CASA EX70/25 — Multi-Engine Helicopters Exemption 2025

This instrument, CASA EX70/25 , Multi‑Engine Helicopters Exemption 2025, is a time‑limited exemption made under regulation 11.160 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR) (instrument header and s 1-2). It commences on 1 August 2025 and is repealed at the end of 31 July 2028 (s 2). Mechanically, it creates a network of targeted, conditional exemptions from specified provisions of CASR and related Manuals of Standards/Manuals for particular people and organisations connected with a defined list of multi‑engine helicopter models (Schedule 1). The exemptions operate by relieving the person or organisation, "to the extent" specified, from compliance with named CASR provisions where the person would otherwise be non‑compliant because they do not hold a pilot type rating for a particular model of multi‑engine helicopter (see, for example, s 5(7) and the repeated “to the extent” language across Parts 2-19).

The core enabling mechanism is section 5. Section 5 authorises a holder of a pilot licence who already holds a pilot type rating for one model of multi‑engine helicopter to exercise the privileges of their licence in relation to a second relevant model, even if they do not hold the pilot type rating for that second model, provided four conditions are met: (a) the licence holder holds the pilot type rating for a named first model (s 5(1)(a)); (b) the licence holder has completed specified training relating to the second helicopter (s 5(1)(b) and (2)); (c) the licence holder has been assessed as competent against the competency standards for a flight review for the pilot type rating relating to the second helicopter (s 5(1)(c) and (4)); and (d) at intervals not exceeding 24 months the licence holder maintains a valid flight review for a relevant multi‑engine pilot type rating or is otherwise assessed as competent as specified (s 5(1)(d)). The instrument prescribes who may conduct the training and the assessment, how the training must be conducted (including a restriction on live training in larger helicopters when an approved simulator is available in Australia (s 5(3))), and the persons who can perform the assessment (CASA, holders of an approval under regulation 61.040 for regulation 61.400, or authorised flight review instructors) (s 5(5)).

meta-content-style-type: text/css meta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8 meta-description: Multi-Engine Helicopters Exemption 2025 title: CASA EX70/25

?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="no"?>

Instrument number CASA EX70/25

I, Daniel bernard o’hagan, Section Manager Drafting, Legal, International & Regulatory Affairs Division, a delegate of CASA, make this instrument under regulation 11.160 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.

[Signed D.B. O’Hagan]

Danny O’Hagan Section Manager Drafting Legal, International & Regulatory Affairs Division

29 July 2025

CASA EX70/25 — Multi-Engine Helicopters Exemption 2025

Contents

Page

4 Meaning of authorised to pilot a model of multi-engine helicopter

Part 2 — Pilot

5 Exemption — authority to exercise privileges of pilot licence

6 Exemptions — valid flight review

7 Exemption — valid instrument proficiency check

Part 3 — Flight instructor

8 Exemptions

Part 4 — Flight examiner

9 Exemption

Part 5 — Australian air transport operator

10 Exemptions

Part 6 — Aerial work operator and pilot

11 Exemptions

Part 7 — Part 141 operator

12 Exemptions

Part 8 — Part 142 operator

13 Exemptions

Part 9 — Helicopter operator

14 Exemption

Part 10 — Independent maintainer and continuing airworthiness management organisation

15 Exemptions

Part 11 — Person permitted to carry out maintenance on a relevant helicopter

16 Exemption

Part 12 — Manipulating pilot controls of a relevant helicopter

17 Exemptions

Part 13 — Minimum height rules

18 Exemption

Part 14 — Taxiing an Australian relevant helicopter

19 Exemption

Part 15 — Relevant helicopter operating on the ground

20 Exemption

Part 16 — Causing, or simulating, failure of flight instruments

21 Exemption

Part 17 — Simulating IMC flying

22 Exemption

Part 18 — Training, or a check, mentioned in Subpart 138.N of CASR

23 Exemptions

Part 19 — VFR flight

24 Exemption

Schedule 1 Relevant helicopters and pilot type ratings

Part 1 — Preliminary

1 Name

This instrument is CASA EX70/25 — Multi-Engine Helicopters Exemption 2025.

2 Duration

This instrument:

(a) commences on 1 August 2025; and

(b) is repealed at the end of 31 July 2028.

3 Interpretation

(1) In this instrument:

authorised to pilot a model of multi-engine helicopter: see section 4.

cell, for a column of the table in Schedule 1, means each individual, undivided unit (regardless of its size) into which the column is subdivided.

flight test endorsement has the meaning given by regulation 61.010 of CASR.

pilot type rating has the same meaning as in Division 61.L.5 of CASR.

relevant helicopter means a model of multi-engine helicopter mentioned in a cell in column 2 of the table in Schedule 1.

relevant unit of competency means a unit of competency mentioned in clause 3 of Appendix L of Schedule 7 of the Part 61 Manual of Standards.

type rating flight test endorsement means a flight test endorsement of that kind mentioned in column 1 of item 5 in table 61.1310 of CASR.

type rating training endorsement means a training endorsement of that kind mentioned in column 1 of item 5 in table 61.1235 of CASR.

(2) Column 1 of the table in Schedule 1 contains general information only and is not intended to qualify, or otherwise affect, the meaning or operation of anything else in Schedule 1.

4 Meaning of authorised to pilot a model of multi-engine helicopter

A person is authorised to pilot a model of multi-engine helicopter mentioned in a cell in column 2 of the table in Schedule 1 if:

(a) the person holds the pilot type rating, relating to the helicopter, mentioned in the corresponding cell in column 3 of the table; or

(b) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

Part 2 — Pilot

5 Exemption — authority to exercise privileges of pilot licence

(1) This section applies to the holder of a pilot licence (the licence holder) who:

(a) holds the pilot type rating, relating to a model of helicopter (the first helicopter) mentioned in a cell in column 2 of the table in Schedule 1, mentioned in the corresponding cell in column 3 of the table but not in relation to another relevant helicopter (the second helicopter); and

(b) has completed the training, relating to the piloting of the second helicopter, mentioned in subsection (2); and

(c) has been assessed as competent to pilot the second helicopter, having regard to the competency standards for a flight review, for the pilot type rating relating to the second helicopter, mentioned in section 14 of the Part 61 Manual of Standards; and

(d) at intervals of not more than 24 months:

(i) has a valid flight review for the pilot type rating in relation to another multi-engine helicopter for which the licence holder holds the rating; or

(ii) has been assessed as competent to pilot a relevant helicopter, having regard to the competency standards for a flight review, for the pilot type rating relating to the helicopter, mentioned in section 14 of the Part 61 Manual of Standards.

(2) For paragraph (1)(b), the licence holder completes training, relating to the piloting of the second helicopter, if:

(a) the licence holder has received training in all the units of competency mentioned in the Part 61 Manual of Standards for the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(b) the training is conducted by:

(i) an instructor for a Part 141 operator that is authorised to conduct the training; or

(ii) the holder of an approval under regulation 141.035 of CASR to conduct the training; and

(d) the instructor, or holder of the approval, is satisfied the licence holder meets the competency standards mentioned in the Part 61 Manual of Standards for the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter.

(3) For paragraph (2)(c), the training must not be conducted in a relevant helicopter with a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity of more than 9 if there is an approved flight simulator for the training available in Australia.

(4) For paragraph (1)(c) or subparagraph (1)(d)(ii), the assessment requires demonstration to a person mentioned in subsection (5) that the licence holder has the competency required of the licence holder under subsection 14.6 of the Part 61 Manual of Standards by each relevant unit of competency for the pilot type rating in relation to the second helicopter.

(5) For subsection (4), the persons are as follows:

(a) CASA;

(b) the holder of an approval under regulation 61.040 of CASR for regulation 61.400 of CASR;

(c) a pilot instructor who is authorised to conduct a flight review for the pilot type rating in relation to the second helicopter.

(6) The assessment must be conducted in:

(a) the second helicopter; or

(b) an approved flight simulator for the assessment.

(7) The licence holder is exempt from compliance with regulation 61.065 of CASR to the extent that the licence holder is not authorised to exercise the privileges of the licence, relating to the second helicopter, under paragraph 61.375(5)(b) of CASR.

Note The effect of the exemption is that the licence holder is authorised, under paragraph 61.375(5)(b) of CASR, to conduct the activity the subject of the exemption while piloting the second helicopter, despite not holding the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter.

(8) In this section:

available, for the training, means able to be used for the training.

instructor has the meaning given by regulation 141.030 of CASR.

6 Exemptions — valid flight review

(1) Subsection (2) applies to the holder of a pilot licence (the licence holder):

(a) who holds the pilot type rating in relation to a model of helicopter (the first helicopter) but not in relation to a relevant helicopter (the second helicopter); and

(b) to whom the exemption under section 5 applies in relation to the second helicopter.

(2) The licence holder is exempt from compliance with subregulation 61.800(1) of CASR to the extent that the licence holder is not authorised to exercise the privileges of the pilot type rating, relating to the first helicopter, as the pilot in command of the first helicopter.

Note The effect of the exemption is that the licence holder is authorised, under subregulation 61.800(1) of CASR, to conduct the activity the subject of the exemption, as the pilot in command of the first helicopter, despite not having a valid flight review for the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter.

(3) Subsection (4) applies to the holder of a pilot licence (the licence holder):

(a) who holds a single-engine helicopter class rating in relation to a model of single‑engine helicopter (the third helicopter); and

(b) who holds the pilot type rating, relating to a model of multi-engine helicopter mentioned in a cell in column 2 of the table in Schedule 1, mentioned in column 3 of the corresponding cell in the table but not in relation to another relevant helicopter (the fourth helicopter); and

(4) The licence holder is exempt from compliance with subregulation 61.745(1) of CASR to the extent that the licence holder is not authorised to exercise the privileges of the single-engine helicopter class rating in relation to the third helicopter.

Note The effect of the exemption is that the licence holder is authorised, under subregulation 61.745(1) of CASR, to conduct the activity the subject of the exemption in relation to the third helicopter, despite not having a valid flight review for the single-engine helicopter class rating in relation to the helicopter.

