So RAA are looking to have 750 kg MTOW as well as 1500 kg MTOW increases from CASA.

[Keith Page]

I had to mention 760kg to have it as the common language of the weight increase.

 

Maintenance will be the same as what RAAus enjoys at the moment.

 

KP

 

 

[Keith Page]

I always said when I heard the proposal RAAA were putting in that it would all be too hard for the dodgers at CASA. As with all govt departments they can only do one small thing at a time as that one thing takes 1000 public servants to counterjump and dodge and pass on to someone else because no one want to put their name to any decision...This is why you need the KISS principle when dealing with public servants...one thing at a time because its all to easy for them to say its all too hard

You omitted one point regarding the PS - work will stuff their Latte' break.

KP

 

 

[facthunter]

We are going over this stuff all the time. Having to repeat arguments and fact is time consuming and mentally exhausting. It's hard to know where to start, but here goes.

 

Increased weight is reduced cost, more choice and better for self build. You use less exotic (read really expensive) and proven construction methods we already have considerable experience with. You can carry all the things you mention but are limited to two persons one is you the pilot and the PAX is an "informed" person understanding they are not in a "normal" certified aircraft and are aware of that by placards and briefing

 

We sacrifice some "privileges" to get reduced (red tape Bull$#1t whatever you want to call it)'

 

No one wants people flying with NO medical considerations /oversight. It doesn't happen either.. There are misconceptions aout there.This subject is /has been covered world wide it's currently an issue. RAAus is based on a car driver's medical standards. You declare you meet them, (and perjury applies) or under other circumstances the GP certifies you meet them.

 

RAAus pilots operate under a Certificate. This is all you need to fly under the rules that apply to RAAus registered aircraft . It's NOT an internationally recognised standard so don't look for overseas reciprocity. People who decide to fly under RAAus and then want all the privileges of GA are not accepting the philosophy of the "show". You can't have concessions on one hand and still demand what the others, who don't get them, are entitled to.

 

The CURRENT management seem to be wanting to take over GA. Perhaps CASA want that also. The rest of GA certainly wouldn't. If this happens the AUF /Real RAAus types will be deprived of the organisation they collectively formed the hard way over time and will either do something else, (give up) or have to re establish an organisation reflecting their original aims. Nev

 

 

[facthunter]

Just to correct the record, the CASA proposed weight limit (nothing to do with any RAAus submission) was originally 762 Kg which just (coincidently) is inclusive of the Cessna 152 and I think the Tomahawk... Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

Isn't the whole push for greater weight an RAAus ploy to get greater membership.

 

Those who talk about building to a greater weight limit can do so now with SAAA. But they must have held a PPL or recreational licence t some time in the past.

 

If I as considering building another plane I would not go with RAAus even if it fell within their weight limits. It is cheaper to build GA reg and it also avoids all the dealing with RAAus mnagement.

 

 

[Nobody]

Isn't the whole push for greater weight an RAAus ploy to get greater membership.Those who talk about building to a greater weight limit can do so now with SAAA. But they must have held a PPL or recreational licence t some time in the past.

If I as considering building another plane I would not go with RAAus even if it fell within their weight limits. It is cheaper to build GA reg and it also avoids all the dealing with RAAus mnagement.

Exactly!!! The push for the 1500kg limit is from the organisation itself and not the general membership in the main. It is to deal with the demographics resulting in reduced members and therefore less money.

 

So RAA are looking to have 750 kg MTOW as well as 1500 kg MTOW increases from CASA.

