Aircraft Importing

[Admin]

The range of aircraft that are now available in the rec aviation arena has increased dramatically and now seeing the aircraft that are available in China, 50 different rec aircraft in the US, all of the European types etc we have a huge range to select from.

 

Also anyone can just start importing an aircraft, get it certified and start selling them to us. Now I don't want to offend anyone and there is nothing intended with this poll but I thought that while the aircraft gets certified there isn't any shall I say "certification" or approval level on the people or companies that import or sell the aircraft, the support they give, their integrity, service, spares carried, honesty with ADs & ANs etc. Should aircraft importers/sellers (inc Aussie manufacturers/sellers) have to go through some licencing or certification process? Would it ensure integrity of aircraft importers/sellers? Is it possible that it could even extend to having a "standardised" spec that aircraft importers/sellers would have to abide by/use when referencing their aircraft in terms of TAS, Takeoff distance, landing distance etc?

 

I am not sure in other States but here in Vic all new and or 2nd hand car dealerships have to become a LMCT (Licenced Motor Car Trader) to ensure certain rules are abided by. So I thought I would ask the question just out of curiosity then to offend anyone - remember there are both Pros & Cons!

 

Perhaps if there was then maybe we wouldn't get to see the range that we have here in Australia (perhaps) but if there was would a purchaser of an aircraft have some surety in whom they are dealing with and the aircraft specs etc.

 

 

[Guest disperse]

ive voted no because i would not want to restrict the availability, slow down the process or increase the retail price. however it would be nice to have some kind of ethical control. there are laws surrounding the retail market and im sure word would spread fast if someone were dodgy. problem with that is, someone has to first get stung for it to be reported. if i were looking at purchasing a plane from a new and unknown importer. i would probably be relying on the reputation of the manufacturer rather then the importer. but if they are both iffy then i may just take my money elsewhere.

 

Troy

 

ps. ive been wrong before and it may just happen again someday

 

 

[TechMan]

Its a difficult one Ian. Generally it is between the wannabe importer and the supplying factory to make the determination whether they will represent their product the way they would hope.

 

You would think that the supplying factory would be most interested in hearing about any negative experiences that include their product and thereby getting the supplying factory to make the necessary 'adjustments' in behaviour / attitude etc or give it to someone who will represent their product accordingly.

 

The authorising body (RA-Aus for eg) does make it clear that any continuing airworthiness requirements are to be made aware of by the importer. The authorising body however cannot interfere with whether or not the importer has enough money to be able to carry a complete aircraft in spares. That is between the importer and the supplying factory.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Chris

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

We've a right to expect that importers/distributors will act in a reasonable and ethical way. I will vote no however on the following basis:

 

1. This is a small market and notoriously prone to gossip - that is good and bad. Bad news travels fast (but scurrilous comment also travels fast). I believe that this is one valuable safety mechanism;
    
    
   
2. The Trade Practices Act also requires that when you are engaged in trade you are not allowed to act in a way that is "misleading and deceptive". The ACCC can and will act against those who do so;
    
    
   
3. I do not believe that this industry needs further regulation, nor do I believe that the RAAus should spend its time on this, in default of all the other things it needs to do;
    
    
   
4. "Facts" can be variable. A manufacturer may indeed get a 75% cruise figure of, say, 105 knots. A distributor may report that in good faith. However a small change may mean that individual aircraft may not achieve that number. We should not penalise people for acting in good faith in such a circumstance.
    
   

 

Ian it does sound as if there is something specific behind this from your point of view however!

 

Regards

 

Mike

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

"Qualified" is an interesting concept given that much of what people have talked about is ethical behaviour.

 

I wonder who would define and then test against an acceptable ethical baseline. hmmm decsions... Little Johnny or Kevin ..... So much ethical excess to choose from.

 

Maybe I could offer a university degree by email "ethical importing in exchange for your ethical bank account details"

 

 

[Admin]

Mike

 

The only thing behind my thoughts were the interesting aircraft in China that Harwis has posted - I just saw every Tom, Dick or Harry jumping in to bring what perhaps may be a cheap aircraft (i.e. "Made in China") and bring them into Australia and then down the track due to problems as outlined in another post about I think a jetski, the seller just closes up shop, declares bankruptcy, people lose deposits and purchasers are left with no support.

 

As I said the question has nothing intended to anyone at all but rather just curiosity in how others thought about it and as I also said there are a lot of Pros and Cons that can be attached to the question - just healthy discussion Mike, healthy discussion!

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

I think it's a great debate. Like many on this forum.

 

Interestingly if we are going to deal with the possibility of the dealer going broke etc and taking people's deposits then you need a fidelity fund like the travel agents have. I think that's getting in deep.

 

Hmmm

 

Mike

 

 

[Downunder]

The term "Qualified" could be open to both extremes (over regulation or it simply being a rubber stamp) and actually stifle a new importation business.