7 Exemption — valid instrument proficiency check

(1) This section applies to the holder of a pilot licence (the licence holder):

(a) who holds the pilot type rating, relating to a model of multi-engine helicopter (the first helicopter) mentioned in a cell in column 2 of the table in Schedule 1, mentioned in the corresponding cell in column 3 of the table but not in relation to another relevant helicopter (the second helicopter); and

(b) to whom the exemption under section 5 applies in relation to the second helicopter; and

(2) The licence holder is exempt from compliance with subregulation 61.805(1) of CASR to the extent that the licence holder is not authorised to exercise the privileges of the pilot type rating under the IFR in relation to the first helicopter.

Note The effect of the exemption is that the licence holder is authorised, under subregulation 61.805(1) of CASR, to conduct the activity the subject of the exemption in relation to the first helicopter, despite not having a valid instrument proficiency check for the helicopter type covered by the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter.

(3) In this section:

instrument proficiency check has the meaning given by regulation 61.010 of CASR.

Part 3 — Flight instructor

8 Exemptions

(1) This section applies to a flight instructor who:

(a) holds the type rating training endorsement for the type of multi-engine helicopter that includes a model of multi-engine helicopter (the first helicopter) mentioned in a cell in column 2 of the table in Schedule 1 but not for another relevant helicopter (the second helicopter); and

(b) holds the pilot type rating, relating to the first helicopter, mentioned in the corresponding cell in column 3 of the table; and

(d) has at least 25 hours of flight time as pilot in command of the second helicopter.

(2) The flight instructor is exempt from compliance with regulation 61.065 of CASR to the extent that the flight instructor is not authorised to conduct flight training for the pilot type rating, relating to the second helicopter, under subregulation 61.1175(1) of CASR.

Note The effect of the exemption is that the flight instructor is authorised, under subregulation 61.1175(1) of CASR, to conduct the activity the subject of the exemption, in relation to the second helicopter, despite not holding the type rating training endorsement for the type of multi-engine helicopter that includes the helicopter.

(3) The flight instructor is exempt from compliance with regulation 61.065 of CASR to the extent that the flight instructor is not authorised to conduct differences training for a variant of the second helicopter, under subregulation 61.1175(2) of CASR.

Note The effect of the exemption is that the flight instructor is authorised, under subregulation 61.1175(2) of CASR, to conduct the activity the subject of the exemption, for a variant of the second helicopter, despite not holding the type rating training endorsement for the type of multi-engine helicopter that includes the helicopter.

(4) The flight instructor is exempt from compliance with regulation 61.065 of CASR to the extent that the flight instructor is not authorised to conduct training to meet the general competency requirement stated in regulation 61.385 of CASR, in relation to the second helicopter, under subregulation 61.1175(3) of CASR.

Note The effect of the exemption is that the flight instructor is authorised, under subregulation 61.1175(3) of CASR, to conduct the activity the subject of the exemption, in relation to the second helicopter, despite not holding the type rating training endorsement for the type of multi-engine helicopter that includes the helicopter.

(5) The flight instructor is exempt from compliance with regulation 61.065 of CASR to the extent that the flight instructor is not authorised to conduct a flight review for the pilot type rating, relating to the second helicopter, under subregulation 61.1175(6) of CASR.

Note The effect of the exemption is that the flight instructor is authorised, under subregulation 61.1175(6) of CASR, to conduct the activity the subject of the exemption, in relation to the second helicopter, despite not holding one of the training endorsements mentioned in subregulation 61.1175(6).

(6) The flight instructor is exempt from compliance with regulation 61.065 of CASR to the extent that the flight instructor is not authorised to conduct the activity mentioned in subsection (2) or (3), relating to the second helicopter, under paragraph 61.1240(1)(a) of CASR.

Note The effect of the exemption is that the flight instructor is authorised, under paragraph 61.1240(1)(a) of CASR, to conduct the activity the subject of the exemption, in relation to the second helicopter, despite not holding the type rating training endorsement for the type of multi-engine helicopter that includes the helicopter.

Part 4 — Flight examiner

9 Exemption

(1) This section applies to a flight examiner who:

(a) holds the type rating flight test endorsement for the type of multi-engine helicopter that includes a model of multi-engine helicopter (the first helicopter) mentioned in a cell in column 2 of the table in Schedule 1 but not for another relevant helicopter (the second helicopter); and

(b) holds the pilot type rating, relating to the first helicopter, mentioned in the corresponding cell in column 3 of the table; and

(i) holds the type rating training endorsement for the type of multi-engine helicopter that includes the second helicopter; or

(ii) is authorised to conduct flight training for the pilot type rating, relating to the second helicopter, under Part 3.

(2) The flight examiner is exempt from compliance with regulation 61.065 of CASR to the extent that the flight examiner is not authorised to conduct a flight test for the pilot type rating, relating to the second helicopter, under paragraph 61.1255(a), subregulation 61.1265(1) and regulation 61.1315 of CASR.

Note The effect of the exemption is that the flight examiner is authorised, under paragraph 61.1255(a), subregulation 61.1265(1) and regulation 61.1315 of CASR, to conduct the activity the subject of the exemption, in relation to the second helicopter, despite not holding the type rating flight test endorsement for the type of multi-engine helicopter that includes the helicopter.

Part 5 — Australian air transport operator

10 Exemptions

(1) Subsections (2) and (3) apply if:

(a) the head of flying operations of an Australian air transport operator does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to a relevant helicopter; and

(b) the helicopter is used to conduct a significant proportion of the operator’s Australian air transport operations; and

(2) The Australian air transport operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 119.060 of CASR to the extent that the head of flying operations does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which otherwise would be a breach of the condition of the operator’s Australian air transport AOC mentioned in subparagraph 119.080(1)(b)(i) of CASR.

(3) The Australian air transport operator is exempt from compliance with subparagraph 119.205(1)(e)(i) of CASR to the extent that the operator’s exposition does not state that the head of flying operations holds the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which is a qualification required to be held by the head of flying operations under paragraph 119.135(1)(b) of CASR.

(4) Subsection (5) applies if:

(a) an Australian air transport operator makes a significant change that is the permanent appointment, or acting appointment, of a person as the head of flying operations of the operator under paragraph 119.090(2)(a) of CASR; and

(b) the operator applies to CASA for approval of the change under subregulation 119.090(3) of CASR; and

(d) the helicopter is used to conduct a significant proportion of the operator’s Australian air transport operations; and

(e) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(5) The Australian air transport operator is exempt from compliance with subregulation 119.090(2) of CASR to the extent that the copy of the part of the operator’s exposition affected by the change, which accompanies the application, does not state that the person holds the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which is a qualification required to be held by the head of flying operations under paragraph 119.135(1)(b) of CASR.

(6) Subsections (7) and (8) apply if:

(a) the head of training and checking of an Australian air transport operator does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to a relevant helicopter; and

(b) the helicopter is used to conduct a significant proportion of the operator’s Australian air transport operations; and

(7) The Australian air transport operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 119.060 of CASR to the extent that the head of training and checking does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which otherwise would be a breach of the condition of the operator’s Australian air transport AOC mentioned in subparagraph 119.080(1)(b)(i) of CASR.

(8) The Australian air transport operator is exempt from compliance with subparagraph 119.205(1)(e)(i) of CASR to the extent that the operator’s exposition does not state that the head of training and checking holds the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which is a qualification required to be held by the head of training and checking under paragraph 119.145(1)(b) of CASR.

(9) Subsection (10) applies if:

(a) an Australian air transport operator makes a significant change that is the permanent appointment, or acting appointment, of a person as the head of training and checking of the operator under paragraph 119.090(2)(a) of CASR; and

(b) the operator applies to CASA for approval of the change under subregulation 119.090(3) of CASR; and

(d) the helicopter is used to conduct a significant proportion of the operator’s Australian air transport operations; and

(e) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(10) The Australian air transport operator is exempt from compliance with subregulation 119.090(2) of CASR to the extent that the copy of the part of the operator’s exposition affected by the change, which accompanies the application, does not state that the person holds the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which is a qualification required to be held by the head of training and checking under paragraph 119.145(1)(b) of CASR.

(11) Subsection (12) applies if:

(a) an Australian air transport operator has a contract with a Part 142 operator for the Part 142 operator to conduct training for the operator’s flight crew in relation to a relevant helicopter; and

(b) a person who conducts the training is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to conduct the activities involved in the training because the person does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the helicopter; and

(12) The Australian air transport operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 119.060 of CASR, in relation to the condition of the Australian air transport AOC issued to the operator mentioned in subparagraph 119.080(1)(b)(i) of CASR, to the extent that the head of training and checking of the operator does not comply with the responsibility stated in subparagraph 119.150(2)(d)(i) of CASR because the person does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter.

(13) Subsection (14) applies if:

(a) an Australian air transport operator has a contract with a Part 142 operator for the Part 142 operator to conduct checking for the operator’s flight crew in relation to a relevant helicopter; and

(b) a flight examiner who conducts the checking is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to conduct the activities involved in the checking because the flight examiner does not hold the type rating flight test endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the helicopter; and

(14) The Australian air transport operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 119.060 of CASR, in relation to the condition of the Australian air transport AOC issued to the operator mentioned in subparagraph 119.080(1)(b)(i) of CASR, to the extent that the head of training and checking of the operator does not comply with the responsibility stated in subparagraph 119.150(2)(d)(i) of CASR because the flight examiner does not hold the type rating flight test endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter.

Part 6 — Aerial work operator and pilot

11 Exemptions

(1) Subsections (2) and (3) apply if:

(a) the head of operations of an aerial work operator does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to a relevant helicopter; and

(b) the helicopter is used to conduct the greatest proportion of the operator’s aerial work operations; and

(2) The aerial work operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 138.055 of CASR to the extent that the head of operations does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which otherwise would be a breach of the condition of an aerial work certificate issued to the operator mentioned in subparagraph 138.050(1)(b)(i) of CASR.

