in accordance with this section, on (Date).

 Signed: (LAHSO instructor)

 ARN: (of LAHSO instructor)

 Flying Training Organisation: (Name, if applicable)

6 Condition on a MU-2 aircraft type rating

 6.1It is a condition on a MU-2 aircraft type rating that the holder of the MU-2 single pilot multi-engine aeroplane type rating must not exercise the privileges of the rating as a pilot in command unless he or she has:

(a) accumulated not less than:

 (i) 50 hours of aeronautical experience as pilot in command under supervision, of MU-2 aircraft; or

 (ii) 50 hours of aeronautical experience as pilot in command of multi‑engine turbo-prop powered aircraft and 30 hours of aeronautical experience as pilot in command under supervision of MU-2 aircraft; and

(b) within the previous 12 months, satisfactorily completed a flight review or proficiency check conducted in a MU-2 aircraft; and

(c) within the previous 90 days, have completed 1 hour of flight time, including 3 landings in a MU-2 aircraft; and

(d) within the previous 24 months completed a proficiency check for the MU‑2 type rating and has been certified by the person conducting the proficiency check as having viewed the Mitsubishi Icing Awareness Training (IAT) video YET-01295.

7 Condition on an instructor rating

 It is a condition on an instructor rating that the holder of an instructor rating with a training endorsement may only conduct training for a flight activity endorsement, if:

(a) he or she has demonstrated competency in doing so to a person authorised to conduct a flight test for the relevant training endorsement; and

(b) the person authorised to conduct the flight test mentioned in paragraph (a) holds the flight activity endorsement.

8 Condition on a single-engine helicopter class rating

 It is a condition on a single-engine helicopter class rating that the holder of that rating may conduct operations in a R22 or R44 helicopter only if:

(a) he or she has completed a flight review, in accordance with regulation 61.745 of CASR 1998; and

(b) the flight review was conducted in a R22 or R44 helicopter.

Appendix 1

Standards to be met for the LAHSO log book certification

1 Introduction

 1.1 This Appendix specifies the standards of competency and aeronautical knowledge required for the issue of a LAHSO log book certification. These standards must be satisfied by a combined oral examination and practical check carried out by a person authorised to issue the log book certification.

 1.2 Before the issue of a LAHSO endorsement, the applicant must demonstrate that the standards of flying competency specified in Appendix 2 have been achieved.

 1.3 The oral examination must indicate an ability to satisfy each of the items included in the aeronautical knowledge syllabus detailed in clause 2 of this Appendix.

 1.4 In the oral examination, candidates may refer to AIP (complete — including En Route Supplement Australia (ERSA) and Aerodrome Directory) and Parts 20 to 99 of the Civil Aviation Orders.

 1.5 The practical check must be conducted in an aeroplane at an aerodrome at which LAHSO are authorised or in a synthetic flight trainer approved by CASA as suitable for that purpose. LAHSO need not be in use at an aerodrome during the test if the appropriate procedures are simulated by the person conducting the check.

2 Aeronautical knowledge syllabus

 2.1 Recall the procedures for participation in LAHSO in Australia.

 2.2 Identify the aerodromes where LAHSO may be conducted in Australia.

 2.3 Explain the term active participation.

 2.4 Explain the term passive participation.

 2.5 Identify and interpret the aerodrome signs, runway markings and lighting requirements that apply to LAHSO.

 2.6 Identify the requirements for pilots to participate in LAHSO.

 2.7 Identify the aircraft performance categories defined for participation in LAHSO.

 2.8 State the conditions under which LAHSO may be offered by ATC to pilots.

 2.9 State the methods of notification that LAHSO is in progress.

 2.10 State the “read back” requirements for pilots engaged in active participation in LAHSO.

 2.11 Establish from ERSA the landing distance available for LAHSO.

 2.12 Calculate the aeroplane landing distance required in dry, wet or downwind conditions, using the procedure set out in AIP.

Appendix 2

Land and hold short operations — LAHSO practical test