A time now sadly gone,

[spacesailor]

Turbs

 

YES 16 builder's had/have problems with CAO95.10, and it's CASA regulation.

 

Builder's weren't told by RAA," of the "wing loading regs" when starting to decide which aircraft suited their needs.(HummelBird)

 

RAA took money from us for registration, THEN told us "Your aircraft doesn't COMPLY with the regs, unless registered before this DATE.

 

I have been told to go VH experimental, but why should I.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[turboplanner]

TurbsYES 16 builder's had/have problems with CAO95.10, and it's CASA regulation.

Builder's weren't told by RAA," of the "wing loading regs" when starting to decide which aircraft suited their needs.(HummelBird)

 

RAA took money from us for registration, THEN told us "Your aircraft doesn't COMPLY with the regs, unless registered before this DATE.

 

I have been told to go VH experimental, but why should I.

 

spacesailor

In taking your money for registration, RAA had an obligation to perform.

It's fairly clear from this thread that RAA needs to cater for all its members, and ELAAA the same.

 

I found the expiry date after about 3 minutes searching for 95.10, so you also had the opportunity to find that out before applying to RAA for membership.

 

In answer to your question on why you should go VH Experimental, if you can meet the medical, that currently looks to be your only path to a flying aircraft.

 

It would be a pity not to fly, when there is a path open to you.

 

 

[kasper]

TurbsYES 16 builder's had/have problems with CAO95.10, and it's CASA regulation.

Builder's weren't told by RAA," of the "wing loading regs" when starting to decide which aircraft suited their needs.(HummelBird)

 

RAA took money from us for registration, THEN told us "Your aircraft doesn't COMPLY with the regs, unless registered before this DATE.

 

I have been told to go VH experimental, but why should I.

 

spacesailor

Or - as has been said many times - go 95.55 which will leave you all with an RAAus registered ultralightYes errors of the past on wing load on 95.10 but to be fair that requirement was introduced 28 years ago so it’s not exactly the current RAAus tech or management fault.

 

Talk to tech. Office. 95.55 is absolutely available to hummelbirds

 

 

[bull]

If anyone had problems with CAO95.10, it's a CASA regulation so your objections and submissions should have gone to CASA.RAA Ltd may have made comments or submissions, but I didn't see any.

Sorry Turby , but it was definetly RAA that has brought on the new requirements for build photos and approvals etc not CASA as RAA are trying to look like they have grown up and can manage the quasi GA aircraft that now dominate a '''SPORT'''regime originally designed and created for the affordable easy, and sporting side of aviation ,,not like now with all just using the freedoms created for such to go from Melbourne to Sydney or Canberra etc as fast and as comfortable as they can '[re, what GA is for].......................Would make my old man turn in his grave to see the AUF destroyed in the way it is now ,,,very sad.............................

[turboplanner]

Sorry Turby ' date=' but it was definetly RAA that has brought on the new requirements for build photos and approvals etc not CASA as RAA are trying to look like they have grown up and can manage the quasi GA aircraft that now dominate a '''SPORT'''regime originally designed and created for the affordable easy, and sporting side of aviation ,,not like now with all just using the freedoms created for such to go from Melbourne to Sydney or Canberra etc as fast and as comfortable as they can '[re, what GA is for'].......................Would make my old man turn in his grave to see the AUF destroyed in the way it is now ,,,very sad.............................

Well just go along to your regional board manager and get him to stop it.

[bull]

Well just go along to your regional board manager and get him to stop it.

Sorry mate you really are behind the times now ah,,,don,t you remember that RAA decided that we don't need 'regional board members any more, and gave the board member jobs to their mates,ie no Nth Qld reps anymore

[turboplanner]

Sorry mate you really are behind the times now ah,,,don,t you remember that RAA decided that we don't need 'regional board members any more, and gave the board member jobs to their mates,ie no Nth Qld reps anymore

Arrgh! that's right! all the local talent is gone.However, if enough people want to, it really is possible to unscramble an egg.

 

 

[bull]

Arrgh! that's right! all the local talent is gone.However, if enough people want to, it really is possible to unscramble an egg.

Or do what Monk and co are doing and add some spring onions and parsley and call it a,,'gourmet omelete,,,, to add to your latte as you sit on the porch of your north shore condo..........................

[octave]

Some years ago I contemplated building a kit aircraft, even sought advice on this forum Skyranger verses X Air Hanuman

 

When I got myself into a financial position to do this I reconsidered. The main reason I decided against it was that almost everything I read led me to believe the rules are too hard and the system is about to fail soon anyway. Perhaps part of the reason people are not building is a lack of positive mentors.

 

When I first staretd flying I was lucky enough to have some mentors who whilst acknowledging the difficulties and frustrations it is all worth it. These days when I am preparing the aircraft I hire it is not uncommon to see someone looking on, often a young person I always invite them over for a closer look and a chat. I tell them whats involved in learning to fly including the negative and frustrating parts of it but in the end I tell them what is the truth for me, flying is awesome and worth getting into.

 

I am no longer in a position to build or buy (spent my money somewhere else) but I made the right desicion.

 

I would imagine any person contemplating learning to fly or build who stumbles accross these kinds of postings may draw the conclusion that it is not an enjoyable pursuit.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Red tape is a investment killer, one of the eternal truths in life. Look how successful the recreational auto industry has been compared to recreational aviation.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Some years ago I contemplated building a kit aircraft' date=' even sought advice on this forum Skyranger verses X Air Hanuman When I got myself into a financial position to do this I reconsidered. The main reason I decided against it was that almost everything I read led me to believe the rules are too hard and the system is about to fail soon anyway. Perhaps part of the reason people are not building is a lack of positive mentors.

