turboplanner

1 minute ago, old man emu said:

I know that you will correct me if I am wrong, but I see the prohibition on entering controlled airspace harkens back to the days when AUF aircraft were slow, simplistic things. Obviously you would not want them mixing with even the likes of a C-150 of PA28-140. I suppose those AUF aircraft couldn't carry a radio, either. Nowadays many of the grandchildren of those AUF aircraft are fast enough to mix it with the big boys. In fact, they can fly loops around something like a Tiger Moth which would be free to fly all day in controlled airspace. So why persist with the prohibition?

 

I'm not saying that an RAA aircraft should be flying into Kingsford-Smith, or Tullamarine and the like. Those airports are part of the country's economic infrastructure. Slow aircraft operating there are like caravaners on a single-lane highway holding up trucks and tradies. But why should RAA aircraft be prohibited from using the Secondary airports like Bankstown and Archerfield if they are carrying R/T sets that allow them to carry on the same level of communication as VH- aircraft. Again I use the example of two Jabirus, built exactly the same, but registered under different systems.

I did mention the city training facilities doing that with RA aircraft suitably specified and students suitably trained. One of our members Motzart Merv was an instructor in Sydney who would have produced many RA pilots that way, but that's not the issue on this thread.

10 minutes ago, bushcaddy105 said:

Turbs, what's your argument against 19- and 24-  registered aircraft (which have bigger 4-stroke engines and look like a GA aircraft) being used as cross-country tourers? They still have to be flown by qualified pilots under the same rules e.g. equipment carried, airspace, radio procedures, etc. The only real difference is no CTA, not wanted anyway in my case. What exemptions do I fly under?

Where you are there wouldn't be much noticeable difference, but around the coast and some of the bigger towns and cities,  some people have difficulty with restrictions.

I'm just in the process of researching some of the pros and cons relating to this thread; things like the implications of various Medical standards and where a change would leave some of the owners of larger aircraft and some of the rag and tubes. I'm aout 1/3 of the way into it.

13 minutes ago, old man emu said:

The topic, Aircraft performance and operations, is definitely one that you need to have by the short and curlies before you head off anywhere, even, as per your example,  a few laps of the training area. Would you agree that "operations" would include how to operate an aircraft when the air is full of potholes and your airspeed indicator is flicking back and forth like windscreen wipers in a downpour?

Yes, the example spacesailor gave was Fuel Burn.

You'll often find in the posts after a fly include a few that never made it due to hiccups on the way one of them being the weather and that someone in a Drifter or Thruster was running short of fuel because of a big head wind and had to turn back.

Doing the Met and factoring the wind into the buel burn calculation would have told him that before he left and given him the option of, say taking a can of fuel and refueling on the way, or just cancelling without the stress.

13 minutes ago, old man emu said:

Proper compliance and enforcement is a bit like the road rules. Who knows the wording and intent of every single rule pertaining to the operation of a motor vehicle on a public street?  You've got to rely on the main ones and hope you don't fall foul of a nit-picking inspector.

Yes and No; Members of Self Administering Organizations fly under two different types of regulations, CASA's "Precriptive/Proscriptive" regulation system where they take the liability on what is safe, tell you what to do/what not to do and inspect you on yor behaviour the same as the cops on the road.

The second type is the Self Administering requirement to eliminate reasonably forseeable risks where you and others up the chain are deemed to have a duty of care and if someone can prove you breached it you can finiish up paying for their injuries and recovery. This is the one most people struggle to grasp. They're right on the mark after they've been bitten by one though.

33 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

But , I , as an RAA student DID learn P & O ! .

We have to know how far the fuel we put in the tank , the take off weight , L p hour fuel use, weather ( MET ) at next stop .Which includes N A V , Oaks / Mittagong / Kiama coalcliff / Mountannan & back to the Oaks .

AND

I FAILED ,! .

C & E ! . We just called it LAW . Had to know ALL the Rule's & Regulations .

SO you say it's just our Vocabulary,  you don't like ? .

spacesailor

No, nothing to do with vocabulary, I did say various  versions are taught. In a city GA/RA school, you would be likely to get the full PPL training which is what you seem to be referring to, ie total useable fuel at start, taxy/runup fuel, takeoff and climb fuel, cruise fuel, descent and taxi fuel at destination and calculate the fuel you need to get to the destination with the legal reserve.

Then take off distance with the airfield surface, grade, altitude, outside air temp etc.

and so on.

