RAA, Recreational Aircraft and ultralights ...

[turboplanner]

I would say that most RAA planes are in far better condition then our GA counter parts as people that fly for fun love there sport and you would find that most put hours of time into the pride and joys where the ga guys relies on lames to look after there craft and use there craft for transport rather then there second love but there are some

Not from what I see.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Why do you say that?

no annual inspections

 

 

[frank marriott]

no annual inspections

??? Certainly 100hrly/annual inspection is done on all aircraft that I have any close knowledge about. (Some lack of compliance in the 12/24 month instrument certification I "suspect" in a few cases - but is a requirement in the Tech Manual)

 

 

[terryc]

I would say that most RAA planes are in far better condition then our GA counter parts as people that fly for fun love there sport and you would find that most put hours of time into the pride and joys where the ga guys relies on lames to look after there craft and use there craft for transport rather then there second love but there are some

Absolutely Doug that is what I see without question, All of the aircraft that are in my circle are as you say have hours spent on them for the love of it.

 

The GA aircraft are I suppose working so the different pilots don't care as much and their getting long in the tooth.

 

 

[ave8rr]

??? Certainly 100hrly/annual inspection is done on all aircraft that I have any close knowledge about. (Some lack of compliance in the 12/24 month instrument certification I "suspect" in a few cases - but is a requirement in the Tech Manual)

Iv'e been looking at a few RAAus aircraft being advertised for sale and have found the log books to be a little short on detail. Annuals not recorded etc etc. I am all for an annual independent inspection of all RAAus aircraft. This can be done by any L2 or higher. The maintenance can still be done by the owner. This review of airworthiness could be sent in with the rego renewal.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

The medical fraternity have this concept called evidence based practise...what it boils down to is don't do anything because its seems like a good idea, do it because there is evidence that there is a problem and evidence that the proposed solution fixes the problem and evidence that it doesn't create a bunch of undesirable side effects.

 

So back to stage one...what problem is it that needs fixing? I presume we have a bunch of incidents and accidents with analysis showing that there is a need for something to change?

 

Andy

 

 

[Roundsounds]

I'd suggest when owner/pilots front up for their flight review a suitably trained instructor could also do a brief review of the aircraft log books. I reckon anyone not complying is probably just not sure of how to complete a log book more than any other reason. The aircraft I fly run a photocopied GA maintenance release. This serves 2 purposes, it allows RAAus pilots to become familiar with GA processes, keeps a running tally of flight times and lists maintenance due dates / times.

 

 

[frank marriott]

I find it hard to believe that here we have people suggesting MORE costs to fix nothing. More conditions will not change the noncompliance, only add costs to the ones already complying. Must have had the CASA needle.

 

"Annual inspection by an L2" what a waste of money. Without generalising, there is some L2s I wouldn't let near my aircraft - next thing will require a LAME (at least they have formal qualifications)

 

 

[Roundsounds]

I find it hard to believe that here we have people suggesting MORE costs to fix nothing. More conditions will not change the noncompliance, only add costs to the ones already complying. Must have had the CASA needle.

"Annual inspection by an L2" what a waste of money. Without generalising, there is some L2s I wouldn't let near my aircraft - next thing will require a LAME (at least they have formal qualifications)

This is why I suggested completing a review of the aircraft log book as part of the owner's flight review. If RAAus doesn't do random audits of maintenance records CASA will. This has been raised recently by both the Coroners office and CASA. RAAus is better being proactive and keeping CASA out of the picture, this way it can be a simple and low key affair. As you may / may not know the CASA system is more interested in the paper trail rather than the standard of workmanship when it comes to maintenance.

 

A quick thumb through an aircraft log book and completion of an online form by a suitably trained instructor would not add any cost to the operation. I am confident this would satisfy the requirements of CASA, to the best of my knowledge the only time aircraft log books are now reviewed by RAAus is following an incident.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

This is why I suggested completing a review of the aircraft log book as part of the owner's flight review. If RAAus doesn't do random audits of maintenance records CASA will. This has been raised recently by both the Coroners office and CASA. RAAus is better being proactive and keeping CASA out of the picture, this waybit can be a simple and low key affair. As you may / may not know the CASA system is more interested in the paper trail rather than the standard of workmanship when it comes to maintenance.A quick thumb through an aircraft log book and completion of an online form by a suitably trained instructor would not add any cost to the operation. I am confident this would satisfy the requirements of CASA, to the best of my knowledge the only time aircraft log books are now reviewed by RAAus is following an incident.

No thanks! You are giving me more work to do. I have to act as the maintenance policeman and you generously say it won't add to the cost? No liability if I miss something? There is no major problem so why complicate things. Our planes are not falling out of the sky due to maintenance issues.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Indeed ...it seems the ratio of human factors to maintenance would suggest we need to focus much more on our collective piloting skills, not our maintenance issues

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Andy / HFlyer - you seem to be missing the point here, if we (RAAus) don't demonstrate to CASA that we are doing some form of auditing of maintenance records CASA will. As an instructor you can elect to opt out of doing flight reviews for aircraft owners, the process is not about being a policemen or taking on liability it's about whether there is a logbook for the aircraft and whether there are any recent entries in it.

 

Here is an extract from a very recent Coronial report:

 

Also, whilst it is accepted that there are limited resources, it is recommended that CASA review its delegation to RA-Aus in terms of what is expected of them in screening and auditing aircraft documentation, which is submitted by its members. Random audits by RA-Aus would be appropriate to assist in the deterrence aspect, but further funding needs to be provided for this purpose, or CASA should consider undertaking such audits itself.

 

Do we really want CASA doing our audits? I'm not sure if you've seen the Ombudsmans report on CASA's response to Coroner's recommendations, but you can bet if we don't get proactive CASA will!

