Airspace in Australia

[rhysmcc]

I thought we were talking about increasing the LSA weight, I think the weight limit applies to the registration of aircraft rather then what the pilot can fly. LSA to 750kg would be a good first step then allowing amateur built to 1500kg.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Based on the current approach being taken by RAAus to gaining airspace privileges, it's unlikely there will be any result for at least a couple of years.

 

 

[Camel]

If, as you suggest, LSA is unchangeable then it won't concern me either way. Just fuel limited with 2 up.

Not unchangeable, here is link to the flying car weight increase http://aviationweek.com/technology/terrafugia-s-roadable-aircraft-faces-weight-hurdle

 

As far as airspace privilidge it could happen very quickly as it is a safety issue, but I believe transit only for RAA and for entry get PPL or RPL with class 2 med. for transit it wouldn't take much training and a RAA instructor with a GA PPL or better should be able to train.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

As far as airspace privilidge it could happen very quickly as it is a safety issue, but I believe transit only for RAA and for entry get PPL or RPL with class 2 med. for transit it wouldn't take much training and a RAA instructor with a GA PPL or better should be able to train.

If GFA and Balloon Federation certificate holders have controlled airspace access with self-certified medicals and no GA qual's I don't see why RAAus shouldn't be extended the same privileges.

 

We would not be asking for any special treatment, just the same as equivalent RAAOs.

 

 

[Ada Elle]

If GFA and Balloon Federation certificate holders have controlled airspace access with self-certified medicals and no GA qual's I don't see why RAAus shouldn't be extended the same privileges.We would not be asking for any special treatment, just the same as equivalent RAAOs.

I don't know what motorgliders using the main runways at Camden do, but on the glider side it must be by special exemption because gliders don't follow Class D procedures there. (Gliders there make a single downwind call when established in the circuit.)

 

The RAAus medical is much weaker than the GFA one, and allows unsafe pilots to fly.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

I don't know what motorgliders using the main runways at Camden do, but on the glider side it must be by special exemption because gliders don't follow Class D procedures there. (Gliders there make a single downwind call when established in the circuit.)The RAAus medical is much weaker than the GFA one, and allows unsafe pilots to fly.

In my 35+ years operating from Camden I have seen many motor gliders operate from 06/24. When there was a Stemme based there it was almost SOP to use the sealed runways to avoid prop strikes.

 

No aircraft at any of the old GAAP airports follow Class D procedures, they follow some locally created hybrid procedures. Albury, Coffs Harbour and Tamworth operate IAW the Class D procedures published in AIP.

 

With reference to the comment regarding unsafe pilots being permitted to fly, I haven't seen the statistics to support your statement. Would you mind directing me to the location of these stat's?

 

 

[Ada Elle]

In my 35 years operating from Camden I have seen many motor gliders operate from 06/24. When there was a Stemme based there it was almost SOP to use the sealed runways to avoid prop strikes. No aircraft at any of the old GAAP airports follow Class D procedures, they follow some locally created hybrid procedures. Albury, Coffs Harbour and Tamworth operate IAW the procedures published in AIP.

Do those motor glider pilots also have a PPL?

 

With reference to the comment regarding unsafe pilots being permitted to fly, I haven't seen the statistics to support your statement. Would you mind directing me to the location of these stat's?

 

A diagnosis of dementia does not always mean that a person has to give up driving straight away. Because the condition involves a gradual decline in cognitive and physical ability however, they will need to stop driving at some point.

What stops a person with early dementia, who still meets the medical standard of a private drivers license, from flying? Such a person might have a restriction of "only drive within 10km from home", but no such restriction needs to be declared to RAAus or be placed on their license.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Do those motor glider pilots also have a PPL?

CAO 95.4 doesn't place any limitations on operations in any class of airspace. The GFA operations manual only requires a controlled airspace endorsement for pilots operating powered sailplanes, appendix 6 of the GFA Operational Regulations refers.

