Whats your favourite fixed wing recreational aircraft?

[SSCBD]

Sounds reasonable, but you already have GA if that's the way you want to fly. Airlines will never welcome traffic that doesn't know exactly what it's doing, in their airspace, and I would be on their side there. You can have VFR procedures for getting in and out of major airports, that work fine. You should have transit procedures for places like Coff s Harbour and Williamtown (coastal @ 500 feet) etc But if you muck it up amongst the big stuff, It will cost, one way or another. Nev

You have completely misread what I said. Nev Not mixing with airlines or their airspace.

 

 

[facthunter]

Well Let me assure you I wouldn't deliberately do that. Perhaps you might elaborate then, as I'm not sure where you are going. Have you carefully read what I said.? I can't see how this sort of thing was ever in place for Sling 2s etc IF you don't think there will be opposition from the section I mentioned, you are wrong. I've explained my view of where we should go. If we go as a new GA it will be a poisoned chalice for this organisation especially with the current attitude of the CASA. to funding us. Someone will need to start another organisation for the left out of the equation people, if this is the new direction. I have plenty of years flying in controlled airspace and I can't see that it's for us. It's a pretty big deal when you get right into it. Your aeroplane and instruments have higher standards. You must be current at flying IFR. Do you have Pitot anti icing? Does your electrical system have the capacity? etc. Nev

 

 

[Hargraves]

This would be detrimental to existing RAA members in my opinion. With the lines between GA and RAA blurred it will mean increased cost to members and increased scrutiny with regard to aircraft and pilots ( as is already happening it would appear).Don, the membership need to be consulted properly about this, I believe the only people interested in this idea are those like yourself at the top ( read expensive ) end of RAA aircraft ownership who have self interest in a bigger/heavier aircraft and can afford it. Good call sir Of course it would be detrimental to most of the members involved in our sport who do so because its an affordable (hobby) as the auf was established for. To try and simplify the problem by two general categorys is a nonsense (drifter vs sling types) their are a great many types that are clearly neither and of the most affordable for non GA pilots.I believed casa was starting down the right track with the RPL as a precuser i,d hoped to creating a LSA category with nothing to do with raa. that would be a good start to fixing the very real problem of the dilution of our hobby towards expensive aircraft that are never going to be affordable, justified nor desired as it is already an expensive enough hobby. Cheers Hargraves

This is not what AUF/RAA was intended for. Our CEO is guilty of taking advice from the wrong people.

[DonRamsay]

OK, so I need to clarify my brief comments earlier.

 

I have no interest in commercial aviation and never will have. How it is regulated, I'm happy to leave that to CASA and the commercial aviation industry to work out. They are the big boys with the big toys and can all look after themselves.

 

For everyone who is not flying for reward from the general public (up to, say, 5,700 kg MTOW) there should be a common form of regulation and licencing that is appropriate to what they are doing. The art and science of flying aircraft is a base that all pilots have to master (or at least be competent at). Then for specific types of aircraft you need to prove your proficiency. Then for the types of flying you do: in or out of CTA, on land or water, VFR/IFR you need to prove your competence. Maintenance of aircraft should be based on a sensible safety case not the same rules for a B737 and a C172.

 

Regulation for non-commercial aviation should be minimised, set at a high level of summary, be in plain English and thereby made accessible to part-time pilots. Medicals should be of the real world and be risk based. Essentially, we allow cars to be driven at closing speeds of 200 km/hr centimetres apart from a head on collision . . . with a genuine driver's licence medical. It should be a matter for GPs and where essential a Specialist opinion. It should require no involvement of a CASA Medical team who are less qualified than a Specialist physician but happy to ignore the more qualified view.

 

The recreational end of GA should end up looking much more like RAAus. There would be no need for any more onerous regulation on the currently RAAus pilots and aircraft. For simple aviation in simple aircraft in Class G airspace it will be even simpler than the current level of detail regulation found in the current RAAus Ops and Tech Manuals. Maintaining a C172 I would suggest would require less expertise than maintaining a Jabiru engined aircraft or a Rotax 912iS. Your freedom to maintain your aircraft should have to do with demonstrated capability rather than whether you have letters or numbers painted on your aircraft.

