RAAus Future

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

With reference to our thread topic header, 'The Future of RAAus?', well, I think the short answer is, there is no future. I guess that started with the end of the AUF.

Once we ran away from our heritage as ultralight people and tried to pretend we were like GA people, well, guess what, now we have become them.

 

All the above talk of material specs, certification, zero accident rates, world (ICAO) recognition ?!! and GA performance and privileges, has moved us so far away from our prime directive (sorry Gene) of affordable entry level basic flying.

 

While I have nothing against LSA class aircraft, I feel that by pushing for, and attaining the implementation of LSA, ie; just copying the American version of it, we, as I said in a previous post, took about a twenty year step backwards from what we already had...

 

If the RAAus board, and I guess more of us rank and file, had read between the lines of LSA, and negotiated with CASA to simply take 101:55 up to 600kg, as an ultralight class, none of the last 12 months of crap would have happened.

 

Now with RPL coming (when?), I'm going to stick my head out and say 'Maybe all the LSA machines need to migrate to GA and be utilised along side the aircraft they are trying to replace'.

 

Sure this may mean they will have to be looked after by LAME's, but truth is, any LSA aircraft currently being used in a training situation, is probably being looked after by a LAME anyway.

 

To put not too finer point on it, most of the people that can afford to buy these sort of aircraft for use in schools, usually can't do their own maintenance anyway.

 

I know, sounds like a generalisation, and there are a lot of guys (and gals) out there with LSA's that do their own work, but most of these are going to be eLSA's.

 

The system we had in the original 101:55 with simply 'approved' aircraft and parts worked OK.

 

I should point out that I still believed 101:55 to be a bit too restrictive, primarily with regard to props.

 

Manufacturers should not have been pushed into dictating one sort of prop or another.

 

Aircraft manufacturers make aircraft, engine manufacturers make engines and PROPELLOR manufacturers make props!

 

I know some out there will say that, 'Yeah, but some of the prop manufacturers are a bit dodgy', and what?, none of the aircraft manufacturers are a bit dodgy??

 

This is where a wider community comes into play keeping an eye on product quality, and reporting suspect items, which ends up as AD's

 

The concept that only one sort of prop is suitable for an aircraft/engine combination is rubbish.

 

Most of the prop manufacturers out there are trying to supply a quality product to the mass market at an affordable price, obviously if they had to go through the whole certification process, their props would be too expensive, but they obviously trust their product well enough to let it loose in the wider (idiot) community hoping to not end up with a bad reputation.

 

Once this has been achieved for any length of time, they can then look back on a 'Safe history of Operation' to justify their claims, and continue to produce without the cost of certification.

 

This is just like car tires, how many out there have Pirelli tires on their cars?

 

These are the best aren't they?

 

How many have Bob Jane Specials?

 

And to those about to complain that tires and props are nothing alike, well you're right, propellors don't endure half the torture the average car tire does!

 

I mean if your prop touches the ground, you usually throw it away, how many throw out their tires if they touch a curb or typical NSW pot-hole?

 

In fact the prop tire comparison is actually flawed in that most of us want to put on more expensive props than those supplied, or at least better quality for the same price....

 

OK, I ran off with my own personal hobby horse there......

 

But as I started out with, I think we (or we have allowed others) to have lost the plot.

 

While GA have expensive maintenance problems, they only pay an initial rego, while we have nearly as many hoops to jump through (for a lesser ability aircraft), and almost as expensive maintenance situation, and the privilege of paying for it each year.......

 

We are no longer the ultralight world (as evidence to our new name), and I feel the next step will be CASA's re-arranging of training with the implementation of the RPL, the possible closure of RAAus schools and forcing new pilots to learn at RPL GA schools before trying to fly their own ultralight!

 

Guess what, then we will have stepped back 30 years into the dark ages before HORSCOT's !!!

 

Need to get out of my firesuit and breathe a bit........

Your history is not very accurate - and therefore your conclusions are not, either.

 

Firstly, CAO 101.55 aircraft were NOT "simply approved" - look up the Jabiru Type Certificate Data Sheet on the CASA website. They were Type certificated by CASA. The aircraft that were "simply approved" were those approved under CAO 95.25, i.e. the Thruster, the Lightwing, the Sapphire, and eventually the wire-braced Drifter - and the process was anything BUT simple; it involved a CAR 35 engineer taking on open-ended liability. There was virtually zero production quality control. There was no way that system could continue. Under CAO 101.55, the first major growth of the AUF occurred, due to the Jabiru and the Skyfox and the strut-braced Drifter.