 

 

[robinsm]

I repeat, EMPIRE BUILDING!!..., think salaries, ambition, self promotion, etc., all most of the members want is someone to cover RECREATIONAL flying...not semi commercial, heavy, etc.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I always said when I heard the proposal RAAA were putting in that it would all be too hard for the dodgers at CASA. As with all govt departments they can only do one small thing at a time as that one thing takes 1000 public servants to counterjump and dodge and pass on to someone else because no one want to put their name to any decision...This is why you need the KISS principle when dealing with public servants...one thing at a time because its all to easy for them to say its all too hard

Calling CASA dodgers, particularly when there are probably in exess of a dozen CASA employees reading this thread in disbelief, and particularly when you've just demonstrated that you don't have a grasp of the exponential effects of Aircraft design, is not very wise.

 

It wasn't CASA who came up with these crazy ideas, and it wasn't the RAA Members; and when you analyse what would occur within RAA and GA if such changes were introduced, it's not hard to see who are the dodgers.

 

 

[jetjr]

Maybe not their idea but they allowed RAA to develop and promote the concept internally then decide put it off until sometime in the future.

 

Its not the first time its been presented and it seems no decent explanation this time either of why refused.

 

If there was no chance of it succeeding why meet and discuss. Waste of everybody's time.and our money.

 

Has little to do with new designs, although would in the future, today there are plenty in RAA and light end of GA which can handle higher weights safely within design limits. Only those designed and tested for the higher weight would be allowed to - exactly as it is now.

 

Large Jabirus operate to 760kg elsewhere in the world without changes

 

The 600kg and 45kts stall are arbitrary limits based on understandable safety reasons. In this case there are plenty of 762 kg, 50kts stall, 2 seat aircraft out there with millions of hours up.

 

I think regulators should have to show WHY NOT to a change like this.

 

 

[M61A1]

Calling CASA dodgers, particularly when there are probably in exess of a dozen CASA employees reading this thread in disbelief, and particularly when you've just demonstrated that you don't have a grasp of the exponential effects of Aircraft design, is not very wise.

I would suggest that we have far bigger problems than we thought, if we have a regulatory body that takes criticism so personally that they would let it influence any decision they make. Not very professional at all if that's the case, and I think it is.

 

 

[spacesailor]

"will either do something else, (give up) or have to re establish an organisation reflecting their original aims."

 

I did that, gave up,

 

Now, where's that New organisation, that I can take my plane & self to!.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[jetjr]

Caught up with similar problems with the same regulator Id guess

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Calling CASA dodgers, particularly when there are probably in exess of a dozen CASA employees reading this thread in disbelief, and particularly when you've just demonstrated that you don't have a grasp of the exponential effects of Aircraft design, is not very wise.It wasn't CASA who came up with these crazy ideas, and it wasn't the RAA Members; and when you analyse what would occur within RAA and GA if such changes were introduced, it's not hard to see who are the dodgers.

Turbo

 

I am no "certified" engineer but after 40 plus years working in electronics, electrical and manual industry involving a lot of metalwork design and fabrication I think I have an idea of how the exponential design works....a lot here dont. I have a ...I think a very good grasp of what is required to put my backside into. Do you?..what sort of real world experience do you have in making a living with this?

 

I would hope there are at least a dozen of them reading this thread and I am sure most would be squirming in their seats reading to comments and not because they think its crap. As I have said common sense doesnt seem to exist anymore. The arguments put forward here are valid and I am sure they would agree.

 

And they are dodgers. You know as well as I do no one wants to put their signiture on anything now because someone doesnt want to be responsible for any decision anymore. Its typical of all government run services not only CASA. Its a mindset that has developed over the past 20 years. Its the same way ambulance chasers will try to sue a council for someone walking down the footpath and they trip base over apex and sue the council for uneven ground. When the actual problem is that person (I mean darwin award contender) can not take responsibility for watching where they are walking. This is the problem and the similar thing runs right up to the high end of the power base that governs the country. no one seems to have any balls anymore to make a decision

 

RAAA may well be trying to grow their base and there is nothing wrong with that premise but they are going about it the wrong way. I have already said this previously in this thread.

