HEON

I think that the lack of thought before the drafting of the AD and the expenditure of 11c per member for the plastic holder which it appeares is not always sent is quite understandable. One should remember where RAA Admin is located. The same spot where they have spent billons on another good idea which seems to have had the same amount of prior thought and planning...any one for a Pink Bat?? Must be the water (or something!) they drink down there!

The AN's wording probably needs a rethink. While I can see what is being attempted it is a bit like using a D9 to dig a garden at your house...will do the job but creates other problems! Such as...in plastic holder! What if not in holder but still visable from LH wing tip? This is technically in breach of the AN! Note some on this thread have said they got the new card but no holder! A normal person would say OK, however there are a lot of very strange people out there (like some airport workers dealings with "the little red card")...no holder=failure to implement the AN! If entered in aircraft log book as directed=falsifying records?????

I have tried here to get answers to some questions that RAA were not prepared to answer. The answers received with Ian's help rearly do not answer the question of "why not" as I beleave a simple computer programme could manage it. One can only conclude it has been put into the not worth the effort box by RAA regardless of a number of members saying with me here that they would like some imput on their number. Since it is a nice to have, not a must have, I am not prepared to man the barricades over it. Quote:"its a courtesy thing really that makes (some) people happy (and involved) " Thank you for your imput. OUT.

No plastic holder? Is this the start of the new policy not working? Question: if what an AN says is not included, can we forget about the AN?

Quote: "(a) realistic, affordable and more workable alternative (to the new policy)" How about enforcing the OLD policy! When the word gets out that is being enforced, the unregistered will retreat to private property where the new policy ALSO will not work. In other words, KILL THE GUILTY BASTARDS!!!! ONLY!!!!

As you have posted your reply to me here Ian which I thought off line, I will post my reply to you here also. Firstly if this is so why was my email not answered saying as much. If the lass I was talking to did not feel confident to do so it should have been passed to someone on a higher pay grade. Not replying should NOT be a RAA policy! Secondly I cannot see a problem in keeping track of "it" .I understand computers are very good at this and I think all people of an age to be employed are OK with them. Thirdly I think you have been sold a "snow job" by someone with a motive I cannot work out at this time. Due to this opinion I will be viewing all future rego's with a view that EVERYONE is subjrct to the IDENTICAL rules and there are NO spaces in numbers issued THAT CANNOT BE ACCOUNTED FOR. For an organisation that says it is more user frindly than CASA, why can people have imput into their rego with them? I also believe you can with the FAA! Lastly, why do rego's have to be in order? Phone numbers are re issued you know! Yes, I am an unbeliever on this. What I did not include previously was information passed to me by another subscriber that casts further doubts in my mind on the reasion on this intractability which I am not prepared to publish due to potential liable laws. It is a sad state of affairs when a member of RAA has to be scared of posting a story which appears true due to liable laws! Being a large number of years since having to study plays, what was the actual quote that went something like "something is rotten in the state of Denmark".

Major, as a retired one myself, well put! Surely we must have a "Midnight Foil" solution soon!

Never thought of a Scout...what about a Drifter? Will the lable and holder slice and dice well through a pusher prop? Was it thought about? Also add a Super Petrel to the slice and dice problem as it can fly with doors removed...Sorry, should have thought of that...Super Petrel's will be prohibited to fly with doors of in Australia due to the potential litter problem!

While I accept there are some people who do not rego their aircraft shorely it is THEIR problem if they do not have insurance, or get fined. As for a passanger not knowing, I can say nearly every one I carry enter from the right hand side of the aircraft and would not notice a left hand side rego lable. You will never convince me that this is going to solve the problem. When the Fed Govt changed gun laws and spent a vast amount of tax dollars on the buy back ONLY the law abiding owners were effected...THE CRIMS STILL HAD/HAVE GUNS!!! Only the law abiding will be effected...if it was going to stop THE CRIMS, booze bus deployments would stop drink driving...and we know how effective that is! Thats why so many DIE as passangers in cars with drunk drivers...do not tell me the vast majority do not know the driver has been drinking. Surely RAA has better things to do than this!

Since we must fit throttle locks, it is assumed an "inspector" would have to get close to see if one was fitted. In doing so the current rego card would be clearly visable. Or is the next requirement to fit a throttle lock that is clearly visable from the left wing tip??? Oh, (Toyota add word), probably given the little red card designer another idea!

Thank you Ian, that would be much appreciated.

In January I phoned RAA and asked for a rego number for a new aircraft. Was answered quickly and told they started with 7. With out much delay a number was chosen which was avalable and I liked, and reserved. In Febuary I again phoned to obtain a rego number for another aircraft and was told flatly that I had no option but to accept the next number. A bit taken aback I sent a (polite) email asking for clarification on the change. Received a quick reply restating what I was told on the phone. Sent another email asking "why" we could now not have imput. At this time RAA has not considered a reply warranted to the question on the policy change. I ask the question here now. Why cannot we now have some imput on our rego number? I cannot see it being a workload problem. Reviewing previous numbers from past years I would have to say it has been not a problem before. Not answering a members email on a subject a member considers important indicates to me a number of things; none flattering. Can anyone cast some light on the subject?

