RAA Increasing Weight

[pmccarthy]

I agree there will be new models built to the new limit, which will be good. But I am wondering which models are already built for it and registered in South Africa or elsewhere at the higher weight.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I'm confused here, no existing LSAs, built under ATSM rules, can't be registered as 760Kg because the LSA rule is capped at 600Kg.

 

Does that mean CASA need to modify LSA rules to support 760Kgs?

 

 

[pmccarthy]

I guess they will not be LSA. But for example the Jab 230 and 430 are structurally the same and the 430 if registered GA has MTOW at 760kg I think. And there are things like the Bushbaby VLA at 750kg.

 

 

[kasper]

The devil will be in the detail. Existing GA with mtow under the limit will come in fairly easily per the wording of the announcement.

 

Any new factory aircraft would have to meet a design standard - the current one used by ATSM manufacturers is the LSA definition and as that has a limit those existibgcairframes are limited to it. And though not clear/explicit I assume that only factory built will be for hire and reward.

 

All the detail will be on if and how kit built airframes will exist and be operated. As this is basically the area of experimental GA at the moment can’t inagibe SAAA are thrilled but a few RVs and other homebuilt s will probably drift across.

 

Those RAAus existing designs built from kits or plans could logically transition up to higher weights but not certain that will be very popular if the maintenance and mods start creeping up and basically being existing GA where if you didn’t build it then it’s lame/L4

 

 

[facthunter]

LSA is LSA, and you will be stuck with it. It was always an ill advised stop gap, probably expected to grow in AUW but the Skycatcher might have finished that idea off. Who knows?. There are millions of ways to be stupid and few to be wise. Nev

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I guess they will not be LSA. But for example the Jab 230 and 430 are structurally the same and the 430 if registered GA has MTOW at 760kg I think. And there are things like the Bushbaby VLA at 750kg.

So will Jabiru have to recertify the 430 as a 2 seater?

 

 

[kasper]

So will Jabiru have to recertify the 430 as a 2 seater?

If it’s a kit there is no certification as such and as a two seater it should logically fit into the new GA group.

If it’s a factory build then it’s probably going to have to meet a standard. It can’t be LSA because that standard limits to lower mtow. Don’t really think they want to meet the same old FAR standard the Cessna and pipers have been designed to.

 

The real stretch will be WHAT the design standard will be for the new GA group for factory built.

 

Equally the issue with non factory in the new GA category will be the maintenance and mod requirements- if it’s the same as current GA experimental it’s going to be Lame/L4 if you didn’t build it - that’s not a good situation BUT given the very clear RAAus statement in protecting and expanding LAME/L4 businesses I’m betting that’s where they will probably want to be.

 

As an L2 this really is a pisser - we will be locked out of the new category and basically I see it as RAAus effectively saying we are not competent and unless we want to become a LAME we can never be accepted to look after all RAAus aircraft.

 

Not a happy bunny

 

 

[fly_tornado]

my mistake, I thought Jabiru where still selling certified aircraft

 

 

[slb]

Equally the issue with non factory in the new GA category will be the maintenance and mod requirements- if it’s the same as current GA experimental it’s going to be Lame/L4 if you didn’t build it - that’s not a good situation BUT given the very clear RAAus statement in protecting and expanding LAME/L4 businesses I’m betting that’s where they will probably want to be.As an L2 this really is a pisser - we will be locked out of the new category and basically I see it as RAAus effectively saying we are not competent and unless we want to become a LAME we can never be accepted to look after all RAAus aircraft.

True Kasper. I think RAAus/CASA are looking to keep the new categories the same as GA so that the lower end of GA can be either GA or RAAus in future, with the same requirements with maintenance etc. for both. LAMEs can now complete modules to become Light Sport LAMES and I guess this is where RAAus are heading with the L2s, with them ultimately becoming Light Sport LAMES. OK maybe if you have a full maintenance business, but for most it would not be economical to do so.

 

They said it would be explained in the PDPs but it wasn't mentioned at the one I attended. The only item on the agenda for L2s was talking about logbooks which we did not need to know about as they are checked every two years at the renewal stage.

 

 

[kasper]

my mistake, I thought Jabiru where still selling certified aircraft

They are selling certified aircraft. You just have to ask WHICH standard are they certified to and in which country is a level of certificate accepted.

In some countries factory built without certificate is allowed. In those countries they sell as much as they can. In some countries even LSA is not accepted and they sell different aircraft from factory eg UK.

 

There is no universal standard for certification - never has been. Look at Airbus and Boeing - they separately certify in Europe and the USA- and other countries generally accept one of those.

 

The new Australian group being put forward here will be potentially unique if it sets a standard of its own. I doubt they will and it will just mean existing already accepted GA factory aircraft will be factory under RAAus GA group and that will not provide anything to support new manufacturers but RAAus are clear on protecting LAME.

