Part 61 Flight Crew Licensing (Prescribed Aircraft and Type Ratings) (Edition 11) Instrument 2026

Explanatory Statement

Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998

Part 61 Flight Crew Licensing (Prescribed Aircraft and Type Ratings) (Edition 11) Instrument 2026

Purpose

Part 61 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR) requires pilots to hold aircraft class or type ratings, and to meet other requirements such as flight reviews and differences training, prior to operating an aircraft.

The main purpose of the Part 61 Flight Crew Licensing (Prescribed Aircraft and Type Ratings) (Edition 11) Instrument 2026 (the Edition 11 instrument) is to prescribe:

(a) the variants, differences training requirements, flight review requirements and type ratings for specified aircraft types for the purposes of relevant provisions in Part 61; and

(b) the flight training and flight review requirements for the exercise of the privileges of class ratings to pilot aircraft prescribed by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).

The Edition 11 instrument repeals and remakes the Part 61 Flight Crew Licensing (Prescribed Aircraft and Type Ratings) (Edition 10) Instrument 2025 (the Edition 10 instrument) because new types and models of aircraft have commenced operations in Australia, and have been included on the Australian Civil Aircraft Register (the civil aircraft register), but are not adequately managed through the existing prescriptions. For that reason, the Edition 11 instrument prescribes new type or class ratings and describes flight and differences training requirements to ensure pilots complete the training required to pilot the prescribed types and models. The Edition 11 instrument changes the prescriptions made by the Edition 10 instrument as follows:

(a) by adding new models Airbus A321 ‘NY’ series aircraft (aka A321 XLR) to the A320 type rating so that they can be operated in Australia by pilots holding the A320 type rating; and

(b) by removing references to the Airbus A321 ‘NX’ models because there are no regulatory training differences that arise between the different models of each high-level series (i.e., A320, A321); and

(c) by prescribing the G8000 as a variant of the G7500, introducing a differences training requirement in Australia; and

(d) by adding the new aircraft type Challenger CL-604XT to the existing CL-604 type rating as a variant that requires differences training; and

(e) by including the new model of the Pilatus PC-12 (PC-12 PRO) as a separate entry to the Pilatus PC12 requiring completion of training and a flight review prior to exercising the privileges of the single-engine class rating; and

(f) by prescribing the B100 (King Air) as a class-rated aircraft that requires training and a flight review prior to exercising the privileges of the multi-engine class rating.

The Edition 11 instrument also:

(a) recognises autothrottle training on King Air 300 series aircraft for operating King Air 200 series aircraft with autothrottle; and

(b) updates a reference to the certificate holder for and manufacturer of certain currently prescribed aircraft, the name of which has changed from Viking Air to De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Ltd.

Legislation

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.

Under paragraph 98(5A)(a) of the Act, such regulations may empower CASA to issue instruments in relation to matters affecting the safe navigation and operation of aircraft.

Part 61 of CASR contains regulations for flight crew licensing, including the various requirements for flight crew licences, ratings and endorsements. These requirements, which include flight training in units of competency, aeronautical knowledge examinations, flight tests, flight reviews and proficiency checks, are predicated on types and classes of aircraft and operations, including whether aircraft are variants of other aircraft and whether, in such cases, differences training is required if privileges are to be exercised in a variant. These requirements are consistent with Australia’s obligations of conformity to the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation, its Protocols and Annexes.

Under subsection 33(3) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (the AI Act), where an Act confers a power to make, grant or issue any instrument of a legislative or administrative character (including rules, regulations or by-laws), the power shall be construed as including a power exercisable in the like manner and subject to the like conditions (if any) to repeal, rescind, revoke, amend, or vary any such instrument.

Fundamental concepts in the operation of Part 61 of CASR

The rationale behind Part 61 of CASR is that a pilot may be authorised to fly a particular type of aircraft only if the pilot has undertaken sufficient training and an assessment has been made to confirm that the pilot is competent in operating that type of aircraft. In addition, a pilot must periodically undergo a review (a flight review or proficiency check) of the pilot’s continued competence operating the aircraft if the pilot wishes to continue flying that type of aircraft.

Within the range of available aircraft types, some can be grouped together and treated in a common way under Part 61 of CASR. Thus, undertaking training and being assessed to operate one type of aircraft may satisfy the training requirements for a number of other types of aircraft if they have similar characteristics and performance. Also, undertaking a flight review or proficiency check in one type of aircraft may satisfy the flight review or proficiency check requirements for a number of other types of aircraft.

Most single-engine aeroplanes are grouped together in this way into the single-engine aeroplane class rating. Before flying such an aircraft, a pilot must complete appropriate training as required by regulation 61.385 of CASR.

