How long until RAA get a weight increase approved?

[Jaba-who]

The local organisation (and their current students) will be surprised to hear that they are classified as inactive.

I did not say they were classified as inactive. I said they had gone inactive. If they now are active again under the same instrument then I am glad to hear it but it doesn’t change any of my factual statement. They do so only under an instrument.

 

 

[jetjr]

So any RAA aircraft (with required gear and pilot) can access CTA? This has been discussed at length here and its seems to be not correct,

 

Don't remember regs (and as for the majority of RAA pilots, I expect, don't really care about CTA) but onl;y aircraft with approval can use the CTA.

 

I thought only factory built or recognized engine aircraft, maybe even certified, were allowable. THIS excluded many RAA aircraft.

 

Whats happened in past and opinions CEO haven't anything to do with it.

 

 

[frank marriott]

Conditions/limitations etc all listed in 95.55 - certainly not a blanket approval for a registration type but an exemption for aircraft that comply with the CAO - certainly excludes many RAA aircraft but also allows compliant ones.

 

Civil Aviation Order 95.55 (Exemption from the provisions of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 — certain ultralight aeroplanes) Instrument 2018

 

 

[aro]

Don't remember regs

Do you have a pilot certificate? You are supposed to know the regulations (at least where to find them). CAO 95.55 is the foundation of RAA existence and your ability to fly RAA registered aircraft on a RAA pilot certificate. It is very important.

 

 

[SSCBD]

There’s a big difference between you getting away with something and no one else picking it up, and something being legal. If it was legal there will be documentation. Without that it’s just a dream.

comment deleted...mod

 

Fully approved and documented, by head and 2ic and also by director sport aviation CASA Brisbane AND was on file with ATC.

 

If RAA wants to call I can give them the names from CASA who signed off and approved the documents. but they should know as the AUF did know after the approval was given.

 

How do you think they let an ultralight (Light wing two stroke into the airspace) the precedent to fly in control airspace has been there for years.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

So any RAA aircraft (with required gear and pilot) can access CTA? This has been discussed at length here and its seems to be not correct,Don't remember regs (and as for the majority of RAA pilots, I expect, don't really care about CTA) but onl;y aircraft with approval can use the CTA.

I thought only factory built or recognized engine aircraft, maybe even certified, were allowable. THIS excluded many RAA aircraft.

 

Whats happened in past and opinions CEO haven't anything to do with it.

You are correct that not ANY RAAus aircraft (even if transponder, radio and any other nit picking reference to equipment are present).

There is reference in further paragraphs that pertain to engine types and airframe types. But for many aircraft types there’s no problem. Eg RAAus Jabirus currently operate in and out of Cairns Class C.

 

 

[turboplanner]

comment deleted...modFully approved and documented, by head and 2ic and also by director sport aviation CASA Brisbane AND was on file with ATC.

 

If RAA wants to call I can give them the names from CASA who signed off and approved the documents. but they should know as the AUF did know after the approval was given.

 

How do you think they let an ultralight (Light wing two stroke into the airspace) the precedent to fly in control airspace has been there for years.

The only information which counts will be in approved documents. If they can't be sourced then it's just rumour.

 

 

[SSCBD]

The only information which counts will be in approved documents. If they can't be sourced then it's just rumour.

As my reply to your comment was deleted by mod above (strange)

 

(no not strange, abuse of that ilk will be edited every time. Play the topic not the man....MOD)

 

- I suggest turbo that you do you own in Brisbane, instead of trying to discredit anything you cant get your head around or that was legally allowed by CASA. Flew for over12 months under it.

 

Many dispensations were common from CASA back then, when we actually had real pilots in charge and they had common sense.

 

including Parachuting, and GA water operations FOR EXAMPLE. How do you think they got airborne when the rules conflicted.

 

Another example for you turbo, flew and landed at Coolangatta, Townsville and Cairns all classed as primary airspace (and yes all were active) were just some airports the Lightwing two stroke had access at the time or are they not good enough examples for you as a precedents?

 

Its not the aircraft par se THESE DAYS with Rotax 912 and a L2 to keep it in the air, its the training of pilots that RAA needs to show and work on with a strong knowledge of operation in, around and out of CTA that should be even better trained than GA. Then you might have a good argument - its not the aircraft that's the problem its the drivers.

 

 

[facthunter]

I don't doubt that a lot of individual dispensations were given out in times past. I know I've had some myself, and it probably worked OK. People knew they had to do it right or the offer would not be continued. You would muck it up for other people, as well.

