RAA in CTA.

[Guest ozzie]

qwerty i'll co sign that letter

 

 

[Al B]

Can someone who saw these cowboys please send me a PM and let me know what happened? If a few idiots really did decide to ruin it for everyone and cast the RAA into disrepute, then, well, I'm disgusted.

 

Personally I don't really care about landing at controlled airfields - I'd just love the ability to transit CTA. I was _hoping_ to get an OCTA PPL, get a CTA endo through the RAA and save 70-80 bucks an hour, then do a CTA checkride or 2 GA. Instead I've now got to do the whole #$#$ing thing at GA training prices.

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

ALB, see my post no 38.

 

I know how you feel about the $$$$, I paid heaps for my PPL, 1) to improve my flying and education and importantly, 2) to be able to transit CTA and occasionally land wherever the hell I wanted. That was some time ago now but I am still peeved at idiots that really do have the potential to curtail the flying that we now have.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Al B, as I understand it key paid management, and the entire Board of RAA were there when it was all happening.

 

Aside from a low key spray in the RAA magazine, there doesn't seem to be anything in the public arena to show they've taken any action since.

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

Clouldsuck get over it!You place your name up for election. If you are elected you make decisions based on what your beliefs and representation suggests. Hence every government that we have in Australia.

 

I say PLB at a cost of $600 with a life of seven years is a great decision for someone going more that 50nm from home in a two seater.

 

If you disagree vote your rep out and put yourself into the seat. The stupid lobbying that has been occuring from Queensland over this item is outrageous. Seems to me it's all about personalities not the PLB's.

 

Our club will purchase several PLB's and rent them out. But most of our serious pilots believe it is well worth while to get their own.

 

Jim:musicboohoo:

Jim, if you have the intelligence to stop fpr a moment and see the real issue, it is not about PLB's. It is about the possibilities of members (the members are RAA remember) being railroaded by stupid decisions. Replace the words PLB with medical or maintanence and you will see what it is all about.

 

For the record, I have a PLB and happliy paid the $650 for the item (I also have a radio and transponder and guess what else, I look out the window as well). I carry the PLB with me everywhere and if I had to vote (given the opportunity) on mandatory PLB's I would be all for it. Look a little deeper and see the issue.

 

And furter for the record, my Rep was one of the only board members to oppose this issue and I am very happy with his representation based on such a big decisions being made without advising the membership.

 

 

[Spriteah]

Cloud,

 

We are a little off point in the thread. Perhaps we should create another and get everyone into the discussion.

 

Jim...

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

Cloudsuck, I guess that the point is that your local RAA member opposed mandatoy PLBs not because he opposed mandatory PLBs but because it was a significant decision and the membership were NOT CONSULTED.

 

 

[Relfy]

I'll throw my two cents worth in here. Sometimes our elected representatives have to make decisions on our behalf, in line with our expectations when we vote for them, to address issues that have considerable outside factors influencing what it is they are deciding on. This will appear on the outside to be them making decisions without consulting members.

 

Now the balancing act they (board membes and elected reps) must play involves members, CASA, ATSB and the relevant state coroners, to mention a few. Having been involved in investigations with all the above, I can tell you that if an org like the RAA is lacking, then decisions will be taken out of their hands and forced upon us.

 

There are a lot of issues behind PLB's stemming from the massive cost to tax payers when aircraft go missing stemming from search & rescue issues. I could fill pages of this forum with reasons why I believe that the RAA has got this spot on and perhaps there are, as mentioned here by others, other agendas at play.

 

 

[HEON]

PLB's are a red herring here. I don't think it serves any purpose here to have a go at the RAA organisation making it a requirement for what, I feel, any sane person would do anyway. From my personal point of view having one when my engine stopped with my wife over the Simpson Desert last year, and resulting unavoidable unplanned landing was worth much more than the cost of the item. As it turned out I rearly did not need it as I had time to notified my sat phone number in distress call and was able to answer when Canberra called...BUT they had me via the 406 when they did!

 

What is the problem here it seems is the actions of some stuffing it for all. If it was actions at Easter or a GA inspired fight back is not important. I was at the Easter activies but took a car this year. Due to the rain I left on Saturday but saw myself a number of "questionable" displays of airmanship while I was there. Since then I have heard of more. What I have not heard about is what has been done about it. If the RAA organisation has not done anything about it, they are as guilty as the stupid cowboys themselves who should not be allowed to control any aircraft that does not have a wind up rubber band for power!

 

I personally rearly wanted to obtain a controlled endorcement as it is hard to fly in some places in Australia without one... for example, how do you miss Alice Springs for fuel?

