Voluntary Membership or Dictatorship???.

[Flyer]

Hey Farri, there's a difference between senior member and old senior member....;).... I referred to it as you more senior members, not necessarily old senior members.....:big_grin:.

 

For my birthday this year, my wife organised me a Ulysses membership. As I'm 40 that makes me a junior and part of my role as a junior is to help the senior (50+) members onto their bikes and make them cups of tea...(or so I'm told by a senior member)

 

Should clear up the senior bits...maybe we should have a ulysses club for aircraft. If it ran like the motorcycle club it would be a hoot...especially watching us junior members load you senior members into your aircraft...

 

Regards

 

Phil

 

 

[farri]

Phil,

 

Your right,I used old,you gave me a laugh though,good on ya.

 

cheers,

 

Frank. :thumb_up:

 

 

[vk3auu]

Hey Flyer, next time I am down at Tooradin, I will make myself known to you and you can make this old timer a cup of coffee. I live at Drouin South. 19-1877

 

Getting back to the Ops Manual bit. It takes long enough to get any changes approved by CASA, without going through all the members too. I imagine that those who represent us have a fair idea of what is needed anyway and while all these new fast birds are arriving on the scene, those of us who fly "real" ultralights, have still got all the privileges they used to have, with a few extra ones thrown in for good measure.

 

David

 

 

[Guest airsick]

Don't get me wrong, I think RA-Aus has done a good job with the Ops Manual (the bits I saw anyway :)) and I also appreciate that it is a long drawn out process to get it done. I wasn't advocating consulting every member on every detail either (although from other posts it looks like there was some consultation anyway). All I was trying to say was I thought it would be a good idea to circulate it before it becomes effective.

 

From what I was told the other day it will become effective once it is sent out. No time to digest it was my concern.

 

And just because CASA is bad at communication it doesn't mean RA-Aus should be allowed to make the same mistakes. We, as a community, should keep onto them to ensure it doesn't turn into a 'mini' CASA. It isn't about forming a lynch mob and looking for a target but we shouldn't accuse every one who has some form of criticism of the organisation as being a conspiracy theorist either. We shouldn't shoot each other down when we have questions, concerns, issues, etc. Sure, debate them, offer solutions, demonstrate why certain queries are not worth worrying about and so on, but to tell someone to bugger off if they're not happy isn't the solution. It is our movement and we should take responsibility for improving it.

 

 

[Arnaud]

Yesterday I picked up a bank cheque from my Community Bank...today I noticed on my statement that they took $100 for the service !

 

$100 is not what it used to be.

 

Everything can be improved, but I am pretty happy with RA-Aus.

 

I am however a little bit concerned about the push by some pilots to obtain more privileges, like controlled airspace endorsement, etc...

 

I said it before: don't expect GA privileges at a RA price.

 

PS Nothing against GA, I have a PPL licence somewhere in a drawer...

 

 

[facthunter]

Big change.

 

As I see it, we used to operate on concessions against legislation. We now will operate under rules in our own right. This is a big change in principle (I know there are some who feel we may/will lose in the process, and that a fair amount of discussion on this forum has already occurred in this regard, and I hope it will be ongoing and productive, However I don't want to examine that aspect of it now, in this post).

 

There was a CASA survey to contribute opinion to how the changes might be implemented, last year, and members of this forum were asked to get involved in the process. From memory most of us felt a little overwhelmed, which I find understandable.

 

Nothing stands still, and this document, ( ops manual) has been delayed too long already, and it has to satisfy legal constraints so we can operate. Under these circumstances, I can't see that there was any other option than to expedite its production using the best expertise available. I hope it will evolve with time to something that serves the movement appropriately. Nev..

 

 

[antzx6r]

I am however a little bit concerned about the push by some pilots to obtain more privileges, like controlled airspace endorsement, etc...I said it before: don't expect GA privileges at a RA price.

I don't really agree with this process. I think the organization you join to fly should reflect the type of flying you wish to do. I don't know if this is how CASA see it but GA seems to have become a bit of an intro course for those heading for a cpl or atpl. Hence the number of pilots sticking their certificate in a draw. Not because keeping it is all that expensive but aircraft hire is. And casa seem to provide more for the commercial side than the private. Or introducing manditory things like ADSB which is great for commercial (the cost is just offset to the customer or claimed on tax) but devistating for the PPL (for recreation). Personally, I think the type of flying for recreation could be expanded to extreem slow or extreem fast(jet even), carbon fibre electronic or motorized hanglider, getting from a to b or going up for a barrel roll or two... So long as it's recreation based. Rules and restrictions will obviously have to come into it, and the expence should reflect the activity. But the decision to go with one organization or the other shouldn't (in my opinion) be based on your buget. If you want to train for the A380 or just charter work go for CASA. I you want to play, build or tour, go for RAA. That's how i'd like to see things go in the future. Am I dreaming??? i_dunno

 

Ant

 

 

[JohnMcK]

Hi all

 

Our Ops manager will decide the date the new manual becomes effective. It will not become effective the moment members receive their copy but some 4 to 8 weeks later so all members have time to read it.

