Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2024C00404:front:0:p26
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2024C00404
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 64512–67532

tolerance as to indicate a lack of competence in the relevant operating conditions; and
(b) certifies to the RePL training organisation, in accordance with the organisation's documented practices and procedures, that paragraph (a) was the case.
       (7) The training course flight test for the relevant RPA mentioned in paragraph (3) (c) must be in accordance with the flight test standards in Schedule 6.

     2.18A Assessment of alternative practical competency standards for advancing technology in medium and large RPA
       (1) Despite section 2.18, to complete the RePL training course component for the operation of an RPA to which section 2.06A applies, the applicant must be assessed as competent in the relevant practical competency units and standards.
       (2) The assessment must be as follows:
(a) for the relevant RPA category (including with or without a liquid-fuel system, as the case requires);
(b) conducted:
           (i) for the automated operation mode; or
           (ii) for both the automated operation mode and the manual mode;
        as the case requires for the RePL that the applicant is applying for (the relevant RePL).
       (3) To be assessed as competent, the applicant must:
(a) demonstrate to a RePL training instructor all of the behaviours for the relevant practical competency units and standards, unless CASA approves in writing that the innovative RPA system design makes demonstration for a particular item impossible, impracticable or unreasonable; and
(b) satisfy the RePL training instructor that each of the behaviours referred to in paragraph (a) has been demonstrated within the relevant tolerances, and across the range of variables (if any), mentioned for the item, unless CASA approves in writing that the innovative RPA system design makes demonstration for a particular tolerance or variable impossible or impracticable; and
       Note   For example, if a feature of the RPA otherwise required an applicant to repeat training previously successfully completed for an initial RePL, CASA may, subject to considerations of aviation safety, consider that such repetition would be unreasonable.
(c) having satisfied the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b), pass a RePL training course flight test in the relevant RPA, conducted, in accordance with the documented practices and procedures of the RePL training organisation, by an examiner.
       (4) For subsection (3), a behaviour must be demonstrated:
(a) for the relevant RPA category and the relevant RePL; and
(b) across as many of the range of variables as the operating conditions and innovative RPA system design reasonably permit.
       (5) If a variable was not selected for demonstration because operating conditions made it impossible in practice to demonstrate the variable, the RePL training instructor must:
(a) require the applicant to provide:
           (i) a satisfactory computerised simulation of the flight characteristics of the RPA under the variable, using a computerised simulation