However, many types of aircraft are sufficiently complex or different from other types as to warrant a pilot undertaking type-specific training to be authorised to fly these types. These aircraft are identified as type-rated aircraft. Aircraft that are certificated to be flown by more than 1 pilot are examples of type-rated aircraft.

Before flying an aircraft, a pilot must be competent in operating the particular aircraft. Consequently, even if pilots are qualified to fly single-engine aeroplanes covered by the class rating, before flying a different type within the class rating, pilots must make sure that they are competent to fly the new type, which may have different systems, performance and handling characteristics to the type of aircraft they flew when qualifying for the class rating.

Nevertheless, some aircraft that are designated as type-rated aircraft are sufficiently similar in their characteristics to other aircraft covered by the relevant class rating as to warrant recognition of ongoing competency checks (flight reviews) done in the type-rated aircraft for the purposes of the class rating flight review.

There will be aircraft that have been included within a class, although they are sufficiently complex or have performance characteristics that warrant initial type-specific training and a flight review. Once the pilot has completed that initial type-specific training and the flight review, the continued competency of the pilot to operate such aircraft in the future can be demonstrated in any aircraft covered by the class rating.

Several regulations in Part 61 of CASR provide for a legislative instrument to prescribe the types of aircraft for which some of the concessions mentioned above apply.

Regulation 61.050 — multi-engine aeroplanes included in single-engine aeroplane class

Under regulation 61.050 of CASR, for paragraph 98(5A)(a) of the Act, CASA may, by legislative instrument, prescribe aeroplanes that are included in the single-engine aeroplane class. Under subregulation 61.020(2) of CASR, the single-engine aeroplane class also includes multi-engine centreline thrust aeroplanes. (A person operating such an aeroplane under the authority of a single-engine aeroplane class rating is also required to hold a multi-engine centreline thrust design feature endorsement under subregulation 61.380(2) of CASR.)

Aircraft referred to by regulation 61.050 are aircraft that would otherwise be included in the multi-engine aeroplane class rating or type rating. These aircraft are sufficiently like single‑engine aeroplanes in their performance and handling characteristics that they can be safely flown under the authority of a single-engine aeroplane class rating.

CASA has reserved its prescription of multi-engine aeroplanes that are to be included in the single-engine aeroplane class because no relevant aircraft have been identified at the time of making the Edition 11 instrument.

Regulation 61.055 — type ratings and variants for multi-crew aircraft

Under subregulation 61.055(1) of CASR, for paragraph 98(5A)(a) of the Act, CASA may, by legislative instrument, prescribe for multi-crew aircraft:

(a) the type ratings that may be granted for multi-crew operations; and

(b) the aircraft models that are variants of each other; and

(c) in relation to each variant — the variants for which differences training is required; and

(d) the type ratings for which the flight review or instrument proficiency check requirements may be met by completion of a single flight review; and

(e) the type ratings for which the instrument proficiency check requirements may be met by completion of a single instrument proficiency check.

Under subregulation 61.055(2), for paragraph 98(5A)(a) of the Act, if 2 or more aircraft models are variants of each other, CASA may, by legislative instrument, prescribe that the models are no longer variants of each other if satisfied that:

(a) the complexity of one of the models’ systems; or

(b) a difference in their performance or handling characteristics;

requires the provision of additional flight training to enable a person to pilot an aircraft of that model safely.

Aircraft referred to by regulation 61.055 are aircraft that are operated by 2 pilots and require initial and ongoing type-specific training and competency checking. These aircraft are sufficiently complex, or their performance or handling characteristics are such, that additional training of the pilots is warranted to enable them to pilot these aircraft safely.

Aircraft types can have variants within each type, and the characteristics of the variants can differ (for example, in such areas as operating systems, size or performance). In some cases, the variant differences are such that additional training of the pilots is warranted to enable them to pilot variants of the original aircraft type. However, there will be variants that are sufficiently similar that additional training and competency checking is not warranted, and completing a proficiency check or a flight review in one variant meets the proficiency check or flight review requirements applicable to the other variants of that type.

Regulation 61.060 — type ratings for single-pilot aircraft

Under subregulation 61.060(1) of CASR, for paragraph 98(5A)(a) of the Act, CASA may, by legislative instrument, prescribe the following:

(a) for a type of aircraft that is certificated for single-pilot operation — whether a single‑pilot type rating is required;

(b) for aircraft for which single-pilot type ratings are required:

 (i) the type ratings that may be granted for single-pilot operation; and

 (ii) the aircraft models that are variants of each other; and

 (iii) in relation to each variant — the variants for which differences training is required;

(c) the type ratings for which the flight review or instrument proficiency check requirements may be met by completion of a single flight review;

(d) the type ratings for which the instrument proficiency check requirements may be met by completion of a single instrument proficiency check.