 

There is a level of support for this type of thinking at top levels in CASA and the political arena. CASA have proved to be not very good at regulation the non-commercial sector to the detriment of the industry. They see non-commercial GA as a pain in the rear and would love to see the back of it.

 

Aviation has been bogged down for decades due to over-regulation and the unjustifiable expense of bringing innovations into the industry. At the top end there can be innovation because the big boys have billions to play with. There has been progress on the very light end because the cost of innovation has been affordable. In the middle it has been a gradual death by starvation of ideas.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Continental drift has nothing on thread drift here

 

 

[facthunter]

That involves large masses moving very slowly. When I was a young chap it was a Theory. The Wegener Theory of Continental Drift. The rate of actual knowledge acquisition is very rapid in our times. DNA comparisons yield interesting facts about what used to be next to what place, a long while ago. (More than 6,300 years even). Nev

 

 

[DonRamsay]

What is fascinating to me is that the DNA studies support the theory that homosapiens all came out of Africa and are now up to about 5% Neanderthal. I saw a fascinating program where Eddie Izzard's DNA was examined and they were able to trace his ancestry from when they were pygmies in the Congo through the migration to Europe and eventually to England. Try explaining that to a racist and see what sort of a gun he points at you.

 

 

[Hargraves]

Thank christ (sic)

 

 

[skippydiesel]

Me thinks this conversation might have strayed, just a a tad.

 

 

[coljones]

Me thinks this conversation might have strayed, just a a tad.

You wouldn't want us to talk about aeroplanes would you? It would just descend into name calling and slagging off at the Rotax owners.

 

 

[Litespeed]

You wouldn't want us to talk about aeroplanes would you? It would just descend into name calling and slagging off at the Rotax owners.

And quite rightly- all one eyed bigots should be pillored with vigour and flogged with a whip.

 

 

[Litespeed]

I could be wrong!.Taking numbers flying world wide, SURPRISE. the HummelBird has over 1,000 registered in the air. And only two fatalities that I know of in thirty years.

spacesailor

If it is a build your own and single seat- then I am definitely a Hummel Bird fan. Tough little bugger, fast and fun. And easy to build even for ham fisted rivet bashers like me.

 

 

[spacesailor]

Litespeed

 

Just a thought, there was 16 Builder's at one time, (me too),

 

why not have a look at a part build, it could save time & money over buying a new set of plans, plus metal, parts, tools, & possibly a motor.

 

what is your suburb post code ?.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Litespeed]

Part build is always a option

 

2155

 

 

[spacesailor]

I will have to check my neighbor to see if his is still on the market, fuselage built and has a half VW with prop,

 

Did ask for $5,000 and same $5,000 for motor.

 

He like others stopped building & bought an existing flying plane.

 

spacesailor

 

PS I bought an air riveter for aviex rivets. no effort needed to pull blind rivets.

 

 

[Litespeed]

Out of my budget at the moment sadly.

 

Currently stuck making prop sounds in my dreams.

 

But I do have a air riveter- fantastic thing they are and damn less painful on the finger joints.

 

 

[spacesailor]

OK , Litespeed,

 

Saves me going up the hill to see if he still has the HummBird.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[skippydiesel]

Have been fantasising about a scale version of a HD Hornet for a million years - Anyone know where I can find one?

 

 

[bexrbetter]

PS I bought an air riveter for aviex rivets. no effort needed to pull blind rivets.

After pulling quite a few thousand rivets over the last few months, I got an electric rivet gun a few weeks ago when I was finally satisfied that the young bloke could keep one perpendicular to the work piece, easy as and much faster and much more convenient than air guns I have previously owned, but I kind of miss the arm workout.

 

 

[peter]

Why not a Onex, you don't have to have big tyres and STOL to have fun. It's trailerable, it's cheap, it's got a small fuel tank so you don't have to pretend you're going to do anything other than just tool around, it's delightfully well balanced, easy to land, has the little wheel at the back, you can't fit expensive electronics on the dash, and it's just fun, fun,fun, to fly.

