The Latest Outstanding Communication from RA-Aus

[APenNameAndThatA]

The email from RA-Aus yesterday whinged that RA-Aus put in the 760 kg application eight months ago and it still has not been approved. 

 

The big danger with the 160 kg weight increase is that half of CASA will be fine with it, and half will be resentful and believe that RA-Aus should be put under the pump for the privilege of muscling in on CASA’s turf. Saying “it really shouldn’t be this hard” is rude, counter productive and shows that RA-Aus understands none of the psychology of what is happening here. 

 

🤦‍♂️

[Student Pilot]

So you blame RAA and not CASA?

[facthunter]

My "understanding' was RAAus put the CTA and Wt increase, in the one deal. (conditional.) Was that clever? I would NOT think so.   Nev

[old man emu]

Six months' wait for a reply from CASA!!! I should be so lucky. My annual medical is likely to expire before CASA sends whatever it sends relating to my 2023 medical. If CASA had an office in the Amazon, the staff would be knocked over by racing sloths.

[Student Pilot]

38 minutes ago, facthunter said:

My "understanding' was RAAus put the CTA and Wt increase, in the one deal. (conditional.) Was that clever? I would NOT think so.   Nev

At least give them some credit for trying? 

[facthunter]

Not if the result was no result.  Nev

[MattP]

41 minutes ago, old man emu said:

Six months' wait for a reply from CASA!!! I should be so lucky. My annual medical is likely to expire before CASA sends whatever it sends relating to my 2023 medical. If CASA had an office in the Amazon, the staff would be knocked over by racing sloths.

To be fair to them, I nearly fell off my chair when the processing of my AFR came through within 1 day of completing it. I think like any big faceless Gov agency, it depends which department you're dealing with.

 

Something like the weight increase isn't standard business operations either. 

[facthunter]

How long has  it been going on?  About 20 years and it was the CASA that suggested a weight of 762 Kgs. How long is long enough??  Nev

[turboplanner]

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

How long has  it been going on?  About 20 years and it was the CASA that suggested a weight of 762 Kgs. How long is long enough??  Nev

If you take off your CASA hate cap, turn it aound to where you are the person within CASA who has to (a) look at the pluses and minuses, but (b) much more importantly look at the GA pluses and minuses and the repercussions and (c) look at the threshold where the liability line between CASA and RAA/L/Pilot will be judged in a PL court then look at, allow for, and set up management policies for the likely outcome, that will give a better idea of where it might go and how long.

[facthunter]

BS about the CASA HATE categorising. It's facts I put up there. When CASA do good things I will say so and have. They'll get full credit for it.   Weight increase is pretty simple and doesn't need to be Conditional on  anything else  and as I pointed out was PROPOSED by CASA ages ago.  Nev

[Student Pilot]

In the last 30 years or so I have had nothing but obstruction and obfuscation from CASA, as a pilot, operator and contractor. 

[jackc]

Too many Cooks, spoil the Broth……

[facthunter]

Everyone in the Game has the same view. Nev

[Jabiru7252]

If you want to fly bigger planes, get a pilot licence. Leave the recreational stuff to 600kg MTOW. It's not rocket science.

[Thruster88]

I don't see 760kg happening for RAAus unless or until RPL and PPL cssa license holders get the same medical standard as RAAus certificate pilots. Will be impossible to justify a double standard for a Cessna 150,152.

[old man emu]

10 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

until RPL and PPL cssa license holders get the same medical standard as RAAus certificate pilots.

But a Basic Class 2 should be sufficient for the majority of non-commercial pilots.

 

The following restrictions apply to a Basic Class 2 certificate:

• only private day operations under the visual flight rules (VFR) and below 10,000 feet
• a maximum of 5 passengers
• only piston engine aircraft
• maximum take-off weight (MTOW) of less than 8618 kg
• no use of operational ratings (such as instructor rating or instrument rating)
• no use of flight activity endorsements (for example, aerobatics and low level).

I can see that the prohibition on use of an instrument rating, non night-VMC  and low level flight could be argued as unnecessary. Also being restricted to piston engined aircraft is going to be a problem in the future if electric motors become feasible, or low power output turbine engines become  practical. 

[trailer]

1 hour ago, Thruster88 said:

Will be impossible to justify a double standard for a Cessna 150,152.

It's already a double standard for medicals. Maintenance and training requirements are to be different as well with the costs of administration by RAA to increase. As has been discussed elsewhere,  compliance within the current GA and Recreational framework is a big issue in many locations already, this weight upgrade will add another layer confusion.

[kgwilson]

CASA created the bureaucracy and has stoked the fire ever since. Any of their proposals to simplify things have always ended up building an even bigger bureaucratic mess.

[turboplanner]

9 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

CASA created the bureaucracy and has stoked the fire ever since. Any of their proposals to simplify things have always ended up building an even bigger bureaucratic mess.

CASA didn't start this and haven't made any decision.

All the theories, requests, and BS have come from the RAA  end and this is stirred from time to time by threads like this one.

[facthunter]

Are you aspiring to be a moderator, or something?  Nev

[turboplanner]

I'm always interested in hearing facts and logic; I'm not intrerested where people with an agenda will do anything to get what they want regardless of the downside to the grass roots people who started this separate branch of affordable aviation.

[facthunter]

The problem is YOU are making the JUDGEMENT. How much AUF type flying did you ever do? Have you instructed? Do you have an RAAus certificate? These things DO matter. Nev

[turboplanner]

2 minutes ago, facthunter said:

The problem is YOU are making the JUDGEMENT. How much AUF type flying did you ever do? Have you instructed? Do you have an RAAus certificate? These things DO matter. Nev

What judgement? You haven't read the comments from the people who would be adversely affected by this?

[facthunter]

You are avoiding my question completely.  Nev

[turboplanner]

Yes. Not into straw man argument.