Under subregulation 61.060(2), CASA may prescribe that a single-pilot type rating is required for an aircraft only if satisfied that:

(a) the complexity of the aircraft’s systems; or

(b) its performance or handling characteristics;

requires the provision of additional flight training to enable a person to pilot an aircraft of that type safely.

Aircraft referred to by regulation 61.060 are aircraft that may be operated by 1 pilot and require initial and ongoing type-specific training and competency checking. These aircraft are sufficiently complex, or their performance or handling characteristics are such, that additional training of the pilots is warranted to enable them to pilot these aircraft safely.

Aircraft types can have variants within each type, and the characteristics of the variants can differ (for example, in such areas as operating systems, size or performance). In some cases, the variant differences are such that additional training of the pilots is warranted to enable them to pilot these variants of the original aircraft type.

Regulation 61.061 — types of aircraft where a flight review for a pilot type rating meets flight review requirements for a class rating

Under regulation 61.061 of CASR, for paragraph 98(5A)(a) of the Act, CASA may, by instrument, prescribe types of aircraft for which the conduct of a flight review or instrument proficiency check for a pilot type rating meets the flight review requirements for a class rating.

Aircraft referred to by regulation 61.061 are identified as being sufficiently complex, or have performance or handling characteristics, that warrant initial and ongoing type-specific training and competency checking requirements that must be satisfied before pilots are authorised to fly these types of aircraft. However, conducting a flight review or proficiency check in such an aircraft is regarded as being sufficient to ensure the pilot is also competent operating similar aircraft covered by the class rating and, therefore, would be acceptable for the purposes of a relevant class rating flight review. The aircraft type has sufficient commonality with aircraft included in a relevant class rating that justifies this recognition.

CASA has prescribed types of multi-engine aeroplanes for this purpose, while reserving its prescription of types of single-engine helicopters on this matter.

Regulation 61.062 — types of aircraft with additional limitations on class ratings

Under regulation 61.062 of CASR, for paragraph 98(5A)(a) of the Act, CASA may, by instrument, prescribe types of aircraft for which flight training and a flight review are required under regulation 61.747 of CASR for the exercise of the privileges of a class rating. Under subregulation 61.747(1), the holder of an aircraft class rating may, subject to other requirements, exercise the privileges of the class rating in an aircraft type prescribed under regulation 61.062.

Aircraft referred to by regulation 61.062 are identified as being sufficiently complex or have performance or handling characteristics that warrant initial type-specific training and a flight review in the specific type.

However, these types are not so different that ongoing training and competency checking needs to be type specific. In these cases, the pilot only needs to complete initial type-specific training along with a flight review, rather than a flight test, as the means of assessing the pilot’s competence in operating that type of aircraft. Thereafter, a flight review in any other aircraft in the same class satisfies the flight review requirements to fly that type of aircraft.

Regulation 61.063 — types of single-engine helicopters for flight reviews

Under regulation 61.063 of CASR, for paragraph 98(5A)(a) of the Act, CASA may, by instrument, prescribe types of single-engine helicopters that may be used to conduct flight reviews for other types of single-engine helicopters.

Aircraft referred to by regulation 61.063 are identified as being sufficiently complex or have performance characteristics that warrant initial and ongoing type-specific training and checking requirements that must be satisfied before pilots are authorised to fly these types of aircraft. However, conducting a flight review in such an aircraft is regarded as acceptable for the purposes of the other listed single-engine helicopter types.

CASA has reserved its prescription of single-engine type-rated helicopters that may be used to conduct flight reviews for other single-engine helicopters.

Background (current policy)

When new aircraft are added to the civil aircraft register, the role of CASA includes to maintain the flight crew licensing scheme by determining the training required for pilots to operate the aircraft safely. In determining the authorisation required to fly a particular aircraft, CASA considers the aeronautical knowledge and practical flight training pilots require to be competent to safely fly the aircraft. For more complex aircraft, CASA refers to evaluations of pilot training requirements conducted as part of the aircraft certification process in conjunction with assessments by CASA subject matter experts.

Where the training for a new aircraft is assessed as minor for pilots who have flown similar aircraft, CASA usually determines the aircraft can be flown under the authority of an existing aircraft rating. For aircraft that require more comprehensive training, CASA prescribes a new type rating or prescribes the aircraft as a variant of an existing type rating. Where flight training for a variant requires use of a flight simulator or in-aircraft flight training, CASA specifies differences training for the variant.

