Hi,

I am studying the PPL and working through the Air Law section. However, the VFRG references don't marry up with my new copy of the VFRG.
Am I missing something or are these references out of date?

For example, I cannot find any reference in the VFRG to the requirement to have passed a flight review in the last 2 years. This is not under Page 1.9 or 1.10. I can only find references to a flight check or review within 90 days.

Also, On page 306 of the PPL book, it says that "you may be granted a PPL" if you are "at least 17 years of age" (VFRG page 1.5 - I cannot find any mention of this). In fact on page 1.8, it mentions the RPL and vives an age restriction of 16!

I am confused. Does the newer VFRG not contain some of the information which was in previous versions?

Thanks for your help.

Dave

Hi Dave,

The licencisng requirements in the VFRG are not as complete in their coverage as you would hope. I suspect this has a lot to do with the fact the Part 61 regulations were (and still are) in total chaos when the VFRG went to print. The information in our PPL textbook is, to the best of our knowledge correct and is extracted from the orginal Part 61 regulations behind the VFRG.

The VFRG references are given in our textbook to show the sections where the material is discussed, but to find the complete answer, you will need to look into the original regulations. These references are also given in the textbookto help you find them more easily.

Fortunately this problem really only affects the VFRG section on licensing and does not detract from the value of the VFRG for the exam. It really is an essential resource for PPL candidates.

To access the original regualtions without spending 100's of dollars on hard copies, take a look at the CASA website:

www.casa.gov.au/rules-and-regulations/la...g-page/current-rules

Cheers,

Rich

P.S. if you would like me to change your username so you are not showing your email address to the world, let me know and I will change it for you.

Thanks Rich,

I think you've hit the nail on the head.

That makes total sense.

Thanks for your post.

Dave