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

Met, Nav and Leg, I understand, but what are P&O and C&E, please?

 

If RAA certificate holders are not getting this instruction, how are they tootling all over the country?

P&O Performance & Operations - the things you caculate before you leave the ground and recalculate in flight.

e.g. Take Off distance at point of departure which this morning is at an altitude of 3000' up a mountain with an outside temp of 28 degC.

C&E Compliance and Enforcement items for the trip.

I haven't seen statistics from RAA on where people are tootling, but from social media chatter I'd suggest most fly around their local areas.

Some will have been trained in GA so these modules aren't an issue for them.

Some have partially self-taught from books.

Some, trained in GA based schools would be taught all the modules at the night sessions.

I would recommend these modules be taught for RPC with electronic external testing, much the same as boat licences are tested.

I would also recommend the training be conducted using electronic classrooms so the student gets the benefit of others asking questions, struggling to grasp the principle etc. and collectively planning a flight and getting confident in calculations. Doing it that way covers the whole of country Australia.

1 minute ago, BirdDog said:

No distress calls etc.  😞  Sad.

That's quite common. There are plenty of ATSB reports to read, there used to be a batch of these in GA at the onset of every winter; disorientation and shock seems to take over quite early in the sequence.

There is plenty of RAA training going on in the cities. The RAA aircraft don’t need much to be made compliant and the extra student training is minimal. 

.....we will now be referred to as having the same brains as sheep.

"Baa haa haaa" laughed the Secretary, and received the death stare.

Baan Baa had, in fact, been named after ............

18 minutes ago, old man emu said:

 

ay, there’s the rub!

 

So what elements of CASA training are missing from RAAus training? I would have thought a rose by any other name would fly as sweet. 

P&O, Met, Nav, Leg, C&E, Maint in various aspects. Things that weren't critical in Trikes and Drifters flying out of paddocks, but have never caught up.

.....provide a brain for study. In the end they took a shortcut and used a sheep's brain, and this led to the legislation known as Section 52A, Baa Baa ...................................

43 minutes ago, old man emu said:

Please point out the logic in this situation.

 

At Camden there was a flying school operating Jabirus. One was VH-XXX and the other 24-9876. It was possible that both these aircraft were doing circuit work at the same time,  each flown solo by a student. Camden is a controlled airport from 8:00 am to 4:00 pm, so a visitor in 24-&^%$  is not permitted to fly into Camden between those time.

 

Leaving out the fact that the flying school had a CASA exemption to operate the 24-9876, where are the safety issues involved in that? Bearing in mind that the student in VH-XXX might be flying on a Basic Class 2 medical and the 24-9876 is self-declaring, and both are making the same broadcasts, why can't 24-&^%$ fly in from The Oaks between 8:00 am to 4:00 pm?

 

My opinion is that by creating RAAus, CASA has caused more problems than it saved. A plane is a plane, is a plane, is a plane. As long as the design is sufficient for purpose, and the finished product is maintained to an acceptable standard why should VH-XXX and 24-9876 use the skies and the airports under different rules?

Because they have different levels of training.

Who was to know that as soon as AUF was set up to allow people to build their own aircraft using small two stroke engines and basic materials, and fly locally without the complications of navigation, older people who couldn't meet the medical standard for PPL would migrate into it, manufacturers would come up with aircraft which looked like GA aircraft, bigger engines would be fitted, people would try to use them as touring aircraft and want to fly town to town and into cities and cross country, but still with the exemptions they'd been granted for local flights. 

......the standard letter writing protocol which dictated that ...............

No, but I'm pulling up the pros and cons; might take a while.

Yes. Not into straw man argument.

2 minutes ago, facthunter said:

The problem is YOU are making the JUDGEMENT. How much AUF type flying did you ever do? Have you instructed? Do you have an RAAus certificate? These things DO matter. Nev

What judgement? You haven't read the comments from the people who would be adversely affected by this?

I'm always interested in hearing facts and logic; I'm not intrerested where people with an agenda will do anything to get what they want regardless of the downside to the grass roots people who started this separate branch of affordable aviation.

.......those nasty non-inclusive, bullying words"

The Stock Transport Association members unleashed their cattle dogs on the Fluoro C.A.S.A FOIs, and these were the meanest mongrels on earth with teeth the size of steak knives and claws that could just about disembowel an unsuspecting jackaroo. The Fluoros ran for Moree, not realising how far it was ...........