In accordance with Part 61 of CASR, CASA prescribes type ratings and differences training requirements for variants covered by a type rating in a legislative instrument, originally called Prescription of aircraft and ratings – CASR Part 61 and now called Part 61 Flight Crew Licensing (Prescribed Aircraft and Type Ratings) Instrument with editions to identify latest versions. The current version is the Edition 10 instrument.

Content of instrument

For the purposes of the legislative provisions mentioned above, the Edition 11 instrument prescribes the variants, differences training requirements, flight review requirements and type ratings for specified aircraft types. It also prescribes flight training and flight review requirements for class ratings.

Section 1 gives the Edition 11 instrument its name and provides that the instrument commences on the day after it is registered on the Federal Register of Legislation (the FRL).

Section 2 repeals the Edition 10 instrument in accordance with subsection 33(3) of the AI Act.

Section 3 contains definitions of terms used in the Edition 11 instrument, including a number of abbreviations.

Section 5 prescribes type ratings for multi-crew aeroplane models under paragraph 61.055(1)(a).

Section 5A provides for the transitional arrangements for pilots who, immediately before the commencement of Edition 9, held an A330 or A330(CR) type rating. The holder of the type rating is taken to hold the new A330/350 type rating or A330/350(CR) type rating but will be subject to the differences training requirements for the variants included or covered by the new rating.

Section 6 prescribes type ratings for multi-crew helicopters under paragraph 61.055(1)(a).

Section 7 prescribes variants for multi-crew aeroplanes under paragraph 61.055(1)(b).

Section 8 prescribes variants for multi-crew helicopters under paragraph 61.055(1)(b).

Section 9 prescribes, for paragraph 61.055(1)(c), differences training that is required for a person to exercise the privileges of a multi-crew aeroplane type rating in a variant that is different from the variant for which the person first received the type rating.

Section 10 prescribes, for paragraph 61.055(1)(c), the differences training that is required for a person to exercise the privileges of a multi-crew helicopter type rating in a variant that is different from the variant for which the person first received the type rating.

Section 13 prescribes the aeroplanes that require a single-pilot type rating under paragraph 61.060(1)(a).

Section 14 prescribes the helicopters that require a single-pilot type ratings under paragraph 61.060(1)(a).

Section 15 prescribes type ratings for single-pilot aeroplanes under subparagraph 61.060(1)(b)(i).

Section 16 prescribes type ratings for single-pilot helicopters under subparagraph 61.060(1)(b)(i).

Section 17 prescribes variants of single-pilot aeroplane models that still have the same type rating for subparagraph 61.060(1)(b)(ii).

Section 18 prescribes variants of single-pilot helicopter models that still have the same type rating for subparagraph 61.060(1)(b)(ii).

Section 19 prescribes, for subparagraph 61.060(1)(b)(iii), differences training that is required for a person to exercise the privileges of a single-pilot aeroplane rating in a variant that is different from the variant for which the person first received the type rating.

Section 20 prescribes, for subparagraph 61.060(1)(b)(iii), differences training that is required for a person to exercise the privileges of a single-pilot helicopter rating in a variant that is different from the variant for which the person first received the type rating.

Section 23 prescribes, for regulation 61.061, types of multi-engine aeroplanes for which the conduct of a flight review for a pilot type rating meets the flight review requirements for the multi-engine aeroplane class rating.

Section 24 prescribes, for regulation 61.062, types of single-engine aeroplanes for which flight training and flight review are required for exercising the privileges of the single‑engine aeroplane class rating.

Section 25 prescribes, for regulation 61.062, types of multi-engine aeroplanes for which flight training and flight review are required for exercising the privileges of the multi‑engine aeroplane class rating.

Section 26 prescribes, for regulation 61.062, types of single-engine helicopters for which flight training and flight review are required for exercising the privileges of the single‑engine helicopter class rating.

The provisions described above devolve the detail of prescribed matters to the Schedules (described below).

Schedules 2, 3, 6 and 7 set out models and variants of type ratings, and whether differences training is required. Schedule 2 is made for sections 5, 7 and 9; Schedule 3 for sections 6, 8 and 10; Schedule 6 for sections 13, 15, 17 and 19; and Schedule 7 for sections 14, 16, 18 and 20. Schedules 10, 12, 13 and 14 list the detail of types and models of aircraft for the purposes of sections 23, 24, 25 and 26.

Sections 4, 11, 12, 21, 22 and 27 are placeholder headings that are reserved for future use. (Placeholder headings for Schedules 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11 and 15 are also reserved for future use.)