(3) The aerial work operator is exempt from compliance with subparagraph 138.155(1)(e)(i) of CASR to the extent that the operator’s operations manual does not state that the head of operations holds the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which is a qualification required to be held by the head of operations under paragraph 138.090(1)(b) of CASR.

(4) Subsection (5) applies if:

(a) an aerial work operator makes a significant change that is the permanent appointment, or acting appointment, of a person as the head of operations of the operator under paragraph 138.062(2)(a) or (3)(a) of CASR; and

(b) the operator applies to CASA for approval of the change under subregulation 138.062(4) of CASR; and

(d) the helicopter is used to conduct the greatest proportion of the operator’s aerial work operations; and

(e) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(5) The aerial work operator is exempt from compliance with subregulation 138.062(2) or (3) of CASR, as applicable, to the extent that the copy of the part of the operator’s exposition affected by the change, which accompanies the application, does not state that the person holds the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which is a qualification required to be held by the head of operations under paragraph 138.090(1)(b) of CASR.

(6) Subsections (7) and (8) apply if:

(a) the head of training and checking of an aerial work operator does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to a relevant helicopter; and

(b) the helicopter is used to conduct the greatest proportion of the operator’s aerial work operations; and

(7) The aerial work operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 138.055 of CASR to the extent that the head of training and checking does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which otherwise would be a breach of the condition of an aerial work certificate issued to the operator mentioned in subparagraph 138.050(1)(b)(i) of CASR.

(8) The aerial work operator is exempt from compliance with subparagraph 138.155(1)(e)(i) of CASR to the extent that the operator’s operations manual does not state that the head of training and checking holds the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which is a qualification required to be held by the head of training and checking under paragraph 138.100(2)(b) of CASR.

(9) Subsection (10) applies if:

(a) an aerial work operator makes a significant change that is the permanent appointment, or acting appointment, of a person as the head of training and checking of the operator under paragraph 138.062(2)(a) or (3)(a) of CASR; and

(b) the operator applies to CASA for approval of the change under subregulation 138.062(4) of CASR; and

(d) the helicopter is used to conduct the greatest proportion of the operator’s aerial work operations; and

(e) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(10) The aerial work operator is exempt from compliance with subregulation 138.062(2) or (3) of CASR, as applicable, to the extent that the copy of the part of the operator’s exposition affected by the change, which accompanies the application, does not state that the person holds the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter, which is a qualification required to be held by the head of training and checking under paragraph 138.100(2)(b) of CASR.

(11) Subsection (12) applies if when a flight of a relevant helicopter involving an aerial work operation begins:

(a) a flight crew member for the flight is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to pilot the helicopter during the flight because the flight crew member does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(b) the exemption under section 5 applies to the flight crew member in relation to the helicopter.

(12) The aerial work operator is exempt from compliance with subregulation 138.475(1) of CASR to the extent that the flight crew member does not meet the requirement stated in subparagraph 138.475(2)(c)(i) of CASR because the flight crew member does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

(13) Subsection (14) applies if:

(a) an aerial work operator is required by regulation 138.125 of CASR to have a training and checking system; and

(b) the operator has a contract with a Part 142 operator for the Part 142 operator to conduct training for the operator’s flight crew in relation to a relevant helicopter; and

(c) a person who conducts the training is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to conduct the training because the person does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the helicopter; and

(d) an exemption under section 8 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(14) The aerial work operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 138.055 of CASR, in relation to the condition of an aerial work certificate issued to the operator mentioned in subparagraph 138.050(1)(b)(i) of CASR, to the extent that the head of training and checking for the operator does not comply with the responsibility stated in subparagraph 138.105(3)(d)(i) of CASR because the person does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter.

(15) Subsection (16) applies if:

(a) an aerial work operator is required by regulation 138.125 of CASR to have a training and checking system; and

(b) the operator has a contract with a Part 142 operator for the Part 142 operator to conduct checking for the operator’s flight crew in relation to a relevant helicopter; and

(c) a flight examiner who conducts the checking is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to conduct the checking because the flight examiner does not hold the type rating flight test endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the helicopter; and

(d) the exemption under section 9 applies to the flight examiner in relation to the helicopter.

(16) The aerial work operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 138.055 of CASR, in relation to the condition of an aerial work certificate issued to the operator mentioned in subparagraph 138.050(1)(b)(i) of CASR to the extent that the head of training and checking for the operator does not comply with the responsibility stated in subparagraph 138.105(3)(d)(i) of CASR because the flight examiner does not hold the type rating flight test endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter.

(17) Subsection (18) applies if:

(a) a pilot performs a duty as pilot in command of a relevant helicopter for a flight involving an aerial work operation; and

(b) the pilot is not qualified, under subparagraph 138.500(1)(a)(i) of CASR, as pilot in command for the flight because the pilot does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(18) The pilot is exempt from compliance with subregulation 138.500(2) of CASR to the extent that the pilot does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

(19) Subsection (20) applies if:

(a) the aerial work operator of a relevant helicopter for a flight involving an aerial work operation assigns a pilot to duty as pilot in command of the aircraft for the flight; and

(20) The aerial work operator is exempt from compliance with subregulation 138.500(2A) of CASR to the extent that the pilot does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

Part 7 — Part 141 operator

12 Exemptions

(1) Subsection (2) applies if:

(a) a person flies a relevant helicopter used in a Part 141 operator’s authorised Part 141 flight training as pilot in command; and

(b) the person is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to fly the aircraft as pilot in command because the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(2) The Part 141 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 141.290 of CASR to the extent that the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

(3) Subsection (4) applies if:

(a) a person flies a relevant helicopter used in a Part 141 operator’s authorised Part 141 flight training as pilot in command; and

(b) the operator authorises the carriage of a passenger on the flight; and

(c) the person is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to fly the aircraft as pilot in command with a passenger on board because the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(d) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(4) The Part 141 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 141.300 of CASR to the extent that the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

(5) Subsections (6) and (7) apply if:

(a) an instructor for a Part 141 operator who conducts authorised Part 141 flight training for the operator in relation to a relevant helicopter is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to conduct the training because the instructor does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the helicopter; and

(b) an exemption under section 8 applies to the instructor in relation to the helicopter.

(6) The Part 141 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 141.075 of CASR to the extent that the instructor does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter.

(7) The Part 141 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 141.175 of CASR to the extent that the instructor does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter.

(8) Subsections (9) and (10) apply if:

(a) the head of operations of a Part 141 operator does not hold either:

(i) a grade 1 training endorsement under Part 61 of CASR; or

(ii) the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes a relevant helicopter, as required by subparagraph 141.125(1)(a)(ii) of CASR; and

(b) an exemption under section 8 applies to the head of operations in relation to the helicopter.

(9) The Part 141 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 141.075 of CASR to the extent that the head of operations does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter, which otherwise would be a breach of the condition of a Part 141 certificate issued to the operator mentioned in subparagraph 141.070(b)(i) of CASR.

(10) The Part 141 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 141.265 of CASR to the extent that the head of operations does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter, which otherwise would be a breach of the requirement about the content of the operator’s operations manual stated in subparagraph 141.260(1)(e)(i) of CASR.

(11) Subsection (12) applies if:

(a) a Part 141 operator makes a significant change that is the permanent appointment of a person as the head of operations of the operator under paragraph 141.085(2)(a) or (3)(a) of CASR; and

(b) the operator applies to CASA for approval of the change under subregulation 141.085(4) of CASR; and

(i) a grade 1 training endorsement under Part 61 of CASR; or

(ii) the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes a relevant helicopter used in the authorised Part 141 flight training conducted by the operator; and

(d) an exemption under section 8 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(12) The Part 141 operator is exempt from compliance with subregulation 141.085(2) or (3) of CASR, as applicable, to the extent that the copy of the part of the operator’s operations manual affected by the change, which accompanies the application, does not state that the person holds the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter, which is a qualification required to be held by the head of operations under subparagraph 141.125(1)(a)(ii) of CASR.

(13) In this section:

instructor has the meaning given by regulation 141.030 of CASR.

Part 8 — Part 142 operator

13 Exemptions

(1) Subsection (2) applies if:

(a) the head of operations of a Part 142 operator does not hold an approval under regulation 142.040 of CASR to be the head of operations for the operator; and

(b) the head of operations does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to a relevant helicopter; and

(d) the exemption under section 5 applies to the head of operations in relation to the helicopter.

(2) The Part 142 operator is exempt from compliance with subparagraph 142.340(1)(e)(i) of CASR to the extent that the operator’s exposition does not state that the head of operations is authorised under Part 61 of CASR to pilot the kind of aircraft that includes the relevant helicopter, which is a qualification required to be held by the head of operations under paragraph 142.185(2)(c) of CASR.

(3) Subsection (4) applies if:

(a) an instructor for a Part 142 operator who conducts an authorised Part 142 activity for the operator in relation to a relevant helicopter is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to conduct the training because the instructor does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the helicopter; and

(b) an exemption under section 8 applies to the instructor in relation to the helicopter.

(4) The Part 142 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 142.230 of CASR to the extent that the instructor does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter.

(5) Subsection (6) applies if:

(a) an examiner, for a Part 142 operator, who conducts flight tests or contracted checking on behalf of the operator for the pilot type rating in relation to a relevant helicopter is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to conduct the tests or checking because the instructor does not hold the type rating flight test endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the helicopter; and

(b) the exemption under section 9 applies to the examiner in relation to the helicopter.

(6) The Part 142 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 142.230 of CASR to the extent that the examiner does not hold the type rating flight test endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter.

