As the result of comments received when it issued its Special Aviation Reuglation on the Mitsubishi MU-2B, the FAA amended its proposed SFAR, adding certain definitions on pilot experience into the Mitsubishi training program. (RAN, October 2, p.8) Its failure to be specific in the use of the term "operating experience," led to confusion as to when and what type of training would be required of pilots. The FAA's intent in the NPRM was that, depending upon a pilot's level of ''operating experience,'' the pilot would be required to take a specific level of training--Initial/Transition, Requalification, or Recurrent. Without specific guidance, a pilot might attend Requalification training, when it was the intention that the pilots attend Initial/Transition training, which is more demanding than Requalification or Recurrent training, said the FAA.

In monitoring the training that has occurred, it found that some pilots, with little or no experience flying the MU-2B, may request training at the requalification level when it was the FAA's intention that such pilots attend training at the Initial/Transition level. It said it would be possible for a pilot to attend requalification training without any previous experience in actually flying the airplane. "We consider this a serious compromise to the level of safety we intended to provide," said the agency, in clarifying the levels of experience required with a specific number of hours.

The proposed definitions are included in the docket but essentially cuts off the time between the requirement for initial/transitional training at less than 50 hours as pilot in command. In addition, those with at least 50 hours would qualify for requalification training. Comments are due February 2. Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking. FAA- 2006-24981. http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/recently_published/