JAR-OPS

2. ??? GAP ??? JAR-FCL JAR-FCL JAR-FCL JAR-FCL JAR-FCL JAR-FCL Work Group to show "a way over ..." JAR-OPS JAR-OPS JAR-OPS JAR-OPS

3. OBJECTIVES: - To work out a recommendation for a training concept for JAR-OPS operators to the attention of the JAA OPS director. - To recommend adjustments to the descriptions of training within subpart N in order to be fully acceptable by JAR-FCL. - To recommend 3 different training organisation models as follows: - AOC-holder with "integrated" TRTO (AOC organisation also certified as TRTO) - AOC-holder relying fully on a separate TRTO - AOC-holder performing training for "own requirements" without a TRTO. SCOPE of ACTIVITIES: - Works should cover mainly JAR-OPS, but should recommend JAR-FCL changes, where it seems necessary. - Showing outlines of possible solutions, not details. - Giving propositions for "further actions" where the WG does not feel adequately qualified or in charge of. The final report reflects the discussions held in the work group and represents the work group's recommendations concerning crew training from a "JAR-OPS" point of view, but also considering the JAR-FCL requirements.

4. CONTENTS of the work group's final report 1. General & Background 1.1. Objectives 1.2. Scope of activities 2. Training Philosophy 2.1. Overall philosophy 3. Process Models 3.1. AOC-holder with integrated TRTO 3.2. AOC-holder relying on separate TRTO 3.3. AOC-holder doing training outside a TRTO 4. AOC-Holder vs. TRTO (Who is reponsible for the training) 5. Relations OPS-FCL 6. Workgroup “exclamation and question marks” 7. Several “conflict” items or open questions

5. Some Explanations General: All items discussed during the work group’s meeting were split into the following categories: - Issue - Recommendation - To Be Considered “Issue”: A description of the item’s “background”. This normally defines the problem and explains the reason for the work group to discuss the item. “Recommendation”:The work group’s recommendation to the OST and the OPS Director, how the issue could be further treated or solved. “To Be Considered”: Once further harmonisation works are done, special focus should be set on the comments contained in the column “to be considered”, which shows some problem areas to be carefully assessed.

6. Training Philosophy Issue: NO OVERALL TRAINING PHILOSOPHY DEFINED ! Recommendation: To bring JAR-OPS and JAR-FCL into "one single concept" ! To be considered: "STANDARDS of PERFORMANCE" (individual AND TEAM performance) !!!

7. Training Philosophy This is a Gulfstream IV. It flies in EUR airspace. This is a Gulfstream IV. It is commercially operated. It flies in EUR airspace. It‘s pilots are trained acc. JAR-OPS 1 standards. This is a Gulfstream IV. It is privately operated. It flies in EUR airspace. It‘s pilots are trained acc. JAR-FCL 1 standards. It is operated for militarypurpose. It‘s pilots are trained acc. military standards. Is there REALLY a difference flying the GIV (MPA) ?

8. Accountable Manager Post-Holder Maintenance Post-Holder Ground OPS Post-Holder Crew Training Post-Holder Flight OPS Quality Manager Process Models AOC-HOLDER with INTEGRATED TRTO AOC-Holder‘s TRTO AOC-Holder‘s Organisation

9. Head of Training Accountable Manager Chief Ground Instruction Chief Synthetic Instruction Chief Practical Instruction Post-Holder Maintenance Post-Holder Ground OPS Post-Holder Crew Training Post-Holder Flight OPS Quality Manager Quality Manager AOC-Holder‘ Organisation (acc. JAR-OPS) TRTO‘s Organisation (acc. JAR-FCL) Process Models AOC-HOLDER relying on SEPARATE TRTO

10. Accountable Manager Post-Holder Maintenance Post-Holder Ground OPS Post-Holder Crew Training Post-Holder Flight OPS Quality Manager Process Models AOC-HOLDER doing training for "OWN" requirements ONLY AOC-Holder‘s Organisation