A standard Glider Pilot Certificate doesn't require any endorsement, apparently it's addressed under item 36 of the training syllabus - "Navigation and Airspace".

 

Which as mentioned in earlier posts, there's no requirement for a glider pilot to hold any GA qualifications to operate in controlled airspace.

 

 

[rhysmcc]

Not unchangeable, here is link to the flying car weight increase http://aviationweek.com/technology/terrafugia-s-roadable-aircraft-faces-weight-hurdleAs far as airspace privilidge it could happen very quickly as it is a safety issue, but I believe transit only for RAA and for entry get PPL or RPL with class 2 med. for transit it wouldn't take much training and a RAA instructor with a GA PPL or better should be able to train.

That's the FAA, they don't set the requirements for LSA here in Australia. CASA have set the requirements for LSA and you'd find a lot of countries have set different rules regarding what is an LSA or not. What we should be asking CASA to do is to lift the limit they put on LSA to 750kg. (One example in the US they have a max speed in level flight of 120 KCAS, no such rule here in Oz).

 

 

[DonRamsay]

What Jill Bailey said at AUSFLY was that RAAus was seeking equivalence with the RPL that CASA has said, in print, is "equivalent". That means, of course, 1,500 kg MTOW. I don't have more good info than that yet but I'm thinking that would entitle a RPC holder to fly an RAAus registered aircraft that has an MTOW 1,500 kg or less.

 

Next issue then is what aircraft can be registered at what MTOW? For the answer to that we have to go back to the Av Law in place now and as amended as a part of the process of equating privileges between RPL and RPC.

 

There is the Euro EASA 750kg standard but that may mean achieving Type Cert at that weight. I can't see any LSA manufacturers being prepared to go to that expense. LSA is set at 600 kg around the world and while that may be difficult to change it is not impossible and it would be easier if EASA and the FAA went that way. Type Cert J230 might be easier to get an STC to take it to 700 kg.

 

My LSA Sling when registered GA Exp has an MTOW of 700 kg. It is a very strongly built aeroplane and, like the J230, would simply be able to have better fuel management with an increase to the design MTOW. Keeping those aircraft at an artificial 600 kg merely compromises safety by restricting the amount of fuel they can carry. The LSA MTOW rule can in this circumstance be seen to be anti safety. By all means stick with 2 pob, piston engine, 45 kts stall but what is the sense of restricting strength of build and fuel carrying capacity?

 

The principle has to be that RAAus can register aircraft at their manufacturer approved MTOW up to 1,500 kg. Exactly how that is achieved is the job in front of RAAus staff and the Board.

 

 

[Nobody]

Don,

 

You should get the imported/dealer for the sling to investigate the possibility of registering the sling in the Primary category. If the aircraft complies with ASTM 2245 it should be relatively striaght forward for CASA to approve, as per:

 

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/casr1998333/s21.024.html

 

Some background can be found here:

 

https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/_assets/main/rules/1998casr/021/021c07.pdf

 

This would require you to register it as VH (and have a RPL) but you would be able to operate legally at the higher weight.

 

 

[rhysmcc]

Don i'm sure the Sling isn't the only aircraft that was tested to greater then 600kg and that the MTOW is only set to that due to the LSA limit, i.e. the airframe being certified to a higher MTOW. But sure if FAA/EASA also went to 750kg a lot of manufactures would get onboard then if it's just us Aussies (small market).

 

 

[Ada Elle]

Wouldn't the prudent thing to do be not to extend LSA, but to accept Primary Category and EASA VLA up to 750 into RAAus? That way you don't need to come up with a bunch of new certification standards that aren't the same as anywhere else; you're just allowing planes which already have a sensible certification at up to 750kg to be re-registered RA.

 

 

[rhysmcc]

I dunno Ada, how does that help LSA owners? They will still be limited to 600kg unless the manufacture certifies them for something different.

 

 

[Ada Elle]

I dunno Ada, how does that help LSA owners? They will still be limited to 600kg unless the manufacture certifies them for something different.