The Schedules are as follows:

How the Edition 11 instrument differs from the Edition 10 instrument

The Edition 11 instrument repeals and remakes the Edition 10 instrument. The changes made to the Edition 10 instrument include the addition, substitution or deletion of aircraft models or variants for various manufacturers or type certificate holders, so that pilots are aware of what type rating or training they must complete to pilot the prescribed types and models of aircraft and complete the training required.

Changed description of models for Airbus A321-NY

Schedule 2 prescribes multi-crew pilot aeroplane type ratings, variants and differences training. Currently, Schedule 2 to the Edition 10 instrument describes the ‘A320’ type rating. Included in this type rating are the following models:

• A318 series
• A319 series
• A320 series
• A321 series
• A320 NX series
• A321 NX series

There are no differences training requirements between these series.

A new model series, known as the A321 NY, has been developed by Airbus and is intended to be operated in Australia.

In its ‘Class and Type Rating & License Endorsement List – Aeroplanes’, the European Union Aviation Safety Authority (EASA), like Australia, considers all A318, A319, A320, and A321 aircraft to be part of the ‘A320’ type rating. The A321 ‘NY’ is a part of the ‘A321 – neo’ series for this purpose.

Both EASA and the Federal Aviation Authority of the United States (FAA) have determined that the A321 ‘NY’ models are covered by the A320 type rating. Based on the EASA operational evaluation, CASA also assesses that the ‘NY’ models are appropriately covered by the CASA A320 type rating.

The Edition 11 instrument includes the ‘NY’ series in the A320 type rating in Schedule 2 to the instrument, to clarify that the new models of the A321 (-NY models) are covered by the existing A320 type rating, and to bring categorisation of these aircraft better into line with international approaches.

Description of A320 family within the Edition 10 instrument

The analysis described above has revealed that the current description of the A320 family within the Edition 10 instrument may be confusing, particularly the specific reference to the ‘NX’ series aircraft. It has also revealed that there is inconsistency between the CASA, EASA and FAA description of this aircraft family.

The Edition 11 instrument updates Schedule 2 of the Edition 10 instrument by removing reference to the ‘NX’ models and relying on the higher-level description ‘A321’, because there are no regulatory training differences that arise between the different models of each high-level series (that is, A320, A321).

Addition of the G8000 as a variant of the Global 7500

An Australian operator has notified CASA of its intention to operate a new model of the operator of a ‘Global 7500’ (G7500) marketed as the ‘Global 8000’ (G8000) aircraft Global 7500.

The Edition 11 instrument includes G8000 as a variant of the Global G7500 in Schedule 2 to the instrument. As the model has been evaluated as requiring ‘level C’ training or checking, which requires use of a training device, the Edition 11 instrument imposes a differences training requirement.

Addition of the CL-604XT to the existing CL-604 type rating

The CL-604XT refers to a CL-604 which has been modified with the Collins Pro Line Fusion touchscreen avionics package. Upgraded aircraft may also have other modifications.

CASA requires training involving the use of a flight simulation training device that replicates that found in the aircraft, and confirmation of the pilot’s knowledge. As a result, it is appropriate to designate the CL-604XT as a variant requiring differences training.

The Edition 11 instrument updates Schedule 2 of the Edition 10 instrument by adding CL-604 aircraft with Pro Line Fusion (CL-406XT) as an aircraft covered by the CL-604 type rating that requires differences training, separating the entry for Challenger CL-604 into two (models without Pro Line Fusion and models with Pro Line Fusion). This will ensure that pilots operating the CL604XT receive training and assessment to ensure they are competent to operate these aircraft types.

Addition of new model of Pilatus PC12 ‘PRO’ as a separate entry to the PC12 in Schedule 12

The PC12 PRO is a new model of PC12 fitted with the Garmin G3000 Prime avionics suite with autothrottle. The PC12 NGX is an established model that also has integrated avionics and autothrottle systems.

The PC 12 models with autothrottle (NGX and PRO) have high levels of integration between the autothrottle system and the avionics/auto flight systems. As for other complex class rated aircraft with various levels of automation and integration (that is, King Air models), CASA has assessed that training to use the autothrottle is required for pilots who have experience on non-autothrottle models and vice versa.

The Edition 11 instrument updates Schedule 12 of the Edition 10 instrument by including the new model of the PC-12 (PC-12 PRO) as a separate entry to the PC12 in Schedule 12, requiring completion of training and a flight review. It is included as a class-rated aircraft that requires training and a flight review prior to exercising the privileges of the single-engine class rating. The Edition 11 instrument adds the PC12 ‘PRO’ as a separate entry to the PC12 in Schedule 12 requiring completion of training and a flight review. This change will ensure that pilots operating the PC12 PRO receive training and assessment to ensure they are competent to operate these aircraft types.