 

Am I not speaking english???.. it seems either I can not either get my point across by my version of the english language by my explanations or there are quite a few members of this forum who are just thick or just wish to be nay sayers

 

Hopefully the end of my ranting due to being very pissed off. RAAA can invite me to the next meeting with CASA and I would gladly attend and put forward my take on this subject and their performance on the issue

 

Mark

 

 

[turboplanner]

TurboI am no "certified" engineer but after 40 plus years working in electronics, electrical and manual industry involving a lot of metalwork design and fabrication I think I have an idea of how the exponential design works....a lot here dont. I have a ...I think a very good grasp of what is required to put my backside into. Do you?..what sort of real world experience do you have in making a living with this?

I would hope there are at least a dozen of them reading this thread and I am sure most would be squirming in their seats reading to comments and not because they think its crap. As I have said common sense doesnt seem to exist anymore. The arguments put forward here are valid and I am sure they would agree.

 

And they are dodgers. You know as well as I do no one wants to put their signiture on anything now because someone doesnt want to be responsible for any decision anymore. Its typical of all government run services not only CASA. Its a mindset that has developed over the past 20 years. Its the same way ambulance chasers will try to sue a council for someone walking down the footpath and they trip base over apex and sue the council for uneven ground. When the actual problem is that person (I mean darwin award contender) can not take responsibility for watching where they are walking. This is the problem and the similar thing runs right up to the high end of the power base that governs the country. no one seems to have any balls anymore to make a decision

 

RAAA may well be trying to grow their base and there is nothing wrong with that premise but they are going about it the wrong way. I have already said this previously in this thread.

 

Am I not speaking english???.. it seems either I can not either get my point across by my version of the english language by my explanations or there are quite a few members of this forum who are just thick or just wish to be nay sayers

 

Hopefully the end of my ranting due to being very pissed off. RAAA can invite me to the next meeting with CASA and I would gladly attend and put forward my take on this subject and their performance on the issue

 

Mark

I make a living at it, including writing software to do 67 concurrent calculations on a proposed product to optimise increasing the loads while maintaining commercial viability.

You've again demonstrated you don't understand the underlying principles involved while at the same time slagging off again at CASA.

 

A lot of GA people must be perplexed that anyone would want to fly the slugs of GA.

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

whatever !!!!

 

You have your opinion and I have mine

 

 

[turboplanner]

You might try something with more engineering content and a little less vitriol.

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

The desire for a weight increase has been on the books for over 20 years. To quote the President's Report (Doug Muir) from 1997 in the AUF Journal Sept Vol 7(9) p.10 - "Some of the main outcomes we are working towards are the introduction of the experimental category, a revised primary and a new intermediate category and an increase in weight to 750kg, 45 knot stall, while retaining the privileges we currently enjoy."

 

He hoped that "manufacturers would be able to produce a new generation of aircraft for the Australian market.". ".. and give us access to much more of the home building market ..". 1997 had a number of letters and articles on 750kg, both for & against and neutral. Letters to the Editor were pretty robust in those days. Nothing new ... just moved on-line ...

 

 

[M61A1]

I think what Mark is suggesting is that we have less of an engineering problem and more of a personality type and legal problem. Too many employees who's sole job is to to ensure that their boss isn't likely to be sued, and a government that rules by making a short list of things you are allowed to do, rather than a short list of things not to do.

 

I would suggest that most here understand the diminishing return concept. Try applying it to government and legislation, we might start to see some real progress then.

 

We have a complex set of rules supposedly designed to stop us killing ourselves, and it doesn't seem to have achieved that.

 

 

[turboplanner]

It's not a football match though FV; in amongst the histrionics is the truth, and the only way to get at that is to do the homework.

 

 

[turboplanner]

We have a complex set of rules supposedly designed to stop us killing ourselves, and it doesn't seem to have achieved that.

That's true, but add an effective compliance and enforcement operation, and you'll see abig reduction.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

You might try something with more engineering content and a little less vitriol.