(7) Subsection (8) applies if:

(a) a person who flies a relevant helicopter as pilot in command in the conduct of an authorised Part 142 activity for a Part 142 operator is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to fly the helicopter as pilot in command because the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(b) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(8) The Part 142 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 142.365 of CASR to the extent that the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

(9) Subsection (10) applies if:

(a) a person flies a relevant helicopter used in an authorised Part 142 activity for a Part 142 operator as pilot in command; and

(b) the operator authorises the carriage of a passenger on the flight; and

(d) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(10) The Part 142 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 142.375 of CASR to the extent that the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

(11) Subsections (12) and (13) apply if:

(a) the head of operations of a Part 142 operator:

(i) does not hold an approval under regulation 142.040 of CASR to be the head of operations for the operator; or

(ii) is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to pilot a kind of helicopter that includes a relevant helicopter, which is used to conduct a significant proportion of the operator’s authorised Part 142 activities, as required by paragraph 142.185(2)(c) of CASR; and

(b) the exemption under section 5 applies to the head of operations in relation to the helicopter.

(12) The Part 142 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 142.060 of CASR to the extent that the head of operations is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to pilot a kind of helicopter that includes a relevant helicopter, which is used to conduct a significant proportion of the operator’s authorised Part 142 activities, which otherwise would be a breach of the condition of an AOC issued to the operator that authorises Part 142 activities mentioned in subparagraph 142.100(1)(b)(i) of CASR.

(13) The Part 142 operator is exempt from compliance with regulation 142.060 of CASR to the extent that the head of operations is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to pilot a kind of helicopter that includes a relevant helicopter, which is used to conduct a significant proportion of the operator’s authorised Part 142 activities, which otherwise would be a breach of the requirement about the content of the operator’s exposition stated in subparagraph 142.340(1)(e)(i) of CASR.

(14) Subsection (15) applies if:

(a) a Part 142 operator makes a significant change that is the permanent appointment of a person as the head of operations of the operator under paragraph 142.140(2)(a) or (3)(a) of CASR; and

(b) the operator applies to CASA for approval of the change under subregulation 142.140(4); and

(i) does not hold an approval under regulation 142.040 of CASR to be the head of operations for the operator; or

(d) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(15) The Part 142 operator is exempt from compliance with subregulation 142.140(2) or (3), as applicable, to the extent that the copy of the part of the operator’s exposition affected by the change, which accompanies the application, does not state that the person is authorised under Part 61 of CASR to pilot a kind of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter, which is used to conduct a significant proportion of the operator’s authorised Part 142 activities, which is a qualification required to be held by the head of operations under paragraph 142.185(2)(c) of CASR.

(16) In this section:

contracted checking has the meaning given by regulation 142.035 of CASR.

examiner has the meaning given by regulation 142.035 of CASR.

instructor has the meaning given by regulation 142.035 of CASR.

Part 9 — Helicopter operator

14 Exemption

(1) This section applies if when a flight of a relevant helicopter begins:

(a) either:

(i) the helicopter’s pilot is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to pilot the helicopter, during the flight, as pilot in command because the pilot does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; or

(ii) the pilot is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to pilot the helicopter, during the flight, as co-pilot because the pilot does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(b) the exemption under section 5 applies to the pilot in relation to the helicopter.

(2) The relevant helicopter’s operator is exempt from compliance with paragraph 133.370(2)(d) of CASR to the extent that the pilot is not qualified under subparagraph 133.385(1)(d)(i) or 133.390(1)(a)(i) of CASR, as applicable, to carry out the duties assigned to the pilot by the operator for the flight because the pilot does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter.

Part 10 — Independent maintainer and continuing airworthiness management organisation

15 Exemptions

(1) Subsection (2) applies if:

(a) an independent maintainer carries out critical control system maintenance on a relevant helicopter or supervises the carrying out of critical control system maintenance on a relevant helicopter by another individual; and

(b) the individual who complies with the responsibilities of an independent individual, in relation to the helicopter, under regulation 42.345 of CASR is the holder of a pilot licence (the licence holder); and

(c) the licence holder is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to fly the helicopter, as required by subparagraph 42.335(c)(ii) of CASR because the licence holder does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(d) the exemption under section 5 applies to the licence holder in relation to the helicopter.

(2) The independent maintainer is exempt from compliance with subregulation 42.340(2) of CASR to the extent that the licence holder does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

(3) Subsection (4) applies if:

(a) a continuing airworthiness management organisation issues an authorisation under subregulation 42.630(1) of CASR in relation to a relevant helicopter, which is authorised to operate under an AOC, to the holder of a pilot licence (the licence holder); and

(b) the licence holder is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to fly the helicopter, as required by subparagraph 42.630(2)(c)(i) of CASR, because the licence holder does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(4) The continuing airworthiness management organisation is exempt from compliance with subregulation 42.630(1) of CASR to the extent that the licence holder does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

(5) In this section:

critical control system maintenance has the meaning given by subregulation 42.015(1) of CASR.

independent individual has the meaning given by subregulation 42.015(1) of CASR.

independent maintainer has the meaning given by subregulation 42.015(1) of CASR.

Part 11 — Person permitted to carry out maintenance on a relevant helicopter

16 Exemption

(1) This section applies if:

(a) a person mentioned in column 2 of item 3 or 4 in table 42.300 of CASR carries out maintenance on a relevant helicopter, which is an Australian aircraft:

(i) to which Part 42 of CASR applies; and

(ii) mentioned in column 3 of the item; and

(b) the person is not working for an approved maintenance organisation; and

(c) the person is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to fly the helicopter, as required by column 3 of the item, because the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(d) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(2) The person is exempt from compliance with regulation 42.300 of CASR to the extent that the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

Part 12 — Manipulating pilot controls of a relevant helicopter

17 Exemptions

(1) Subsection (2) applies if:

(a) during a flight of a relevant helicopter, a person manipulates the flight controls of the helicopter; and

(b) the person is not authorised to pilot the helicopter under Part 61 of CASR because the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(2) The person is exempt from compliance with subparagraph 91.155(1)(b)(i) of CASR to the extent that the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

(3) Subsection (4) applies if:

(a) during a flight of a relevant helicopter, the pilot in command of the helicopter permits a person to manipulate the flight controls of the helicopter; and

(b) the person is not authorised to pilot the helicopter under Part 61 of CASR because the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(4) The person is exempt from compliance with subparagraph 91.155(2)(b)(i) of CASR to the extent that the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

Part 13 — Minimum height rules

18 Exemption

(1) This section applies if:

(a) a relevant helicopter is flown other than over a populous area or a public gathering; and

(b) the pilot in command of the helicopter flies the helicopter below the height mentioned in paragraph 91.267(2)(a) of CASR; and

(c) the pilot in command is not authorised to pilot the helicopter under Part 61 of CASR because the pilot in command does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter, and does not hold an approval under regulation 91.045 of CASR to fly the helicopter below the height mentioned in paragraph (b); and

(d) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(2) The pilot in command is exempt from compliance with subparagraph 91.267(3)(h)(i) of CASR to the extent that the pilot in command does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

Part 14 — Taxiing an Australian relevant helicopter

19 Exemption

(1) This section applies if:

(a) a person taxis a relevant helicopter that is an Australian aircraft; and

(b) the person is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to taxi the helicopter because the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(2) The person is exempt from compliance with subparagraph 91.415(1)(b)(ii) of CASR to the extent that the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

Part 15 — Relevant helicopter operating on the ground

20 Exemption

(1) This section applies if:

(a) a person is operating a relevant helicopter, which is an Australian aircraft, on the ground; and

(b) the helicopter is being operated other than for maintenance or maintenance training; and

(c) the person is not authorised to pilot the helicopter under Part 61 of CASR because the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(d) the exemption under section 5 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(2) The person is exempt from compliance with subparagraph 91.430(2)(a)(i) of CASR to the extent that the person does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

Part 16 — Causing, or simulating, failure of flight instruments

21 Exemption

(1) This section applies if:

(a) during a flight of a relevant helicopter, a failure of an instrument of the helicopter of any of the kinds mentioned in paragraph 91.715(1)(a) of CASR is caused or simulated; and

(b) the pilot in command of the helicopter is not authorised to pilot the helicopter under Part 61 of CASR because the pilot in command does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(2) The pilot in command is exempt from compliance with paragraph 91.715(2)(c) of CASR to the extent that the pilot in command does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

Part 17 — Simulating IMC flying

22 Exemption

(1) This section applies if:

(a) during a flight of a relevant helicopter, IMC are simulated; and

(2) The pilot in command is exempt from compliance with subparagraph 91.720(2)(c)(i) of CASR to the extent that the pilot in command does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the relevant helicopter.

Part 18 — Training, or a check, mentioned in Subpart 138.N of CASR

23 Exemptions

(1) This section applies if:

(a) a flight crew member of the personnel of relevant helicopter’s operator undertakes training, or a check, mentioned in Subpart 138.N of CASR; and

(b) the training or check is conducted by an individual who is engaged by the operator to conduct the training; and

(i) an aerial work certificate holder; and

(ii) not required to have a training and checking system, under regulation 138.125 of CASR, for an aerial work operation conducted in the helicopter.

(2) Subsection (3) applies if:

(a) the individual is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to conduct the training, as required by paragraph 23.10(1)(b) of the Part 138 Manual of Standards, because the individual does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the helicopter; and

(b) an exemption under section 8 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(3) The individual is exempt from compliance with regulation 138.505 of CASR to the extent that the individual does not hold the type rating training endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter.

(4) Subsection (5) applies if:

(a) the individual is not authorised under Part 61 of CASR to conduct the check, as required by paragraph 23.10(1)(b) of the Part 138 Manual of Standards, because the individual does not hold the type rating flight test endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the helicopter; and

(b) the exemption under section 9 applies to the person in relation to the helicopter.

(5) The individual is exempt from compliance with regulation 138.505 of CASR to the extent that the individual does not hold the type rating flight test endorsement for the type of helicopter that includes the relevant helicopter.

(6) In this section:

aerial work certificate holder has the meaning given by subsection 1.04(6) of the Part 138 Manual of Standards.

Part 19 — VFR flight

24 Exemption

(1) This section applies if:

(a) a flight of a relevant helicopter is a VFR flight under subregulation 91.280(1) of CASR; and

(b) item 2B in table 2.07 (3) of the Part 91 Manual of Standards applies to the flight; and

(c) an NVIS crew member who conducts the flight is not authorised to conduct an NVIS operation by Part 61 of CASR with the helicopter, as required by subparagraph 2.07(3B)(c)(i) of the Part 91 Manual of Standards, because the NVIS crew member does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter; and

(d) the exemption under section 5 applies to the NVIS crew member who is not authorised to conduct the NVIS operation by Part 61 of CASR with the helicopter.