9 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

CASA created the bureaucracy and has stoked the fire ever since. Any of their proposals to simplify things have always ended up building an even bigger bureaucratic mess.

CASA didn't start this and haven't made any decision.

All the theories, requests, and BS have come from the RAA  end and this is stirred from time to time by threads like this one.

......taunt the "Fluoro Fairies" as they called them, and it wasn't long before the ex CASA people, used to intimidating the more effeminate flyers.....................................

.....throwing the Street Directory at you.

Next they started carrying six guns on their hips and wearing fluoro jodhpurs.

Then came the "aviator' sunglasses.

All of this made them a bit obvious when they walked into the truckstops for free coffee.

Now we know that a truck stop restaurant can be a dangerous place to stand up and say "Truckies are GAY [ORIGINAL WORD STRUCK OUT - MOD BULL)

The CASA IIs had been renamed Cockatoos in Goondiwindi within 45 minutes of the first crew entering the first roadhouse out of Mebourne, such is the power of the CB., and they were waiting for them at the BP Goondiwindi with a Prickly Pear Welcome. It .............

10 minutes ago, jackc said:

The CEO is ex CASA?  I would allege he could have a tainted view of how RAA policies and regulatory responsibilities are and should be  be applied?  I believe there was  a covert visit by one of their officials to the Old Station Fly In. No doubt on a data gathering mission?  

Is the whole RAA System too onerous?  Its not correctly structured as it is being a regulator we must be a member of as well as being a company.  This is MY opinion and my comments are based on that. 

There would be no reason for either CASA or RAA not to make a visit to a fly in.

In CASA's case being a prescriptive organization, they are observing for compliance with their regulations.

In the case of a Self Administering body where they and ultimately you are legally responsible for duty of care, the body doesn't come in and throw its weight around issuing instructions because that would be assuming legal liability, but self administering authorities can come along and audit the event to review whether it is operating to organisation rules or industry standards. They are distictly different ways of operating, but if done well, will achieve the same result, minimal injuries and fatal accidents.

1 hour ago, Carbon Canary said:

A different angle on this tragic situation.  Who knows if there is any truth in this ?
 

https://au.news.yahoo.com/pilot-killed-alongside-pregnant-wife-may-not-have-had-licence-071037118.html

Well there will be an ATSB report on this one so we'll find out.

From the comments of the Club where he started training, it's possible, and the saddest part of that is that the later training covers the news areas not previously covered; Navigation and Cross Country Met.

If you do compressed training; getting a PPL in less than a month for example, including Navex, and the weather doesn't change in that period, it's easy to think Met is just a matter of checking Windy etc. 

.... possible non-compliance of the aircraft.

He pulled out his pen, but before he could write anything he noticed the faces and hands of 15 people in the windows poking their tongues out, and giving him signs the way Soccer fans do when the game's not going his way. He notoced another 10 with heads down clearly using their electronic devices illegally and was about to put that first when the phone rang. It was the Minister "What are you DOING!" he blustered in half-Aboriginal. "We've gone to No 1 on Facebook as enemies of all Pilots, Aircraft Companies and nwo passengers who are now calling you a XXXX and me worse!". The CASA FOI held up his sheet and face-timed it to the Minister. "I've got nothing on the sheet!" The Minister Called a Press Conference supporting all FOI's and won substantial support from the public, who joined in and ......................

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

How long has  it been going on?  About 20 years and it was the CASA that suggested a weight of 762 Kgs. How long is long enough??  Nev

If you take off your CASA hate cap, turn it aound to where you are the person within CASA who has to (a) look at the pluses and minuses, but (b) much more importantly look at the GA pluses and minuses and the repercussions and (c) look at the threshold where the liability line between CASA and RAA/L/Pilot will be judged in a PL court then look at, allow for, and set up management policies for the likely outcome, that will give a better idea of where it might go and how long.

..........gaps in business, for example noticing that whenever you went into a fish and chip shop you always got fish and chips, and whenever you went into a  hardware shop they could never find the bolt you wanted or althought they had the bolt they were out of nuts. "You wouldn't be eating chips if  bulls were out of nuts" exploded Turbo one day to the smug dude in the white apron. So Joshua Turbine built Colonel Hexagon Nut and Hardware Emporiums throughout the United State, and sold the Australian franchise to a WA Chinese who'd landed in Robe with all the other Chinese and had no sense of direction, so he walked west instead of east to the Ballarat and Bendigo Goldfields and made a fortune selling dim sims to the people of Perth. His name was Bun Ning .................................