OUT WITH THE OLD, IN WITH THE NEW?
First up, the progress of the FAA’s testing standards with the transition to the “new” Airman Certification Standards (ACS) and away from Practical Test Standards (PTS). For those unfamiliar, the ACS project started in 2011 as a means to improve pilot knowledge testing and practical evaluations. The FAA and industry partners have sought a systematic approach that would provide explicit standards for aeronautical knowledge, list specific behaviors for risk management, consolidate overlapping tasks in the PTS, and tie the many “special emphasis” items to knowledge and skill tasks. Also, the FAA and industry partners seek to connect the standards for knowledge, risk management, and skills to the guidance H-series handbooks, knowledge test questions, and practical tests.
As many will recall, we have been patiently waiting for the better part of four years for the ACS to make its way into our side of the
utilizing a legal process known as “Incorporating by Reference” (IBR). In all, 30 different pilot and flight instructor ACS (and some PTS still) would be added to the new Part 61.14 in such a way that would make them “legal.”
Our fixed-wing brethren transitioned to the ACS for some of the practical tests in 2017 with the change to their airplane private, instrument, and commercial testing standards. This change came after years of tireless ACS Working Group labor to improve training, testing, and proficiency standards. I applaud the group members for their incredible work.
industry. This hiatus of advancement stemmed from a
Department of Transportation interpretation from 2018, coupled with a presidential proclamation, that created a legal mess of sorts. Finally on Dec. 12, the FAA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that would bring the ACS to reality. The NPRM proposes several amendments, primarily to Part 61,
The December NPRM offered the customary 30-day “comment period,” and with the holidays a mere 21 of those days were “business” days, thus limiting the time to prepare responses by vested parties. Thankfully, folks had already responded (including the ACS Group, which dedicated countless hours to the ACS advancements), asking for the comment period to be extended so the proposed Airman Certification Standards can be reviewed.
It is difficult to guess when the new standards will become “law,” but this may be our year!
70
Jan/Feb 2023
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84