 

 

[Happyflyer]

I have no idea why the coroner recommended this. Was the maintenance an issue? Anyway, he recommended RAAus get funded for the random audits. Employ someone and bring on the audits, I have nothing to hide.

 

CASA are so bogged down in their own debacle (Part 61) they will never audit individual member maintenance. Nothing will come of the recommendation, RAAus will not do it because it can't afford to, CASA won't fund it because it can't afford to and won't do it themselves because they are too busy wrecking GA. Again, don't over do something that doesn't need d0ing at all.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

I have no idea why the coroner recommended this. Was the maintenance an issue? Anyway, he recommended RAAus get funded for the random audits. Employ someone and bring on the audits, I have nothing to hide.CASA are so bogged down in their own debacle (Part 61) they will never audit individual member maintenance. Nothing will come of the recommendation, RAAus will not do it because it can't afford to, CASA won't fund it because it can't afford to and won't do it themselves because they are too busy wrecking GA. Again, don't over do something that doesn't need d0ing at all.

HappyFlyer, in the past I would've agreed, however now I wouldn't be as confident as you regarding your comments about CASA not acting. Post the following into your web browser and read the executive summary at least.

 

ombudsman.gov.au/files/casa_final_report_2015_april.pdf

 

This report released in April 2015 addresses the matter of CASAs past inaction to Coroner's recommendations. The Federal Govt has recently issued CASA with a requirement to regularly report on their response to Coroner's recommendations.

 

I'm not being an alarmist, just a realist. The past "head in the sand" method of management hasn't proven very effective for the organisation from my observations.

 

 

[M61A1]

no annual inspections

That's crap..periodic maintenance has been a required the whole time I've been a member. Have read of your tech manual.

 

 

[ave8rr]

That's crap..periodic maintenance has been a required the whole time I've been a member. Have read of your tech manual.

We know periodic maintenance is required but as I said in post 80 I have found when looking at log books this maintenance is not recorded so was it done? A GA "type" maintenance release for the aircraft would help in this regard. It would record hours flown, fuel and oil uplift etc along with landings and so on. This form would then be held in the log book once a new maint release is raised at a 100 hourly or annual. All work could still be carried out by the owner but is at least recorded. All RAAus have to do is raise the form as they do for condition reports etc. No cost just "required" paperwork.

 

 

[turboplanner]

No thanks! You are giving me more work to do. I have to act as the maintenance policeman and you generously say it won't add to the cost? No liability if I miss something? There is no major problem so why complicate things. Our planes are not falling out of the sky due to maintenance issues.

Well two of them did; two dead in one and one survived with a broken nose strut.

 

But they were all good guys so no need to worry about any lessons from them.

 

 

[M61A1]

We know periodic maintenance is required but as I said in post 80 I have found when looking at log books this maintenance is not recorded so was it done? A GA "type" maintenance release for the aircraft would help in this regard. It would record hours flown, fuel and oil uplift etc along with landings and so on. This form would then be held in the log book once a new maint release is raised at a 100 hourly or annual. All work could still be carried out by the owner but is at least recorded. All RAAus have to do is raise the form as they do for condition reports etc. No cost just "required" paperwork.

Why not just record your periodic maintenance in the log book as you should be doing anyway? Record the servicing carried out and any rectifications resulting from the inspections, not hard.

In any case the response was to FT, who was trolling by suggesting that annual/periodic maintenance was not a requirement.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

mick, you're a mechanic, most RAA planes aren't owned by mechanics, they are owned by pilots.

 

 

[jetjr]

The data (thats available) doesnt seem to indicate L2 or even LAME maintained aircrft fail less often

 

 

[Powerin]

I would never buy an aircraft that didn't have proper maintenance paperwork. Not only for my own safety and peace of mind but when it comes time to sell it I need to be able to prove to the next buyer that everything is above board. Otherwise I may find myself with an unsaleable aircraft or at least take a big hit on the resale price before the next buyer is willing to take the risk.

 

 

[bull]

Who really cares about all this ?You can legally fly now under the current system so stop winging and go FLYING.

Asmol,, I CARE MATE as the true ultralighters have been forced to fund this GA-lite brigade and a lot of original ultralight operaters are not happy with this and another organisation for ULTRALIGHTS NOT QUASI ga SHOULD BE REPRESENTING ultralight flyers NOT ga-LITE

 

 

[M61A1]

mick, you're a mechanic, most RAA planes aren't owned by mechanics, they are owned by pilots.

Mech or not, anyone with more than a passing interest is capable of educating themselves sufficiently to carry out periodic maintenance, and those who aren't confident are usually smart enough to get a professional to do it anyway. It doesn't need to be made any more difficult than it already is. Making things more complicated just makes it more likely that errors/violations will occur.

 

 

[coljones]

Mech or not, anyone with more than a passing interest is capable of educating themselves sufficiently to carry out periodic maintenance, and those who aren't confident are usually smart enough to get a professional to do it anyway. It doesn't need to be made any more difficult than it already is. Making things more complicated just makes it more likely that errors/violations will occur.

It isn't the L2 or LAME or the self educated pilot who keeps across the maintenance needs of the plane they own. The people who worry me are those who don't know what they don't know but will still do their own maintenance. I suspect that this is the true reason that our costs are so high - insurance to cover the potential that an owner maintained aircraft is going to fall out of the sky together with the necessary bureaucracy to ensure that someone will offer insurance. The true cost of going over the road over 300 feet

 

 

[Happyflyer]

I had a GA registered plane that was changed to RAAus registration. The insurance cost did not change. QBE did not want to know who was maintaining it. Where is the evidence that there is a problem? We have to stop making new regulations and laws every time there is a perceived problem, real or not. In Australia we are drowning in over regulation. Individuals have to accept responsibility for their actions.