jackc

Well I opened my magazine and had a quick read, bypassed all the plastic fantastic wallet draining stuff. One article piqued my interest, think I need to write an article for the mag?

I checked, I can change my T300 to VH rego? If I want to go that way. RAA are gong to steadily lose a lot of aircraft to VH rego over time.

Something tells me the MARAP process is going to turn into a control freak operation.😥 over time?

WELL, take an FAA FAR Part 103 ‘holiday’ to the U.S. 🤩

Will this mean that new, complete crate motor assemblies will be available in the future?

Well, that’s great 😁 Hopefully they will display good PR, as RAA needs it right now 👍

The hierarchical structure is toxic, based on phone calls from what people tell me. There is a lot of historical bad blood 🤢 Which I find sad……. Maybe there needs to be big changes for RAA to move forward in a positive light?

Personally, I think the structure of Aviation does not show very many shining lights, anywhere right now. RAAus hierarchy were formally invited to attend SAAA Fly In, if they don’t turn up? That will be interesting.

It won’t…….the cat is out of the bag to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, read RAA ‘money’ I would like to be a fly on the wall at the SAAA Flyin 🤩

Word has it at the SAAA Fly IN that RAAUS members are jumping ship everywhere 🤩 GO VH, they said, AND they are.🤩

First we need a foot in the door and adopting the U.S. FAA FAR Part 103 regime as it stands, is the answer. IF it can be proven to work here, THEN work on changes, the RAA principle of 760 MTOW is an example. in our case, we don’t want RAA near any Part 103 system here, CASA must administer the Part 103 to start with. The RAA model has worked for it except now it wants to be GA with slick aircraft cost and complexity. The structure of RAA is wrong, I was changed with a vested interest of making money and increasing to cost of flying in the Aviation segment it administers. It forgotten where it came from……

I am bothered when I see RAAUS staff on the part 103 technical working group which leads me to believe there will be a conflict of interest in the outcome of that working group which will not favour part 103 in any way? It’s come to the point where I may need to make a complete, direct submission to CASA in support of trying to establish an FAA FAR Part 103 aviation segment in Australia. My recommendation, that it would be not in any way be part of the RAAUS umbrella.

RAA will do anything they can to squash anything to do with any part 103 like existence in Australia I would even question the fact of those staff members are actually on the technical working group because they have vested interest not to see part 103 type operation in Australia ever

Not much hope for us here when you see our RAA staff members on the technical working group for part 103 listed in Casa documentation. RAA will be doing their best to shoot the concept down.🤢

But it nice and shiny, with lovely glossy pages produced at great cost 🤢 The membership pays?