Pseudo GA

[Roundsounds]

If its good enough for sport pilots in NZ, UK and USA - why not in Australia?

Don

If it's good enough for the Gliding Federation of Aust and Ballooning Federation of Aust to operate in controlled airspace on a certificate issued by their SAAO on a self certified medical, it should be for RAAus!!

 

 

[bull]

Are the smaller aircraft flyers and owners sure their end of the RAA spectrum is cheaper to run and manage per aircraft or pilot than say LSA?Maybe purely based upon numbers, theres more money coming into RAA from those wanting to fly bigger and quicker aircraft than that coming in from R&T crew.

 

RAA is perhaps simply catering for the average member and providing services they want.

 

If by some chance this is correct then the smaller guys should be a bit careful about branching out. It would become user pays for sure then with sad results.

Without all the Ga add on costs that the quasi ga mob want AH ,,Na can,t see it being more expensive then GA which is what you are getting with raa now.

 

 

[frank marriott]

With the approach of the current RAA admin with emphasis on academic qualifications and nil on aviation experience/knowledge it is difficult to see how sensible and informed discussion can occur about aviation topics and all the time I thought we were an aviation organisation, silly me.

 

The more informed opinions brought to the table results in better final decisions - maybe in time this will be realised but I suspect it is a while off, hopefully before the BS approach destroys RAA as we have known it. I get the feeling that more political type hype is necessary before enough of the members who bother to vote realise the obvious (to some) outcome. Plenty are discusted but are in the "I just want to fly" group and don't get involved until they are personally effected.

 

The difference this time around, should it happen, the money will be gone.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

With the approach of the current RAA admin with emphasis on academic qualifications and nil on aviation experience/knowledge it is difficult to see how sensible and informed discussion can occur about aviation topics and all the time I thought we were an aviation organisation, silly me.The more informed opinions brought to the table results in better final decisions - maybe in time this will be realised but I suspect it is a while off, hopefully before the BS approach destroys RAA as we have known it. I get the feeling that more political type hype is necessary before enough of the members who bother to vote realise the obvious (to some) outcome. Plenty are discusted but are in the "I just want to fly" group and don't get involved until they are personally effected.

The difference this time around, should it happen, the money will be gone.

Frank,

I can't agree with any of that but I'm sure that won't surprise you. But rather than swap opinions, let's have a look at the facts.

 

• Firstly, all candidates for the Board positions must first and foremost be pilots.
   
   
  
• Secondly, when you look at the current Board, it would be on average the Board with the most aviation experience EVER. Try adding up the the aviation experience of Trevor Bange, Mick Monck, Tony King, Eugene Reid and Rod Birrell and you'll come to a very large number.
   
   
  
• Thirdly, have a look at the Corporate experience/qualifications of Mick Monck, Barry Windle, Michael Linke and Katie Jenkins. There are a few MBAs in there and Chartered Institute of Directors Members. This is the highest set of corporate qualifications RAAus has ever had the benefit of.
   
   
  

 

 

So, we now have a team with the most aviation and corporate experience RAAus has ever enjoyed. How is that going to kill the organisation?

 

Back in the "good old days" when 10 out of 13 Board Members were CFIs, RAAus all but collapsed under the weight of its own incompetence.

 

And please, there is no ban on any member of RAAus running for the Board. To get elected all they need is to get sufficient votes from the members.

 

Every member of the current Board was elected by a popular vote of the members based on their perceived suitability for the job. Every member had the opportunity to use their democratic right and it is up to us to respect the democratic process.

 

Don

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Without all the Ga add on costs that the quasi ga mob want AH ,,Na can,t see it being more expensive then GA which is what you are getting with raa now.

What "Ga add on costs" did you have in mind Bull? I certainly can't think of any.

 

 

[frank marriott]

Frank,I can't agree with any of that but I'm sure that won't surprise you. But rather than swap opinions, let's have a look at the facts.

 

• Firstly, all candidates for the Board positions must first and foremost be pilots.
   
   
  
• Secondly, when you look at the current Board, it would be on average the Board with the most aviation experience EVER. Try adding up the the aviation experience of Trevor Bange, Mick Monck, Tony King, Eugene Reid and Rod Birrell and you'll come to a very large number.
   
   
  
• Thirdly, have a look at the Corporate experience/qualifications of Mick Monck, Barry Windle, Michael Linke and Katie Jenkins. There are a few MBAs in there and Chartered Institute of Directors Members. This is the highest set of corporate qualifications RAAus has ever had the benefit of.
   
