AirVenture funding crisis - Facebook statements.

[turboplanner]

CASAs ramp check guidance sheet says:The inspector will check:

 

...

 

Evidence of pilot and passenger weights (standard weights should not be used in

 

aircraft with fewer than 7 seats)

 

The guidance sheet quotes CAO 20.16.1 however on a quick look that doesn't support the guidance sheet. Which is my main beef with ramp checks - the CASA list of what is required seems to be far greater than what is in the actual regulations.

That's where I got to this morning; standard weights can be used from 7 seats to above 500.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Show me "ramp check" in the regulations. Anywhere. Anyone? Your time starts.........................now.

I can show you a nice prison cell if you've got a torch.

Ramp checks are part of Compliance and Enforcement action. I listed the most common methods earlier; Compliance and Enforcement covers the sticks and carrots bodies use to enforce regulations.

 

However, you raise an interesting point, and that is what the powers of a body are to conduct ramp checks and where.

 

 

[Yenn]

I have enough knowledge of what affects the W & B of my aircraft, that I will know when an actual weight is required. That is through doing many calculations to see when the limits will be approached. For example I know that an 80kg passenger with full fuel will be no problem, but a 90kg passenger with part full tanks and I would do a quick calculation.

 

 

[aro]

Show me "ramp check" in the regulations.

Probably CAA 9 (1) (f) conducting comprehensive aviation industry surveillance...

 

9 (3)(ba) enforcing the requirements of this Act...

 

13 (1) In addition to any other powers conferred on it by this Act, CASA has, subject to this Act, power to do all things necessary or convenient to be done for or in connection with the performance of its functions.

 

That one seems pretty broad, I assume that lawyers would read it to be somewhat less sweeping than it seems

 

 

[turboplanner]

I have enough knowledge of what affects the W & B of my aircraft, that I will know when an actual weight is required. That is through doing many calculations to see when the limits will be approached. For example I know that an 80kg passenger with full fuel will be no problem, but a 90kg passenger with part full tanks and I would do a quick calculation.

Your earlier calculation becomes your calculation, particularly if you're doing the same route over and over again with the same pax and the same baggage and the same fuel.

What usually catches people out is someone absent-mindedly putting a machine part on board in the wrong place.

 

 

[aro]

I know that an 80kg passenger with full fuel will be no problem

Sure, but CASA wants to see evidence that the passenger weighs 80 kg not 90 or 100, and that you determined that before flight.

 

 

[derekliston]

Back to the original thread. Latest email from SAAA says Airventure definitely on now. Let's hope all problems now sorted.

 

 

[VFR Pilot]

Sure, but CASA wants to see evidence that the passenger weighs 80 kg not 90 or 100, and that you determined that before flight.

I have never been subjected to a ramp check so how do you supply evidence of the passengers weight? Dose casa have a set of scales with them that they use to weigh pax and items on board?

 

 

[turboplanner]

Sure, but CASA wants to see evidence that the passenger weighs 80 kg not 90 or 100, and that you determined that before flight.

CAR 233 Responsibility of Pilot in Command before flight

Calls up CAR 235

 

CAR 235 says: "The Pilot in Command must ensure that the load of an aircraft throughout a flight shall be so distributed that the Centre of Gravity of the aircraft falls within the limitations specified in its certificate of airworthiness or its Flight Manual.

 

The Flight Manual I looked at invites you to insert your own weight and all pax weights at the appropriate moment arms.

 

So based on CAR 235, you need to put the exact pilot/pax weights into the W&B envelope if you are to get the exact result to compare with the envelope graph.

 

The graph usually has quite a big "Normal Category" envelope, so unless you were right up one end or one corner of it, there could be a substantial tolerance.

 

So it would be interesting to search a bit more for any specific instruction to handle that situation, or whether anyone from CASA has told you what you suggested.

 

 

[kaz3g]

Probably CAA 9 (1) (f) conducting comprehensive aviation industry surveillance...9 (3)(ba) enforcing the requirements of this Act...

13 (1) In addition to any other powers conferred on it by this Act, CASA has, subject to this Act, power to do all things necessary or convenient to be done for or in connection with the performance of its functions.

 

That one seems pretty broad, I assume that lawyers would read it to be somewhat less sweeping than it seems

Add Part III of the Act and the additional compliance powers in the CASR and CAR...kaz

 

 

[kasper]

I'm not denying the importance of W&B - although I would agree that W&B training in RAA is poor to nonexistent.

 

If they are ramp checked, have they legally calculated W&B if actual passenger weight must be used?

 

Many people e.g. flying a C172 would have done a generic W&B and know that with one passenger of any reasonable weight, they will be within W&B limits. However, is it legal to fly without determining the actual weight of the passenger? Can CASA ask to see a W&B calculation using actual weights, or are you safe saying "Well we're obviously NOT overweight".

And good luck with either a CASA ramp check or even RAAus tech on W&B if you happen to fly a weightshift ultralight.

