Jump to content

clouddancer

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    38

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by clouddancer

  1. clouddancer
    En-Route Supplement Australia ( ERSA) - Gen -FIS - Inflight from either Airservices under Documents and Downloads or from OzRunways. This link will probably only work if you are logged into NAIPS https://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/ersa/GUID_ersa-fac-2-9_27NOV2025.pdf Section 16.
  2. clouddancer
    Thank you, I couldn’t for the life of me remember the name of the wooden prop on the Gazelle and Skyfox aircraft
  3. clouddancer
    They don’t need to clear the air, the Tech Manual has already been quoted and is very clear.
  4. clouddancer
    Type certified is very different to LSA
  5. clouddancer
    Rotax engines have a calendar life as well as hours for TBO. As it was a factory built aircraft, the 912A in the Gazelle was only approved for use with a Woodcomp prop. Trying to change the factory approved prop on a Cessna requires a Supplemental Type Certificate, which is CASA speak for a RAAus MARAP. Staff at RAAus didn’t review the condition reports for compliance until a CASA audit which resulted in greater attention to this area. Gazelle aircraft are no longer factory supported, so MARAP is the only way to get legal changes made. it is not a RAAus problem, but they are trying to assist members to remain compliant using MARAP. if it wasn’t for MARAP, the aircraft would be grounded due to lack of Woodcomp props and Rotax 912A engines. Buyer beware (or seller, be aware)!
  6. clouddancer
    Hey ClintonB, while aviation is “inherently risky”, we can all take steps to reduce risk, and also need to remember the hundreds of thousands of hours safely flown in a year, privately and commercially. Taking a risk based look at our personal flying habits, not just saying, “it’ll be right”, using resources like instructors and other pilots we trust, can help us stay safe. Not accepting any dodgy aircraft maintenance, or taking shortcuts will also help.
  7. clouddancer
    Probably more to do with BFR in 3 axis, or weightshift microlight or powered parachute? If CASA accept flight reviews which don’t cover all your design feature endorsements it makes sense for RAAus.
  8. clouddancer
  9. clouddancer
    I am only making a minor point, with potentially major outcomes for aviation. she will be right mate 🤣😉
  10. clouddancer
    Certainly more likely to, if we all assume it is male 🤣
  11. clouddancer
    If it was a driverlesss taxi, it would be allowed to go, not him? 😉 “One pulled up near us and did a quick u turn as soon as the traffic allowed him too. Amazing to see.”
  12. clouddancer
    There is a difference in the RAAus syllabus about solo at a competency standard of 3, controlled conditions and direct supervision of the instructor, yes the time is logged by the student ss PIC, but the instructor is authorising the flight and supervising the student. Once the RPC or RPL is issued, the pilot is authorising and responsible for the entire flight, unless under training for a nav endorsement, where they revert back to being a student being authorised to fly beyond 25 nm. clear as mud?
  13. clouddancer
    Try the main page of the RAAus website and scroll down for a complete explanation of the policy and a link to the policy. https://raaus.com.au/news/member-benefit-raaus-members-liability-insurance/
  14. clouddancer
    It is essential for any RAAus member to understand that the CAOs (95.55 for three axis, 95.32 for weight shift and 95.10 for single seat), have been around for almost as long as RAAus has (or the AUF for those who remember that). CASA has always set the rules to operate an RAAus aircraft and while the organisation has spent many many hours, days and years arguing with CASA, in the end, the regulator (CASA) is the boss of Australian aviation, not RAAus. Expecting anything different after 40 + years is never going to happen. Read the rules, understand the rules, go flying following the rules and you can enjoy the privileges.
  15. clouddancer
    They are both correct, it is an either, or, kind of scenario. either the aircraft taking off had turned onto crosswind, or it is climbing straight ahead and is further along the runway and you can finish your landing roll. simples.
  16. clouddancer
    “On the other had it was RAA which submitted a list of engine failures one of which was a flat tyre, so maybe RAA has some work to do which would satisfy the complainants.” incorrect, RAAus was asked to supply a database extract of any accident or incident involving a Jabiru, this information was not filtered correctly when analysed by CASA, resulting in a flat tyre in an aircraft powered with a Jabiru engine being included in engine failure statistics!
  17. clouddancer
    It is a funding and resourcing issue. The ATSB don’t have the funds to investigate any accidents involving sport aviation aircraft. Unless a minister gets involved and demands they investigate. The solution is to lobby for the ATSB to be better funded and resourced. As pilots are generally Australian taxpayers, regardless of the aircraft registration, fatal and serious accidents should be investigated. it is not an official policy or written document AFAIK, but a budgetary decision.
  18. clouddancer
    “ A minus for raaus for me is they told me this week I can't use my xair to complete my solo training because I wasn't involved in the building of the kit. But I can do my endorsements in it. That is silly. They won't let me fly it solo but are happy for me to carry the instructor around for the endorsements. “ I think you will find this is in the CAO 95.55, so it is not a “rule” RAAus has made, but a rule made by CASA.
  19. clouddancer
    First question. Is a Bolly prop legal on a Gazelle? Because Gazelle’s are Type Certified, not originally. Allsize were the original certified prop. But yes, if the MARAP process has been followed you can put a Bolly prop on a Gazelle. MARAP is exactly like a STC for RAAus Type Certified aircraft. So did the original owner pay for a MARAP for a Bolly prop? seems like the answer is no. is this fair on a subsequent owner? No, but buyer beware. Do research before you buy an aircraft, confirm what is original.
  20. clouddancer
    As far as I know there are 12 pilots in that photo and there are no company cars, there is not enough budget.
  21. clouddancer
    Check out the RAAP on controlled airspace on the RAAus website. https://www.raa.asn.au/storage/raap-14-can-i-fly-in-controlled-airspace.pdf
  22. clouddancer
    Try this. https://www.raa.asn.au/storage/raap-11-converting-a-pilot-from-another-organisation-to-raaus-pilot-certificate-instructor-rating.pdf
  23. clouddancer
    The report states “under review” I don’t think this is anything more than the pilot’s report, not the outcome.
  24. clouddancer
    https://www.raa.asn.au/calendar-of-events/mtow/
  25. clouddancer
    I think there would be an announcement from RAAus if they could register 760 kg MTOW aircraft already. Mid 2022 is what has been provided in emails by RAAus
×
×
  • Create New...