Prescription of the B100 (King Air) as a class-rated aircraft that requires training and a flight review prior to exercising the privileges of the multi-engine class rating

Schedule 13 prescribes the types of multi-engine aeroplanes for which flight training and flight review are required for exercising the privileges of the multi‑engine aeroplane class rating.

The King Air 100 series is a complex pressurised turboprop aircraft that is covered by the Multi Engine Aeroplane class rating. The aircraft is of equivalent complexity to other aircraft for which flight training and a flight review is required by Schedule 13.

The Edition 11 instrument includes the B100 (King Air) in Schedule 13 as a class-rated aircraft that requires training and a flight review prior to exercising the privileges of the multi-engine class rating to ensure consistency with CASA’s management of aircraft of similar complexity and ensure that pilots receive the training and assessment appropriate to safely fly an aircraft of this complexity.

Recognising autothrottle training on King Air 200 series and King Air 300 series

The King Air 300 series aircraft are prescribed as requiring a type rating (BE350/1900) listed in Schedule 6. Models with and without autopilot are listed in separate cells, and a differences training requirement applies.

Schedule 13 prescribes the types of multi-engine aeroplanes for which flight training and flight review are required for exercising the privileges of the multi‑engine aeroplane class rating. The Schedule recognises autothrottle training on King Air 300 series aircraft for operating King Air 200 series aircraft with autothrottle by allowing pilots who meet the King Air 200 series (without autothrottle) training and flight review requirement to operate models with autothrottle if they meet the King Air 300 series differences training requirement for aircraft with autothrottle.

The King Air 200 series does not require a type rating. However, it is listed in Schedule 13 as a multiengine aeroplane for which flight training and flight review are required for exercising the privileges of the multi-engine aeroplane class rating. As for the King Air 350, the table differentiates between models with autothrottle and those without. The purpose of differentiation between autothrottle and non-autothrottle models is to ensure that pilots have received the required training to safely operate the aircraft so fitted, in particular, to safely manage flight in the case of failures such as autothrottle failure or engine failure.

CASA has been advised that the autothrottle systems fitted to the King Air 200 and B350 aircraft models operate the same when the aircraft are fitted with the same avionics suite. That is, the autothrottle on a Proline Fusion B200 will function the same as an autothrottle on a Proline Fusion B350. Operators have highlighted possible efficiencies in changes to the differences training/flight.

To this end, the FAA have approved a common Airplane Flight Manual Supplement which means there is a common self-test, normal operating modes, limitations and emergency procedures.

There are differences in autothrottle use between autothrottle function between avionics fitments. It is assessed that these differences are of a nature suitable to be managed through the general competency requirement in CASR 61.385.

Further, while there are an increasing number of BE200 series aircraft fitted with autothrottles, there are very few simulators with this capability. This means that training must be carried out in the aircraft, with associated risks and training limitations. There are several BE300 series simulators with autothrottle capability available in Australia.

For these reasons, the Edition 11 instrument recognises a qualification to fly a BE300 series aircraft with autothrottle as meeting the flight training and flight review requirement for the BE200 series with autothrottle for pilots who meet the flight training and flight review requirement for the BE200 series without autothrottle.

The Edition 11 instrument recognises autothrottle training on King Air 300 series aircraft for operating King Air 200 series aircraft with autothrottle, by updating Schedule 13 to allow pilots who meet the King Air 200 series (without autothrottle) training and flight review requirement to operate models with autothrottle if they meet the King Air 300 series differences training requirement for aircraft with autothrottle. The change will allow more efficient training for pilots operating both BE200 and BE300 series aircraft with autothrottles.

This is achieved by inserting subsection 25(2) which provides that subsection 25(1) does not apply to a person exercising the privileges of a multi-engine aeroplane class rating in an aeroplane of a model in the King Air 200 series that has autothrottle if the person meets the flight training and flight review requirements in regulation 61.747 of CASR in any model of aeroplane in the King Air 200 series that does not have autothrottle and successfully completes the differences training required by section 19 to exercise the privileges of a multi‑engine aeroplane class rating in a model of aeroplane in the King Air 300 that has autothrottle.

Subsection 25(1) provides that a person may not exercise the privileges of a multi-engine aeroplane class rating in an aeroplane of a type or model mentioned in a cell of column 2 of the table in Schedule 13 unless the person meets the flight training and flight review requirements in regulation 61.747 of CASR in any type or model of aeroplane mentioned in the same cell of the column.

Schedule 13 includes a note to the prescription of King Air 200 series (models with autothrottle) that specifies that the requirement does not apply if the pilot meets the Schedule 13 flight review requirement for King Air 200 series (excluding models with autothrottle) and meets the Schedule 6 differences training requirement for King Air 300 (models with autothrottle).