 

Cheers

 

John McKeown

 

 

[Guest Elk McPherson]

Membership IS voluntary

 

The aircraft MUST be registered with the RAA, that is a requirement of the CAO's.

 

However, you DO NOT need a RAAus ticket to fly RAAus if you have a PPL.

 

A pilot at my airfield was recently dobbed in to CASA for flying an ultralight without a RAAus ticket. RAAus couldn't do anything (not one of theirs) and CASA Legal admitted that as he holds a PPL, their hands were tied too.

 

(please read further on in this thread to know more about this - Ian)

 

 

[Flyer]

"However, you DO NOT need a RAAus ticket to fly RAAus if you have a PPL."

 

My understanding is that unless you have a current RAA pilots certificate you cant legally fly an aircraft registered with RAA.

 

I have a PPL and my PPL hours certainly counted towards my RAA ticket but the PPL wouldn't cover RAA aircraft.

 

If that is not the case, I'll dump the RAA certificate and just keep my PPL current. Cant see the necessity to have/keep 2 pilots licenses current if it's not necessary.....

 

Regards

 

Phil

 

 

[Guest High Plains Drifter]

Probably pay to get the opinion of your insurers Phil (Flyer)

 

 

[Guest brentc]

Sorry ELK, however you are not off to a good start with your previous post based on your joining comments! An RA-Aus certificate is indeed required and gives you the excemptions of 95.55 etc.

 

Quote - 'We have recently started a new flying school in the Hunter Valley and we would like to help folks with a professional level of Ultralight training.'

 

 

[Guest airsick]

The aircraft MUST be registered with the RAA, that is a requirement of the CAO's.However, you DO NOT need a RAAus ticket to fly RAAus if you have a PPL.

 

A pilot at my airfield was recently dobbed in to CASA for flying an ultralight without a RAAus ticket. RAAus couldn't do anything (not one of theirs) and CASA Legal admitted that as he holds a PPL, their hands were tied too.

It is in black and white in the CAOs. For example, 95.55 section 3A says:

 

For the purposes of paragraph 20AB (1) (b) of the Act, a person is authorised to perform a duty essential to the operation of an aircraft to which this section applies without holding a flight crew licence if he or she complies with the conditions set out in subsection 4.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So you don't need a licence to fly an RAA registered aircraft. But you still need to comply with section 4 of the CAO part of which states:

 

 

 

 

the aeroplane must not be operated by a person as pilot in command unless the person holds a valid pilot certificate and, subject to the other conditions set out in this section, operates the aeroplane in accordance with the privileges and limitations of that certificate;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What all this means is that if you DON'T have a licence you CAN still fly an RAA plane if you have an RAA issued pilot certificate. Nowhere does is say that you are exempt from the requirement to have an RAA certificate if you hold a licence.

 

And to really hammer the point home a while back I wrote to CASA to confirm my beliefs. This is a snippet from the response I got back from Martin Holberton in Flight Crew Licensing:

 

If you wish to fly an ultralight aircraft (Registered through the Australian Ultralight Federation), then you will need to be licensed through the AUF (Now called the Recreational Aviation Australia Inc.). You cannot fly a RAA registered aircraft with a CASA issued PPL.

 

I hope you get this right before starting your flying school. I can't think of anything worse than having a whole bunch of people being misled into thinking they don't need a certificate.

 

PS. Isn't it nice to be able to cut and paste relevant parts of the legislation?

 

 

[Admin]

I hope to be able to report more on this subject very soon but at the moment to be succinct to legally fly an RAAus registered aircraft you MUST be a current certificated and member of RAAus - hopefully some more detail on this will come soon

 

 

[Guest airsick]

I hope to be able to report more on this subject very soon

Just curious Ian, what more is there to say? Seems pretty straightforward to me.

 

 

[Guest brentc]

I'll guess that this has been tested and a precedent has been set. I wait with baited breath as they say.

 

I am aware of an RA aircraft that was registered with CASA (and given an RA number) a while back that wasn't registered through RA. Perhaps this will be something similar but licence related.

 

 

[Guest airsick]

I am aware of an RA aircraft that was

Was what??? I will wait with baited breath to find out. :)

 

Didn't have to wait long did I...