 

Primary category and LSA were originated overseas - and as Australia has had, since 1985 or so, a policy of automatic acceptance of overseas certification (from certain accredited countries - see CASR 21.012 - we had to introduce those categories into Australian legislation also. You did not HAVE to buy them - you voted with your cheque books. What is happening is being driven by the consumers - YOU! Not by CASA - Not by RAAus - by the Great Australian Public (or the sector of it that wants to fly little aeroplanes. CASA and RAAus have simply reacted to consumer demand.

 

I agree that the consumer demand seems to be driven more by greed than by commonsense - and it shows almost zero interest in actually knowing something about the products it craves - (says a lot about advertising psychology; you're a lot of Pavlov's dogs, it would appear).

 

So railing about it is not actually the least bit productive. Thngs have changed; the DIY days are fading away along with those of us who grew up in that era. What we have now, is the "whitegoods" era - i.e. buy a turnkey package, use it until the ashtrays are full (or whatever the equivalent may be) and throw it away. Maintenance? When did you last get a mechanic to fix your fridge or washing machine? No, you scrapped it and bought a new one, didn't you? So there aren't any fridge & washing mechanics any more; guess why?

 

Well, like it or not, that's the way it is, to-day. Buy a new plastic fantastic, use it for five years, then flog it. All we need to do, is make it mandatory to flog it offshore, and we can do away with maintenance altogether, just as we have for fridges etc.

 

OR - we can start running maintenance schools; and handing out maintenance accreditation according to demonstrated knowledge and ability. (That's what technical colleges are for). And requiring an annual inspection pro-forma be filled out & returned to RAA. And require RAA to run a proper filing system for each registered aircraft.

 

You choose.

 

 

[frank marriott]

"while we have nearly as many hoops to jump through (for a lesser ability aircraft), and almost as expensive maintenance situation"- check out the cost of an average 100hrly done by a LAME in a certified workshop

 

"but truth is, any LSA aircraft currently being used in a training situation, is probably being looked after by a LAME anyway" - L2s and some L3s ,around my area at least, and a lot cheaper then a LAME rate.

 

I believe all the doom and glume around the CASA RPL is unfounded - unless one wants to fly the bigger aircraft [and then limited to 1500kg and 1 pax and GA hire rates - may as well do a PPL and get rid of the limitation] then I will be surprised if many go that way at all, maybe a small percentage that wish to gain CTA access [who have suitably equiped aircraft] but I don't see the masses changing. Even then they will still need a RAA certificate to fly a RAA registered aircraft.

 

Maybe it is different around Taree or elsewhere but the local area here [Townsville] are mainly LSA - the few that are not would not pay one empoyees wages.

 

 

[coljones]

"while we have nearly as many hoops to jump through (for a lesser ability aircraft), and almost as expensive maintenance situation"- check out the cost of an average 100hrly done by a LAME in a certified workshop"but truth is, any LSA aircraft currently being used in a training situation, is probably being looked after by a LAME anyway" - L2s and some L3s ,around my area at least, and a lot cheaper then a LAME rate.

 

I believe all the doom and glume around the CASA RPL is unfounded - unless one wants to fly the bigger aircraft [and then limited to 1500kg and 1 pax and GA hire rates - may as well do a PPL and get rid of the limitation] then I will be surprised if many go that way at all, maybe a small percentage that wish to gain CTA access [who have suitably equiped aircraft] but I don't see the masses changing. Even then they will still need a RAA certificate to fly a RAA registered aircraft.

 

Maybe it is different around Taree or elsewhere but the local area here [Townsville] are mainly LSA - the few that are not would not pay one empoyees wages.

Frank,

the weight and pax limitation is not attached to the RPL but to the "recreational aviation medical practitioner’s certificate" (The the modified Austroads medical). If a pilot has a class 1 or 2 licence then the limitations are much less eg greater than 1500Kg and more than 1 pax etc.

 

You can also use a "recreational aviation medical practitioner’s certificate" in lieu of a Class 1 or 2 medical for other licences but the licence holder is then restricted to less than 1500 and max 1 pax etc

 

The RPL is more or less the old restricted licence or more lately the GFPT, and has a number of endorsements allowing more priveleges and can lead to a PPL. The RPL also provides a path for RAA certificate holders to articulate to an RPL and PPL.

