Could this be the beginning of the end of RA Aus privileges?

[Guest Escadrille]

The link below shows a collaboration between CASA and SAAA to comprehensively move against RA Aus with respect to Amateur built Light sport aircraft .

 

For example,Note the training of Instructors and changes to maintenance privileges for owners.

 

"Train and appoint instructors for the purpose of conducting Aircraft Flight Reviews

 

(AFRs), note , previously called Biannual Flight Review ( BFR) also type training in

 

members own amateur built aircraft"

 

 

Those of us who currently operate 19 Registerd aircraft may be substantially affected.

 

Having a CASA appointed registration auditor in RA Aus at the moment will allow them to gather a huge amount of intel with regards the amount of aircraft administered by RAAus that SAAA members and CASA would like to withdraw from the RA Aus fraternity.

 

See this link:

 

http://www.saaa.com/Portals/0/PDFs/CASA/SAAA-Recreational%20Aviation%20Administration%20Organisation.pdf

 

In addition a members only link has this to say..

 

Anticipated developments between CASA and SAAA.

 

In early March 2012, an SAAA delegation went to Canberra to meet with some Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) personnel, to discuss the future of the SAAA, delegations that we would be seeking, and permissions that we believe will make a significant improvement in safety for all our members involved in the construction, repair, maintenance and operation of amateur-built aircraft.

 

Al very interesting. Anyone out there in Cyber land know the truth?

 

(No not you F_T !)

 

Andy

 

 

[ave8rr]

Anticipated developments between CASA and SAAA.

In early March 2012, an SAAA delegation went to Canberra to meet with some Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) personnel, to discuss the future of the SAAA, delegations that we would be seeking, and permissions that we believe will make a significant improvement in safety for all our members involved in the construction, repair, maintenance and operation of amateur-built aircraft.

 

Al very interesting. Anyone out there in Cyber land know the truth?

 

(No not you F_T !)

 

Andy

Hi Andy, I read this info on the SAAA site a day or so back also however, I think SAAA are just trying to get what RAAus already have in the 19-xxx category.

SAAA want to be able to build, maintain, instruct/AFR etc outside CASA.

 

I have an experimental aircraft and can look after it maintenance wise but unlike RAAus, have to do AFR's etc through the current GA system of training.

 

SAAA are trying to get an "instrument" that will allow in house training from what I can understand.

 

Just my take on it.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Where do we signup?

 

 

[Guest Escadrille]

Ave8rr,

 

I agree that may be a conclusion you could come to on the brief info contained on the SAAA website. Why then should the new organisation be called

 

Recreational Aviation Administration Organisation (RAAO ) if it will only pertain to high performance aircraft like your RV 9?

 

 

Just to be clear ,my position is I have no objections to the SAAA being responsible for their high end of the performance spectrum of aircraft. I have been a member of SAAA too and know that the organisation is powerful and influential.

 

Having been involved with aviation for most of my working life I am aware that many (people) with vested interests and skewed emotive reasons would like to see RAA aircraft and operators out of the sky and off the airfields...

 

Why have such an important link made for members only?

 

RA Aus is also very secretive wrt info to members..it appears to be a common malaise...but why?

 

The new RA treasurer blames the membership for the position we are in wrt the CASA audit outcome (Any way the real point of the CASA audit is that the people involved were over worked , under staffed and under paid.).He says they are apathetic. In my opinion this is a classic misunderstanding of the members general position. If members know nothing or are not informed or misinformed then they will feel that they can affect nothing.

 

Additionally many members have not the time nor the resources or training or experience or confidence to be involved in the politics of organisations like RAA or SAAA and CASA.

 

So they say nothing ...and can be victims of those who would have aviation the exclusive province of some who feel more entitled...like some trolls on here...

 

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Good points but it's still a fantastic day for Australian Aviation. You can now get a recreational licence which has a path to a PPL, if you so choose. GA flying schools can now tap into the recreational market. All good

 

 

[damkia]

Could the word "harmonisation" be responsible? Currently we have too many disparate "Governing instruments" in the sky not really talking to each other, and we probably need to trim a few of them away, or at least amalgamate some, as I have said in other threads.

 

As an example of what I mean, how many different registration categories are there in the air at the moment? (Hang gliders, Manufacturer built gliders, Amateur built gliders, Amateur built GA, Kit built RAA, Manufacturer built RAA, Ultralight RAA, Manufacturer built GA, Historic, etc) Most of these are administered by differing bodies, some of whom have been shown not to be up to the task. Surely it is better to have one organisation (CASA or delegated offshoot) and supporting legislation look after the registration with the various other existing bodies acting as support clubs/general information sources.

