Controlled Airspace Endorsment

[lambadaman]

Hi all,

 

Recently I was speaking to one of our RAAus officers, and he said that they were working on a new endorsment for our Recreational Licence. This endorsment would allow us to enter controlled airspace, provided we and the aircraft meet the requirements. This would make a coastal flight past Coffs Harbour much safer. I'm sure there are many more scenario's like this one. Another aspect of this endorsment would open the door for existing GA schools that are based inside controlled airspace to open a Recreational Wing to their operation! What do people think?

 

Safe Flying...

 

 

[PaulN]

To me, it's all good. Like you I think clearance through CTR would be most helpful and safer, not to mention convenient. From discussions I've had with RA-Aus staff it's likely training for these endorsements is some way off yet, maybe even a couple of years.

 

 

[Yenn]

I believe it is legal for an RAAus aircraft to enter controlled airspace if the engine is GA approved, and also the pilot holds a PPL or better licence.

 

My Corby Starlet engine is suitable being a Jabiru 2.2. I hold a PPL but do not have a valid medical at the moment but if I did I would have no worries about requesting a clearance. Even without a valid medical cert. I think a clearance could be obtained in some instances, such as entering or exiting Rockhampton zone as the control zone is not active 24 hours per day and it becomes a CTAFr.

 

I know that others have transited control zones after making first contact on the ground by phone and explaining the situation.

 

Ian

 

 

[Ultralights]

i often fly into CTA, but only in an aircraft with a certified engine,

 

a Transponder, i hold a valid PPL, unfortunatly my medical has expired

 

as i refuse to pay the stupid $130 CASA fee so they can put a stamp on

 

it.

 

 

[Wilfred]

As you should know if you dont have a current medical your PPL is not valid and you do not have any of the priveledges that go with the PPL.

 

 

[lambadaman]

My understanding is that at the moment the pilot must have a current PPL, the aircraft must be factory built and be fitted with an 'approved engine'. A radio must be fitted, and a transponder fitted if that airspace requires one. I am aware that the Ops. Manual is being amended at the moment, but my origonal post was to see what people think of the idea of the RAAus introducing a Controlled Airspace endorsment to the RAAus Recreational Licence? How may it effect the current training schools?Should the RAAus control the number of schools operatingat controlled aerodromes? I know that the RAAus would like to see it introduced soon, maybe as earlyasnext year!........

 

 

[Guest David C]

I think a " controlled airspace endorsement" or similar would be a great benefit to many RAAus pilots , me included who live and fly in a area which is surrounded by such airspace . From a safety point of view , and really that should be the main consideration here , it far more safer to fly through say the Gold Coast CTA than skirt around the gap between the CTA and the surrounding high ground . An alternative would be to have more VFR transit lanes established around CTA's , the same as exist around Nowra , V1 around Sydney and the Williamtown lanes . These provide a safe and expeditious alternative to the inland routes , and the scenery is great too !!

 

Dave

 

 

[Guest Fred Bear]

ThereIS a "controlled airspace endorsement" and it's called a PPL.:)

 

One of the primary requirements of entering CTA is a valid "licence" and at present an RA-Aus "certificate" is not a "licence."

 

I would be VERY surprised if the rules were changed in the near future to add it as an "endorsement" to an RA-Aus certificate as there would need to be an excemption made to the CAO's, as well as modification to the RA-Aus syllabus.

 

At present most RA-Aus instructors aren't qualified to enter CTA themselves, with a PPL theory exam (not practical) being required to obtain an RA-Aus senior instructor rating. Thus most instructors would have to get qualified themselves first and this would take time.

 

Also, there is a significant difference between GAAP airports and Class C controlled airspace. Many a Recreational pilot may believe that it "wouldn't be a problem" however experience tells me that this is not the case at all. Listening to other aircraft entering CTA makes it sound really easy. There are many new topics to cover - readbacks, Special VFR, clearances, amended clearances, flightplanning, taxi clearances, waypoints, IFR approach points, GAAP landmarks, required altitudes, reporting sequences, ATIS, AWIB, terminologies such as "cleared to close", etc, etc. and the list goes on.

 

Certainly not something you'd cover in a Sunday afternoon's flying.

 

Don't get me wrong though - it would be a good thing if it can be done relatively easily.

 

PS: Ultralights, I can't confirm, but I don't think the $130 is actually being charged yet as it's in the discussion phase. I didn't even get charged for my Police check on my ASIC.