 

The fact that it seems that a PPL is now going to be required even though I will never want I fly with more than two people rearly makes me SLIGHTLY mad. If the cowboys have caused this I feel it is open seasion on them. If the RAA organisation cannot/will not clip their wings, I feel it is the duty of all non cowboys to do so and report them to an authorty that will ground them. This is not "dobbing in", it's self preservisation!

 

 

[turboplanner]

What I have not heard about is what has been done about it. If the RAA organisation has not done anything about it, they are as guilty as the stupid cowboys themselves who should not be allowed to control any aircraft that does not have a wind up rubber band for power!

Quite right Heon, and it's interesting that Directors who didn't think twice about using this site for personal promotion are still remaining silent.

 

 

[skybum]

Guys, for myself I'm disappointed that the ammendment was not allowed.....However, what worries me more than anything is our AIRMANSHIP!

 

Every last one of you that witnessed ANYTHING stupid and obviously breaking rules should be tarred as equally as quilty as the perpetrators. If you didn't take down regos and inform the ATSB of your observation then you are all guilty as charged.

 

There was an incident in South Aus where a young fella got killed flying with an idiot who liked to do abrupt manuevers after takeoff. A lot of people knew of this guy's antics and nothing was done about it and a young fella is dead because of it.

 

It is no use whinging about the bad apples...KICK EM OUT AND KICK THEM WHERE THEY HURT!

 

/RANT

 

 

[turboplanner]

I just added up what this decision has cost me to just under $7,000.00, and I don't own and maintain an aircraft.

 

These are rubbery figures, but multiply that by just 2,000 RAA members and that's $14 million down the drain!

 

This also give some insight into the possible financial impacts on RAA flying schools who havwe done all the hard work in producing thousands of responsible pilots.

 

 

[robinsm]

Controlled airspace, plb's, pseudo GA aircraft etc may be all very well but I think people are forgetting that a lot of pilots are just happy to fly within the limits of their aircraft and their abilities. The reason we have a seperate organisation is to control the lower performance end of the market and look after the pilots that just want to fly for the pleasure of it. If pilots want to cross oceans or deserts, compete with 747's or do what larger and faster aircraft do, then go and get their ppl and leave us "normal people alone". I fly rag and tube, get a real kick out of a lazy flight on a fine afternoon and do not wish to compete with larger GA aircraft in either performance, passenger capacity or speed. (if I did I would get my PPL and buy an aircraft to suit). I carry a radio as I think they are essential, I do not carry a PLB. Do not try and make me a pseudo GA pilot as I don't want it.

 

Cheers

 

Maynard

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

robinsm, Well said and I think that would reflect what the majority of the membership would believe also.....................................................

 

 

[j3pipercub]

That was a really good post skybum. It is up to each and every RAAus pilot (and GA) to do something about it. I have been in the position where I knew a cowboy on the airstrip and did/said nothing...he wrote himself and his passenger off in his trike and I always think...could I have changed that...

 

 

[Guest brentc]

I just added up what this decision has cost me to just under $7,000.00, and I don't own and maintain an aircraft.

Can you please elaborate on how this decision cost you $7,000?

 

I can only think that you began obtaining an RA-Aus certificate under the assumption that CTA would be available and now it's not? If that is the case, how did it / or how will it cost you $7,000 ?

 

I obtained my PPL for under $3,000 having already obtained my RA-Aus cert with XC endorsement. Keep in mind too that the RA-Aus CTA endorsement would also cost a certain amount of money with the required flight test and practice.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Not just the leadership, but anyone should be able to stand up against the idiots. If I remember the rules correctly, the highest rated instructor is in charge of ops anywhere we fly. And they have the power to ground anyone for being unsafe.

 

Why didn't any of the many CFIs no doubt present at Narromine go up to these clows and told them they're grounded?

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

Skybum, with due respect your post ignores the reality of the situation at Narromine. What you are talking about is a sociological phenomenon referred to as "group think" where basically everyone adopts the attitude that everyone else is OK with this whatever so I should be OK with this whatever too. In some cases it is a perfectly reasonable response. At Narromine for instance, a public visitor or a visiting pilot should not reasonably be expected to take the lead in law enforcement when there is the whole board of RAAus, the whole RAAus management team, enough instructors and CFIs to sink a battleship....AND .... the entire organizing committee for the event. I cant point the finger at jo average or jo average pilot for not raising hell in this environment.

 

At at ordinary field on an ordinary day I believe that EVERYONE bears responsability to do whatever is neccessary to stop stupidity.