Which is the exact situation that they would be in if LSAs were redefined to 750kg. The manufacturer would still have to recertify them (self-certification) to 750kg. Do we have a 750kg LSA standard? Do we really want to create one and lead the world? Do you trust CASA not to create one like the RAMPC?

 

 

[rhysmcc]

By recertify I meant from LSA to VLA etc. yes if 750kg hasn't been proven in the testing then it couldn't be used (wasn't that the same from going 450 to 600?).

 

When the sling went through testing they did 700kg, believe jab did the same on some models.

 

 

[Ada Elle]

By recertify I meant from LSA to VLA etc. yes if 750kg hasn't been proven in the testing then it couldn't be used (wasn't that the same from going 450 to 600?).When the sling went through testing they did 700kg, believe jab did the same on some models.

What certification/testing standard did they test the Sling to?

 

I thought the Jab was tested in the Primary category (the 230C anyhow; the 230D is LSA).

 

I don't have a copy of the LSA standards, and I don't know enough aerospace engineering to judge whether they would work at 750kg. All I have said is that prudence would dictate that we should copy someone else's standard for the time being rather than going it alone by being the first country to permit 750kg LSAs.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

. . You should get the imported/dealer for the sling to investigate the possibility of registering the sling in the Primary category. If the aircraft complies with ASTM 2245 it should be relatively striaght forward for CASA to approve, as per:. . . This would require you to register it as VH (and have a RPL) but you would be able to operate legally at the higher weight.

There are Slings registered VH and with the 700 kg MTOW.

 

One Sling has circumnavigated the Earth. It had a take-off weight around 1,100 kg. Quite a bit of fuel on board and flown across the South Atlantic from Africa to the Americas. Nuts perhaps but demonstrated the strength of this "LSA".

 

I'm happy to keep it registered RAAus and hold CASA to their word that the RPL and RPC are equivalent.

 

RAAus has not always been the easiest mob to deal with for everybody but I get the impression that VH could be out of the pan and into the fire.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Don i'm sure the Sling isn't the only aircraft that was tested to greater then 600kg and that the MTOW is only set to that due to the LSA limit, i.e. the airframe being certified to a higher MTOW. But sure if FAA/EASA also went to 750kg a lot of manufactures would get onboard then if it's just us Aussies (small market).

True, there are some and the SLing and J230 are just two that I know. Another I know of is the Arion Lightning that has 650 kg when not LSA.

But, there are lot of Euro aircraft that are built "down" to the 600 kg to get the best empty weight/payload. Similarly there are lot of Euro sourced aircraft that were originally "overbuilt" for the 450 kg category and have been "stretched" to pass as 600 kg LSA and would never meet higher than 600 kg safely.

 

Obviously, it depends on the particular aircraft as to whether it could ever conceivably be registered at more than 600 kg.

 

A 1,500 kg MTOW allowed would bring a number of the excellent RVs into RAAus and that would not be a bad thing at all.

 

 

[Nobody]

There are Slings registered VH and with the 700 kg MTOW.One Sling has circumnavigated the Earth. It had a take-off weight around 1,100 kg. Quite a bit of fuel on board and flown across the South Atlantic from Africa to the Americas. Nuts perhaps but demonstrated the strength of this "LSA".

 

I'm happy to keep it registered RAAus and hold CASA to their word that the RPL and RPC are equivalent.

 

RAAus has not always been the easiest mob to deal with for everybody but I get the impression that VH could be out of the pan and into the fire.

Don,

 

Are the 700kg slings Experimental or factory built? Aircraft built from a kit can be within reason (justified by calculation or flight test) any weight as they are experimental. The primary category allows for factory built aircraft designed and tested to a consensus standard (ASTM 2245 or another equivalent) to be sold and flown.