 

 

[frank marriott]

Col

 

Yep I was thinking RPL with restricted medical - I realise I didn't say that now, I agree with your post - I realise no one can be expected to understand what I was thinking but not saying.

 

By way of explaining some of my other comments re RAA certificate I give the example of this morning (again referring to my local area only) -

 

I flew into a local ALA this morning, not an organised fly in and many did not know the others were going but the break down was -

 

10 x aircraft

 

1 x VH

 

7 x LSA

 

2 x RAA registered, but I didn't take enough notice to be able to say what cat. they fell into. It didn't matter.

 

Make what you like from that but 9 out of 10 were using their RAA certificates.

 

 

[pylon500]

Your history is not very accurate - and therefore your conclusions are not, either.You choose.

You're probably right, it's not the RAAus that's destined for extinction, it's me.

An ageing early ultralight pilot/instructor with a fondness for the old Lightwing, which I believe was the best trainer we ever produced, (I can hear the higher percentage of members trying to compare their later plastic fantastics) rough as it was...

 

The world has moved on.

 

Who can even remember what a taildragger was?!, let alone a two stroke engine, (even our lawnmowers are four stroke these days)

 

The days when we flew around wondering when our engine was going to fail, as opposed to flying around not even considering if our engine could fail, are now gone.(oops, another Jabiru pilot)

 

How many pilots practice full idle approaches (remember, we're not allowed to do dead sticks...) to the ground?

 

I guess the truth is, if you did the statistics with regard to the levels of approval/certification compared to numbers built/hours flown against manufacturing fault fatalities between 95:25's and 101:55's, chances are the modern machines come out on top.

 

(However, I still feel that of the original GR series Lightwings with some 200 odd built (?), there has only been ONE fatality that I know of, and there is talk that it may have been a heart attack, and nothing to do with the aircraft.)

 

But I digress.

 

I'll just have to hang on to instructing in the Foxbat, and try to get my Lightwing finished and training, (before it gets relegated to the 19 class) until I get classified as an anachronism, and fade away...... . . . . .

 

 

[Keith Page]

Pylon

 

I have Lightwing with a 582. It is just a treasure and we do full idle landings not a bother as short field tricks what else would one need.

 

As for the Jab it is a different kettle of fish.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[planet47]

Pylon - an anachronism?

 

I know what its like to fly a two stroke - a 2stroke that JUST kept going and a brand new 2stroke.

 

Will never fly a lightwing cause that's a boy's toy but there is a taildragger in the making.

 

I appreciate the knowledge.

 

 

[turboplanner]

The days when we flew around wondering when our engine was going to fail, as opposed to flying around not even considering if our engine could fail, are now gone.

Quote of the year.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Hi All

 

I thought I would bring this back to life..

 

Start reading this thread from the beginning,, I thing this is now relivant to current happenings.

 

Interpret the drift of the thread and toss the dribble out.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[Doug Evans]

You're probably right, it's not the RAAus that's destined for extinction, it's me.An ageing early ultralight pilot/instructor with a fondness for the old Lightwing, which I believe was the best trainer we ever produced, (I can hear the higher percentage of members trying to compare their later plastic fantastics) rough as it was...

The world has moved on.

 

Who can even remember what a taildragger was?!, let alone a two stroke engine, (even our lawnmowers are four stroke these days)

 

The days when we flew around wondering when our engine was going to fail, as opposed to flying around not even considering if our engine could fail, are now gone.(oops, another Jabiru pilot)

 

How many pilots practice full idle approaches (remember, we're not allowed to do dead sticks...) to the ground?

 

I guess the truth is, if you did the statistics with regard to the levels of approval/certification compared to numbers built/hours flown against manufacturing fault fatalities between 95:25's and 101:55's, chances are the modern machines come out on top.

 

(However, I still feel that of the original GR series Lightwings with some 200 odd built (?), there has only been ONE fatality that I know of, and there is talk that it may have been a heart attack, and nothing to do with the aircraft.)

 

But I digress.

 

I'll just have to hang on to instructing in the Foxbat, and try to get my Lightwing finished and training, (before it gets relegated to the 19 class) until I get classified as an anachronism, and fade away...... . . . . .