 

The elimination/amalgamation of the RAA flying certificate into the Rec Aviation licence of CASA is clearly the most logical point here. This would ideally be done by upskilling the current RAA certificate issuers to the level of competence required by the Rec Aviation CASA licence.

 

There is little sense in breaking down the groups into "performance bands" as a way of demarcation of jurisdiction as there are WAY too many overlaps in physical sizes of aircraft with similar performance. Weight only would be the most obvious way. The automotive equivalent is that a car licence allows you to drive a car (up to 4.5 tonne) a truck licence allows a larger weight limit, and a semi-trailer licence allows you to drive a semi. All vehicles actually have the same operation performance (operational speeds, braking capability etc) regardless of how you intend to drive them.

 

All for the KISS principle........

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Well looks like i better buckle up for another ride on the urdy gurdy.

 

 

[facthunter]

There's a lot of misinformation about regarding the RPL. Your doctor ticks all the squares if everything is clear cut and then submits it for the records. There is no review. Anything that is contentious and you are requested to do the class two instead, where you are back dealing with avmed and get a PPL which may have "conditional" aspects to it and costs.

 

The RPL is not the same as the recreational certificate conditions as many believe. Some hard line conditions apply as the RPL permits operations in and out of secondary airports for maintenance purposes primarily for the VH registered planes being flown. Nev

 

 

[ave8rr]

Ave8rr,I agree that may be a conclusion you could come to on the brief info contained on the SAAA website. Why then should the new organisation be called

Recreational Aviation Administration Organisation (RAAO) if it will only pertain to high performance aircraft like your RV 9?

Escadrille, I think the Term RAAO is the term used by CASA for all Rec Av Organisations. RAAus is a RAAO along with the HGFA etc.

 

 

[poteroo]

There's a lot of misinformation about regarding the RPL. Your doctor ticks all the squares if everything is clear cut and then submits it for the records. There is no review. Anything that is contentious and you are requested to do the class two instead, where you are back dealing with avmed and get a PPL which may have "conditional" aspects to it and costs.The RPL is not the same as the recreational certificate conditions as many believe. Some hard line conditions apply as the RPL permits operations in and out of secondary airports for maintenance purposes primarily for the VH registered planes being flown. Nev

Agree - the RPL, (DL-aviation), medical is actually just about at the Class 2 standard anyway. Many disappointments ahead for older pilots looking for an easy out to continue flying their 4/6 seaters in GA.

 

The SAAA push to have their own check & training setup is nowhere near what the FAA allows in the US. There, FAA tests and approves a rated instructor to legally provide 'transition' training in their own aircraft - usually experimental/kit built. That way the builder can undertake enough training to be able to safely fly their own aircraft upon it's completion of Phase 1 testing, or, if already expienced, to undertake the initial and Phase 1 of their own aircraft. CASA have baulked at that. Which means SAAA is fiddling about with approving pilots to carry out BFR's, and 'transition' training - but in the owners aircraft - and only after someone else has completed Phase 1. IMHO, they should have held out for exactly what EAA has negotiated with the FAA.

 

happy days,

 

 

[dazza 38]

The link below shows a collaboration between CASA and SAAA to comprehensively move against RA Aus with respect to Amateur built Light sport aircraft .For example,Note the training of Instructors and changes to maintenance privileges for owners.

"Train and appoint instructors for the purpose of conducting Aircraft Flight Reviews

 

(AFRs), note , previously called Biannual Flight Review ( BFR) also type training in

 

members own amateur built aircraft"

 

Those of us who currently operate 19 Registerd aircraft may be substantially affected.

 

Having a CASA appointed registration auditor in RA Aus at the moment will allow them to gather a huge amount of intel with regards the amount of aircraft administered by RAAus that SAAA members and CASA would like to withdraw from the RA Aus fraternity.

 

See this link:

 

http://www.saaa.com/Portals/0/PDFs/CASA/SAAA-Recreational Aviation Administration Organisation.pdf

 

In addition a members only link has this to say..

 

Anticipated developments between CASA and SAAA.

 

In early March 2012, an SAAA delegation went to Canberra to meet with some Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) personnel, to discuss the future of the SAAA, delegations that we would be seeking, and permissions that we believe will make a significant improvement in safety for all our members involved in the construction, repair, maintenance and operation of amateur-built aircraft.

 

Al very interesting. Anyone out there in Cyber land know the truth?

 

(No not you F_T !)

 

Andy

 

Escadrille, I think the Term RAAO is the term used by CASA for all Rec Av Organisations. RAAus is a RAAO along with the HGFA etc.

I wrote a bit about this back in January. The thread was Australian Ultralight Federation Mark 2. Post #101