Jump to content

jackc

Members
  • Posts

    2,301
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Everything posted by jackc

  1. With my limited knowledge I will see what I can come up with, will be able to glean information from the EAA as a start….
  2. Backward thinking Australia all over, life has its elements of risk and nothing is perfect, just look at our recent most tragedy. All the qualifications in the World could not stop it……it comes down to the brains or lack of by an individual. Its impossible to protect all individuals, from themselves despite having mountains of rules…..
  3. We just give it another designation, CASA adopt the FAA rules and do like the FAA does and away it goes. The FAA leave it up to organisations like the EAA to support the sector and by being a member of that type of organisation you get support and you participate. FAA and EAA dont even have crash statistics data, because I asked for it, being an EAA member and doing research etc. IF a heap of these machines fell out of the sky, no doubt FAA would come down like a ton of bricks. I know people hate the concept, thats fine as they dont need to participate, just leave the people alone who want to give it a go.
  4. That is easy, just cut and paste all the FAA stuff and go for it 🙂.
  5. Its a company raising its prices how they want. I will bet some CFI’s will call it a day. Flying School rates will rise to cover it and in these times of an economic squeeze they may well decide its not viable to continue.
  6. The way thingsare going Part 103 will be all you can afford……
  7. Hummelbird Ultracruiser is Part 103 compliant. https://www.hummelaircraft.com/ultracruiser
  8. Nothing ventured, nothing gained…..
  9. Turbs, sorry to say there is ONE answer. Just adopt FAA rules holis bolus, dont change anything. WHY complicate the concept? Next job? Plan landing right to Avalon Air Show 🙂 🙂
  10. Air Venture 2023, how good is this 🙂 Applies to FAR Part 103 Aviators.
  11. RAAus wont touch FAA FAR Part 103 with a 40 ft barge pole, UNLESS its its run their way. In which case the concept will fail on account of too many rules. Best thing RAAus can do is ignore it, it does not exist…… But as people move on from Part 103, RAAus will pick up on those Aviators wanting to move up, but RAAus cant see the woods, for the trees. They would want it their way, or its the highway. Besides RAAus is not structured to work with a Part 103 regime, as its a company. OK chuck bricks at me…….
  12. But RAAus will not allow NO Rego, NO Licence and you would need membership, the very stuff, the low budget Aviator wants to avoid……
  13. RAAus are a company that you must be a member and answer to, for all aspects of owning and operating your aircraft. Pay the appropriate fees including registration of your aircraft and membership. Yes you do get insurance being in RAAus. GA Aviators answer to CASA and don't pay membership or registration for their privileges? FAR Part 103 does not have any fees for licence or registration and I would ask for the same situation in Australia. We do not need an organisation set up to administer Part 103, that would add a layer of cost and added regulations we do not require.
  14. Any links relevant to our desired Aviation regime? General laws maybe so, but Federal can override many of those too?
  15. Why do we need to consider the states, its a Federal issue? The U.S. does not have differing rules for 48 states? I might add under certain circumstances Part 103 aircraft can be permitted to enter/pass through controlled airspace too
  16. If Part 103 works for portly Americans? It can work here……
  17. Sorry, I think that RAAus would do nothing, except sink the concept to the bottom of the Mariana Trench 😞 RAAus is a company that makes money, a perceived threat to the income would be unacceptable………
  18. Maybe I need to plan a trip to the U.S. and see some people in the relevant organisations and some of the aircraft vendors. Been a few years since I have been to the U.S. when I did business there.
  19. Turbs, so why change something the FAA has seen fit not to change? The fact that the FAA rules have not changed over time is testament to the fact they must be happy how its working. IF we take FAA regulations and do what Australia historically does, make ego driven b/s changes and just fcuks up the principles of FAA FAR Part 103. The whole principle would be destroyed in what we seek. But at times I think some people in Aviation would like it to fail, too many Curmudgeons in this country 😞
  20. Take what aro has said and transfer it holus bolus to Australia, CASA takes it on board exactly as U.S. FAA does. Leave RAAus out of it, they started with it and have run their race with what they have done and to this day have grown the sector to become more regulated over time and closer towards GA with more expensive aircraft etc. We only need to answer to CASA at the same levels as U.S. Part 103 answers to FAA.
  21. Another John Moody YouTube video…. https://youtu.be/jvav17CxISY
  22. Turbs if you want to get creative, there are ways of getting around law suits costing you everything you have. If that kind of stuff bothered me I would have departed this Earth long ago realising life was so dull and not worth living. Why begrudge people in our case with Aviation, the chance or will to make changes that may benefit some who want to participate in Part 103 be free of too many regulated constraints, and have fun? May as well croak in your rocking chair watching Netflix 😞. Think of Bon Jovi’s song ‘Its My Life’. I live by it 🙂
  23. FAA Advisory Circular 103-7 https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.information/documentID/22640
  24. The Corporation has struck 😞
×
×
  • Create New...