FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1996
1996 - 2450.PDF
AIR TRANSPORT LICENCING AND MAJOR REGULATORY ISSUES R EGULATIONS which affect cross-crew qualification (CCQ) and mixed- fleet flying sometimes directly limit the number of commercial type-ratings a pilot is allowed to have on his licence, but in all cases specify the training necessary first to obtain the type ratings and then to maintain type-rating currency. The reg ulatory components are: • pilot's licence: once obtained, a licence to fly is permanent unless downgraded or withdrawn by the authorities for medical or competency reasons; • type-rating: an airline pilot's licence is useless unless it is endorsed with a type rating, which reflects the successful completion of authorised minimum sys tems-knowledge and flying-skills train ing on at least one aircraft type; • licence currency: currency is condi tional upon the completion of a mini mum amount of flying in a given calendar period, and a set amount of type-specific refresher training or line checking. When applied to more than one type, "recency" rules may apply to each air craft type, specifying the maximum time which may elapse since the pilot last flew that type without a required period of retraining; • common type-rating: some types are so similar in systems and flying charac teristics that the authorities grant a com mon type-rating. Examples of large air craft with a common type-rating include: Airbus Industrie's A319/A320/ A321 series, and its A310 and A300-600; Boeing's 737 series, and also its 757 and 767; and McDonnell Douglas' DC-9/ MD-80 series. Training for a common type-rating consists of a full course, plus specified minimum line-operational experience on one of the types, then a "differences course" for the other(s), which does not normally need to be repeated. Cost of refresher training and checks are kept the same as that for a sin gle type by "flip-flop" training, which alternates the pilots' training and checks periodically between the various types in the group; • cross-crew qualification (CCQ): the system of training a pilot to a full type- rating on one aircraft within a group of types which are ruled to be generically similar (but not similar enough for a common rating), then being able to gain full ratings on the other(s) with short ened courses; • mixed-fleet flying: airline operation which makes full use of CCQ by flying aircraft in an accepted group. Cross-crew 111 with 141-400? Pilots say that it is the differences which count, not the similarities Highly rated Is cross-crew qualification delivering its promises? DAVID LEARMOUNT/LONDON PAUL PHELAN/CAIRNS AS AIRLINES AND regulators start to gain experience with cross-crew qualifi cation (CCQ) training and mixed-fleet flying (MFF), its potential is becoming clearer. Cathay Pacific Airways, with its unique Airbus Industrie A3 30/A3 40 MFF operation, now has 55 complete crews qualified simulta neously on both types, and says that it is begin ning to see the benefits. Cathay's experience is unique because cross- crewing between a twinjet and a four-jet, although technically allowable under US Fed eral Aviation Administration rules, has not been practised by the airlines. The FAA permits pilots to have as many type-ratings as they can keep current on their licences, and allows air lines to carry out MFF operations on any two types. Boeing points out that there is no evi dence that any serious accident has ever been attributable to pilots moving between different aircraft types. What has become known as MFF, however, has not been normal practice, reflecting the technical difficulty and expense of complying with multiple-type-rating regulations until recently, and undoubtedly also the natural con servatism of airline operations departments. Despite the lack of in-depth human-factors research to backup the concept, it seems always to have been assumed that the one-type-at-a- time concept was a "good thing". The Inter national Federation of Airline Pilots' As sociations (IFALPA), while keeping an open mind about what the future might have in store, says that it is inclined to remain conservative in its approach. In Europe, the rules assume that "public- transport" pilots will be rated on one type, the only exceptions being for aircraft "family" groups which have been accepted for common type-rating. Any other arrangement (eg, MFF) has to be specifically approved by agreement with the national aviation authority. An inter esting aspect of the Cathay A330/A340 MFF operation is that the rules for it are, effectively, being monitored, worked out and written by a European aviation authority, because (until 1997) the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Authority remains an autonomous offshoot of the UK Civil Aviation Authority. Capt Hans-Ulrich Raulf of the German Cockpit Association, who has worked with the European Joint Aviation Authorities 0AA) in developing the JAR FCL (Joint Aviation Regulations Flightcrew Licensing) framework for CCQ, says that there is some way to go yet before even the definitions of "type" and "vari ant" are clear. "The airworthiness people • 46 FLIGHT INTERNATIONAL 11 -17 September 1996
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