   
  

 

 

So, we now have a team with the most aviation and corporate experience RAAus has ever enjoyed. How is that going to kill the organisation?

 

Back in the "good old days" when 10 out of 13 Board Members were CFIs, RAAus all but collapsed under the weight of its own incompetence.

 

And please, there is no ban on any member of RAAus running for the Board. To get elected all they need is to get sufficient votes from the members.

 

Every member of the current Board was elected by a popular vote of the members based on their perceived suitability for the job. Every member had the opportunity to use their democratic right and it is up to us to respect the democratic process.

 

Don

You are correct Don, you and I don't agree on much but I give you credit for being polite about it, I did wonder how we would interact when I first met you - but that's life, you will certainly be rembered for you input.

 

 

[coljones]

Don unfortunately I don't agree with the way you are going with this. Just because you have been into Tamworth (not a particularly simple thing don't get the idea that is all there is in flying in CTA.)You cant expect to mix it with the expensive stuff and not be required to upgrade in many ways. you won't be VFR always either and you have to cruise where you are cleared. Give amended ETA's, know radio fail procedures and much more A lot of CTA is over rough country, you will need adsb shortly. Its a different world. All WE ned is transit rights and procedures across /through airspace and into specific aerodromes which would be better done with "special VFR" procedures. Like Victor one. Nev

I can at the moment fly an RAA plane into CTA based on my PPL CTA endo. Why can't a RAA Cert holder not allowed to get a CTA Endo. What is the knowledge gap? Same plane, 2 outcomes!!

 

 

[bull]

What "Ga add on costs" did you have in mind Bull? I certainly can't think of any.

The one,s already spent to lobbing so you can fly into Tamworth etc, that has put raa into deficit and caused the loss of the magazine and a members organisation for members,Don////////////////

 

 

[Admin]

I feel that if you want to fly CTA then spare RAAus the extra costs in administrative overhead that is then placed on every RAAus member, and would have to pay for, and simply just get your PPL and change your aircraft to VH...it is very simple and will stop any future potential CASA burdening on RAAus...next we could end up losing our right of self maintenance because a few want to fly in CTA and all it would take is just one accident for it all to come crashing down on recreational aviators...simply because a few were to lazy to just go PPL...keep the seperation and just let us have our fun and they can have theirs

 

 

[facthunter]

Flying in and out of certain aerodromes in VFR that are in CTA is not the end of it. I'm ALL FOR "Clearing through" zones and having "Special VFR procedures" to get into some other aerodromes. I held a command ME/ IFR for 20+ years and keeping that up is a fairly big deal. We can forget the Multi engine bit as it has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Flying "controlled" has to be paid for every time you do it, the same as aerodrome landing fees. When you fly CTA you fly to close tolerences and should really have 2 good radios and perhaps a HF radio. You have to be in radio contact all the time and you will have to have an electriclal system that is load evaluated and up to the job. Forget the idea of having non tso'd stuff and not having it calibrated regularly. You will be in a situation where ALL other aircraft meet ICAO standards of training and instrumentation who have good reasons to not want non compliant aircraft in with them. It's not a snob thing or anything about YOUR rights. Muck something up in there and it can be big money and big headines. You should know what YOU ASK FOR. I've mentioned radio fail procedures a few times and no comment so far. Interesting. There's not much room for getting things wrong where you want to go. In case you might suggest I'm elitist or something, forget that. I'm just trying to get information to you that you should consider if you want the RAAus to be what it should be. Go for something that's useful for the majority like my second sentence contains. There's too much airspace locked up from our use. Nev

 

 

[shags_j]

I'm with Ian on the CTA access etc. I bit the bullet and have commenced my PPL training and will let my RAAus membership lapse. It's just become too hard trying to work within the RAAus rules with what I want to do in my flying.

 

Leave RAAus to how they want it. I sincerely do hope the ELAAA gets off the ground and may look into that when it does.

 

Cheers,

 

Shags

 

 

[bull]

I'm with Ian on the CTA access etc. I bit the bullet and have commenced my PPL training and will let my RAAus membership lapse. It's just become too hard trying to work within the RAAus rules with what I want to do in my flying.Leave RAAus to how they want it. I sincerely do hope the ELAAA gets off the ground and may look into that when it does.