 

Clem.

 

 

 

[PaulN]

Clem,

 

Most of us like surprises,pleasant ones at least. I first heard about the upcoming CTA endorsements for RA-Aus from CASA themselves. Part of their thinkingarises from the recent changes to Class E rules and exemptions granted to recreational a/c.Yes, the CAOs will require amendments. Yes, the RA-Aus training syllabus needs to be amended. Yes, it will take some time for all this to come-to-pass. Yes, it's on the way.

 

Paul

 

 

[Yenn]

I can't see any problems with RAAus pilots having a control area endorsement. It would have to be worked for and involve study and training with a check flight at least, but it would add safety to all airspace users. Access to control zones would be denied if the controllers considered they were unable to cope with the extra work load. Even PPLs in GA aircraft are denied access at times so there is no guarantee that VFR flights will get immediate access.

 

Ian

 

 

[Guest Fred Bear]

I did clearly say that it would be a good thing, but be prepared for it to take a considerable amount of time to come through, for the reasons that I said in my previous posts. It is also in the CAO's (95.55) that a U/L can only enter CTA for the purposes of Take-off or Landing, so that would have to be changed too. Off the top of my head, it would probably consist of an endorsement made up ofseveral hours air including, transit, entry and exit and probably around2-3 on the ground.

 

GA pilots are sometimes lazy and if you put in a flight plan a clearance is pretty much guaranteed.

 

 

[Guest AusDarren]

The Current Situation (Source Kris From Oasis Pt Cook CFI PE both RRAus & GA)

 

there are 5 Reqirements to operate CTA in RAAus Aircraft

 

1. Certified Engine

 

2. Certified Airframe (Means rego begins with 55; sorry to all you builders)

 

3. GA PPL

 

4. Operational Radio

 

5. Transponder (I think mode C with Alt encoder)

 

the great thing about doing a flight review in one of his Jabiru's is that it counts both as a GA review, and a RAAus review :-)

 

Regards,

 

Darren

 

 

[Guest Fred Bear]

Sorry AusDarren, not exactly. Sorry to bear both bad news and good news on your post. There are many variations on this that people (instructors included) seem to conjure up :-)

 

The requirements for entry into controlled airspace are clearly defined in CAO 95.55. A copy of which is enclosed in your RA-Aus technical manual that you should have received when you paid your membership.

 

- You don't need a "certified" engine. Only probably 5%? (if that -near impossible to easily find out)of RA-Aus aircraft have certified engines. You need an "approved" engine, meaning a 4 stroke and twin ignition model. Most new RA-Aus aircraft don't have certified engines these days.

 

- A Certified airframe is not a requirement. Once the aircraft has flown off it's initial 25 hours, it meets the requirements for entry into controlled airspace. 95.55 does not differentiate between homebuilt and certified aircraft. The same goes for home-built GA experimental aircraft, such as a Jabiru for example. Don't get 95.55 confused with your aircraft's registration as it applies to 24 rego's as well. The Skyfox Gazelle is also a certified factory built aircraft with a rego starting with 24-. This is because the Gazelle is / was in a higher weight category than the LSA55 Jabiru's as it was 520 kg's. The Skyfox taildragger has a 55- rego because it is some 70kg's lighter than the Gazelle sistership and is in the same weight category as the LSA55 Jabiru.

 

- Any registration or RA-Aus (less obvious exceptions such as 32- weight shift) qualifies as long as the other requirements are met, such as radio, transponder, PPL and approved engine. Remember 55 series are not the only "certified" aircraft, as 24 are too for example.

 

- Transponders are only required for operation in Class "C" airspace. GAAP airports do not require a transponder to be in use so you could fly your Jabiru from Point Cook into Moorabbin without a transponder. For the purposes of this discussion, GAAP is controlled airspace, however a transponder is not a requirement.

 

Don't upset the CT, Sportstar and Tecnam owners out there who fly into CTA in their 24 registered machines!

 

Oh and one almost last thing! If you fly GA and you do your review in a Jab it doesn't necessarily count for an AFR! A GA AFR (aeroplane flight review) must go for a minimum of one hour and include controlled airspace if the reviewee' has an unrestricted PPL(A). You can do your AFR in the aircraft (either rego) in which you have done the most flying in, in the previous 90 day period. (I'm not 100% sure on the 90 days, but that's close enough). If you have an unrestricted PPL(A), you'll need to transit and possibly land in class C to successfully complete your AFR in your RA-Aus registered aircraft.