(2) The pilot in command of the relevant helicopter is exempt from compliance with subregulation 91.280(1) of CASR to the extent that the NVIS crew member mentioned in paragraph (1)(d) does not hold the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter.

(3) In this section:

NVIS crew member has the meaning given by subsection 3.02(1) of the Part 91 Manual of Standards.

NVIS operation has the meaning given by subsection 1.07(6) of the Part 91 Manual of Standards.

Schedule 1 Relevant helicopters and pilot type ratings

Note See sections 3 and 4, and paragraphs 5(1)(a), 6(3)(b), 7(1)(a), 8(1)(a) and 9(1)(a).

Schedule 1 Table – Relevant helicopters and pilot type ratings
Column 1Type certificate holder or manufacturer (see subsection 3(2)) Column 2Helicopter model Column 3Pilot type rating
Agusta Westland orAgustaSee Leonardo
Airbus HelicoptersAerospatialeEurocopterKawasakiMesserschmitt Bolkow BO105 (all models) BO105
EC 135 (excluding H and CPDS models) EC135
EC 135 (all CPDS models)
H 135 (all H models)
AS 355 AS355
AS 355 N
MBB-BK117 (all A and B models) BK117/EC145
MBB-BK117 (C-1 models)
BK117 C-2 (EC145 C-2 models)
BK117 C-2e (EC145 C‑2e models)
BK117 D-2 (H145 D-2 models)BK117 D-3 (H145 D-3 models)
SA 365 (excluding all N and N3 models) AS365/EC155
SA/AS 365 N models (excluding N3 models)
AS 365 N3
AS 365 N3+
EC 155
Bell HelicopterTextron Inc. Bell 206LT BH206LT
Bell 222 BH222/430
Bell 230
Bell 430
Bell 427 BH427
Bell 429 BH429
Bell HelicopterTextron Inc.Leonardo Bell/AB212 BH212/412
Bell/AB412
Leonardo A 109 (all A and C models) A109
A 109 E
A 109 K2
A 109 S
A 109 SP
MD Helicopters MD 900 Explorer MD900
MD 902S
Sikorsky S 76A series SK76
S 76B series
S 76C series
S 76D series

meta-content-style-type: text/css meta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8 meta-description: Multi-Engine Helicopters Exemption 2025 title: CASA EX70/25

?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="no"?>

Instrument number CASA EX70/25

[Signed D.B. O’Hagan]

Danny O’Hagan Section Manager Drafting Legal, International & Regulatory Affairs Division

29 July 2025

CASA EX70/25 — Multi-Engine Helicopters Exemption 2025

Contents

Page

4 Meaning of authorised to pilot a model of multi-engine helicopter

Part 2 — Pilot

5 Exemption — authority to exercise privileges of pilot licence

6 Exemptions — valid flight review

7 Exemption — valid instrument proficiency check

Part 3 — Flight instructor

The instrument is constructed around a small set of tightly defined concepts that determine who can benefit from the exemptions and how they operate. Key definitional and operational concepts appear primarily in section 3, section 4, section 5 and Schedule 1.

Relevant helicopter and Schedule 1 mapping. "Relevant helicopter" is defined as a model of multi‑engine helicopter mentioned in a cell in column 2 of the table in Schedule 1 (s 3(1)). Schedule 1 provides the mapping between helicopter models (column 2) and the pilot type rating (column 3) that would ordinarily authorise piloting that model. The instrument explicitly states that column 1 of the table contains general information only and is not intended to qualify or affect meanings elsewhere (s 3(2)). Practitioners must therefore treat the column 2/column 3 mapping as the operative data: the model and the associated pilot type rating.
Authorised to pilot a model of multi‑engine helicopter. Section 4 sets out that a person is "authorised to pilot" a Schedule 1 model if they either hold the pilot type rating mentioned in the corresponding column 3, or the exemption under s 5 applies to them for that helicopter. The s 5 pathway therefore functions as an alternative authorisation route to holding the formal type rating.
Pilot type rating and endorsements. The instrument uses the statutory term "pilot type rating" with the same meaning as in Division 61.L.5 of CASR (s 3(1)). It also references "flight test endorsement" (regulation 61.010 meaning), "type rating flight test endorsement" and "type rating training endorsement" as used in CASR tables (s 3(1)). Those CASR concepts determine what a person would otherwise need under Part 61, and the exemption relieves that need in specified circumstances.
The s 5 eligibility and competence framework. Section 5 is the instrument’s heart. It sets out a multi‑element test for a licence holder to be exempted to pilot a second relevant helicopter where their licence only carries a different multi‑engine pilot type rating:
- Completed training covering the units of competency for the pilot type rating in the Part 61 Manual of Standards (s 5(2)(a) and references to Appendix L of Schedule 7 in the definitions in s 3).
- Training must be delivered by a Part 141 authorised instructor or holder of an approval under regulation 141.035 (s 5(2)(b)), and must be conducted in accordance with s 5(3)-(4) , notably s 5(3) prevents live‑air training in a relevant helicopter with more than nine passenger seats if there is an approved flight simulator available in Australia for the training.
- Assessment as competent requires demonstration to specified assessors that the licence holder meets the competency standards for a flight review, as set out in section 14 of the Part 61 Manual of Standards, for each relevant unit of competency (s 5(1)(c), s 5(4)-(6)).
- Currency requirement: at intervals not exceeding 24 months, a valid flight review for the pilot type rating in relation to another multi‑engine helicopter, or an assessment of competency for the relevant helicopter (s 5(1)(d)).
"To the extent" and partial relief. The instrument repeatedly states that entities are "exempt from compliance ... to the extent that" the person or organisation does not hold the pilot type rating or endorsement required by CASR (see the operative language across Parts 2-19). That phrasing makes clear the exemption is strictly circumscribed to fill gaps created by the absence of a type rating, not to displace other regulatory obligations.
Cascade across operational roles. Once s 5 applies to an individual, the instrument provides parallel exemptions across a wide set of CASR obligations: flight reviews, instrument proficiency checks, instructor activities, examiner activities, qualifications for heads of operations/training/checking across Australian air transport (Part 119), aerial work (Part 138), Part 141 and Part 142 operators, and permissions tied to operational tasks and training scenarios (Parts 9-19). Many of those exemptions explicitly tie to operational documents such as operator expositions or applications for approval (for example s 10(2)-(5), s 11(2)-(5), s 12(2)-(4), s 13(2), s 14(2)). Several exemptions explicitly allow operators not to state a missing type rating in a submission accompanying an application when the person meets the instrument’s conditions (eg s 10(5), s 11(5), s 12(12), s 13(15)).
Interaction with Manuals and existing CASR approvals. The instrument cross‑references the Part 61 Manual of Standards (including Appendix L units and section 14 competency standards), the Part 61, 91, 119, 138, 141, 142 and 42 regulatory provisions, and existing approvals under CASR (for example reg 141.035, reg 61.040 and reg 61.400) for who may deliver training or conduct assessments (s 5(2)(b), s 5(5)). This makes the exemptions dependent on existing CASR approval pathways and on manual competency standards.

Taken together, the instrument’s main conceptual thrust is to create a competence‑based, conditional pathway to substitute training, assessment and currency for formal pilot type ratings for named multi‑engine helicopter models for a limited period, while leaving the underlying CASR framework and competency standards as the normative baseline.

The instrument specifies a broad set of affected persons and entities, each identified in the relevant Part and linked back to the core s 5 exemptions. The principal categories are:

Pilot licence holders. Section 5 applies directly to holders of pilot licences who hold a pilot type rating for one listed multi‑engine helicopter (the first helicopter) but not for another listed model (the second helicopter), provided they complete the training and assessment requirements and maintain currency (s 5(1)). Sections 6 and 7 create related exemptions for flight review currency and instrument proficiency checks for such licence holders (ss 6-7).
Flight instructors. Section 8 applies to flight instructors who hold the type rating training endorsement for a multi‑engine type that includes the first helicopter and the pilot type rating for that first helicopter, who are authorised to pilot the second helicopter and have at least 25 hours PIC in the second helicopter (s 8(1)). Where those conditions are met, various training, differences training, general competency training and flight review authorisations flow by exemption (s 8(2)-(6)).
Flight examiners. Section 9 covers flight examiners who hold the type rating flight test endorsement for a type that includes the first helicopter but not for the second, who hold the pilot type rating for the first helicopter and either have the type rating training endorsement for the second or are authorised to conduct training under Part 3 (s 9(1)). The examiner then gets an exemption to conduct flight tests/checking for the second helicopter (s 9(2)).
Operators with regulatory appointment‑requirements. The instrument affects numerous operator categories where CASR requires appointed roles to hold type ratings or training/flight test endorsements:
- Australian air transport operators (Part 5). The head of flying operations and head of training and checking may be covered by s 5, and the operator receives exemptions from requirements that would otherwise breach AOC conditions or exposition content rules (ss 10(1)-(14)).
- Aerial work operators (Part 6). The head of operations, head of training and checking, assigned pilots, and contracted training/checking arrangements are all covered for specified non‑compliance with type rating/endorsement requirements (ss 11(1)-(20)).
- Part 141 and Part 142 certificate holders (Parts 7-8). Instructors, heads of operations, examiners and pilots operating in authorised training activities are included where they meet the instrument’s antecedent conditions (ss 12-13).
- Helicopter operators generally (Part 9). Operators receive specific relief where a pilot in command or co‑pilot lacks the type rating but is covered by s 5 (s 14).
Maintenance and airworthiness organisations. Part 10 and Part 11 address independent maintainers, continuing airworthiness management organisations (CAMOs), and persons permitted to carry out maintenance on a relevant helicopter, where regulation 42.300/42.340/42.630 would otherwise require a person to hold a pilot type rating or to be authorised to fly the helicopter (ss 15-16). The exemptions apply where the responsible person is a licence holder covered by s 5.
Persons manipulating pilot controls during flight. Part 12 exempts people who manipulate flight controls in flight (eg training, demonstration, handovers) where they are not authorised under Part 61 because they lack a pilot type rating but are covered by s 5 (ss 17(1)-(4)).
Operational permissions and training scenarios. Parts 13-17 cover minimum height rules, taxiing, ground operation, simulation of instrument failure, and simulating IMC in flight, where the pilot lacks the type rating but meets s 5 conditions (ss 18-22).
Personnel conducting Subpart 138.N training/checks; NVIS VFR flights. Part 18 creates exemptions for individuals engaged by an aerial work operator to conduct training or checks under Subpart 138.N where the individual lacks a type rating or flight test endorsement but otherwise meets conditions (ss 23(1)-(5)). Part 19 addresses VFR flights where NVIS crew members may lack type ratings but are covered by s 5 (ss 24(1)-(3)).