 

Cheers,

 

Shags

G,day Shags,good to see your still kicking lol

 

 

[Roundsounds]

I can at the moment fly an RAA plane into CTA based on my PPL CTA endo. Why can't a RAA Cert holder not allowed to get a CTA Endo. What is the knowledge gap? Same plane, 2 outcomes!!

The knowledge gap under part 61 is simply the applicable CTA endorsement - very simple. I put forward this as a suggested approach, I'm pretty sure the whole risk assessment approach is still being followed. There should be no cost to RAAus, simply insist on being afforded the same privileges as other Australian Sport Aviation Org's as per the Civil Aviation Act.

 

 

[P4D]

I think you are all forgetting this is RECREATIONAL aviation.

 

Done for RECREATION.

 

Controlled airspace is not for RECREATIONAL flying.

 

Its for commercial operators who can meet the cost, skills and equipment standards required.

 

No doubt many of you meet the skills requirement.

 

Few RAA aircraft would meet the equipment standard

 

I don't know of anyone willing to meet the financial requirements.

 

That's why we fly RAA..... for RECREATION

 

If you have a purpose to enter a different class of airspace than currently permitted, do the right thing and upgrade your knowledge, skills and class of equipment and fly in a different class of aircraft and with a different license.

 

Meanwhile we will be RECREATING while you are sweating blood just in front of the BA146 and just behind the A330 with the B747 holding and the F28 on a 3 mle final

 

 

[kaz3g]

I think you are all forgetting this is RECREATIONAL aviation.Done for RECREATION.

Controlled airspace is not for RECREATIONAL flying.......

 

Its for commercial operators who can meet the cost, skills and equipment standards required.

 

If you have a purpose to enter a different class of airspace than currently permitted, do the right thing and upgrade your knowledge, skills and class of equipment and fly in a different class of aircraft and with a different license.

 

Meanwhile we will be RECREATING while you are sweating blood just in front of the BA146 and just behind the A330 with the B747 holding and the F28 on a 3 mle final

I find it very convenient to be able to fly into controlled airspace at Moorabbin, Essendon and Albury to visit friends, go shopping, look at old aeroplanes or whatever. I've been to Alice Springs several times and Parafield once. And I have shared the circuit with heavy metal at all of them. Yes, I'm VH and PPL but I don't see much difference between the AUSTER and many RA machines including our club Tecnam.

 

I also shared a CTAF circuit with an A330 at Ayres Rock which was no different to sharing the circuit back home with a Warrior except the A330 circuit was huge. We talked to one another and he was most appreciative of my offer to allow him to land first. I did a couple of orbits on the dead side in deference to his higher fuel burn.

 

No blood, sweat or tears at all.

 

We have the extraordinary benefit of having a couple of Controllers here in this internet space and they don't eat recreational pilots trying to do the right thing. Being able to enter their airspace should just be another privilege that every pilot can train for.

 

Kaz

 

 

[P4D]

I find it very convenient to be able to fly into controlled airspace at Moorabbin, Essendon and Albury to visit friends, go shopping, look at old aeroplanes or whatever. I've been to Alice Springs several times and Parafield once. And I have shared the circuit with heavy metal at all of them. Yes, I'm VH and PPL but I don't see much difference between the AUSTER and many RA machines including our club Tecnam.I also shared a CTAF circuit with an A330 at Ayres Rock which was no different to sharing the circuit back home with a Warrior except the A330 circuit was huge. We talked to one another and he was most appreciative of my offer to allow him to land first. I did a couple of orbits on the dead side in deference to his higher fuel burn.

 

No blood, sweat or tears at all.

 

We have the extraordinary benefit of having a couple of Controllers here in this internet space and they don't eat recreational pilots trying to do the right thing. Being able to enter their airspace should just be another privilege that every pilot can train for.

 

Kaz

That's a fantastic privilege.

 

Unfortunately by your own admission above you cannot differentiate between the equipment requirements of an RAA or a GA aircraft to fly in CTA.

 

Your underpinning knowledge and understanding of the requirements is not up to speed.

 

You have a very fortunate privilege that should not be confused with a right given in law.

 

 

[coljones]

I think you are all forgetting this is RECREATIONAL aviation.Done for RECREATION.

Controlled airspace is not for RECREATIONAL flying.

 

Its for commercial operators who can meet the cost, skills and equipment standards required.

 

No doubt many of you meet the skills requirement.

 

Few RAA aircraft would meet the equipment standard

 

I don't know of anyone willing to meet the financial requirements.