 

I would like to see importers perhaps form their own code of practice/conduct maybe?

 

What does the USA have? Is there a body or association that manufactures/importers have over there?

 

I voted no anyway.

 

Regards,

 

RJM

 

 

[Bigglesworth]

The term "Qualified" could be open to both extremes (over regulation or it simply being a rubber stamp) and actually stifle a new importation business.

I agree with that, regulation needs to be there, but the question is; how stringent will it be. If it is just red tape, it will only stop the honest people.

 

However, if it is governed by RAA and not CASA, it should be alright:).

 

 

[Guest disperse]

when it comes down to it regardless of reputation or promise

 

DO THEY OWN ENOUGH TO SUE !!!

 

because even if they go to gaol for ripping you off it still dosent give you your money back

 

QUESTION IS : HOW DO YOU TELL

 

 

[HEON]

My understanding of the LSA rules would make me look at importer and manufacturer since I beleave if support stops the aircraft has to be fostered by another manufacturer or it cannot be used. Can anyone state the correct rule on this?

 

 

[Admin]

That's interesting so far - 2 to 1 in favour of NOT having any controls placed on people importing or selling aircraft - for the protection of the buyer I would have thought it may have been the other way around - interesting!

 

 

[TechMan]

My understanding of the LSA rules would make me look at importer and manufacturer since I beleave if support stops the aircraft has to be fostered by another manufacturer or it cannot be used. Can anyone state the correct rule on this?

That is correct to a point. I would not look at Importer as importers come and go. It is the manufacturer you need to look at, because if they go belly up, then the "factory" built aircraft drop down to experimental and cannot be used for training anymore, unless someone else (does not have to be a manufacturer, can be a person) picks up the pieces and 'acts' as the manufacturer.

 

CASA AC21.41 and .42 have the requirements for LSA.

 

Chris

 

 

[TechMan]

Ian,

 

I am no expert in this, but if one buys something that does not do what it has been marketed and sold to do, then we have protection under consumer affairs or Dept of Fair Trading.

 

If an importer is refusing to assist a person and the aircraft fails to meet the marketed hype, then you may have a case against the importer as Pelorus has already pointed out.

 

Perhaps once people actually want to only deal with the manufacturer and not the importer, and tell the manufacturer that if they have to deal with the importer they won't buy the product, then perhaps self regulation will become the power that is missing? As has already been mentioned, it is a small industry and word gets around fast.

 

Chris

 

 

[facthunter]

Importer requirements.

 

I can't see that learned people like US (RAAus) couldn't impose some minimum practical requirements on importers, after all you are going to be sending them money as deposits , relying on them for spares & information etc. Doesn't a type have to be approved to be registered. with us? Surely the importer should have enough experience/ knowledge to ensure that the aircraft he wishes to sell is suitable, and the supplier is reliable, and can "deliver the goods"& if he/she sells the product, there should be a situation, where you know they will "back" the product. I know of many Russian & chinese motorcycles that would never meet Australian standards, and were never put on the roads, although they were in this country. I'm not sure you can "duck" this issue, and let the free market take care of it.

 

I'm not interested in unnecessary red tape either. Nev...

 

 

[Guest Decca]

consider this;

 

The manufacturer should not have a problem with an importing agent if the proprietors were LAME’s (with RAA Pilot Certificates?) with business credentials & knowledge of customer service, rather than the agent having to be a registered or licensed importer.

 

Which also assures that the end user is not just dealing with a salesman, but someone who was raised in the aero industry & should know what he’s dealing with.

 

Regards, Decca.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Hi all, yes very good thread. Our company imports several different brands of equipment. non aviating stuff. belive me manufacturers of any product, if they themselves are credible, will not let anyone with a pocketful of readies just deal with their equipment. we had to prove that we were not only established and have a good reputation. but had to show where our business plan was taking us and show how we were going to provide product support across this big wide country. ect ect ect. I am sure that the current agents of aircraft already being imported would have been asked the same. the manufacturers have a greater investment and a worldwide reputation to uphold. they would not allow a fly by nighter to misrepresent their product. Not only would the proposed agents have to comply with Australian laws they would have to meet the possibly stricter requierments of the manufacture. so that in itself would be good protection for the end user.

 

ozzie

 

 

[facthunter]

Quality control.

 

Yes ozzie, good points there . I reckon the problem you might anticipate is that the product itself may be deficient in some cases. (desgn & manufacture) The provider may outsource parts or corners may be cut out of ignorance or to increase profit. A good manufacturer will (as you say) be very particular as to who his representative is, but one piece of aluminium looks like any other, but may be only 1/3rd the strength.

 

In an aeroplane, it's got to be right, the design , the workmanship and the material.

 

N...