All of these categories are conditional on the helicopter being one of the Schedule 1 listed models and on the person meeting the s 5 preconditions (see s 4 tying authorisation to either holding the type rating in column 3 or the s 5 exemption). The Schedule 1 list includes models and manufacturers such as Airbus/Eurocopter (EC135, AS355, BK117/EC145, AS365/EC155), Bell (BH206LT, BH222/430, BH427, BH429, BH212/412), Leonardo (A109 variants), MD Helicopters (MD900, MD902S), Sikorsky (S‑76 variants) and others (Schedule 1). Column 3 identifies the pilot type rating that corresponds to a group of models (for example BK117/EC145 groupings). Users must check the Schedule 1 cell mapping to determine whether their exact helicopter model is a "relevant helicopter" and which pilot type rating is the comparator.

Finally, the instrument affects organisations’ regulatory submissions and documentation. Multiple provisions expressly exempt operators from particular exposition or application content requirements "to the extent" the head of operations/training/checking does not hold the specified type rating because the exemption under s 5 applies (see e.g. ss 10(3), 10(5), 11(3), 11(5), 12(6), 13(2), 13(15)). That makes the instrument operationally important for workforce appointments, applications to CASA, and contractual arrangements with Part 142 training providers.

The instrument sets out both duties that a person or organisation must meet to obtain the exemption pathway and the specific rights the exemption confers. The key legal duties are primarily imposed on the licence holder seeking the substitute authorisation and on the trainers/assessors and operators who rely on the exemption.

Duties and preconditions in section 5 (pilot licence holders)

Hold a pilot type rating for a listed model (the first helicopter) and not hold it for the second model (s 5(1)(a)). This is the starting point: the person must already be rated for one relevant multi‑engine model mapped in Schedule 1.
Complete training for the second helicopter that covers all units of competency required in the Part 61 Manual of Standards for the pilot type rating (s 5(2)(a)); the training must be delivered by an instructor authorised under Part 141 or a holder of an approval under regulation 141.035 of CASR (s 5(2)(b)); and the training must be conducted in accordance with s 5(3) (simulator availability prohibition) (s 5(2)(c), s 5(3)).
Undergo assessment of competency that demonstrates compliance with the flight review competency standards in section 14 of the Part 61 Manual of Standards for each relevant unit of competency (s 5(1)(c), s 5(4)). The assessment must be made to one of the persons listed in s 5(5): CASA, the holder of an approval under reg 61.040 for reg 61.400, or a pilot instructor authorised to conduct the flight review (s 5(5)).
Maintain currency: the licence holder must either hold a valid flight review for the pilot type rating in relation to another multi‑engine helicopter or be assessed as competent to pilot a relevant helicopter at intervals of not more than 24 months (s 5(1)(d)).

Duties on training providers and assessors

Training must be delivered by an authorised Part 141 instructor or a holder of an approval under regulation 141.035 (s 5(2)(b)). The instrument therefore places an implicit duty on trainers to ensure they hold the necessary Part 141 authorisation or regulator approval before delivering the training that triggers the exemption.
Assessors must be persons specified in s 5(5); CASA itself is listed as a permitted assessor (s 5(5)(a)). Where CASA is chosen as assessor the instrument creates a direct regulatory interface.

Duties linked to simulator availability

Section 5(3) requires that training must not be conducted in a relevant helicopter with a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity of more than 9 if an approved flight simulator for the training is available in Australia. Practically this creates a duty to check simulator availability before arranging live training in larger helicopters.

Rights conferred by the exemptions

Authorisation to exercise licence privileges for a second relevant helicopter. When the s 5 conditions are met, the licence holder is authorised, under paragraph 61.375(5)(b) of CASR, to conduct the activity that would otherwise require a type rating, despite not holding the type rating (s 5(7) and the accompanying note). The instrument’s repeated notes make the same point: the exemption operates to authorise activities "despite not holding" the type rating (eg notes to ss 6-9).
Ripple rights for associated activities. Once s 5 applies, the instrument provides exemptions that allow licence holders to be treated as having valid flight reviews or instrument proficiency checks for particular purposes (ss 6-7), permit instructors to conduct training and reviews despite lacking type rating training endorsements (s 8), permit examiners to conduct flight tests despite lacking type rating flight test endorsements (s 9), and permit operators to meet AOC/exposition requirements even where appointed personnel lack the specific type rating (ss 10-14). The effect notes in each applicable Part explicitly link the exemption to authorising the relevant activity in place of the formal endorsement.

Other duties arising for operators and organisations

Operators relying on these exemptions remain required to ensure that appointed individuals meet the s 5 conditions. Several operator exemptions are conditional on factual tests such as whether the relevant helicopter "is used to conduct a significant proportion" or "the greatest proportion" of the operator’s operations (see ss 10(1)(b), 11(1)(b), 11(1)(b) language). That factual nexus imposes a duty on operators to assess and document the extent to which a helicopter model is central to their operations before relying on the relevant exemption.
Documentation and application content. Where an exemption applies to an appointment that requires filing a copy of an operator’s exposition or a change application (eg ss 10(4)-(5), 11(4)-(5), 12(11)-(12), 13(14)-(15)), operators are permitted, to the extent of the exemption, not to state that the person holds the specified type rating. That right is expressly limited "to the extent" and therefore does not remove other obligations to provide accurate or complete material in submissions.

Limitations and scope constraints

The instrument repeatedly uses "to the extent that" to circumscribe the relief. The exemptions do not grant broader relief from unrelated CASR obligations. They only relieve the specific requirement that cannot be met solely because the person lacks the pilot type rating/endorsement.
The instrument is time‑limited. The rights only exist while the instrument is in force (s 2).

In sum, duty holders must ensure compliance with the procedural and competency prerequisites in s 5, and that trainers/assessors meet their authorisation requirements, in order to lawfully rely on the suite of associated exemptions that the instrument grants to individuals and organisations. The instrument’s rights are narrowly focused, competence‑based authorisations that substitute for formal type ratings for the listed models and for the limited period of the instrument.

The instrument is an exemption instrument; it does not itself create specific criminal offences or civil penalties in its text. Instead it operates by exempting persons or organisations "from compliance" with particular provisions of CASR to the extent set out in each section (for example s 5(7), and the repeated operative phrases across Parts 2-19). The legal consequence is that, while the exemption applies, the person or organisation is not in breach of the specified CASR provision for the particular reason that would otherwise exist because of the absence of a type rating or endorsement.

Enforcement and regulatory effect depend on two features of the instrument:

Conditional nature of the exemption. The instrument makes clear in numerous places that the exemptions only apply where the preconditions are satisfied (for example, the s 5 conditions for individual authorisation and the factual tests about a helicopter being used to conduct a "significant proportion" or the "greatest proportion" of operator operations for operator‑related exemptions, see ss 10(1)(b), 11(1)(b)). If those preconditions are not met, the exemption does not apply and the underlying CASR requirement remains in force. Practically, that means regulatory enforcement under CASR would re‑apply if a person or organisation relied on the instrument where the qualifying conditions were not satisfied.
CASA’s role in assessment and approvals. The instrument explicitly names CASA as one of the persons who may conduct the required competency assessment (s 5(5)(a)) and cross‑references existing approval mechanisms (e.g. regulation 141.035, regulation 61.040 for regulation 61.400). Where CASA is an assessor or where training/assessor approvals are required, CASA retains a front‑line regulatory point of contact. That creates operational enforcement levers: CASA can refuse approvals, deny assessments, or query compliance with the instrument’s conditions when those conditions are prerequisites to the exemption.

What the instrument does not do in terms of penalties

It does not specify fines, suspension powers or particular enforcement steps that flow from misuse of the exemption. Any penalties for non‑compliance with CASR remain within the CASR framework and CASA’s enforcement powers as set out in CASR and related enforcement guidance. The instrument simply creates a temporary carve‑out for named regulatory requirements where the statutory conditions are met.

Practical enforcement implications for practitioners

Documentation and auditability will be central to enforcement assessment. Because the exemptions are conditional on training, assessment and currency elements (notably s 5(2)-(6) and the 24‑month flight review requirement in s 5(1)(d)), operators and individuals who rely on the instrument must be able to demonstrate that the conditions were met at the relevant time. The instrument’s repeated wording , exemptions apply "to the extent that" and "despite not holding" the endorsement , makes the factual record the key determinant of whether a person or organisation was within the terms of the exemption.
Risk that an error in eligibility will re‑expose the person or organisation to standard CASR obligations. If in practice a trainer lacks the necessary Part 141 authorisation, or a simulator availability check is ignored (s 5(3)), or the assessor is not one of the permitted persons (s 5(5)), the exemption will likely not be in effect for that instance and the person or organisation would need to show compliance with the ordinary CASR requirements , a regulatory exposure potentially enforceable by CASA under the usual statutory powers.

In summary, the instrument grants targeted regulatory relief rather than creating new penalty structures. Enforcement hinges on whether the instrument’s preconditions have been complied with; CASA’s inclusion as a permitted assessor and the cross‑references to existing approvals connect the exemptions to established regulatory oversight channels under CASR.

