“I know you have a current instrument rating on the Citation, but you have to do another IPC on the Cessna 402 before you are qualified to fly that aircraft”. Ahhh! Another wrong understanding of Part 61. More money wasted, more inefficiency. 
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against training and testing, I’m not against a standard well above the minimum. Often they are desirable goals and I support that, if that is the path chosen when all the paths are understood. However, I am against lack of knowledge and vague understandings of the regulations because that can cause serious safety and financial problems.
Regulations are not always easy to understand – I know that from 35 years in the aviation industry of which 11 were spent working for CASA as a Flight Operations Inspector. However, regulations are “knowable” and certain regulations lead themselves to quite helpful flow charts and diagrams to facilitate quick reference and to avoid mistakes. How can we do this better? How can we improve our knowledge and prevent serious safety and financial problems, particularly as the regulations are changing and we all must transition to the new regulations. Let me suggest 3 steps we can all take:
- Read the regulations! Not the detail just yet, just read the table of contents to begin with. Print out the major headings and subheadings. Get a feel for how the regulations are structured and “what is where”. Once you understand that, you realise that there’s a lot of regulation that you don’t need to read. I don’t need to read about “Flight Engineer Licence”, and I am not particularly interested in “Glider Pilot Licences” – don’t read it.
- Get one or two people in your organisation to become the “local lead” in a particular Part, or section of a Part. For example have someone as an expert of Part 61, a different person for part 142, and a different person for CAR 217. If that is too big, have someone become an expert in IPC/OPCs, someone else in relation to aircraft endorsements, and someone else in relation to initial flight training requirements. Celebrate, encourage, support and promote these “local leaders” within the organisation and use them to guide you.
- Use other resources such as CASA training material or courses, external consultants, and good quality forums (where you can trust that the source is knowledgeable) to provide specific guidance.
The Citation/Cessna 402 dilemma… Part 61.745 specifies that any instrument rating would be valid for the Cessna 402. The pilot did not need to do an additional IPC. However, I wonder if the company realised that what the pilot really needed was to complete a Flight Review prior to flying the Cessna 402! Fortunately, the IPC met those requirements in this case but if they got that wrong they could roster a pilot who was not qualified – and that can have disastrous effects…with CASA and with your insurer. This company had many other ways of achieving the same currency goal in a cheaper and more efficient manner, they just didn’t know the options. Know the regulations and know your options. If you would like a free summary of the training, flight review and IPC requirements for all the various classes and types of aeroplanes and helicopters (from a Cessna 152 through to a Boeing 747), see the sidebar.
What sections in Part 61 do you find confusing?
Want More?
Would you like to receive a free Summary of the Training, Flight Review and IPC requirements for all the Part 61 fixed wing and helicopter types?