Ultralight Federation mark II anyone?

[dazza 38]

CASA wants RAAO's to succeed. RAAO- stands for Recreational Aviation Administration Organisations. Not to be confused with the RAA.The last few months have really given CASA a bit of headache with the the problems at the RAA & im guessing AWAL. CASA wants to get back to just focusing on the fare paying public.

 

CASA is going to persist with RAAO's.Reason ? It is cheaper for the government for us to be self administered and nearly self funded.

 

Dont be surprised if in a few years time- PPL/GFPT holders will also have to be a member of a RAAO & administered by that RAAO.

 

There is a good write up on CASA'S corporate goals in the jan/feb 2013 Australian flying.

 

Post script- In a nut shell - Casa is heading towards getting all recreational flying including GA , administered by RAAO's.eg- like ATM with the RAA & the GFA. Then they can concentrate on commercial operations.

 

 

[turboplanner]

CASA doesn't run Aviation in Australia; it is an Authority which can be closed down, changed or duplicated almost instantly, plans or no plans

 

 

[dodo]

Once the dust settles on the current RA-Aus issues, it would be a good idea to consider RA-Aus role and relationship with CASA.

 

For all the RAAOs, CASA pays little, gets a lot of administration done, and doesn't have to do much. I think all RAAOs should consider that,and consider how they think this should develop. It might be one organisation says - CASA pays for what should be CASA administration, and can't complain if the administration is poor when poorly funded by CASA - and therefore concentrates on costs to its membership. Another might think costs are less important to their membership, so long as certain rights/responsibilities or similar are preserved. For example, the Warbirds might be prepared to suffer more administration and costs in return for more freedoms - or the paragliders might just want to be left in peace so long as they stay far from anyone else (limited rights,but limited responsibilities and costs).

 

sorry if this is a little off-topic, but I think the RAAOs should consider these issues, as CASA certainly will!

 

dodo

 

 

[dazza 38]

Once the dust settles on the current RA-Aus issues, it would be a good idea to consider RA-Aus role and relationship with CASA.For all the RAAOs, CASA pays little, gets a lot of administration done, and doesn't have to do much. I think all RAAOs should consider that,and consider how they think this should develop. It might be one organisation says - CASA pays for what should be CASA administration, and can't complain if the administration is poor when poorly funded by CASA - and therefore concentrates on costs to its membership. Another might think costs are less important to their membership, so long as certain rights/responsibilities or similar are preserved. For example, the Warbirds might be prepared to suffer more administration and costs in return for more freedoms - or the paragliders might just want to be left in peace so long as they stay far from anyone else (limited rights,but limited responsibilities and costs).

sorry if this is a little off-topic, but I think the RAAOs should consider these issues, as CASA certainly will!

 

dodo

Not off Topic mate.Its where recreational aviation is heading.

 

 

[farri]

Who's up for a good old-fashioned re-emergence of the ultralight federation? I haven't been around the aviation circles for that long but i hear too many stories of how simple and easy things "used to be"...

Volksy, Here`s another little story to add to your list and just a little background information so you know where I coming from, so to speak!

 

I`m AUF/RAA member number, 000993 so unlike you I have been around " Ultralight Aircraft " for a while. Over the years I`ve flown numerous types and I still choose to own and fly my WB Drifter,which I fly regularly, from my own property! I`m also glad of all the privilages that our organisation has gained for us " Grass Roots " pilots!

 

Back in the late mid eighties, I and a few others, Techair, for example, formed the Far North Queensland Ultralight Association (FNQUA) and established UL flight training in the Cairns area,here off my property. I can tell you for a fact that nothing was simple and easy! A lot of very hard work and effort,by many people,me included,went into getting the AUF up and running! I finaly achieved my CFI rating and ran my own CASA approved flying school for twelve years before I decided to retire from instructing.

 

Keep in mind that in the good old days,when it was so simple and easy,though UL twin seat flight training was now legal,a UL aircraft could not legaly be flown above 500 feet AGL. Within the perimeter of a built up area or township. Closer than 100 meters horizontally from any house. Couldn`t fly into any GA non controled aerodromes. Does anyone realy want to go back to that?

 

If attempting to form AUF mark 11,so as to get back to " Grass Roots " flying from a paddock somewhere! Keep in mind that not every pilot has a paddock to fly from and in this day and age I very much doubt that there are many paddock owners who would warmly greet " Ultralights " on their property!

 

Would I be interested in doing it all over again? Not in this lifetime! Would I object to anyone forming an AUF mark 11? Certainly Not! As long as it doesn`t impact on myself and others like me.