Don't worry mate the old two stroke will not die out with me ,that all I fly and all my landing are glide no power landing the little two stroke these day are very reliable if treated right 229 i had a bit over 400 hrs with out a single problem just proper maintains now I have 0032 which also has a 582 blue top with oil injection best think ever for these little engines Your right about there safety record no one has die from a lightwing and only 3 COA. s not bad for over 29 years of flying

Yes the little tail dragers are far and few but we are still out there holding up the true ultralight and there are still many about

 

I for one love the lightwings. And I know many other out there that feel the same.

 

Cheers Doug

 

 

 

[Keith Page]

Good on you Doug the Lightwing 582 are just treasures.

 

You talk about your glide landings, what about take off --- full throttle- stick forward- the little tail just pops up- stick neutral not long after that it just hopps off the ground and then you are away. "What a great feeling"

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[Doug Evans]

There no better feeling then beening behind a buzzing two stroke at full noise climbing to the clouds with stick in hand and a grinn from ear two ear then before ya know it your at 1000 ft an drop ya power back to crusie step up on the step zipping along with an Alsome feeling of joy and freedom in a world of achievement that I in control of this beautifull craft looking down at the world !

 

 

[flyerme]

Don't worry mate the old two stroke will not die out with me ,that all I fly and all my landing are glide no power landing the little two stroke these day are very reliable if treated right 229 i had a bit over 400 hrs with out a single problem just proper maintains now I have 0032 which also has a 582 blue top with oil injection best think ever for these little engines Your right about there safety record no one has die from a lightwing and only 3 COA. s not bad for over 29 years of flying Yes the little tail dragers are far and few but we are still out there holding up the true ultralight and there are still many about

I for one love the lightwings. And I know many other out there that feel the same.

 

Cheers Doug

Me too. Wish I could re new the reg

 

 

[pylon500]

Currently using a 582 Lightwing for tailwheel and two stroke work.

 

Had been flying with a Warp Drive prop for the last 'umpteen' years, set up just right for circuit work.

 

But then the rego crap happened, and I had to drag out the old cruise prop it was originally supplied with, so now I stagger around the circuit, vibrating most of the way, (yes, the prop has been balanced as best as possible, it's simply the dynamics of a two blade prop)

 

Rumour has it that approved clones of the 'AllSize' rubbish will be available again soon, but who wants to pay $1500 for a piece of wood, when you can buy a real prop (Warp or even Bolly) for $1000, and adjust it to suit your flying requirement?

 

A simple wooden prop (two blade) shouldn't cost more than about $500.

 

 

[Keith Page]

In case you haven't noticed, KP, Ed is still on the Board. All that has changed is Ed's title ............. (and the fact that there have been no jobs for the boys since Rod took the helm).You are delusional, in my opinion, if you think that Myles and Ed could have prevented the RPL from coming into effect and CASA from applying the pressure that they are (and will) to RAA, which in my view is a direct consequence of RAA proving over the past few years that it has been unable to run, administer and govern itself effectively.

 

If you want to apportion blame for that previous lack of governance within RAA, look closely & directly at the last 4 or 5 Executives and the Board members who supported them so vehemently. Those Executives were dominated by Middleton, Reid & Runciman and the fawning vehement support for their actions & inactions was dominated by Herring, Breitkreutz, Thobaven and Caban. That was all demonstrated clearly at, and in the lead-up to, last February's EGM (which I remind you was demanded by the members to address what were the several triggers for CASA's present actions).

We'll the ship did sail too far with Rod at the wheel.

 

KP.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Organisations are only required to become RTO to deliver Vocational Education & Training (VET). The key word is Vocational i.e. for employment not recreational. There are very few, if any, existing training packages which are relevent to recreational flying or maintenance - the costs of setting all this up in addition to the costs of getting and maintaining RTO registration (particularly across multiple sites eg each FTF) would be immense. Even most CASA GA flight schools aren't RTO's. Who would pay for all this ?I'm all for improving standards but the way to achieve this doesn't need to include the extra costs, bureaucracy and overheads associated with ASQA IMO

 

Cheers

 

John

Hi Crezzi

I do not know where you are these days however look in the latest mag.. There in all it's glory RAAus are going ahead with the RTO... It has come to fruition.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[Captain]

We'll the ship did sail too far with Rod at the wheel.KP.

You are good at being wise & posting your little observations 8 months after the event, aren't you?

 

 

 

20/20 hindsight is nothing special, Keith, although it might get you a free beer as a guru up there at your drinking hole.

 

 

 

But at least Rod did give it a go, & perhaps your comment about the previous President may even be the very reason behind why there is a new one.