 

That's why we fly RAA..... for RECREATION

 

If you have a purpose to enter a different class of airspace than currently permitted, do the right thing and upgrade your knowledge, skills and class of equipment and fly in a different class of aircraft and with a different license.

 

Meanwhile we will be RECREATING while you are sweating blood just in front of the BA146 and just behind the A330 with the B747 holding and the F28 on a 3 mle final

Your Technam is quite capable of flying Class D now.

 

 

[P4D]

Your Technam is quite capable of flying Class D now.

Hello Col

Do you think we should have a special dispensation rule for Technam's in Class D written into our regulations or just go with the current rules governing classes of equipment, licensing and skills?

 

 

[coljones]

That's a fantastic privilege.Unfortunately by your own admission above you cannot differentiate between the equipment requirements of an RAA or a GA aircraft to fly in CTA.

Your underpinning knowledge and understanding of the requirements is not up to speed.

 

You have a very fortunate privilege that should not be confused with a right given in law.

Perhaps you could articulate your knowledge of the requirements on a plane going into the various classes of controlled airspace and the requirements of a plot going into that airspace. You might surprise yourself. There is no basis to the claim that the cost to RAA to issue a CTA Endo will be any higher than the cost of putting a CTA onto the members card at renewal time.

 

 

[coljones]

Hello ColDo you think we should have a special dispensation rule for Technam's in Class D written into our regulations or just go with the current rules governing classes of equipment, licensing and skills?

You don't need a dispensation for your Technam to fly into Class D. An RAA trading school maybe given a dispensation for flying STUDENTS at some controlled airports. The plane is not constrained. If RAA was given the same right as your GA instructor to issue a Class C/D endo then you would be good to go into Class D. If you have a TSO'd transponder you could fly in Class C and E as well. The cost of the Endo is.for the pilot to cover. The cost of the transponder is for the plane owner to cover. RAA has no costs different from any of its other endos. It is called user pays

 

 

[P4D]

Perhaps you could articulate your knowledge of the requirements on a plane going into the various classes of controlled airspace and the requirements of a plot going into that airspace. You might surprise yourself. There is no basis to the claim that the cost to RAA to issue a CTA Endo will be any higher than the cost of putting a CTA onto the members card at renewal time.

Hello Col

I don't intend getting into a personal slanging match by discussing personal qualities as you suggest.

 

I simply state that there are existing regulations that need to be complied with to enter CTA for both the pilot and their aircraft.

 

Simply stamping a license with a CTA endorsement at renewal falls far short of those requirements.

 

 

[P4D]

Hello Col

 

You seem to have an issue with RAA. Why not take it up with your local rep.

 

You say "If RAA was given the same right as your GA instructor to issue a Class C/D endo then you would be good to go into Class D "

 

I say If RAA was given the same rights as GA it would be called GA not RAA

 

which is my original point..........RECREATIONAL flying.

 

(Edited - Moderator)

 

 

[Nick Sieczkowski]

Hello ColI don't intend getting into a personal slanging match by discussing personal qualities as you suggest.

I simply state that there are existing regulations that need to be complied with to enter CTA for both the pilot and their aircraft.

 

Simply stamping a license with a CTA endorsement at renewal falls far short of those requirements.

I would love to know what these requirements are that everyone keeps talking about. I don't think the intention is to fly IFR oceanic in RVSM airspace and then shoot a coupled ILS into a major international airport.

 

 

[coljones]

Hello ColI don't intend getting into a personal slanging match by discussing personal qualities as you suggest.

I simply state that there are existing regulations that need to be complied with to enter CTA for both the pilot and their aircraft.

 

Simply stamping a license with a CTA endorsement at renewal falls far short of those requirements.

Not at all,. My logbook is stamped with the Class C&D endo. There is nothing else to do. There may be a need to demonstrate CTA procedures as part of my AFR/BFR but that is it. I don't see that the CTA endo is beyond the vast bulk of RAA Certificate holders nor an imposition on RAA. I think you are overthinking this.

 

 

[coljones]

I would love to know what these requirements are that everyone keeps talking about. I don't think the intention is to fly IFR oceanic in RVSM airspace and then shoot a coupled ILS into a major international airport.

Most pilots,RAA or GA, are Day VFR only. CTA access will continue to be Day VFR for most pilots. Planes in Class C&E require TSO transponder. Pilots in Class C&D require a CTA endorsement. Planes in controlled airspace require a serviceable Aero Radio.