 

Today, I wouldn't trust anything that I'm told verbally without official back up in print. If I had a concession for a while but hadn't used it I would also want confirmation of it still being valid. What stands up in a court of Law may end up being the issue. Finding out the hard way may be expensive. Nev

 

 

[jetjr]

Do you have a pilot certificate? You are supposed to know the regulations (at least where to find them). CAO 95.55 is the foundation of RAA existence and your ability to fly RAA registered aircraft on a RAA pilot certificate. It is very important.

Yes I do have a certificate and no I don't recall verbatim regulations related to activities I cant, nor want to do

 

Ill assume you do?

 

 

[spacesailor]

AND how are the trainee's, supposed to know it ALL, before getting their certificate.

 

Four pages of abbreviations, Law, aeronautics, Radio. And learn to fly all at the same time.

 

Beyond me. I failed.

 

Not happy jan!

 

spacesailor

 

 

[aro]

Yes I do have a certificate and no I don't recall verbatim regulations related to activities I cant, nor want to doIll assume you do?

I do tend to look up a regulation before I make a comment about what it says.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

I do tend to look up a regulation before I make a comment about what it says.

Without wanting to fan any flames I will have to jump to Jetjr's defence here.

He has said he wasn't sure of the regs - not an unreasonable statment BUT more importantly all his assertions are correct.

 

 

[aro]

Without wanting to fan any flames I will have to jump to Jetjr's defence here.He has said he wasn't sure of the regs - not an unreasonable statment BUT more importantly all his assertions are correct.

I shouldn't have picked on Jetjr specifically, it is a more general problem here as well as across all aviation. People will tell you what they think the rules are but they never actually look them up.

 

I have literally been in the room when 3 flight instructors were unsure whether something was allowed under the regulations, they had a vote: "2-1, well that settles it, it is not allowed". Ridiculous.

 

Jetjr's assertions are correct in at the high level of "not all RAA aircraft can access CTA" but not very useful if you want to know which aircraft can access CTA.

 

 

[Keith Page]

The mail I have is that dont expect it until at least 2 to 3 years...BUT what has been said so far though is nothing but suggestions and talk...absolutely nothing in stone except that if it does for to 760kg the caveat will be the aircraft must be designed for that weight. You can NOT put a aircraft that has a published design weight for say 820kg into the category it will not be allowed

Do not get dis-heartened regarding the 820kg max.

It may be acceptable to placard the aircraft, nominate the weight category , that is the winning stroke.

 

It is happening at the moment, with the Jab 230 or 430. (VH or Numbers).

 

KP

 

 

[facthunter]

RAAus listed rules apply unless another CASR or such over rules it. People who could give a DEFINATE answer with this material would be few and far between. It's NOT the way it should be. Pilot (user) friendly reliable interpretations of the REGs. should be up to date and clear. It's written by Lawyers and can only be understood by "some" specialist Aviation Lawyers, at best. It's always been the same but probably worse now. We used to have a separate minister for CIVIL Aviation who was responsible and knew something of his/her portfolio.. Nev

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Do not get dis-heartened regarding the 820kg max.It may be acceptable to placard the aircraft, nominate the weight category , that is the winning stroke.

It is happening at the moment, with the Jab 230 or 430. (VH or Numbers).

 

KP

Not sure what you mean by this.

There is no suggestion in the CASA releases ( unless they have said someelse recently that I messed) that you will have any capacity to nominate weight. They have stated the certified weight will be the ONLY weight you will be able to use.

 

So if the RAAus weight went up to hypothetically 820 kg, but an aircraft is certified at say 890 kg then that’s it. You won’t be able to nominate say 820 kg and then only ever load it up to 820 kg nor pull out a seat or baggage compartment to limit the actual weight.

 

You will only be allowed to take an aircraft that is certified at 820 kg and register it with RAAus.

 

There is no change in the Jabiru weights. Those weights have been that way since they started selling the kits.

 

 

[turboplanner]

RAAus listed rules apply unless another CASR or such over rules it. People who could give a DEFINATE answer with this material would be few and far between. It's NOT the way it should be. Pilot (user) friendly reliable interpretations of the REGs. should be up to date and clear. It's written by Lawyers and can only be understood by "some" specialist Aviation Lawyers, at best. It's always been the same but probably worse now. We used to have a separate minister for CIVIL Aviation who was responsible and knew something of his/her portfolio.. Nev

Well if that was the case, about 30,000 Australian "Pilot" would have to hand in their Certificates/Licences, because it would be an admission they were not up to flying to the regulations. I would suggest the regulations are comprehensible by students who have passed Year 9 for private recreational flying. The problem in this thread is that some people are making statements of "fact" without even reading the regulations, and others have never bothered to go on to the aviation sites - CASA, Airservices, ATSB and RAAus to learn what their obligations are.