Am pleased that RAA is adopting something that even Qld has moved on from! Three weeks ago I was driving down a country road in car with personalized number plates and passed a police car. Quick check of speedo...I'm OK! With much susprise not long after the blue lights flashed behind me. They had made a spelling mistake keying in information of my car rego on their "little black box" which said the rego was not current (probably also had my underpants size as well). Soon cleared up. Not rearly the police fault: he was probably educated (?) in a Qld school! The point is that even on a country road they could quickly check that rego. Why do we need a bit of paper? Has the designer of our invaluable and so useful little red security card found new employment? Will someone please save us from these "back to the past" inventions...please! Are they now working on our Pilot Certificate to "up size" to that of a Pilots Licence so we can be retro there also.

Ovidiu: most autopilots in RAA instalations have a servo box around a quarter the size of a shoe box with a leaver attached to the applicable control arm(s) to move it either way. On mine the leaver is attached to the Al tube control rods. I see no reasion why it would not work on a Morse push/pull type cable instead. While different aircraft would require fine tuning the principle is equally simple.

I was not implying that one can just change oil, filter and add fuel and continue into the never never. Of course one has to check such things as compression, metal in oil, gearbox backlash, and replace items subject to "ageing" such as hoses and O rings (esp in Bing's); even some Rotax's break! There seems to be a lot of evidience however that TBO is not a figure that is not only achievable, but is frequently exceeded by numerous Rotax's.. What I was implying was Rotax engines, especially the 80hp, should see an old "gentleman" (did not like my other word) like me never having to place an add when I eventually sell which reads something like those very common in RAA mag..."airframe 1000hr, engine 400hr"...for non Rotax engined aircraft. My current 914 which produces 115hp at 39inHg from (I think) about 1070cc...in other words a high output for capacity with some complexity...has more hours than a number of non Rotax engines I personally know that broke big time. I rearly do not wish to start another Holden/Ford p.....g contest and will be very happy when "the other brand" have people posting about their engine reaching 4000hr plus "on condition"

Just love to hear of them hours on Fisher 912 as in process of getting one up and running. Since I will not be mustering and over 60 seems I should only have to do fuel and oil until into my 80's or 90's! That will be cheap flying as total new cost is well under Jab 120 cost of $63,000. The engine is half the cost!

Anyone know any school in SE Qld with a VH rego Jab or other RAA type aircraft. Being a bit over 60 I think I will have to go PPL to get controlled airspace endorcement I want as I don't think I have enough flying years left to wait for RAA.

Have a 40L one. Workmanship very good with seperate fuel pump. Only disadvantage is price; you do get what you pay for however.

I was down there a week or so ago and put my card on the notice board! Ready to do good deals for all Hech Field flyers on a Super Petrel AMPHIBIAN so you can use your field at ALL times... Looking forward to your order...:drums: roll

I think he got his instrument rating as well as multi engine...I am sure it must have been him from the landing the last time I flew commercial with

Sorry about Super Petrel LS kits: factory decision over which I had no control although I told the factory frequently they were sellable here. Ready to fly from around A$115,000 fly away, with radio, is still very good value however. Demo and another (sold) due in June.

Thank you for the replies, NOWEVER... I have been in Amberley active restrictive area with clearance in 24 rego aircraft with PIC holding current licance (GA) that meets the legal requirements. This is against the wording of the CAO I quoted. It is NOT what is written in a magazine story but what it says in the CAO I quoted. I have read the OTHER CAO that seems to allow it, HOWEVER it would NOT remove the words of the CAO I quoted. If it stuffs up, do we have to rely on the victory of the lawyer we pay for?????

Yes, but that is NOT what the CAO says!

There has been a lot of previous discussion on RAA in CTA's in other forums. "Aviator" Feb 10 has an article titled "Equitable Access" which quotes CAO 95.55 (5.1e) which says RAA aircraft must not be flown inside an area that has been designated in the AIP as a prohibited or restricted area at such times as any such prohibited or restricted area is active. I thought that a suitably equiped RAA aircraft (radio and transponder) could do so if the PIC held a current PPL (or higher) licence with suitable CTA endorcements. In other words, it is the PIC qualifications, not the aircrafts registration, that controlled legal entry. What is correct?

Did a bit of time in a Drifter last year doing the normal bunch of endorcements (TW,LP,2S,LL) and enjoyed it so much purchased a Fisher 912...waiting delivery currently.That would be called a Super Drifter in USA, but wire/not strut braced. Don't know how much use it will get on the Darling Downs during winter with other HEATER equiped aircraft in the hanger, but can hardly wait to have it for the "low and slow" flights when a bit above brass monkey temperature.