I've done more calculation, scenarios and costing than most in this area over the last few years and 600kg sux for larger people who want to actually go somewhere with baggage in safety (and in a cheaper aircraft).

 

In America, 600kg LSA is a failure while those 750kg "slug" Vans keep on rolling out the factory en mass, outselling all the LSA models combined, they are the ideal size, power, speed weight combination because the market has spoken, not numbers.

 

I know what I would rather see happening in Australia, especially with the future reduction in airfields that will make the jumps longer.

 

 

[M61A1]

That's true, but add an effective compliance and enforcement operation, and you'll see abig reduction.

Only because very few people will bother to do it any more....just like your speedway.

I would also lay money that the accident rate won't change, because that's just how humans are. One day our governments will realise that.....it's that diminishing return thing.

 

Most people don't need enforcement not kill themselves. In the US the rules are far more practical, and they don't have a higher accident rate, it would appear that we (govt) just like to waste resources and then make the user pay for those wasted resources.

 

 

[Mike Borgelt]

Reading this thread makes you realise what a shambles Australian aviation regulation is at the low end.

 

turbo:"that's true, but add an effective compliance and enforcement operation, and you'll see a big reduction."

 

What utter drivel. Give us a break, mate. Do you work for CASA? Or some other part of the public service?

 

 

[turboplanner]

Reading this thread makes you realise what a shambles Australian aviation regulation is at the low end.turbo:"that's true, but add an effective compliance and enforcement operation, and you'll see a big reduction."

What utter drivel. Give us a break, mate. Do you work for CASA? Or some other part of the public service?

With the volunteer compliance and enforcement operation backing up self generated rules, Victorian speedway racing has come from John Wren's "Murderdrome" to the point where we haven't killed a driver in over 50 years.

Sorry, it's not drivel, it's a complete missing link in parts of aviation, so yes, installing volunteers to oversee aircraft standards, condition and operation will make a big difference.

 

If you look at the Old Bar Ferris wheel accident, which could have been a disaster, one C&E volunteer on duty in the Clubrooms that day would have called up the pilot, advised that the runway he was proposing to land at was not the duty runway, and was seriously compromised by a Ferris wheel in the splay, and directed the pilot to the duty runway. Everyone would have learned something, and there would have been no collision.

 

You yourself have raised gliding issues recently, and based on what you've said, if people had taken action to eliminate the faults you've identified, a few more pilots would be around.

 

 

[poteroo]

In America, 600kg LSA is a failure while those 750kg "slug" Vans keep on rolling out the factory en mass, outselling all the LSA models combined, they are the ideal size, power, speed weight combination because the market has spoken, not numbers.

I'd agree with the popularity of RV's, but lets remember that their usual MTOW lies between 750 and 800 kg. That's a very good reason that we should be looking at 800 kg instead of 750 kg - if we hope to include the RV series in RAAus.There actually isn't an 'upper' limit under EXPERIMENTAL category because each aircraft is a custom build and is then test flown through 25/40 hrs and a set of flight numbers are generated from those tests. If the builder/test-pilot is doing their job responsibly, every RV will have slightly different 'numbers'. My own RV9A has 795kg MTOW and stalls @ 44kts.

 

We also need to recognise that their popularity, with 160-200 HP 'Lycoming' engines, has much to do with cheaper fuel over there. Despite there being a 'low' compression engine being available, (with lower HP), do many of these get fitted? I'm told - not many.

 

That's true, but add an effective compliance and enforcement operation, and you'll see abig reduction.

Unless CASA takeover all of RAAus 'operations' - then it couldn't happen because RAAus doesn't have the legal powers to conduct much in the way of 'compliance & enforcement'. Only CASA FOI's have such power, and they would have to be directed to become active within the RAAus pilot group. In any case, the 'big stick' approach hasn't worked in the past. An improved training syllabus , with more recurrent training requirements, is probably a more effective approach.

 

happy days,