Change of name of a manufacturer

Schedule 13 prescribes the types of multi-engine aeroplanes for which flight training and flight review are required for exercising the privileges of the multi‑engine aeroplane class rating.

In the Edition 10 instrument, DHC-6 (all models) are prescribed covered by the Multi Engine Aeroplane class rating and the type certificate holder/manufacturer is listed as Viking Air.

The name of Viking Air has been changed to De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Ltd. That name change is reflected in Schedule 13 of the Edition 11 instrument.

Legislation Act 2003 (the LA)

Under paragraph 98(5A)(a) of the Act, CASA may issue instruments in relation to matters affecting the safe navigation and operation of aircraft. Under subsection 98(5AA) of the Act, an instrument issued under paragraph 98(5A)(a) is a legislative instrument if expressed to apply in relation to a class of persons or aircraft.

Under regulation 61.055, CASA’s prescription of type ratings and aircraft model variants for multi-crew aircraft is made by legislative instrument. Similarly, under regulation 61.060, CASA’s prescription of aircraft types that require a single-pilot type rating, and the prescription of the type ratings that may be granted for single-pilot operation, is made by legislative instrument.

The various prescriptions made by the Edition 11 instrument apply to classes of persons and aircraft. The instrument also prescribes type ratings and aircraft model variants for multi‑crew aircraft and single-pilot aircraft under regulations 61.055 and 61.060. Therefore, the instrument is a legislative instrument, and is subject to tabling and disallowance in the Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the LA.

As the Edition 11 instrument relates to aviation safety and is made under CASR, Part 4 of Chapter 3 of the LA (the sunsetting provisions) does not apply to the instrument (as per item 15 of the table in section 12 of the Legislation (Exemptions and Other Matters) Regulation 2015).

The Edition 11 instrument deals with aviation safety matters that, once identified, require a risk response or treatment plan. As such, the instrument is intended to have enduring operation and it would not be appropriate for it to be subject to sunsetting. The exemption from the sunsetting provisions affects parliamentary oversight by not requiring the instrument to be remade and subject to further tabling and disallowance in the Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the LA. Despite this, CASA’s accepted practice has been to repeal and remake a new edition of the instrument, generally every year, as an alternative to amending it. A renewal of the instrument would be subject to tabling and disallowance in the Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the LA, in which case the exemption from sunsetting would not affect parliamentary oversight of this instrument.

Consultation

Aircraft operators have requested that CASA prescribe the new models Pilatus PC-12 (PC-12 PRO) and the G8000 variant of the G7500 and recognise autothrottle training on King Air 300 series aircraft for operating King Air 200 series aircraft with autothrottle. No other consultation has been undertaken under section 17 of the LA. Complex aircraft, like those that are certified for operation with at least 2 pilots, are prescribed a type rating in accordance with standards and recommended practices in Annex 1 – Personnel Licensing to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. For multi‑crew certified aircraft CASA must prescribe aircraft type ratings to enable pilots to be issued a flight crew authorisation, required by the regulations, to fly the aircraft.

Flight crew ratings prescribed by CASA are consistent with the ratings specified by other foreign national aviation authorities. As new type ratings are required to support the introduction of new aircraft types, the proposed changes to the Edition 11 instrument since the Edition 10 instrument are normally exempted from the requirement for an impact analysis (IA) as they are considered to be machinery in nature.

The changes from the Edition 10 instrument relating to adding new models Airbus A321 ‘NY’ series aircraft (aka A321 XLR) to the A320 type rating, adding the new aircraft type Challenger CL-604XT to the existing CL-604 type rating, adding the new model of the Pilatus PC-12 (PC-12 PRO) and the B100 (King Air) and adding the G8000 as a variant of the G7500 are consequential upon changes to the civil aircraft register. If a national airworthiness authority provides an Operations Evaluation report regarding the type rating and required level of training for an aircraft, and the amendments are consistent with the report, as they are in this case, CASA considers that further consultation is not necessary.

The changes to references to the certificate holders and manufacturers of certain currently prescribed aircraft, the name of which have changed from Viking Air to De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Ltd are technical and administrative and, therefore, do not require further consultation.

CASA is satisfied that no further consultation is appropriate or reasonably practicable for this instrument for section 17 of the LA.

Sector risk, economic and cost impact

Subsection 9A(1) of the Act states that, in exercising its powers and performing its functions, CASA must regard the safety of air navigation as the most important consideration. Subsection 9A(3) of the Act states that, subject to subsection (1), in developing and promulgating aviation safety standards under paragraph 9(1)(c), CASA must:

(a) consider the economic and cost impact on individuals, businesses and the community of the standards; and

(b) take into account the differing risks associated with different industry sectors.