 

RAAus need to be a little bit careful comparing the rights and restrictions to the GFA in getting access to the CTA. Do they want the GFA maintenance rules as well? ie giving up the ability to do most of the work yourself without an formal qualification/training. Or how about not being able to operate independently of a club until you have over 100 hours? Or annual flight reviews instead of every 2 years?

 

 

[DonRamsay]

What certification/testing standard did they test the Sling to?

The usual LSA 600 kg and the Euro VLA 750 kg class (but at 700 kg). The aircraft is strong enough to go to the full 750 kg but they might need to reconsider the wing to stay under 45 KCAS stall in the landing config.

 

I thought the Jab was tested in the Primary category (the 230C anyhow; the 230D is LSA).

The J230 can have 700 kg when VH reg (J430).

The J170 is only LSA and at 600 kg with only 80 hp it would struggle to lift any more (imho).

 

The J160 C was type certified at, I think 540 kg but was later granted 600 kg

 

The J160 D is LSA and limited to 600 kg. Again I doubt it would be suited to a higher MTOW with just the 80 hp

 

I don't have a copy of the LSA standards, and I don't know enough aerospace engineering to judge whether they would work at 750kg. All I have said is that prudence would dictate that we should copy someone else's standard for the time being rather than going it alone by being the first country to permit 750kg LSAs.

Agreed. It would be very easy to change the Sling rego from LSA to JLA as a means to get 700 kg as it is already certified for that from the factory. For home built Slings, they can already get 700 kg as VH ABA and would be able to have 700 kg in RAAus as a 19 reg if/when RAAus gets clearance to 1,500 kgs.

 

EASA VLA is very like CASA/FAA LSA except up to 750 kg (and no cruise speed limit). From the great wizard of Wiki:

 

EASA CS-VLA

 

is the

 

[/url]European Aviation Safety Agency

 

 

C

 

ertification

 

S

 

pecification for

 

V

 

ery

 

L

 

ight

 

A

 

ircraft.

 

The

 

Very Light Aircraft

 

or

 

VLA

 

aircraft certification category introduced in 2003 by the

 

EASA

 

is intended to make it easier and less costly to get full European certification of a

 

[/url]general aviation

 

aircraft. The somewhat relaxed certification procedure is available for aircraft satisfying the following criteria:

 

• A single engine with spark or compression ignition (i.e. no jets).
   
  
  
   
  
• One or two seats.
   
  
  
   
  
• Maximum take-off weight (MTOW) of not more than 750 kg.
   
  
  
   
  
• Stall speed in the landing configuration (VS0) of no more 83 km/h (45 knots).
   
  
  
   
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A CS-VLA aircraft is not certified for

 

aerobatics

 

and may be flown under daylight

 

visual flight rules

 

only.

 

 

 

 

[rhysmcc]

The MTOW restriction is on the aircraft registration though rather then the Pilot Certificate. So if we could introduce the EASA VLA under RA-AUS (a new CAO or in the new part 103?) could be the way to go. If aircraft are already built to the higher standard then could they be moved over? Do VLA have the same restrictions a LSA in terms of modifications needing factory approval?

 

PS the j160d is only 540kg still. (At least the one I've flown in)

 

 

[facthunter]

750 Kgs is enough weight structurally and in most other ways for a two seater and I consider the limit to TWO as being of the "essence " of cheaper more relaxed aviation. Single seat by the same logic should be even less restrictive.

 

LSA was never a good idea. Some sort of stop[ gap solution with many downsides and not many upsides.

 

Also Europe is what it is and is in many ways quite different and generally more complex and expensive. If what they do grabs you fair enough but don't make their limits OUR limits. There is a large absence of new designs and owner builds HERE. Nev

 

 

[DonRamsay]

I agree that 700/750 kg is the sweet spot. Strong, comfortable, good fuel capacity and fuel efficiency. That'll do me, personally, for all time.

 

 

[facthunter]

Another Factor is the value of OUR currency. IF it stays where it is or goes lower it will be a game changer in affordability of the imports. materials engines and complete aircraft. Nev