 

Finally, for the record for anyone that asks, Jabiru / RA-Aus time DOES count towards an ATPL (Air Transport Pilot's Licence) however only to a maximum of 750 hours. The remaining hours must be flown in a recognised "registered" aircraft, such as a GA one or even a glider!

 

I hope this clarifies things. Clarification on this is important as this topic always seems to come up in forums of this type. Take this post back to Kris next time you see him and see what he says!

 

Clem.

 

ClemBrown

 

 

[PaulN]

Thanks Clem,

 

It's good to see this forum gettingexperienced input, something we can all learn from. Your contribution is valued .

 

Paul

 

 

[Guest Ken deVos]

As has already been discussed, currently there are major distinctions between RA-Aus certificate and CASA PPL licence privileges in regard to controlled airspace.

 

I understand that currently there are exemptions issued by CASA for the operation of RA-Aus schools located withincontrolled zones.

 

However,the water is going to get muddied when the CASR Part_61 Flight Crew Licensing changes are introduced and specifically the Recreational Pilot Licence (RPL)

 

{see 61.E in http://rrp.casa.gov.au/nprm/nprm0309fsA_DRAFTcasr61_06Aug03.pdf}

 

"61.400 Conditions (3) The holder of an RPL must not exercise the privileges granted by the licence in other than Class E orG airspace unless he or she holds an endorsement to pilot an aircraft in the control zone associated with a specific aerodrome in Class C or D airspace or within a GAAP control zone."

 

I believe an endorsement would be required for each control zone that the RPL pilot wanted to operate from.

 

From my limited understanding, the RPL is to be introduced to "level the playing field" of the operational costs between RA-Aus and GA flying schools by introducing a "GFPT licence with endorsements".

 

Coincidentally, another endorsement of the RPL is "cross-country" and the medical requirement is - you guessed it - "driver's licence". Sound familiar?

 

The question is, who will administer the RPL in order to reduce costs? CASA? Perhaps the RA-Aus? SAAA?

 

Ken deVos

 

 

[johnprop]

Bill McIntyre of CASA advised me in 2003 that the proposed Recreational Pilots Licence (RPL)which would requires a car driver's medical and not a Class 2 medical,was expected to commence from April 2005. I have just been advised by Dick Reynoldson of CASAthat the RPL is not likelybefore 2008.For 10 years since 1996 CASA has been talking about issuing aRecreational Pilot Licence and I don't think it will happen with CASA.

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

"Any registration or RA-Aus (less obvious exceptions such as 32- weight shift) "

 

In what way are these an exception ?

 

Mine is CASA type certified in primary category.

 

Regards

 

John

 

 

[Guest Fred Bear]

Crezzi - 95.32 currently phohibits entry into controlled airspace, it's simply not in the ops manual.

 

It would confuse things a little if your Trike was fitted with a 912 as it theoretically is close to complying, however I just don't think it will happen. You're not allowed over built up areas also and there are many interpretations of this which is where you would probably come unstuck in the event that you tried it. That's when the gliding distance discussion starts up too.

 

 

[Guest Guest]

Well, personally I wouldn't like to mix it with the big fellas in Brissy in a Gazelle, however quieter towered aerodromes like Maroochie would be not a bad thing..

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

Hi Clem

 

My trike does have a 912 andthe latest 95.32 (31st May 2006)allows flight in controlled airspace (subject to the same requirements as already mentioned - valid PPL, radio etc).

 

http://www.casa.gov.au/download/orders/cao95/9532.pdf para 5.2

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

Additional -

 

95.32 does allow factory built trikes to fly over built-up areas above 1000' agl provided they can glide clear.

 

 

[Guest Fred Bear]

See you at Moorabbin or Bankstown then!

 

 

[Guest Teenie2]

Fred Bear ,in a earlier quote you said something like 4-stroke and twin ignition would possibly be the engine for being "approved", this is incorrect, 447 ,and 582 are approved types .If the engine is the same as an engine fitted to a approved a/c (55,25 ect) ,it has been approved by the tech manager (RAA), you have a valid ppl,If equiped with a electrical system, and require a transponder and radio ( there are some exemptions to txr and radio)

 

This is all covered in the RAA manuals. (I think except transponder and radio)

 

You can still get exemption from entering controlled airspace if do not have all or any of the above requirements,by contacting the authority in writting and requesting permision,this is normally granted if its a reasonable request.