facthunter Posted March 23, 2015 Posted March 23, 2015 Do they want to facilitate this or impede it? (CASA). Nev
fly_tornado Posted March 23, 2015 Posted March 23, 2015 So who is a "sub-part 21M Aeronautical Engineer" I can contact to get a quote on my plane? Can anyone recommend one in SEQ?
Guest Andys@coffs Posted March 23, 2015 Posted March 23, 2015 I have assumed that in issuing the MARAP process Darren has a list of subpart 21M engineers that we are providing to those that need to know. I have asked him for a copy of the list and will advise amounts and distribution as soon as I see it. In the meantime I suggest a question to [email protected] should get you the answer you are seeking. What type of things do you think you need to deal with? edit: actually a quick google turned up this http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_90506 Andy
fly_tornado Posted March 23, 2015 Posted March 23, 2015 There are 13 matches for your search criteria Aerotech Australia Pty Ltd Location: Queensland Contact: C.W. (Bill) Whitney Address: 307 Verney Road East Graceville QLD 4075 Ph: 07 3278 3143, 0404 848 172 Email: [email protected] Services Repair and Modification of Structural, Mechanical Systems and Electrical and Avionics Systems on all categories of aircraft. Australian Avionics Pty Ltd Location: Cairns Airport Contact: Bill Tapscott Address: PO Box 111H, Edge Hill Cairns QLD 4870 Ph: 07 4030 1872 Fax: 07 4035 9798 Email: [email protected] Web site: www.australianavionics.com.au Services Repair and Modification of Electrical and Avionics Systems on all categories of aircraft. Aviation Engineers Pty Ltd Contact: Jason Hazell - (Chief Engineer) Address: 7/10 Burnside Road Yatala QLD 4207 Ph: 07 3804 7245 Fax: 07 3036 5738 Email: [email protected] Web site: www.aveng.com.au Services Repair and Modification of Structural and Mechanical Systems on all categories of aircraft. Bain, Kevin trading as Kevin Bain Location: Queensland Contact: Mr Kevin Bain Address: 33 Beatrice Terrace Ascot QLD 4007 Ph: 07 3268 6306, 0407 146 016 Email: [email protected] Services Repair and Modification of Structural, Mechanical Systems, Engine GE Aviation Systems Australia Pty Ltd Contact: Ross Gibson (Systems Engineering Manager) Address: 3 Hakea St. Brisbane Airport QLD 4007 Ph: 07 3860 0700 Fax: 07 3860 0701 Email: [email protected] Services Repair and Modification of Electrical and Avionics Systems on all categories of aircraft. GSAero Pty Ltd Contact: Phil Gray Address: 2/90 Latrobe Terrace Paddington QLD 4064 Ph: 07 3139 1464 Email: [email protected] Web site: www.gsaero.com.au Services Repair and Modification of Structural and Mechanical Systems on all categories of aircraft and CAR (1988) 42ZS authorisation. Sikorsky Helitech (A Sikorsky Aerospace Services Company) Contact: Dallas Crisp (Engineering Manager) Address: PO Box 1374 Eagle Farm QLD 4009 Ph: 07 3632 7000 Fax: 07 3260 1616 Email: [email protected] Web site: www.sikorsky.com.au Services Repair and Modification of Structural, System and Equipment (mechanical, electrical and avionics) and Powerplant installation on all categories of aircraft. Melbourne Aeronautical Design Contact: Graeme Willaton (Design Manager) Address: 9 Plantation Place Wellington Point QLD 4160 Ph: 07 3637 3957 Email: [email protected] Services Repair and Modification of Structural and Mechanical Systems, limited electrical and avionics approvals, on all categories of aircraft. Michael J Punshon Location: North Queensland Contact: Mr Michael Punshon (Aeronautical Engineer) Address: 26 Corella Crescent Mount Louisa Townsville QLD 4814 Ph: 07 4774 7387 Fax: 07 4774 7061 Email: [email protected] Services Repair and Modification of Structural, System and Equipment (mechanical, electrical and avionics) and Powerplant installation and Flight Analyst on all categories of aircraft TAE Contact: Mr David Balassa, (Marketing Manager) Address: Hanger 71, Aviation St PO Box 133 Amberley QLD 4306 Ph: 07 3282 9955 Fax: 07 3282 9911 Email: [email protected] Web site: www.tae.com.au Services Repair and Modification of Structural, Mechanical Systems, Engine, Powerplant Installation, Electrical and Avionics Systems on all categories of aircraft. The Aeronautical Design Services Location: Caloundra Airport Contact: Mr Alan Kerr Address: PO Box 307 Woombye QLD 4559 Ph: 0408 767 135 Fax: 07 4155 3937 Email: [email protected] Services Repair and Modification of Structural, Systems and Equipment (mechanical, electrical and avionics), Engine, Propeller, Powerplant installation and Flight analyst on all categories of aircraft. Airline Technical Services Pty Ltd Location: Brisbane Contact: Justin Stannard (Engineering Manager) Address: 137 Rainbow Street Sandgate QLD 4017 Ph: 07 3869 3882 Fax: 07 3269 2323 Email: [email protected] Web site: www.airlinetech.com.au Services Repair and Modification of Structural, Systems and Equipment (mechanical, electrical and avionics), Engine, Propeller, Powerplant installation and Flight analyst on all categories of aircraft. AEA Aerospace Group Pty Ltd Location: Brisbane Contact: Aaron Barclay, Graham Swannell (Engineering Manager, Head of Design) Address: 137 Rainbow Street Sandgate QLD 4017 Ph: 07 3269 3995 Fax: 07 3269 2323 Email: [email protected] Web site: www.aeroengaus.com.au
Guest Andys@coffs Posted March 23, 2015 Posted March 23, 2015 If I choose QLD and search (using IE11) I get a list of 13 people/orgs in QLD
jetjr Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 I read thata under MaRAP, tech manager will arranage Part 21 approval There may or may not be efficiencies there Will annoy some no doubt as they will have to pay for part 21 advice to RAA they can purchase cheaper directly. Others it could be more cost effective as it may be an informal yes from engineer for small stuff Darren is making the call, he is using Part 21 to back his descisions I am just as annoyed requiring an L2 to do paperwork and ACR AND implement the modification.