 

 

[kasper]

True Kasper. I think RAAus/CASA are looking to keep the new categories the same as GA so that the lower end of GA can be either GA or RAAus in future, with the same requirements with maintenance etc. for both. LAMEs can now complete modules to become Light Sport LAMES and I guess this is where RAAus are heading with the L2s, with them ultimately becoming Light Sport LAMES. OK maybe if you have a full maintenance business, but for most it would not be economical to do so.They said it would be explained in the PDPs but it wasn't mentioned at the one I attended. The only item on the agenda for L2s was talking about logbooks which we did not need to know about as they are checked every two years at the renewal stage.

I will not talk in detail about the PDP I attended beyond saying RAAus spin and advertising self was prominent.

On maintenance it was all about documentation and nothing about practicals or that any failings in docs aligned with let alone caused accidents or incidents.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

The new Australian group being put forward here will be potentially unique if it sets a standard of its own.

Sadly there's nothing unique about that at all, generally across the board for just about everything sold in Oz, or rules for sports, workplace, etc for the last 50 years. It has made everything more expensive than it had to be.

 

Our 'Public Service' is an oxymoron, with emphasis on the moron part of it.

 

 

[jetjr]

Heard a little more today

 

The new catagory is only planned for training aircraft first up. Only factory built Lame maintained

 

After RAA has a more comprehensive maintennace training management system it could be taken more seriously by CASA

 

No scope for experimental in group G yet but its a logical step later

 

Summary is no change for existing aircraft in RAA for the time being

 

 

[kasper]

Well that’s nice then. Just a takeover of GA factory built.

 

And the waffle inthe middle of your post about demonstration of better history of maintenance taken with the RAAus statement they will look to 1500kg after demo of safe ops does not leave me feeling any experimental GA will get relief from LAME

 

 

[jetjr]

How is allowing training in heavier aircraft taking over GA?

 

At this point it seems you can train in a heavier aircraft but then have nothing in that group to fly afterwards

 

Whats going to happen later is anyones guess and it wont happen soon

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Why do you need 760KG if you are training?

 

 

[kasper]

How is allowing training in heavier aircraft taking over GA?At this point it seems you can train in a heavier aircraft but then have nothing in that group to fly afterwards

Whats going to happen later is anyones guess and it wont happen soon

Nothing to fly afterwards? Read the realease from RAAus - they are not just for training but for hire and reward exactly the same as current RAAus. Or you can go out and buy your own Cessna or piper from the factory rep here in oz and get your local LAME to look after it.

That’s pretty much GA clubs n schools today for everyone not heading into an airline ... and several ga training schools for airlines are already starting them in RAAus then across to GA for the bits RAAus can’t do now.

 

After this change more of the end to end for these schools will sit with RAAus and they can use the same aircraft both sides to simplify there training.

 

Much easier for the GA schools and “protects” the LAME. Not sure there’s much in it for recreational aviation in general.

 

 

[jetjr]

More certified aircraft options, spin training permitted, easler transition to std aircraft types

 

It is a step and good to hear CASA is changing but not sure this first step does much for existing RAA members

 

 

[frank marriott]

There is room for owner maintenance but the organisation that represents us has to have its members (NOT JUST A COUPLE) interests in mind not some not some personal agenda taking us to a train wreck.

 

Overall, the rules and procedures in 132.M aim to:

 

• empower an administering authority (limited category aircraft organisation under Part 132) to oversight maintenance functions
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

[frank marriott]

That was meant to include:

 

e.g. for warbirds and the like, but there has got to be a desire expressed, NOT because we are incompetents we want GA maintenance!!!

 

Overall, the rules and procedures in 132.M aim to:

 

• empower an administering authority (limited category aircraft organisation under Part 132) to oversight maintenance functions
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

[fly_tornado]

if you are paying for the same maintenance as a VH reg what advantage is there in going RAA?

 

 

[kasper]

if you are paying for the same maintenance as a VH reg what advantage is there in going RAA?

If you are paying your instructors lower rates for RAAus instructing then I can see some advantage to someone

 

 

[fly_tornado]

lower rates of pay will only encourage people to get out of training and join airlines

 

 

[facthunter]

Getting RAAus to do all the work on the promise of "something" for the show overall "sometime" in the future. From the AUTHORITY. OK how much room is there for the RAAus to move in this deal.? I would say next to NONE. Bring LAME's onside with assurances of continued inclusion and MONEY. They hate working on RAAus stuff . It's beneath them and just junk compared with business jets etc as far as many are concerned and not worth the risk.. Good interested ones would get work anyhow. Good work would cost little more if done by a LAME or any other classification who does a thorough job.. IF people resist paying corners get cut or it's done as a favour. Will owners be able to DO their own planes without rheams of paperwork. The" NEW GA" will be a rather LARGE undertaking. Australia is a big place..Will there be some place for the remnants of( AUF Plus a few mods)?

 

Simple affordable flying. It MUST be there somewhere??? There's a few assurances (hopes). WE need positive answers. This is taking too long without any certainty. Nev

 

 

[Bennyboy320]

Just had a look at the RAAus web site, at present there are 3,344 a/c on the register, a few more old C150’s maintained by LAME’s will not affect the vast majority of our day to day operation.