When I first staretd flying I was lucky enough to have some mentors who whilst acknowledging the difficulties and frustrations it is all worth it. These days when I am preparing the aircraft I hire it is not uncommon to see someone looking on, often a young person I always invite them over for a closer look and a chat. I tell them whats involved in learning to fly including the negative and frustrating parts of it but in the end I tell them what is the truth for me, flying is awesome and worth getting into.

 

I am no longer in a position to build or buy (spent my money somewhere else) but I made the right desicion.

 

I would imagine any person contemplating learning to fly or build who stumbles accross these kinds of postings may draw the conclusion that it is not an enjoyable pursuit.

Are you talking about aircraft building Octave, or RA flying? If it’s flying, membership is still up around the all time high, so there’s no need for pessimism. If it’s building we’re probably getting close to the cause; just needs to be sorted out.

[Guernsey]

During my lifetime I have had a keen interest in both boats and aeroplanes and owned more than a handful of both, my first boat being owned at eight years of age.

 

I have built several boats but never built an aircraft although I have owned several homebuilts.

 

It must be that I am more of a wood worker that a metal worker.

 

Alan.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

There are more design components, more systems, and more complexities in a GA size aircraft than, say, a Thruster, and the expectations and flight applications are wider and more complex. Does RAA have the same builder support level as SAAA?

That’s being very selective about the type of aircraft involved.I think these days many RAA builds are exactly the same aircraft as GA experimental. Jabirus and zenair variations etc can be built for either category.

 

Same systems, same complexities.

 

 

[turboplanner]

That’s being very selective about the type of aircraft involved.I think these days many RAA builds are exactly the same aircraft as GA experimental. Jabirus and zenair variations etc can be built for either category.Same systems, same complexities.

Which accounts for some of the failures. I know of two LSA 55 kits started around 2010 and never completed. If you read some of the endless Savannah posts, it’s clear that this is about the crossover point where it starts to become too difficult for an unskilled person. Perhaps these people would not step down to a simpler, smaller aircraft, but it seems to me that might be one of the solutions for people to achieve a return on their investment.

[spacesailor]

When I started those many decades ago there was no known "Time-Limit on completion ", when nearing the finish I applied for & was given (payed for) my registration number.

 

years later with NO correspondence from RAA. I applied for completion examination by L2 then told Not in compliance for 95-10 category,

 

even tho three or four were flying, exactly the same plans built aircraft.

 

So why change to 95-55 or any other category just to have the same happen, if they wish to keep the 95-10 type out of the air.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[kasper]

When I started those many decades ago there was no known "Time-Limit on completion ", when nearing the finish I applied for & was given (payed for) my registration number.years later with NO correspondence from RAA. I applied for completion examination by L2 then told Not in compliance for 95-10 category,even tho three or four were flying, exactly the same plans built aircraft.

 

So why change to 95-55 or any other category just to have the same happen, if they wish to keep the 95-10 type out of the air.

 

spacesailor

Simple answer is the rules changed and only those already registered get to keep rego under a grandfathered registration. Same reason there are factory built 95.10 registered aircraft that all were on the register before the change to remove the factory build option.In both cases there are alternate routes to registration. Home built not within 95.10 have 95.55 andctes there was a gap in the early 1990’s when you had no option but for the past 20 years 95.55 has been there and ANY Hummelbird completed could have been registered for any and all of those 20 years.

 

I can understand the frustration and anger at being told the wrong thing more than 20 years ago and losing a rego fee but sorry I can’t sympathise with anyone refusing to register an aircraft for more than 20 years just because the rules might change.

 

If you still have the aircraft and want it register it and enjoy it.

 

 

[spacesailor]

Hi Kasper,

 

Am thinking of using you to check out a trike wing, with the thought of putting the Hbird under it, It should be well over the required wing area, but thinking they will say NOT allowed

 

.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[kasper]

Hi Kasper,Am thinking of using you to check out a trike wing, with the thought of putting the Hbird under it, It should be well over the required wing area, but thinking they will say NOT allowed.

 

spacesailor

If you’ve got enough wing for 30kg/m^2 at mtow you’re able to reg 95.10.Must say the look of a Hummel with a flex wing over the to would be interesting.

 

If you want some thoughts on how to run controls from the stick up to the wing pm me. I’d love to see it all put together.

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

Well just go along to your regional board manager and get him to stop it.

No such animal in RAA

[Yenn]

The problem is due to the fact that the younger people have no interest in building. The sme problem exists in many other cases, where those doing whatever all older people. Anything that requires getting up and doing something physical is not taken up by young people.

 

Years ago in Gladstone which is my nearest city, there were dozens of boats being built. A tour of the town was littered with hulls propped up in backyards. Now you never see one. The money is there for people to buy factory built and when it breaks down, discard it and buy another. Aeroplanes, the same. I don't know of anyone actively building a plane in Gladstone, but a few years ago there were several. There is one I know of that should have been completed years ago, but iot seems to have stalled. Another is 99.9% complete, should have flown last year but is sitting waiting. For what I am not quite sure.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

the used market is flooded with cheap boats and planes now

 

 

[kasper]

No such animal in RAA

No such animal as what? There are weightshift 95.10 but a weightshift Hummel would be unique.

[spacesailor]

AND they've upped the weight just to let me "BIPLANE" the HB with a trike wing over the standard wing !. LoL

 

After all they certainly are NOT interested in the safety accept of flying.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[turboplanner]

No such animal as what? There are weightshift 95.10 but a weightshift Hummel would be unique.

He was talking about RAA Inc. board members; now there is no local representation for groups like bull's.

[spacesailor]

Turbs said "However, if enough people want to, it really is possible to unscramble an egg."

 

GREAT ANOTHER

 

Ultralight.Flying.Club.

 

for all the people who don't like the RAA in it's present form.

 

spacesailor