fly_tornado Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 I can see where the RAA are coming from, having the RAA do the part 21m inspection, works on simple things like replacing a propeller on #25 aircraft where the OEM propeller is not available and there are similar parts available. This works like the STC process for GA aircraft. but how well will this process work for non standard designs and one off modifications? What engineer is going to sign off on experimental stuff without a careful inspection. It's going to add a huge expense and add another layer of uncertainty to owning a experimental. There are huge numbers of aircraft types on the RAA registry with less than dozen examples, owners of these aircraft are going to get slugged.
Guest Maj Millard Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 So who is a "sub-part 21M Aeronautical Engineer" I can contact to get a quote on my plane? Can anyone recommend one in SEQ? I believe he is the new 'CAR 35' engineer by another name under the new Part 66 regs.
fly_tornado Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 So Ross, have you previously had to deal with these engineers, what's the likely cost? I am about 2 hours traveling time from Brisbane, so I am thinking a single onsite visit could be costing about 5-6 hours, at $150 an hour I won't get much change out of a grand. and if the RAA want to quiz him that could well drag on...
Guest Maj Millard Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 So Ross, have you previously had to deal with these engineers, what's the likely cost? I am about 2 hours traveling time from Brisbane, so I am thinking a single onsite visit could be costing about 5-6 hours, at $150 an hour I won't get much change out of a grand. and if the RAA want to quiz him that could well drag on... I deal with them all the time in my job as an aircraft engineer....no they aren't generally cheap, and some can be quite expensive. With some you can fax/ email your details with drawings/ photos and they will take it from there. I would suggest you work through Darren myself.
Oscar Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 FT, why don't you borrow a trailer, put your Drifter on it and take it to Alan Kerr at Caloundra? That's about 2 - 2.5 hours drive from you, if my memory serves me correctly, going via Toogoolawah and Kilcoy and cutting off through Commissioners Flat Road.
Nobody Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 I wonder if changing the pitch on a ground adjustable prop counts as a modification?
Ron5335 Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 It's good to see a couple of Board members on the forum. Let's assume that the MARAP is the magic plan that is going to improve safety beyond the greatest expectations of those who introduced it. What about the members who got caught in the trap, that is those who have started, carrying out, or like me finished the mods ? I finished in early March, then waited for a L2 todo an inspection and issue a Condition Report and carry out a Weight and Balance. Everything that was and is required under 95.55, then included a new set of photos to comply with RAA. Suddenly, overnight, on Thursday 19th March everything changed. Today, I am still 100% compliant with 95.55 (The Parent Law), but blocked by a Regulator/Administrator Requirement in obtaining registration. RAA has claimed the MARAP as their Brainchild, so that makes it pretty easy on who I target for my dilemma. Would you expect me, or others like me, to simple Suck it Up and move on by losing our asset? or Would you expect us to seek out the right to be compensated for the asset we no longer have, just because the Administrator & Regulator did a deal that was to include some Wish List laws that were absent in the Parent Law that governs them ? If your answer is the second half, then the MARAP (How good it may be envisaged to be) will come at a cost........ And that cost will be passed onto the ALL of the members. For once CASA and RAA can stand in a Court and spruik about improved safety all day long , but the fact will remain, a number of people were directly financially affected by their actions in making it an impossible program for some people to comply with, yet at the same time these affected parties are totally compliant with the Parent Law ?