 

Frank.

 

 

[dodo]

Volksy, Here`s another little story to add to your list and just a little background information so you know where I coming from, so to speak!Keep in mind that in the good old days,when it was so simple and easy,though UL twin seat flight training was now legal,a UL aircraft could not legaly be flown above 500 feet AGL. Within the perimeter of a built up area or township. Closer than 100 meters horizontally from any house. Couldn`t fly into any GA non controled aerodromes. Does anyone realy want to go back to that?

 

If attempting to form AUF mark 11,so as to get back to " Grass Roots " flying from a paddock somewhere! Keep in mind that not every pilot has a paddock to fly from and in this day and age I very much doubt that there are many paddock owners who would warmly greet " Ultralights " on their property!

 

Would I be interested in doing it all over again? Not in this lifetime! Would I object to anyone forming an AUF mark 11? Certainly Not! As long as it doesn`t impact on myself and others like me.

 

Frank.

I agree. But...lets not let the organisation and rights we have get stuffed up, either.

 

dodo

 

(joined 2009)

 

 

[Guest ratchet]

CASA wants RAAO's to succeed. RAAO- stands for Recreational Aviation Administration Organisations. Not to be confused with the RAA.The last few months have really given CASA a bit of headache with the the problems at the RAA & im guessing AWAL. CASA wants to get back to just focusing on the fare paying public.CASA is going to persist with RAAO's.Reason ? It is cheaper for the government for us to be self administered and nearly self funded.

Dont be surprised if in a few years time- PPL/GFPT holders will also have to be a member of a RAAO & administered by that RAAO.

 

There is a good write up on CASA'S corporate goals in the jan/feb 2013 Australian flying.

 

Post script- In a nut shell - Casa is heading towards getting all recreational flying including GA , administered by RAAO's.eg- like ATM with the RAA & the GFA. Then they can concentrate on commercial operations.

Exactly. The bureaucrats would take on RAA or anything if there was money for it. But gvt asks them to do more

 

with less each year. No way we will revisit the past. More likely an RAAO will be a 1300 number that goes

 

to India. They only can afford to administer the fare paying passenger stuff.

 

 

[David Isaac]

Well said Franco,

 

I was around in those days too, I remember well the restriction of what was then the first ANO 95-10. Back then they were called Air Navigation Orders (ANOs), now of course CAOs Civil Aviation Orders. It is interesting how many name changes the Federal aviation bureaucracy has had; in my short life I have seen them all.

 

Would I be happy to go back to 1980 freedoms? Not on your life,you had to be flying then to appreciate what we have now.

 

 

[facthunter]

We should all realise how far we have come and what we have now, but what do we really know we have now? It seems all up in the air.( pun intended but I'm serious. ) we need certainty. ( As much as it can be achieved. I'm still dumbfounded at what has gone on here... Nev

 

 

[turboplanner]

Wise words Facthunter, there's a whole orchestra fiddling here with smoke on the horizon.

 

 

[Guest ratchet]

We should all realise how far we have come and what we have now, but what do we really know we have now? It seems all up in the air.( pun intended but I'm serious. ) we need certainty. ( As much as it can be achieved. I'm still dumbfounded at what has gone on here... Nev

Unless there is a seriously big accident involving RAA i'm sure it will be business as usual. Pollies want votes. If we don't bother the masses we can have our crazy sport so long as it costs the taxpayer zilch and doesn't harm them. In the process the pollies win our votes too.

 

It's not Menzies 50s anymore and no-one will go back to CASA inspecting your wiring and billing you for it.

 

Not for a sport that only harms the crazies who do it.

 

Whatever safety discrepancies may be revealed in RAA will be a fraction of those in commercial. Every

 

mustering chopper's log book is a work of fiction. I have wiped oil off the bellies of leased C210s for the extra

 

5 knots. Really, they don't want to know and everyone wants a lot of cheap promises that it will get better

 

by introducing a new form and 2 people to stamp it. Truly, we learned a lot and it won't happen again

 

at least during this election cycle.

 

The same process applies to nuclear reactors so i;m sure a few aviators can be chastised, a few committees

 

meet and some promises made and it's all better again.

 

The pollies want to put the budget into hospital beds and schools, not fat bureaucrats looking at log books

 

and not fees and charges on pilots to pay fat bureaucrats to read logbooks. That burns votes too.