This instrument explicitly operates by modifying how particular provisions of CASR apply to specified persons and organisations for the duration of the instrument. It cross‑references and interacts with numerous provisions of CASR and with Manuals of Standards/Manuals. The interaction is achieved by granting exemptions from named CASR regulations and referring to competency standards in the Part 61 Manual of Standards and other manuals. The key cross‑references and interactions are:

Part 61 (Pilot licensing, endorsements and type ratings). The instrument is principally about substituting training, assessment and currency for the formal requirement to hold a pilot type rating under Division 61.L.5 of CASR. It expressly provides temporary relief from regulation 61.065 in relation to conducting training/examination or to authorisations referenced in multiple places (for example ss 5(7), 8(2)-(6), 9(2)), and addresses subregulation 61.800(1) (flight review validity), subregulation 61.745(1) (single‑engine class rating flight review), subregulation 61.805(1) (instrument proficiency check) and other Part 61 instruments via specific exemptions (ss 6-7).
Manuals of Standards and Manuals. The instrument depends on competency standards in the Part 61 Manual of Standards, specifically section 14 for flight review competency standards and Appendix L units of competency mentioned in Schedule 7 (s 3 definitions; s 5(1)(c)-(4)). It thus integrates the instrument’s substitute authorisation into the existing competence architecture of CASR.
Part 119 (Australian air transport operators), Part 138 (aerial work), Part 141 and Part 142 (training organisations and activities). Sections 10-13 provide multiple, specific exemptions from operator‑qualification and exposition requirements under these Parts (for example regulation 119.060, 119.090; regulation 138.055, 138.062; regulation 141.075, 141.085; regulation 142.060, 142.140). The exemptions are constructed so an operator is not in breach of AOC/exposition conditions to the extent the person appointed lacks the nominated type rating while covered by the s 5 pathway.
Part 42 (continuing airworthiness and maintenance). Parts 10 and 11 provide exemptions from certain Part 42 requirements where a person carrying out independent maintainer responsibilities or continuing airworthiness management functions would otherwise be required to be authorised under Part 61 to fly the helicopter (ss 15-16). The instrument therefore interacts with airworthiness authorisation rules where those rules themselves reference pilot licence authorisations.
Part 91 and the Part 91 Manual of Standards. The instrument creates exemptions for manipulating pilot controls (reg 91.155), minimum height rules (reg 91.267), taxiing and operation on the ground (regs 91.415 and 91.430), simulation of instrument failures (reg 91.715) and simulating IMC (reg 91.720) where the person lacks a pilot type rating but meets the s 5 conditions (Parts 12-17). It also interacts with Part 91 MOS NVIS rules in respect of VFR flights and NVIS crew members (Part 19).
Specific regulation cross‑references. The instrument cites and provides exemptions from a long list of specific CASR provisions. Examples include regulation 61.065 (authorisations), paragraph 61.375(5)(b), subregulation 61.800(1), subregulation 61.745(1), subregulation 61.805(1), regulation 119.060, subparagraph 119.205(1)(e)(i), subregulation 138.055(1), regulation 141.075, regulation 142.230, regulation 42.340(2), regulation 42.630(1), paragraph 133.370(2)(d), regulation 91.715, paragraph 91.267(2)(a), subregulation 91.280(1), and many others as enumerated in Parts 2-19. Each exemption is therefore tied to an explicit cross‑reference to CASR.

Mechanics of interaction

The instrument does not amend CASR itself. Instead it declares an exemption from compliance with particular CASR requirements where the factual and competence conditions are met. That preserves the structure of CASR while temporarily modifying how compliance is judged for the listed actors and activities.
The instrument relies on existing approval and assessor mechanisms within CASR. For example, training must be delivered by Part 141 authorised instructors or holders of an approval under regulation 141.035 (s 5(2)(b)). Assessments can be made to CASA or holders of approval under regulation 61.040 for regulation 61.400 (s 5(5)). This means the instrument’s implementation is layered onto the existing approval infrastructure rather than creating separate parallel approval pathways.
Manuals and competency standards remain authoritative. The instrument’s competence assessments must be against the competency standards for a flight review set out in section 14 of the Part 61 Manual of Standards (s 5(1)(c), s 5(4)). Likewise training must cover units of competency listed in Appendix L of Schedule 7 of the Part 61 Manual of Standards (s 3 definition). This embeds the exemptions within the same competence criteria that underlie the formal type rating framework.

Practical consequence

The instrument’s exemptions create a substitutional compliance route whereby satisfying manualised units of competency, training delivery conditions and assessor rules lets an individual or operator satisfy CASR obligations without holding a formal type rating for the particular model. However, because the CASA approvals and Manual of Standards standards are invoked as the benchmark, interactions with other CASR obligations continue to govern safety standards and documentation.
Where an operator’s compliance with CASR obligations depends on statements in expositions or application materials, the instrument provides for limited non‑statement "to the extent" that the person does not hold a type rating because the s 5 exemption applies (eg ss 10(5), 11(5), 12(12), 13(15)). That produces a direct, operational interface between the exemption and documentation obligations under other CASR Parts.

Overall, the instrument is an overlay to CASR that leverages existing competency and approval structures; it does not amend the CASR text but it modifies which actors must comply with specific regulatory requirements where the instrument’s conditions are satisfied.

The instrument text provided contains the original instrument metadata and signature block but records no amendments. The amendment‑relevant items present in the instrument are:

Instrument identification and making authority. The instrument is titled "CASA EX70/25 , Multi‑Engine Helicopters Exemption 2025", made by a delegate of CASA, D.B. O’Hagan, Section Manager Drafting, Legal, International & Regulatory Affairs Division, under regulation 11.160 of CASR (instrument header).
Date and signature. The instrument is signed and dated 29 July 2025 (instrument header).
Commencement and repeal dates. The instrument commences on 1 August 2025 and is repealed at the end of 31 July 2028 (s 2). These are the only temporal markers that define the instrument’s duration.
No recorded amendments. The provided text does not contain an amendment history section, nor does it show any variants or prior versions of the instrument. The content of the instrument as presented should therefore be treated as the instrument as originally made on 29 July 2025.

Implication for users and counsel

Time‑limited nature. The instrument has a built‑in expiry (31 July 2028). Practitioners must therefore plan for the termination of the exemption pathway: after expiry the normal CASR requirements for holding type ratings and endorsements will resume in full unless a subsequent exemption or a permanent regulatory change is made.
No further amendment information is given in the instrument itself. If users require to know whether the instrument was later amended, revoked earlier, superseded, or extended beyond 31 July 2028, they must check the official register or CASA publications; such follow‑up is outside the instrument text itself. The instrument as produced contains no indication of prior amendments or versions.
Record‑keeping for transitional arrangements. Because the instrument is a three‑year instrument, operators and licence holders should document training, assessments and reliance on the instrument clearly to show what occurred during the instrument period. If any dispute or audit covers periods during which the instrument was in force, contemporaneous records will be the key evidence that the s 5 preconditions were met.

In short, the instrument as provided is an original, time‑limited exemption made in July 2025 with a fixed repeal date in July 2028, and no amendment history is recorded in the text supplied.

The instrument text does not include, cite or reference any judicial decisions, litigation, or administrative appeals relating to the instrument or the matters it addresses. There are no cases named in the instrument, and it contains no litigation record or references to precedent.

Practical note for practitioners and researchers

Absence of litigation references in the instrument does not mean there will be no later litigation or administrative challenge. The instrument itself simply sets out the exemptions and the conditions upon which they operate. If disputes arise (for example, over whether a person met the s 5 conditions, whether a helicopter is used to conduct a "significant proportion" of an operator’s operations, or about the interpretation of Schedule 1 mapping), resolution of those disputes would occur through the usual CASA administrative processes and, if contested, through the courts or tribunals. None of that appears in the instrument.
If users require a litigation history (decisions interpreting or challenging this instrument), those would need to be located in subsequent case law, tribunal decisions or CASA enforcement records after the instrument’s commencement. The instrument itself contains no litigation history and names no cases.
For authoritative legal advice on potential litigation risks or precedent, parties should search relevant court and tribunal databases and CASA determinations for any post‑commencement matters that mention CASA EX70/25 or raise issues about the instrument’s operation. That is outside the scope of the instrument’s text as supplied.

Several practical and legal traps arise directly from the instrument’s drafting and structure. These are operational details and interpretation points that can materially affect whether an individual or organisation may rely on the exemptions and should be confirmed before treating the exemptions as available.