Guest Andys@coffs Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 Ron If you feel you have been treated poorly by the techman for what ever reason you always have the opportunity to take your concerns to the CEO and discuss directly (ring the main office number and ask for Michael). Michael Linke is a reasonable man and I'm pretty sure he will give you a fair hearing. Having said that in turn if you are not happy with his determination or (in)action then you have the right to write to a board member and ask for the board to review. It doesn't happen too often, but I have seen it escalate to the board and at the end of the day everyone was happy with the outcome. At first glance I do not understand why you are discussing MARAP if you are the builder of the aircraft (ie >= 51%) Modifications in such a case are, as I understand it (and that's a non definitive statement if ever!) the sole purvey of the builder, and the people doing the checks necessary through the build.....If you are 2nd or subsequent then I can see you being caught up.... Andy
fly_tornado Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 FT, why don't you borrow a trailer, put your Drifter on it and take it to Alan Kerr at Caloundra? That's about 2 - 2.5 hours drive from you, if my memory serves me correctly, going via Toogoolawah and Kilcoy and cutting off through Commissioners Flat Road. Experience tells me that anyone involved with a system like this is going to get burnt badly by the system until they work at what works and what doesn't. So I'll pass until a few others have been through the meat grinder.
Ron5335 Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 Andy, I am the second owner, but you would think that by stripping it down including the skins, then rebuilding it including the mods with an approval letter from the manufacturer that includes new flight figures for the mods, I would be classed as the builder or re-builder at least. I'm retired, & it took 15 months, In that time I could have completed a couple of Jab kits, so whats 51% Can you direct me to the legislation that denies the second & subsequent owners the right to carry out mods on a 19 Reg. It seems that it is a term that was spoken about that many times to the point where it somehow became a law, except no one has recorded it. Well not where I can find it at least. 2
fly_tornado Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 This is the quandary you are now in Ron, if you can get your aircraft registered now is it exactly how it should be? Because, the next time you try to make a change, the RAA might knock you back. It certainly makes owning and maintain a #19 aircraft a huge financial gamble.
robinsm Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 Ron, the rules say 51%, not a rebuild. Run it past the tyech manager.
robinsm Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 So far CASA have stuffed up the resale on Jabiru's, RAA have just stuffed up the resale on 19...reg aircraft, make you wonder what the overall plan is and who is writing it?......just sayin
Ron5335 Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 Andy, Thank You for your advice on contacting the CEO. I did it in an email setting out the basics and my concerns and requested he contact me to discuss. In an hour I received a call back from Darren, and it was a 100% turn around from what I was told on Friday, it was even common sense stuff !!!! Basically, I and others like me will be unaffected, and our applications will be processed the old way. It's probably not going to be over until I receive the rego in the mail, but at least it appears it will be coming. 1
Roundsounds Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 Given CAO 95.55, para 6.1 (f) (iv) says modifications can be approved by certain authorities under CASR21 subpart M or by: "the RAA in accordance with a process for the approval of modifications set out in the RAA Technical Manual", the MARAP would need to be included in the Tech Manual as an amendment before it becomes effective. The way CAO 95.55 reads now the old process would be applicable.
Oscar Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 The advice I have received from an ex-CAR35 Engineer who is extremely conversant with the CARs is: "There can be no formal approval of a modification to an experimental aircraft, because since it does not comply with any design standard in the first place, nobody can approve the design of a modification as 'complying with any design standard in force under these Regulations'. However, an experimental certificate is issued on the basis of a risk assessment; and if the risk is altered by a modification, the aircraft may have to go back and fly off another 25 hours or whatever, in a remote area." This is an area that requires FAR more interpretation and without doubt, clarification. I believe that the focus on 19-reg aircraft - while extremely understandable and most definitely needing further work including quite possibly pointing out to CASA forcibly that it is not complying with its own regulations (AKA taking certain people out the back of the shed for a good kicking) - the potential value of the MARAP initiative for the continued operation of Certificated aircraft should not be lost in the wash. MARAP appears to me to be a considerable streamlining for continued operation of a significant percentage of the RAA fleet including a very healthy number of aircraft used for training and line hire work. The further we get with experience of LSA aircraft, the more it appears that Airworthiness Authorities, by accepting the ASTM as an 'alternate' standard, have abrogated their responsibility ( de jure or de facto) to administer aviation safety for the good of their clients. For want of a better analogy, LSA appears to be an aviation equivalent of a 'free trade agreement' - good for the 'winners' and increasingly bad for everybody else. I believe that with MARAP, RAA has achieved something that - with tuning - is a major step forward in providing the 'recreational' sector with appropriate flexibility for its operation. Yes, the situation for 19-reg needs work - but to damn MARAP because it is not perfect in its initial iteration is to ignore the good bits. 1 3
robinsm Posted March 24, 2015 Posted March 24, 2015 The provision of 3 bladed props for gazelles involved in training schools is maybe a case for this rule change. The 2 blade props are nigh on impossible to find and a valuable training aircraft is languishing because of a propeller issue. Is this the thrust of these changes? 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now