 

 

[farri]

lets not let the organisation and rights we have get stuffed up, either.dodo (joined 2009)

dodo, I agree in principal but most of what I read on this forum is opinion and opinion, mine included, is just that! I believe that right and wrong, good and bad,( stuffed up ) is relative to the objective, therefore, before we can take action of any kind, so that we don`t let our organisation and our rights get stuffed up, we must know and be united on the objective, then take the appropriate action. Identifying the problem is only the first part of the solution and incorrect action will not fix the problem.

 

In my opinion, the RAA ( our organisation ) has become a political playground with many objectives and like any democratic political arena, everyone who want`s to have a go at running it, claims that if given a go,they will do better than the last guy.

 

Frank.

 

 

[facthunter]

I have always supported the sport being less fuss for less privileges and access to airspace. The RAAus has plenty of detractors of malevolent intent. Your form of aviation could be wiped out, or at least seriously threatened. This would make us look ridiculous internationally, but if you think you have any real power let me know why you think that way because I'm interested. It is no good saying something because you want it to be that way. That's called wishfull thinking. We DID have something that looked better than most other places in the world. People will die in our ranks, because of varied reasons, whatever we do. We can improve but we will never be utterly safe. Nothing is. None of us are getting out of this alive. Perhaps death under a mountain of paperwork. Nev

 

 

[Guest ratchet]

I have always supported the sport being less fuss for less privileges and access to airspace. The RAAus has plenty of detractors of malevolent intent. Your form of aviation could be wiped out, or at least seriously threatened. This would make us look ridiculous internationally, but if you think you have any real power let me know why you think that way because I'm interested. It is no good saying something because you want it to be that way. That's called wishfull thinking. We DID have something that looked better than most other places in the world. People will die in our ranks, because of varied reasons, whatever we do. We can improve but we will never be utterly safe. Nothing is. None of us are getting out of this alive. Perhaps death under a mountain of paperwork. Nev

Actually membership and plane numbers in RAA make it reasonably powerful. Certainly has more clout than

 

SAAA or HGFA or the glider mob. I think people are stressing out needlessly. With our numbers we have to

 

be accomodated. The old AUF with wheeler scouts had little clout and achieved a lot. Also the membership

 

now crosses into the commercial and GA community (they didn't really like wheeler scouts and thrusters too

 

much) so we have even more muscle.

 

Have faith young skywalker.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Unless there is a seriously big accident involving RAA I'm sure it will be business as usual. Pollies want votes.

How many more were you counting on?

 

I'd give it one more Ferris Wheel.

 

Don't forget they know this flying is just for fun, they know there would not be a serious unemployment issue if they fixed it by:

 

"As a result of continuing fatalities due to marginal and non-safe flying activities, including low flying bet ups of populated areas, caravans and airfields the Government has decided to act to minimise the risk of a major catastrophe and will be requiring all forms of Recreational Aviation to operate under the strict controls of the Department of Infrastructure and Transport.

 

"This will not impact on safe, responsible recreational flying standards, but will simply involve the same safety controls established for recreational boating and motoring"

 

How would you like something like that?

 

 

[Guest ratchet]

I gave you more credit than that, OK I will explain further, I am comparing planes like tailwheel and nose wheel Lightwings, Skyfox and Gazelle, tailwheel and nosewheel Jabiru, Piferper Pacer and Tripacer, Cessna 180 and 182 and so on, do you understand now? My comments do relate to these examples. This all started from derogatory comments made by Turbo whom I suspect was fishing for bites. I do not accept the friendly 'form of ribbing' excuse and could not care about the ego factor I was simply stating facts as I understood them.

Personally i prefer aircraft with a tail skid. That way when I count the number of wings and wheels it is the same and it makes the pre-flight a whole lot easier. I once had a biplane and the combination of odd and even numbers caused great confusion...

 

 

[Guest ratchet]

How many more were you counting on?I'd give it one more Ferris Wheel.

 

Don't forget they know this flying is just for fun, they know there would not be a serious unemployment issue if they fixed it by:

 

"As a result of continuing fatalities due to marginal and non-safe flying activities, including low flying bet ups of populated areas, caravans and airfields the Government has decided to act to minimise the risk of a major catastrophe and will be requiring all forms of Recreational Aviation to operate under the strict controls of the Department of Infrastructure and Transport.

 

"This will not impact on safe, responsible recreational flying standards, but will simply involve the same safety controls established for recreational boating and motoring"

 

How would you like something like that?