 

 

[David Isaac]

We'll the ship did sail too far with Rod at the wheel.KP.

Hi Keith, I am not sure what point you are attempting to make with this comment. Will you enlighten us please?

 

 

[Keith Page]

Hi David

 

Been wondering on a couple of points Captain has put light on it.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Hi Kiwi

 

First of all I will ignor you.

 

Secondly find out what is happening behind the scene with regard to history and what is happen in the senate enquiry.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page

 

 

[Keith Page]

Just to start the process of getting up to speed..

 

Nothing is there yet only the prelimary jargon.

 

However for those who wish to know here is a click and go.

 

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=036c3bd9-ec50-4936-8b24-d781dc8bb2c9

 

Regardas

 

Keith Page

 

 

[David Isaac]

Keith, with great respect, I wish you would stop talking in riddles. I doubt any of us have the faintest clue as to what point you are attempting to make.

 

Btw I would suggest that if you are going to ignore Kiwi, you should do just that ... LOL

 

 

[turboplanner]

I'm convinced that forums are not a good place to discuss serious business because of the varying attention spans of people, and the rolling wall, where anything no longer on the screen is never referenced and much of what is in a post is ignored in preference to writing down a new post with a personal agenda based on a personal background.

 

For example, I know Keith has been diligently researching his subject, and while that doesn't always come across, what he's been saying for the most part carries weight.

 

For example he posted a link which has ominous implications, yet no one has commented.

 

It was a comment from lawyer Shannon O'Hara from Carter Newell, in an Association of Corporate Counsell document, and here are some execerpts.

 

"In mid-November 2013, the Australian Government announced it will be undertaking an independent review of aviation safety regulation in Australia."

 

"

 

The background to the review (as per the terms of reference5) is the extensive period of ongoing regulatory reform which has been implemented by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) over the past three years, and which is expected to continue into 2014."

 

"An additional factor was reportedly the release of the Senate report into Aviation Accident Investigations (in mid-2013) which highlighted a range of issues with the regulation and governance of aviation safety within Australia.7"

 

"The terms of reference for the review provide the objective for the panel to investigate:

 

• ‘The structures, effectiveness and processes of all agencies involved in aviation safety;
   
   
  
• The relationship and interaction of those agencies with each other, as well as with the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development;
   
   
  
• The outcomes and direction of the regulatory reform process being undertaken by CASA;
   
   
  
• The suitability of Australia’s aviation safety related regulations when benchmarked against comparable overseas jurisdictions; and
   
   
  
• Any other safety related matters.’8"
   
   
  

 

 

This is a watershed event, and events like these can often take off in totally unexpected directions, so I would have expected to see regular strategic reports and polling of opinions by RAA to get ready for some very quick positioning and defensive work.

 

I'm also stunned that virtually no one has made any comments on the Senate Inquiry which affects the future of CASA, which in turn affects the future of RAA.

 

I suspect that is just part of what Keith is trying to get across, so when he writes a post it might be well worth looking at what he has written.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

I suspect that is just part of what Keith is trying to get across, so when he writes a post it might be well worth looking at what he has written.

And why do you suspect rather than know......clarity in posting? Perhaps Keith could spend a few cents on some more words that mean we don't have to read between the sparse lines. Of course to do that you need to have sufficient info, perhaps even facts, to fill in the extra space with something meaningful..... but...Andy, play the ball not the man!

 

What does the review mean for RAAus, I and everyone else has no idea today because as yet, as I understand the report has not been released (this is supposition because we don't know an exact date, just that it will, or should, be in May this year). I do note however that the time for submissions to be made finished in January this year so the fact that nothing is being discussed about it now is hardly surprising in context of time isn't it?

 

In searching here I can see that:-

 

Bruce Tuncks (Adelaide) who posts here from time to time did provide a personal submission http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/airsafety-submission.114918/

 

We discussed the review in some detail, including from memory the RAAus submission and others as well, in the http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/john-mccormick-leaving-casa.113470/ thread.

 

Discussions today, will provide us with what facts exactly?

 

Andy

 

 

[David Isaac]

Turbo,

 

We have discussed this safety review, (the link that Keith sent us to) and in particular the excellent submission by the AAAA and how that contrasted in content and quality to our RAAUs submission.

 

Keith posted a link about what we all knew and the submissions involved. The report and the consequential outcomes won't be known for many months I suspect.

 

But if we are to post, what is the point if no one knows the point you are attempting to make.