 

 

[Guest MickP]

Just to set the record straight, Airsick you are on the right track with respect to the CAO's but I will quote them again,

 

CAO 95:55

 

4 General conditions of exemption

 

(b) the aeroplane must not be operated by a person as pilot in command

 

unless the person holds a valid pilot certificate and, subject to the other

 

conditions set out in this section, operates the aeroplane in accordance

 

with the privileges and limitations of that certificate;

 

(d) subject to the other conditions set out in this section, the aeroplane must

 

be operated in accordance with the requirements of the RAA Operations

 

Manual;

 

From our Ops Manual,

 

SECTION 2.01

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FLIGHT CREW LIMITATIONS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PILOT IN COMMAND

 

1. No person shall act as Pilot-In-Command of a recreational aircraft operated under the provisions of CAOs 95.10, 95.32 (RA-Aus registration) or 95.55 or any relevant legislation as amended from time to time, unless that person:

 

a. is the holder of a valid RA-Aus Student Pilot or higher level Certificate, as listed in Section 2.05, issued or recognised by the RA-Aus.

 

Note: this is our new ops manual issue 6,, the current or issue 5 manual states similar except using old terminology of AUF and Ultralight.

 

Further to this I am awaiting a written reply from CASA Legal which they are in the process of writing for me now. This will be posted here in due course and also put in our magazine to clear up this issue. It has been a subject of scuttlebut for some time and I hope this helps clear the air on the issue. If you have any specific concerns then I am more than willing to take your calls.

 

Mick Poole

 

Operations Manager RA-Aus.

 

 

[Guest brentc]

Looks like we were on the right track Airsick. Membership is NOT voluntary! No where's my renewal paperwork got to :confused:

 

 

[Guest airsick]

Looks like we were on the right track Airsick.

One day people will realise the true genius of our minds, one day...

 

 

[motzartmerv]

lol:laugh:...:thumb_up:

 

 

[vme]

And just to confuse things further, the new 103 appears to say membership of Ra-Aus will, in fact, be optional ...

 

Part 103 will also establish a 'parallel pathway' for CASA to administer these activities when individual participants, for whatever reason, choose not to participate as members of an administering organisation.

 

(From CASA intro to NPRM 0603AS - Sport and Recreational Aviation Operations.

 

 

[farri]

Just to set the record straight, Airsick you are on the right track with respect to the CAO's but I will quote them again,CAO 95:55

 

4 General conditions of exemption

 

(b) the aeroplane must not be operated by a person as pilot in command

 

unless the person holds a valid pilot certificate and, subject to the other

 

conditions set out in this section, operates the aeroplane in accordance

 

with the privileges and limitations of that certificate;

 

(d) subject to the other conditions set out in this section, the aeroplane must

 

be operated in accordance with the requirements of the RAA Operations

 

Manual;

 

From our Ops Manual,

 

SECTION 2.01

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FLIGHT CREW LIMITATIONS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PILOT IN COMMAND

 

1. No person shall act as Pilot-In-Command of a recreational aircraft operated under the provisions of CAOs 95.10, 95.32 (RA-Aus registration) or 95.55 or any relevant legislation as amended from time to time, unless that person:

 

a. is the holder of a valid RA-Aus Student Pilot or higher level Certificate, as listed in Section 2.05, issued or recognised by the RA-Aus.

 

Note: this is our new ops manual issue 6,, the current or issue 5 manual states similar except using old terminology of AUF and Ultralight.

 

Further to this I am awaiting a written reply from CASA Legal which they are in the process of writing for me now. This will be posted here in due course and also put in our magazine to clear up this issue. It has been a subject of scuttlebut for some time and I hope this helps clear the air on the issue. If you have any specific concerns then I am more than willing to take your calls.

 

Mick Poole

 

Operations Manager RA-Aus.

Hello Mick,

 

I`m glad that you have taken the time to take part in this post.

 

I`m very familiar with the requirements, as I was the First AUF CFI in the Cairns, NQLD area and ran the first school here.

 

The reason that I posted was not, in your words, "Skuttlebut" but to create debate due to the fact that in all the time I was running the school, and creating membership for the AUF,we were told by the AUF that we were independent operators and threrfore we had to look after ourselves, and that membership was voluntary,I dare say that this is still the case with the RAA,today.

 

I set out to show that this is not correct and that membership is not voluntary but compulsory and I think that you have confirmed this.

 

Regards,

 

Frank.

 

 

[Guest Elk McPherson]

I apologise, I didn't word my post (above) very well.

 

I merely intended to point out that not everyone follows the rules, and they are not always enforced.

 

I am not querying the written rules.

 

I am not for a minute saying anyone should break the rules as we know them (I have been a firm RAAus supporter since 2001 and a CFI since 2003).

 

I am merely saying that if you fly a RAAus aircraft with a PPL, and not a RAAus Pilot Certificate, CASA will not touch you.

 

 

 

[vk3auu]

My understand of the present rules is that you are not actually legal if you fly a RaAus registered aircraft while you only hold a PPL, (even if CASA turn a blind eye to it), but when Part 103 (and Part 149) comes in, that will change, as it will no longer be mandatory for you to belong to the RaAus, and another path will be available through CAA.

 

We are still holding our breathe.

 

David