Pollies read voters like sharks read a school of fish-- with great skill. The sheep public would not identify the

 

Ferris wheel crash as anything other than a GA aircraft. If it had been a thruster and 2 of the public were

 

killed then maybe we would have an issue. But for the sheeple it's just crazy sport pilots and they came a

 

bit close. If they had collided with an A-320 then I agree, we would live for years with annual inspections,

 

BFRs and medicals of GA standard that we pay for.

 

We aren't anywhere near that yet. It's only when we actually harm nonparticipants/innocents in a

 

noticeable way that i think there will be a regulatory clamp down.

 

As for the same standards applied to recreational boating and motoring well in some parts of Oz no-one gets

 

a test drive every 2 yrs like a BFR, no car or boat is inspected on sale (even notionally as

 

in RAA),

 

no-one logs hours driven/flown or keeps a maintenance log or has to stay away from certain

 

designated areas.

 

Indeed, quite regularly 6 pissed blokes in a boat never inspected since the ark, leaks, blows up a motor,

 

wanders into a squall, gets swamped or overturns, not a piece of paper between them, the flares are past expiry, radio

 

not working and the EPIRB was supposed to be in the eskie (that was Wozza's job) but isn't.

 

Since they're all backpackers no-one cares about the fine (if there is one).

 

So maybe car/boat standards could be a little less onerous.

 

Just sayin...

 

 

[Guest ratchet]

Are rag and tube flyers really disadvantaged in RAA?

 

This question seems to underlie the idea of AUF Mk2 and i once thought this way too. But when pressed

 

the only issue i can see is insurance for 2 seat R&T planes. That is, the fantastics can get

 

insurance for passengers (?) when they take friends for a fly but the R&T crowd can't insure 3rd parties in the

 

right hand seat.

 

That;s why I flew solo and left the seat for fuel.

 

Not even sure if hull insurance is even viable in R&T if you could get it.

 

To me, as I raised some posts back, the name change from ultralight to recreational, as well as aircraft performance gains, shifted many GA flyers into RAA. This larger membership pool and the 4 stroke engines (many certified) that these people flew on, lowered premiums for them. But not for the 2 stroke R&T crowd.

 

Other than that i can't see much discrimination. The magazine likes to photograph fantastics and the push from RAA is for constant gains in weight and performance, however there is nothing that restricts the 25 and 10 prefixed

 

planes from doing what they want. Not as far as i can see but i'd like to hear other views.

 

And let's face it, few 95-10 pilots want much to do with controlled airspace even if a miracle happened.

 

As i've said in previous posts, the major threat to our continuing freedoms is not from organisational failures.

 

RAA may have failed several audits, maybe money is missing or misallocated, maybe the Board are all

 

cross dressers, I dunno. These and many worse sins are always bureaucratically fixable with a little

 

inquiry, some committees, letters and emails, lots of promises about a newly changed culture, some nifty

 

forms, a big red stamp and a part-time, highly trained official big red stamper who will be part of a sweeping

 

process of reform as we "move forward". Say "moving forward" 20 times and they will eventually

 

believe you.

 

That's because it gets everyone past the next election and everybody wins.

 

On the other hand, what is a real, but low probability threat to our freedoms is the prospect of an RAA registered aircraft running into something big or near missing something big in controlled airspace.

 

That may happen when the RAA a/c has a right to be in said airspace. Or it could accidentally happen when a car license medical, doddery septagenarian struggling with a fast, complex aircraft that is way beyond them (today) zooms in at 130 knots (upside down).

 

Possibly because they forgot their green and blue pills this morning.

 

If that low probability event ever happens- and it probably won't- nothing is this country that gets 6 inches off the

 

ground will be self regulated. At that point, no-one will be able to afford it and the sport will die for 5-10

 

years until the public forgets.

 

As the pilot population ages and a/c performance increases also continue, then the risk increases.

 

But the failures of the organisation are of little concern. The public i.e. voters don't care so long as cattle class is cheap

 

and nothing frightens them. CASA don't want extra regulatory work on the non commercial aviation front

 

(since they won't get any extra funding for it). The pollies don't want to lose 5000 pilot votes or more in

 

an election year when the public don't care and more people died doing stupid things on quad bikes than

 

doing stupid things in recreational aircraft.

 

Yes sometimes we hit ferris wheels and sometimes old farts in sailing boats need destroyers and cruise liners

 

to divert in order to effect a rescue with a C-130 overhead.

 

But it doesn't happen often enough to shift the sheeple's focus from Iron Chef or similar garbage.

 

There may be a coup in the RAA palace in February, but the new emperor will have a new coat made of the

 

same nothingness as the last one and all will still be amazed how gracefully he "moves forward" into a

 

new future of stringent accountability and rigor.