And for those with no experience of this group the answer is The concept of B does not and cannot apply just W and hang point ... which for any factory manufactured machine is mechanically limited to ensure controlled flight within any permitted take off weight.

 

 

[djpacro]

Sure, but CASA wants to see evidence that the passenger weighs 80 kg not 90 or 100, and that you determined that before flight.

They may want to see it but you have no obligation to have it with you on the flight. That will change when the draconian Part 91 is signed by the GG.

Dose casa have a set of scales with them that they use to weigh pax and items on board?

They used to quite a few years ago on the day when everyone flew north for the races, their focus seemed to be on big singles etc where aft cg was a potential hazard and they'd just weigh the whole aeroplane loaded.

[turboplanner]

And good luck with either a CASA ramp check or even RAAus tech on W&B if you happen to fly a weightshift ultralight.And for those with no experience of this group the answer is The concept of B does not and cannot apply just W and hang point ... which for any factory manufactured machine is mechanically limited to ensure controlled flight within any permitted take off weight.

Not so fast there Kasper; we had a long thread on this with a number of trike people saying the same as you. The theory among some of the trike operators is that it hangs from the pivot, so it doesn't matter what you do with the body.With a single hang point the centre of downforce on the wing is fixed, like it is in a fixed wing aircraft.

 

Some models offer two or three hang points, and that changes the centre of downforce on the wing.

 

The body hangs from the hang point in a pendulum arrangement which leads to this apparent thought process that you don't have to worry about balance.

 

This belief is reinforced because manufacturers have been doing the balance calculations, then simplifying them into loading instructions.

 

So I needed to reverse engineer these instructions to get back to a point where I could produce an envelope which would allow loading other than the Pilot or Pax.

 

I found a CASA Type Certificate for a particular trike, and included in it was:

 

Number of seats: Solo flight permitted from front seat only

 

Maximum weight in rear seat: 100 kg

 

Maximum Baggage: 4 kg in and around front seat

 

Maximum Pilot/Pax weight: 200 kg

 

Front seat pilot weight range: 55 - 100 kg

 

Rear Seat Pax weight: 0 - 100 kg

 

All of those requirements include a moment arm, each weight relates to a specific point from a datum, just as it would in a Jab or Cessna, but in this case the manufacturer is doing the work for you.

 

Why? Well go to your wardrobe, find a couple of steel coat hangers; Hang one on your finger; it should be hanging in the pendulum configuration and be sitting level. Pull one end down, it returns to level. Get another coat hanger and hook it over the base of the first one in the centre. The two coat hangers should be level. Now hang the second coat hanger out at the end of the first; base of the first hanger is now pointing up at an angle, representing the change in prop thrust line of the body of a trike, which has changed in relationship to the wing the coat hanger would be hanging from. Turn your finger in a yaw motion with the second hanger in the centre of the first one, then out at the end and you'll notice some inertia and run on.

 

So while fundamentally a trike hangs down like a parachute hangs down, its prop is supposed to thrust at a predetermined angle and to control geometry allows for the yaw momentum set by the designer.

 

The discussion turned up pilots who were going away on fly ins and camping trips with camping gear stuffed into the wings changing the COG of the wing, and some people had welded brackets on to the side of the body to carry jerry cans to increase range. Neither of these significant changes were expected by the manufacturer.

 

In the more vertical seats of trucks I can get a very accurate driver/passenger mass by using a body COG of 50 mm from the undeflected seat back, but I needed to get the COG position used for the trike calculations, because the body is at a different angle. This would then allow me to back calculate all the above limitations, so, for example, you could position a jerry can bracket so the fuel would not exceed the rear seat maximum etc.

 

However, before I could get to this an Instructor brought the discussion to an end when he was killed in an unstable takeoff.

 

 

[ClintonB]

I have weighed myself,the mrs and 2 kids,even the 182 can only Carry us plus 250L of fuel and 20 kg of equipment/luggage. At least that is 4 hrs plus reserves. I have learnt Even bigger craft have limits.

 

Will have to keep dieting for a bit more.

 

 

[M61A1]

Well based on your definition a few days ago, if you flew into the circuit in a Drifter, at Jabiru height, you'd probably attract attention right from the start; that's not interpreting an uninterpretable reg.There's no "competition" trigger to differentiate between a spectator and a participant; if several people go for a walk together, they all participate in the walk.

I think we all have a fairly good idea why some people stay away when we know there's a ramp check on.

Maybe you should have a read of the Drifter POH. The regs give you a maximum cct speed of 55kts at 500ft, and that's about the speed over the fence. The other issue is that do I really want to be lower and slower with faster aircraft above and behind me, that have me totally obscured with their nose high cowl?

So I assume then that everyone at a racetrack is a "participant? You need to get this silly idea out of your head that we are like your local Motorsport club or heavy vehicle operators, we are no different than Joe Bloggs going for a Sunday drive. We are not like truck drivers operating a business, we are the aerial equivalent of a private motorist.

 

 

[turboplanner]

The other issue is that do I really want to be lower and slower with faster aircraft above and behind me, that have me totally obscured with their nose high cowl?