Most seem to learn to fly an aircraft going no further than the RAAus data, and want to fly in CASA airspace, never realising that to do that they will by flying under CASA and Airservices regulations.

 

The recent discussion on use of radio is a classic example of that. Any student reading through that thread would not be able to sift through all the opposing views to get any idea of what their formal obligations are to fit into the general flying activity of the day and place

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Well if that was the case, about 30,000 Australian "Pilot" would have to hand in their Certificates/Licences, because it would be an admission they were not up to flying to the regulations. I would suggest the regulations are comprehensible by students who have passed Year 9 for private recreational flying. The problem in this thread is that some people are making statements of "fact" without even reading the regulations, and others have never bothered to go on to the aviation sites - CASA, Airservices, ATSB and RAAus to learn what their obligations are.Most seem to learn to fly an aircraft going no further than the RAAus data, and want to fly in CASA airspace, never realising that to do that they will by flying under CASA and Airservices regulations.

The recent discussion on use of radio is a classic example of that. Any student reading through that thread would not be able to sift through all the opposing views to get any idea of what their formal obligations are to fit into the general flying activity of the day and place

I agree with your last bit but would suggest that your first bit is not a true reflection of reality.

 

I’ve got way more education than Grade 9, basically as far up the education chain in my field that’s possible go, done 2 aviation licence exams that have air law, done 2 maintenance procedures course (the ones where you are taught how to read and find stuff in the AIP and various other CASA books and CASA website ) and honestly - it is not easy.

 

If you can find it, which is sometimes near impossible; just about every rule is countered by an exemption or a modifier, some of which themselves are difficult to find.

 

Some of the rules are not spelled out in black and white and clearly are written by someone who has never been in the applicable position because they just don’t make sense. The rules are ambiguously written and interpretation is often varied.

 

If they weren’t we wouldn’t have all these discrepancies turning up all the time.

 

 

[spacesailor]

Not much hope for me then.

 

Five years schooling from go to working for a living.

 

Always said "ten's of lawyer's write our law's" just so we can't understand what they mean.

 

Leaves most of us at a disadvantage when in a court of law.

 

The UK has a law for every thing we do, and if a baby could read at day one, it would die of old age Before getting to the end, of all those said laws

 

spacesailor.

 

 

[aro]

RAAus listed rules apply unless another CASR or such over rules it.

That's a slightly misleading way of putting it.

 

CAA, CAR, CASR, CAO all apply to RAAus the same as GA, except where an exemption is granted i.e. the specific exemptions listed in CAO 95.55.

 

In addition, you have the rules written by RAAus (Ops manual etc). They apply because operation according to those manuals is a condition of the exemptions in CAO 95.55.

 

 

[turboplanner]

If you can find it, which is sometimes near impossible; just about every rule is countered by an exemption or a modifier, some of which themselves are difficult to find.

If you go to the source legislation it’s usually much clearer.

 

If they weren’t we wouldn’t have all these discrepancies turning up all the time.

I’ve always found confusion with laws is directly in proportion to the wish to do something outside them. A few people want to break into the bottom end of GA; nothing confusing about that.

 

 

[frank marriott]

That's a slightly misleading way of putting it.CAA, CAR, CASR, CAO all apply to RAAus the same as GA, except where an exemption is granted i.e. the specific exemptions listed in CAO 95.55.

 

In addition, you have the rules written by RAAus (Ops manual etc). They apply because operation according to those manuals is a condition of the exemptions in CAO 95.55.

Agreed, that was what I unsuccessfully attempted to get across.

 

 

[jetjr]

Reckon only the builder can increase or decrease mtow, for factory or lsa that will be tough

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Reckon only the builder can increase or decrease mtow, for factory or lsa that will be tough

It’s a bit harder than that.

If you have a kit build - I’m talking here about the current sutiuation and specifically about GA experimental so I am happy to accept it may be a bit different for RAAus and you build it yourself.

 

The kit manufacturer has to have specified some weight specifications to get the kit approved.

 

As the builder you could claim anything as the new weight but you would have to convince the person who issued the C of A that your weight is acceptable and the kit manufacturers weight is not.

 

This would probably have to be accompanied by testing which you couldn’t do because you have to build it and get it approved at the normal weight and fly it first then change the weights to prove your weights ok. Once it’s approved at a specific weight it’s difficult to change it to something else.

 

So it would be unlikely an authorised person would approve a weight that differed from the kit manufacturer.