 

Speaking of which I shall now "move forward" to the fridge for a reform of its contents...

 

Be well...

 

 

[Guest ratchet]

dodo, I agree in principal but most of what I read on this forum is opinion and opinion, mine included, is just that! I believe that right and wrong, good and bad,( stuffed up ) is relative to the objective, therefore, before we can take action of any kind, so that we don`t let our organisation and our rights get stuffed up, we must know and be united on the objective, then take the appropriate action. Identifying the problem is only the first part of the solution and incorrect action will not fix the problem.

In my opinion, the RAA ( our organisation ) has become a political playground with many objectives and like any democratic political arena, everyone who want`s to have a go at running it, claims that if given a go,they will do better than the last guy.

 

Frank.

Frank, when has AUF/RAA NOT been a political playground? You would recall many silly bun fights even in the

 

days of rag and tube only. Coups and plots. Most organisations-- like clubs-- are like that. I recall when AUF

 

bought their building with member funds. Big fight. Others objected when flexwings joined. On and on.

 

The main thing is that we're all still flying. The personalities and amateur pollies can strut on stage as much as

 

they like but the average member just wants to fly safely and affordably. Thankfully we still can and

 

probably always will.

 

Thanks to you and your era for all the hard work you put in. It's not forgotten. Indeed we really need an official

 

history of the organisation so that it remains acknowledged and documented for future generations.

 

I would prefer funds spent on that than another board meeting.

 

We could team up with organisations that share this history- people like John Corby, the Wintons, Wheeler

 

etc etc.

 

Good on you for your time and sacrifice for what was actually a "movement" until it became an organisation

 

and now an industry.

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

 

 

 

Thanks to you and your era for all the hard work you put in. It's not forgotten. Indeed we really need an official

 

 

 

history of the organisation so that it remains acknowledged and documented for future generations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There's an official history on the old RAAus site - http://flysafe.raa.asn.au/regulations/benchmarks.html

 

Pity it hasn't made it to the new, official RAA site, and there is no link to it.

 

 

 

Sue

 

 

[Admin]

There's an official history on the old RAAus site - http://flysafe.raa.asn.au/regulations/benchmarks.html

Pity it hasn't made it to the new, official RAA site, and there is no link to it.

 

Sue

Sue, are you aware that all of John Brandon's writings are right here on Recreational Flying and John keeps his pages here updated so they are the latest:

http://www.recreationalflying.com/tutorials/regulations/benchmarks.html

 

They are in the site menu under the menu tab of "Resources" and then "Tutorials"

 

 

[Guest ratchet]

There's an official history on the old RAAus site - http://flysafe.raa.asn.au/regulations/benchmarks.html

Pity it hasn't made it to the new, official RAA site, and there is no link to it.

 

Sue

I think i've read it before. To me it reads as a summary rather than a true history. History is very person focused and identifies the context of challenges faced by key people. e.g. a history of D Day would have to include detail on

 

the issues faced by commanders and politicians and the tensions between them. It wasn't just a list of boats and

 

a plan.

 

A real history would have more detail on the people involved e.g. what the wintons achieved was amazing. The

 

death of scott and its impact. Also there just isn't enough detail on the cross pollination from the US and UK.

 

People like David Cook and the VLA movement culminating in the streak shadow and some of the first transcontinental and London-Sydney flights.

 

In the US people like John Chotia and the weedhopper which lives on as the X-Air. The Pterodactyl and first

 

cross US flight in an FAR103.

 

People were highly influenced by these developments and swapped ideas.

 

It shouldn't just be a record of us fighting gvt- although that would be there- but also about people of limited

 

means succeeding in achieving what humans dreamed of for thousands of years- a safe and reliable and

 

affordable means of getting into the sky.

 

 

[David Isaac]

Well said Ratchet ...

 

 

[farri]

It shouldn't just be a record of us fighting gvt- although that would be there- but also about people of limitedmeans succeeding in achieving what humans dreamed of for thousands of years- a safe and reliable and affordable means of getting into the sky.

Good on you ratchet, I agree!

 

Frank.

 

 

[68volksy]

How many more were you counting on?I'd give it one more Ferris Wheel.

I actually have a feeling that the one ferris wheel may have been enough. The investigation on that is still ongoing and it's my impression that it was the impetus behind everything that has happened since and the hard-set attitude adopted by CASA in suspending the registration renewals. It seems apparent that ATSB and CASA delved further into the "regulation" of RA-Aus and the further they dig the more rot they've found.