Dependence on s 5 as the gateway. Most Parts explicitly require that "the exemption under section 5 applies" to the person in relation to the helicopter before the operator‑focused or activity‑focused exemptions apply (for example ss 6(1), 8(1)(c), 9(1)(c), 10(1)(c)). This means that failure to meet any element of s 5 may defeat numerous downstream exemptions. Put simply, s 5 is the indispensable gateway; it is not optional.
The "to the extent" drafting creates partial relief only. Each exemption is narrowly expressed as an exemption "to the extent that" the person or entity does not hold the required type rating or endorsement. That means the instrument will not excuse breaches of other unrelated CASR requirements. Practically, operators must audit which specific regulatory obligations they are relying on the instrument to satisfy, and which remain in force.
Training coverage requirement is precise. Section 5(2)(a) requires that the licence holder "has received training in all the units of competency mentioned in the Part 61 Manual of Standards for the pilot type rating in relation to the helicopter." That is a unit‑by‑unit requirement, not a loose competency generalisation. Practitioners must check Appendix L of Schedule 7 of the Part 61 MOS to confirm which units apply for the particular pilot type rating in column 3 of Schedule 1 and ensure each has been covered.
Assessment must demonstrate each relevant unit of competency. Section 5(4) requires that the assessment demonstrate to a permitted assessor that the licence holder has the competency required by subsection 14.6 of the Part 61 MOS "by each relevant unit of competency for the pilot type rating." Again, the unit‑by‑unit framing means granular assessment evidence will be required.
Currency requirement: flight review at intervals not exceeding 24 months. Section 5(1)(d) imposes a rolling currency test that can be satisfied either by a valid flight review for the pilot type rating in relation to another multi‑engine helicopter or by being assessed as competent to pilot a relevant helicopter, using the flight review competency standards. Failure to meet this 24‑month cycle will remove the exemption pathway for that licence holder.
Simulator availability prohibition can restrict live‑air training. Section 5(3) states training "must not be conducted" in a relevant helicopter with a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity of more than 9 if there is an approved flight simulator for the training available in Australia. Practically this imposes a duty to check whether an approved simulator is available and to use it where available , ignoring that could invalidate the training condition.
Who may assess. Section 5(5) limits who can perform the competency assessment: CASA, a holder of an approval under reg 61.040 for reg 61.400, or a pilot instructor authorised to conduct the flight review. Choosing an assessor outside that list will mean the assessment does not meet the s 5 requirement.
Schedule 1 grouping and column 1 caveat. Schedule 1 groups models under a pilot type rating (column 3) and includes a column 1 listing of manufacturers/type certificate holders that is explicitly "general information only" (s 3(2)). Practitioners must pay attention to the exact cell in column 2 describing the helicopter model and to the linked pilot type rating in column 3. Misreading column 1 as authoritative can lead to misclassification.
Factual tests for operator exemptions. Several operator exemptions apply only where the relevant helicopter "is used to conduct a significant proportion" or "the greatest proportion" of an operator’s operations (for example ss 10(1)(b), 11(1)(b), 11(1)(b) and 13(1)(c)). These are empirical tests that can be contested by CASA. Operators should document the basis for such claims.
Exemptions for documentation and application content are limited. The instrument allows operators, "to the extent" the exemption applies, not to state that an appointee holds the pilot type rating in exposition copies or application materials (e.g. ss 10(5), 11(5), 12(12), 13(15)). However, other accuracy and truthfulness obligations when making applications to CASA remain. The instrument does not otherwise relieve obligations to be accurate in submissions.
Multiple linked exemptions: chained risk. The instrument creates many interlocking exemptions (instructors, examiners, operators, maintainers). Relying on one person’s exemption may rely on training delivered by another person whose authorisation is itself reliant on an exemption (for example Part 142 contracted checking). That chain must be mapped and documented to ensure that no circular reliance undermines the overall legal basis.
Time limit and planning. The instrument ends 31 July 2028. Organisations that restructure workforce qualifications around this instrument must plan for how to transition when the instrument expires or is not renewed.
Unspecified administrative processes. The instrument references existing approval mechanisms (reg 141.035, reg 61.040 etc.) and CASA as a permitted assessor, but it does not prescribe administrative timelines, fees, or booking processes. This can create practical delays in obtaining assessments or training slots, particularly where CASA assessment is chosen.
Maintenance and airworthiness exemptions hinge on the licence holder status. Parts 10-11 exempt independent maintainers and CAMOs only where the independent individual is a licence holder covered by s 5. If the individual is not a licence holder or not covered by s 5, the exemption will not apply and Part 42 requirements (such as the requirement that the independent individual be authorised to fly the helicopter) remain.

These "gotchas" show that the instrument is competence‑based and documentation‑driven rather than a blanket relaxation of rules. Careful cross‑checking of Schedule 1, unit lists in Part 61 MOS Appendix L, assessor authorisations, simulator inventories and operational use statistics will be essential when relying on the instrument.

Below is a practical compliance checklist and recommended process for individuals and organisations that intend to rely on CASA EX70/25. Each step cites the relevant provision(s) which establish the requirement.

Confirm the helicopter is a "relevant helicopter" in Schedule 1 (s 3(1); Schedule 1).
- Identify the exact model in column 2 and the corresponding pilot type rating in column 3. Do not treat column 1 as authoritative (s 3(2)). If the model is not listed in Schedule 1, the instrument does not apply.
Confirm the licence holder’s baseline rating (s 5(1)(a)).
- The licence holder must hold the pilot type rating for another listed multi‑engine helicopter (the first helicopter). Document the licence and rating.
Complete the required training for the second helicopter (s 5(1)(b) and s 5(2)).
- Ensure the training covers all units of competency required by the Part 61 Manual of Standards for the pilot type rating for the second helicopter (s 5(2)(a); see Appendix L units in Schedule 7 of the Part 61 MOS referenced in the instrument).
- Engage a trainer who is either (i) an instructor for a Part 141 operator authorised to conduct the training, or (ii) holds an approval under regulation 141.035 of CASR to conduct the training (s 5(2)(b), s 5(2)(b)(i)-(ii)). Verify and record the trainer’s Part 141 authorisation or reg 141.035 approval.
Check simulator availability for larger helicopters (s 5(3)).
- If the second relevant helicopter has a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity of more than nine and an approved flight simulator for the training is available in Australia, training must not be conducted in the live aircraft (s 5(3)). Confirm whether an approved simulator exists in Australia for the relevant training and document that check.
Arrange the required assessment against flight review competency standards (s 5(1)(c) and s 5(4)-(6)).
- The assessment must demonstrate competency per section 14 of the Part 61 MOS for each relevant unit of competency (s 5(4)).
- Choose an assessor who is one of the persons in s 5(5): CASA, the holder of an approval under regulation 61.040 for regulation 61.400, or a pilot instructor authorised to conduct the flight review. Verify and record the assessor’s authorisation.
- Conduct the assessment in either the second helicopter or an approved flight simulator (s 5(6)), and record the assessment evidence unit‑by‑unit.
Maintain currency , flight review at intervals of not more than 24 months (s 5(1)(d)).
- Ensure either a valid flight review for the pilot type rating in relation to another multi‑engine helicopter is maintained, or that the licence holder is reassessed as competent to pilot a relevant helicopter against the flight review competency standards at intervals not exceeding 24 months. Track these expiry/cycle dates and schedule assessments in advance.
Document everything.
- Keep training syllabi showing all Appendix L units covered, trainer authorisations, proof of simulator availability checks, assessor identity and approval, assessment checklists demonstrating each unit of competency was met, and records of flight reviews. The instrument’s exemptions are conditional and documentary proof will be essential to demonstrate compliance.
For instructors and examiners: verify additional minimums and authorisations (s 8-9).
- Instructors relying on s 8 must hold the type rating training endorsement for the first helicopter, hold the pilot type rating for the first helicopter, be authorised to pilot the second helicopter and have at least 25 hours PIC in the second helicopter (s 8(1)(a)-(d)). Document the 25 hours PIC.
- Examiners relying on s 9 need to meet the criteria in s 9(1) (type rating flight test endorsement for the first helicopter, pilot type rating for the first helicopter, and either the training endorsement for the second or to be authorised to conduct training under Part 3). Document endorsements and authorisations.
For operators: check the "significant proportion/greatest proportion" tests and document the factual basis (ss 10(1)(b), 11(1)(b), 12(1)(a) and similar provisions).
- If relying on operator‑level exemptions (AOC or exposition content or change applications), prepare supporting data showing how the relevant helicopter is used in the operator’s fleet (for example, flight hours, sectors, passenger numbers) to support the claim that the helicopter is used to conduct a "significant" or "greatest" proportion of operations where required by the relevant subsection.
For maintenance and CAMOs: check the licence holder condition (ss 15-16).
- Parts 10 and 11 require that the independent individual or licence holder is covered by s 5. Ensure the person performing or supervising critical control system maintenance is a licence holder covered by s 5 and document that status.
For training/contracting arrangements with Part 142/other providers: verify instructor/examiner authorisations and any chained reliance (Parts 6, 12, 13).
- Where training or checking is contracted, ensure the third party conducting the activity either holds the necessary endorsement or that an exemption under s 8 or s 9 applies to them in relation to the relevant helicopter (see ss 11(11)-(16), 12(5)-(7), 13(3)-(6)). Document contracts and the third party’s authorisations or the existence of the applicable exemption.
Operational permissions and simulation. For activities such as manipulating controls, simulating instrument failure, simulating IMC, taxiing, ground operation, and NVIS VFR operations (Parts 12-19), confirm and document that the s 5 exemption applies to the person manipulating controls or to the NVIS crew member (see ss 17-24).
Exposition and application drafting. When preparing operator expositions or application materials where a person does not hold the type rating but the exemption applies, follow the instrument’s direction to omit stating the type rating only "to the extent" permitted (for example s 10(5), s 11(5), s 12(12), s 13(15)). Ensure other required information is still provided and maintain records showing the basis for omission.
Monitor instrument expiry and plan transition. Because the instrument ceases on 31 July 2028 (s 2), plan for how required type ratings, endorsements, or alternative arrangements will be secured after expiry. Maintain a register of affected personnel and their licence/type rating status and schedule any necessary formal type rating training or regulatory applications ahead of the repeal date.
Engage CASA where appropriate. If there is doubt about whether an assessor is acceptable (s 5(5)) or whether simulator availability triggers s 5(3), engage CASA early to confirm interpretation or to arrange an assessment. The instrument explicitly contemplates CASA performing assessments (s 5(5)(a)).
Legal and compliance review. Have counsel or compliance staff review the training syllabi, assessment evidence, and operator documentation before relying on the instrument in contentious or enforcement‑sensitive contexts, particularly for high‑exposure activities (night NVIS flights, aerial work with passengers, AOC changes).

If these steps are completed and documented, a person or operator will be in a position to rely on the specific exemptions set out in CASA EX70/25 for the applicable relevant helicopter models during the instrument’s operation. Remember that these directions are drawn from the instrument’s specific text , the principal governing rules are s 5 (eligibility and competence conditions), the unit lists in the Part 61 Manual of Standards (Appendix L/Schedule 7 references), the assessor and trainer approvals referenced in s 5(2) and s 5(5), and the various "to the extent" operator‑focused exemptions in Parts 5-19.

CASA EX70/25 — Multi-Engine Helicopters Exemption 2025

Plain English Summary

Deep Dive

What it does

Current sections