The instrument replaces an existing instrument with the same (or largely the same) provisions and conditions. The instrument prescribes new type ratings for new aircraft added to the civil aircraft register to ensure pilots complete the training required to conduct a flight in the type of aircraft safely. Prescribed type ratings also enable pilots to comply with the requirements of Part 61 of CASR. As pilots typically need to complete flight training to be competent to fly each kind of aircraft, the changes to the instrument impose no additional cost impacts on industry.

The instrument also makes minor or machinery changes to an existing instrument, including to correct changes to the names of manufacturers and type certificate holders that have occurred since the last amendment, and there will be no change to the economic or cost impact on individuals, businesses or the community.

Impact on categories of operations

The instrument will have an impact on operators of aircraft that are being added or amended in the instrument. The instrument will facilitate the introduction of new types of aircraft and regularise the administration of the licensing system. Necessarily, flight training operators will require training courses to be developed, new training endorsements and examiner endorsements to be introduced that will be applicable to persons involved in training, flight testing, flight reviews, proficiency checking and (where applicable) training and checking activities.

Impact on regional and remote communities

The instrument will not have any impact on any particular regional or remote community.

Office of Impact Analysis (OIA)

An IA is not required in this case, as the instrument is covered by a standing agreement between CASA and OIA under which an IA is not required for amendments to Part 61 of CASR to add additional aircraft for the purpose of pilot type ratings (OIA reference number: OIA23-06249).

Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights

The Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights at Attachment 1 has been prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

Making and commencement

The instrument has been made by a delegate of CASA relying on the power of delegation under subregulation 11.260(1) of CASR.

The instrument commences on the day after it is registered on the FRL.

Attachment 1

Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights

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

Part 61 Flight Crew Licensing (Prescribed Aircraft and Type Ratings) (Edition 11) Instrument 2026

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

The main purpose of the legislative instrument is to prescribe:

(a) the variants, differences training requirements, flight review requirements and type ratings for specified aircraft types for the purposes of relevant provisions in Part 61; and

(b) the flight training and flight review requirements for the exercise of the privileges of class ratings to pilot aircraft prescribed by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).

The legislative instrument repeals and remakes the Part 61 Flight Crew Licensing (Prescribed Aircraft and Type Ratings) (Edition 10) Instrument 2025 because new types and models of aircraft have commenced operations in Australia and been included on the Australian Civil Aircraft Register but are not adequately managed through the existing prescriptions. For that reason, the legislative instrument prescribes new type or class ratings and describes flight and differences training requirements to ensure pilots complete the training required to pilot the prescribed types and models. The Edition 11 instrument changes the prescriptions made by the Edition 10 instrument as follows:

(a) by adding new models Airbus A321 ‘NY’ series aircraft (aka A321 XLR) to the A320 type rating so that they can be operated in Australia by pilots holding the A320 type rating; and

(b) by removing references to the Airbus A321 ‘NX’ models because there are no regulatory training differences that arise between the different models of each high-level series (i.e., A320, A321); and

(c) by prescribing the G8000 as a variant of the G7500, introducing a differences training requirement in Australia; and

(d) by adding the new aircraft type Challenger CL-604XT to the existing CL-604 type rating as a variant that requires differences training; and

(e) by including the new model of the Pilatus PC-12 (PC-12 PRO) as a separate entry to the Pilatus PC12 requiring completion of training and a flight review prior to exercising the privileges of the single-engine class rating; and

(f) by prescribing the B100 (King Air) as a class-rated aircraft that requires training and a flight review prior to exercising the privileges of the multi-engine class rating.

The legislative instrument also:

(a) recognises autothrottle training on King Air 300 series aircraft for operating King Air 200 series aircraft with autothrottle; and

(b) updates a reference to the certificate holder for and manufacturer of certain currently prescribed aircraft, the name of which has changed from Viking Air to De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Ltd.

Human rights implications

To the extent that certain aircraft are or are not prescribed, it might be said that the right to work, equality and non-discrimination under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights are engaged for pilots of such aircraft, as they cannot access some of the flight review and proficiency check concessions that the legislative instrument might otherwise provide. However, such differential treatment arises from the requirements of aviation safety for the particular types of specialised aircraft involved, and is consistent with honouring the safety obligations imposed by the Civil Aviation Act 1988.

Conclusion

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. To the extent that it may also limit human rights, those limitations are reasonable and proportionate in the interests of aviation safety.

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

Civil Aviation Safety Authority