[Litespeed]

looks nice- love the paint job. What sort of hrs did she take to build without paint?

 

what are your performance figures?

 

 

[M61A1]

I just did a rambling thoughts answer on anther post BUT saw this pop up.Since I am both GA and go back to the AUF days I would offer the solution of,

For those who want to fly the drifter lightwing thruster types (i have and love them as well ) outside of control airspace and in the back blocks non controlled airspace, why not have two standards for RAA licence. With the other for the bigger beasties like sling2 and in controlled airspace etc (which again I like to fly as well) . The system worked in the AUF days and was just upgraded and keep going. It would able people to decide on how much they pay and gives a clear two step standard. The standards are already written and exams done from the AUF days so what's the problem.

 

Gives people a clear choice Drifter types or Sling2 types and some lower cost for flying and training with the first. Its not unsafe with same maintnace level as well.

 

Then if and when they want to do more or go bigger faster etc or spend more they can -ITS THE MEMBERS CHOICE!

I think some people miss the point about "Grass Roots" flying, I don't see it as just Thruster/Drifter stuff, but be able to design and build. There is no reason a weight increase should hinder that, in fact it allows more options. The recent changes to the tech manual (major thread drift alert), however are just more regulation in the way of innovation and design, and especially if you have no intention of becoming a manufacturer. The difference for me between "grass roots" , and whatever the new lot call themselves, has more to do with whether you built it yourself or handed over a wad of cash for a ready to fly aircraft. Yes you can still go out and build one (or modify one for that matter), but it just got a lot more painful. The weight increase will only be bad if they continue to make make it harder to build and/or modify. "Grass Roots" is about being able to do stuff yourself and being responsible for the outcome, sadly not only are are moving away from that, we are actively discouraging it.

 

 

[spacesailor]

So we Do need an "Ultralight Flying Federation"!, as opposed to the moneyed "Sports Recreation Association" Formally RAA .

 

It seems to a lot of rag&tube member's are not getting value for money, from the compulsory Association, as well as being in their local flying club.

 

Borrowed from another forum "

 

Private and sports aviation regulation in Australia is an unholy shambles of conflicting and differing regulatory requirements with organizations like GFA and RAAus bought by CASA for a pittance each year when they should in fact be acting for their members.

 

CASA is charged by Parliament with regulating. So do it. The various organization should be consulted and should lobby politically to make sure the regulations are the minimum necessary and are evidence based. The regs must be CASA regs, not rules or quasi regs promulgated by private organisations like GFA and RAAus which can force people to join them. Whatever happened to freedom of association?"

 

spacesailor

 

 

[spacesailor]

To pass the RAA pilot certificate test I need to Know ALL the answer's to ALL forms of flying whether: Jumbo-jet, rotory-craft, PPC,RPL, even HGA.

 

No one should interpret CASA's regs to suit themselves, nor a CFI having their own slant on them, name same "name word " for same instruction without acronyms.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[coljones]

I just did a rambling thoughts answer on anther post BUT saw this pop up.Since I am both GA and go back to the AUF days I would offer the solution of,

For those who want to fly the drifter lightwing thruster types (i have and love them as well ) outside of control airspace and in the back blocks non controlled airspace, why not have two standards for RAA licence. With the other for the bigger beasties like sling2 and in controlled airspace etc (which again I like to fly as well) . The system worked in the AUF days and was just upgraded and keep going. It would able people to decide on how much they pay and gives a clear two step standard. The standards are already written and exams done from the AUF days so what's the problem.

 

Gives people a clear choice Drifter types or Sling2 types and some lower cost for flying and training with the first. Its not unsafe with same maintnace level as well.

 

Then if and when they want to do more or go bigger faster etc or spend more they can -ITS THE MEMBERS CHOICE!

Why should/would a Drifter certificate cost less than a Sling. I can't see that RAA incurs greater costs per unit for a Sling compared to a Drifter. Same with controlled airspace - what additional costs accrue except the endorsement done by an external examiner at the pilot's cost - as with any endorsement.