Easy decision for CASA, don't follow the rules and you'll find out soon enough.

 

 

[M61A1]

Easy decision for CASA, don't follow the rules and you'll find out soon enough.

Not sure what you mean there....the regs state that I should be at 1000 ft. simple

 

 

[turboplanner]

Not sure what you mean there....the regs state that I should be at 1000 ft. simple

Well they don't at Pittsworth; they say 500 feet for a Drifter and they refer to 55 kt speed.

 

Here's a link to CAAP 166-01 v4.1, April 2017, The Circuit heights are shown in Clause 5.3, page 21; The references to the applicable Civil Aviation Regulations are on Page 7

 

166-01.pdf | Civil Aviation Safety Authority

 

If you are flying at 500' there will be aircraft behind you, and you will be below their nose, but there's a clear 500' between you, and they don't have to expect you to come into vision until they are on late final, when you could be on Base, or final well within their vision envelope.

 

If you are flying at 55 kts at 100', firstly in a crowded circuit there would be faster aircraft spearing out of he circuit trying to avoid hitting you, but the one most likely to get you (LH Circuit example) is the pilot letting down on to downwind, with his eyes on a fast aircraft which has started to track downwind.

 

Here's a chart and diagramme from the CAAP which makes it clear.

 

 

 

 

[M61A1]

You are assuming that my circuit speed is 55kts or less....it isn't. I've read that CAAP countless times.

 

 

[JG3]

Must remember that you should always be within gliding distance of the runway, so an ultralight with it's typical glide ratio from 500' is going to be much closer to the runway than a faster aircraft at 1000', so no chance of being run over from behind, and in a position such that it's right in line of sight from the aircraft at 1000' who should be watching in that direction for ground traffic and picking his point to turn base. The only point of conflict on a common flight path would be on final, which is going to be very short for the ultralight, so excellent visibility from base leg for the ultralight looking out the longer final for the faster oncoming aircraft, and excellent visibility for the faster aircraft looking in from base and final to his proposed touchdown point. That ultralight circuit makes for excellent separation.

 

 

[turboplanner]

You are assuming that my circuit speed is 55kts or less....it isn't. I've read that CAAP countless times.

The CAAP says about 55 kts

 

I took your advice and looked up a Maxair Drifter Manual which specified a Cruise at 55 mph (48 kts)

 

And maximum cruise at 70 mph (61 kts).

 

Other publications quoted the cruise speed for Drifter at: 52 kts, 52 kts, 43 kts, 48 kts

 

Cruising speed in the 1000' circuit is a long way away at about 100 kts.

 

What may be causing some confusion is that the Drifter ASI may be like this one, reading in mph, not knots.

 

 

 

[M61A1]

I'll start be reassuring you that my ASI indicates in knots and has been regularly checked both on the bench, using a certified and calibrated Druck tester, and in the air against a GPS.

 

Now...The Austflight A503 Rotax 503 powered) manual quotes cruise as 48kts and max cruise of 75 kts, with a Va of 65kts

 

The Austflight SB-582 (strut braced Rotax 582 powered) manual states a cruise and Va of 65 kts.

 

I spend most of my time between 60 and 65kts, including in the circuit area. Not fast I know, but certainly between 55 and 150 kt cruise speed.

 

Now here is a cut and paste of CAAP 166.01 3.6.1

 

3.6 Ultralight aircraft and operations

 

3.6.1 The term ‘ultralight’ applies to many small recreational aircraft including trikes, powered parachutes and other small fixed-wing aircraft that cruise at maximum speeds of up to about 55 kt. Pilots of these aircraft should conduct their standard circuit at 500 ft above aerodrome elevation.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Now here is a cut and paste of CAAP 166.01 3.6.1

3.6 Ultralight aircraft and operations

 

3.6.1 The term ‘ultralight’ applies to many small recreational aircraft including trikes, powered parachutes and other small fixed-wing aircraft that cruise at maximum speeds of up to about 55 kt. Pilots of these aircraft should conduct their standard circuit at 500 ft above aerodrome elevation.[/QUote]"About" being the operative word, but certainly a long long way from 100; regardless, it's up to CASA what they want to do with cases like this.

[M61A1]

Consider also that there are many RAA aircraft that will be at similar speeds in the circuit, and by similar, I mean anywhere between 50 and 70 kts. The Auster, Savannah Ch701 and Rans S7 can fly faster and slower than the Drifter. I'm not sure why you feel the figure of 100 kts has relevance.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Consider also that there are many RAA aircraft that will be at similar speeds in the circuit, and by similar, I mean anywhere between 50 and 70 kts. The Auster, Savannah Ch701 and Rans S7 can fly faster and slower than the Drifter. I'm not sure why you feel the figure of 100 kts has relevance.

I don't; I was just giving you an example of the mainstream you are tangling with C150, C172, PA 28, Jab, Sportstar, C182/RG, C206, C210, all the way up to light twins. You're the bug, they're the smashers.