 

 

[Al B]

I think the problem is the RAA is trying to be too many things to too many different people. We seem to have 2 groups of members without much overlap:

 

1) those who love 'bugs in your teeth' ultralights

 

2) those who want 'GA Lite'

 

I'm not convinced it makes sense to apply the same set of rules to both.

 

Maybe the RAA should introduce an additional type of aircraft rego (call it Recreational Sport instead of Ultralight/Microlight perhaps). That way, when some members push for CTA, aeros, 760kg, etc, any new restrictions can be tacked onto that group _only_, leaving the poor buggers who fly out of farms etc alone.

 

Personally I am in favour of CTA etc but not at the cost of new restrictions for simpler aircraft.

 

Edit: I kind of like the USA's rules. You can get a Sport Pilot license that lets you fly anything under XYZ kilos (with a speed limit too I believe). People with PPL's can also fly these aircraft without needing a special license.

 

I think it's crazy that the same aircraft can be registered as GA, GFA or RAA, with only members of a certain group being able to fly it!

 

 

[shags_j]

good idea Al.

 

What really irks me about the Casa guys (Forget his name) letter is that there is no explanation other than safety risk. Give us a reason why. All this cloak and dagger stuff is irritating. I wish they would all just come out and tell us why, give examples, show us incident reports etc.

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

Shags, read my post no 38. What else do you want??? names???

 

 

[shags_j]

Sorry. Must have missed a post or two in amongst these. My bad.

 

 

[68volksy]

There have been several mentions of the "us and them" mentality between RA and GA flying on here. From my understanding the people who created this mentality are those who created RA-Aus. GA has been evolving for over 100 years with its primary focus over those years being safety regardless of cost. RA-Aus was created (and I will say rightly so) to allow for Recreational flyers to avoid a large part of that cost. Hence it became "us and them". In avoiding that cost the only sacrifice that was made was safety (training also being an inherent factor in safety). I think that a persons individual right to choose the situations in which they place themselves is important however the impact on that person on others is so much more important.

 

Now it seems that RA-Aus wants to begin again where GA began in the early 1900's. If we continue down this path we will no doubt see, over the next hundred years or so, some RA aircraft fall into populated areas, some passengers getting killed, loads of the associated press and pressure on those in power to stop it from ever happening again. Exactly the same situations through which the safety and training requirements of GA has evolved.

 

Why on earth do we want to start this over again?

 

My two cents is that GA exists for a purpose as does RA. Let's keep it that way. If a situation arises where the two arenas clash then make a grown-up decision to go one way or the other, respect the rights of the non-aviation community and stop trying to bend the world. Either way you can still fly.

 

 

[skybum]

Skybum, with due respect your post ignores the reality of the situation at Narromine. What you are talking about is a sociological phenomenon referred to as "group think" where basically everyone adopts the attitude that everyone else is OK with this whatever so I should be OK with this whatever too. In some cases it is a perfectly reasonable response. At Narromine for instance, a public visitor or a visiting pilot should not reasonably be expected to take the lead in law enforcement when there is the whole board of RAAus, the whole RAAus management team, enough instructors and CFIs to sink a battleship....AND .... the entire organizing committee for the event. I cant point the finger at jo average or jo average pilot for not raising hell in this environment. At at ordinary field on an ordinary day I believe that EVERYONE bears responsability to do whatever is neccessary to stop stupidity.

Tell you something QWERTY, take away all the punters at a show and who have you got left? If you are part of the show, you see people in the crowd ...the people who matter...your mates...your representatives in the association. If you see a newb doing something stupid or someone who should know better you either fronted them. Or, if they were a loser and wouldn't listen to helpful advice, you go and see that someone you know and do something about it.

 

I used to dragrace motorcycles within ANDRA. No matter where I raced around Aus, I knew someone in the crowd and down at the pad and in the pits and knew people within the association. Only raced group 3 but I had mates right at the top of the game in group one. The common link was we all loved our sport. Nobody took shortcuts and we all looked out for each other. It was a privelage to be a part of that group.

 

What it comes down to was you never did anything stupid and let your mates down. These guys either do not have any mates or have d***heads for mates to allow such a thing.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Al B, like i have been saying for several years the US system is the best thing that has ever happened for this type of flying/aircraft. We should have aligned ourselves with it right from the start, LSA, LSP, ELSA, and FAR103, and

 

LSA repairman/instructor. Instead they have just done a rehash of an out of date system that was never suitable for what it was intended for in the first place now it is all going down in flames. it will cost us much time and money to sort it all out.