11. AOC-Holder vs. TRTO Issue:Recommendation:To be considered: Course ContentsAOC-holder is responsible,Syllabus structureeven if parts are „out-sourced“ Type Rating vs. ConversionQuality System to assessCommunicationTrainingTRTO-parts !AOC-holder  TRTO FCL for „BASIC“, OPS for FCL to define needs for acquisition of Subpart N to contain„ADVANCED“ Training a licence, OPS to cover operator‘s needs references to FCL, LST to accept OPS-approach Simulator dry lease problems Dry lease shall be possible for AOC- Training to be regarded(„packages“ incl. Theory holder including „own“ TRIs/SFIs ! As operator‘s duty, not& SIM = „wet lease“ !!!) as „stand-alone“ solution. Influence of AOC-holder TRTOs must follow operator‘s JAA to put pressure onto the TRTO (see above item) instructions (i.e. syllabus)organisations not complying. Out-sourcing training toOut-sourcing possible, but AOC-holder Documentation ?!another organisation to have „overall“ responsibility. Quality System to assess third-party organisation TRTO-concept in MPA-world ?Philosophy, Policies, Procedures to be Training MUST berespected by training organisation „customized“ !

12. Relations OPS-FCL Issue:Recommendation:To be considered: TRI/TRE (SFI/SFE) WhatDefinition of „stds of performance“Instructor training to beis required ?for instructors („teacher“-oriented, not reviewed / re-defined.type-oriented !!!) FCL to accept licence- All training items to be mentioned in Subpart N to containrelevance of JAR-OPS training subpart N (JAR-OPS), including FCL- all required training anditems (e.g. by references) training steps (including all TGLs, ACJs, AMCs, IEMs and FCL-items.Solution for licence-relevance Adjustment of validity period to 12 months Training to „pro-of OPCs and validity of OPCs and coverage of all LPC-items for OPCs. fessionalism“, not stupidEmphasis on training, not on checkingrepetition of same issues. Low Visibility Operation not Initial training for PPL and IR should - Taxiing in low visibilityknown by PPL / IR Cat I holders include low visibility knowledge.- Low visibility procedures - visibility „picture“

13. Exclamation and Question marks Issue: Defining "experience" in terms of flight time does not seem to be adequate in several cases, as "experience" alone does not guarantee a "standard of performance". Recommendation:Defining "minimum" experience should be reconsidered generally. In some cases the "elapsed" time may be adequate, in other cases "flight time" could be the criteria, in other cases "training to professionalism" would help much more than "previous experience". Other ways of gaining "experience" should be considered (i.e. as simulator instructor, as observer, etc.)

14. "Conflict" items and open questions Can an AOC be issued with the operator not able to cover his own training requirements ? Recommendation: Yes, according model 2 above (relying on a TRTO). This means, that any AOC-holder shall have established his own training programme and respective syllabi. He shall be responsible for the training, even if that training is not performed by his own organisation. The concepts and training programme shall be according JAR-OPS.

15. "Conflict" items and open questions Modular approach to training steps, either covering FCL- or OPS-parts Recommendation: AOC-holders should perform training in an "integrated" way, wherever possible, as this is the only certain way to integrate operations philosophy, policies and an operator's procedures (SOPs). Wherever "modular" training is used, the "integration" part shall be done by the AOC-holder. This might require the operator to add some "ground" training or even some practical training to the modules used (i.e. when "out-sourcing" parts of the training). In any situation, the AOC-holder shall have the overall responsibility for the training concepts, contents, procedures, etc.

16. "Conflict" items and open questions Number of sessions ? Should there be a definition for the skill level of a pilot ? The JAA should, in some way (maybe JOEBs “approving conversion courses”) state the minimum required training for each aircraft type (including simulator and supervision flights or IOE [initial operating experience]). “Experience level” shall be defined regarding: - years in commercial aviation - type of operation (short, medium, long haul) - other activities performed (e.g. training, management functions, etc.) - original profession - other relevant knowledge and/or experience

17. Questions ? (or did I forget something ?) Final Report

18. Thank you for listening !