SSCBD

I thought twins died off due to the high operating costs and maintenance? Surely they aren't thinking of allowing something like the aircam into RAA?

Quick answer so far

TWO ways to take this

1. IF IT GOES AHEAD - I can see a class f cat will be made for twins - but what size and weight - very vague on what they said. Assuming existing Piper Cessna twins or are they talking about LSA only type 750kg that could be made now at that weight.

Even if it limited to piston only GA type piper lets say, and not for charter commercial operations ie private use only, the standard will still have to be the current GA training and maintenance. These things that are say six to eight seats are tricky to fly at limits and engine failures.

They as stated looking for increased revenues and membership. However how they will cost this is anyone's guess.

2. But is see LSA type twins being built with 750kg this is think is coming anyway. So if its LSA type all for it - BUT those who fly it will need GA twin training and endorsement. Then I don't have any problems - as long as user pays and it will not impact the lower levels of RAA planes and costs involved.

SSCBDAs far as the 750kg goes for RAA I am told it is for 2 people only and the aircraft specs still have to fall inside the 45knot stall speed....that will limit a stack of aircraft but what it does mean is we can now fly slightly larger aircraft with more comfort and also they will be somewhat stronger which is a failing at the moment where the current 600kg limit does affect how the aircraft must be constructed. Personally I couldnt give 2 stuffs about the 1500kg push...also led to believe max of 2 people as well and I have no interest in night ratings or CTA and I would suspect that 95% of those who want these increases couldnt care less about them either

 

Mark

So looking at RAA we have single seat rag wing, then two seat rag wing, then light wing types were all classed really as ultralights - now we have the 600 kg beasts, carbon fibre or full metal factory built types - now to 750kg which means you can stick a 160 hp engine in the dam thing and still have heaps of weight to use up.

The mind boggles what could be built with this weight and yes if the stall speed is 45kts you can --- (and I got laughed at for say this) --- fowler flaps, of which a few types are now playing with in the 600kg class(have a look at the swiss Risen as per my logo here (yes top of the range but still at 554kg and had the official speed record of 160 kts from memory. Then also ad leading edge slot which will get them well under the 45 kts stall speed IF needed. (I flew a Robinson STOL decked out king air many years ago, and the bits they put on that were amazing to slow it down and reduce landing roll and we were using one way strips not legal here). They also have kits for single engine Cessna's off the shelf and don't forget people in RAA now are playing with wing vortices strips.

What I am saying is that the 45kts stall speed can be got around if you really want to.

The machines from Europe are really, cutting edge carbon fibre, and they are still limited in weight, cant wait to see what will be put on the market or modified to this new weight limit. We may even get a few jets...... maybe.

What I really would like is a to see a night rating come in with this weight limit as well. But also keep our rag wing heritage.

I don't know if casa will ever let RAA issue something like a PPL, RPL directly as such, at best they might make it like the RPL is right now where it's recognised from your pilot certificate. As for things like night, multi engine etc I don't imagine casa giving that to RAA, they are all activities with significantly more risk involved and I imagine casa will want to maintain direct control over that. Also I suspect the vast majority of RAA members don't want that, as it really gets a long way from the basic principles of what RAA was formed for.

What are you flying

Depends on the reason of the instructor - I would fly students in that without any worries and have done many times, but was there any other reason to call it off. Go ask why?

Not going to help alot of existing aircraft.............

Disclamer - I HAVE NO COMMERCIAL INTEREST IN THIS AIRCRAFT.

Its versatility, the ventura is designed to fit into different market segments:

from the spacious two-seater with ample luggage area in the S-LSA category (600 kg MTOW) to the

three-seater version certified EASA VLA (750 kg MTOW) and at experimental four-seater (800 kg MTOW).

All metal construction and manufactured with cutting-edge industrial technologies, the ventura

is a high-wing plane that can accommodate engines with power ranging from 100 to 160 hp.

The ventura can approach for landing

is slow as 80 kph at maximum weight and with its high propeller clearance can operate from semi

prepared runways shorter than 250 meters with large margin of safety.

two, three or four seats plus bags depending what you want.

Fuel capacity 2 x 36 L + 6 L reserve / 20,6 US Gal

Extended range option 4 x 36 L + 6 L reserve / 9,6 US Gal

Baggage allowance 70 kg + 20 kg / 154 lbs + 44 lbs

MTOW (Kg) 600 kg (Maximum take off weight) 1320 lbs

Empty weight (Kg) 340 kg (Empty weight of standard configuration) 750 lbs

Useful load (Kg) 260 kg (Passenger, baggage and fuel) 574 lbs

Ventura ROTAX @ 600 kg 189kms 102 kts ROC 850

Ventura M09 @ 520 kg 210 113 1250

Ventura M09 @ 600 kg 208 112 1100

Ventura Lycoming @ 560 kg 225 121 1400

Ventura Lycoming @ 750 kg 222 120 1000

Before you get too excited about 750kg, what will the stall speed limitation be?This could mean not as many aircraft fit as you first thought.

After watching a video clip posted on one of the forums here which I cannot find with RAA saying about the weight increases.

The 1500 kg aircraft also will be under a separate group called G whatever that is.

So that kind of opens up a can of worms.

The 750 kg caught me off guard having heard for years it was 700 kg, this opens up some interesting scenarios, which brings quite a few GA aircraft into the fold.

It also opens up a lot of four seat aircraft that could fit, off the top my head jabs, sling 4, the new Ventura just as an example.

The 1500 kg max takeoff weight under this new group G category with no other information was available on the video. It seems to haul in and divorces GA aircraft from CASA into RAA and releases Casa from any management of such. Gives RAA a huge amount of new registration fees and all GA pilots become RAA pilots which is another huge input of funds and members into RAA.

Forgetting the expansion and infrastructure requirement of RAA would have to do to handle this, dose it also mean the GA flying schools fold in to RAA. With my train of thought it will also allow night flying and IFR flying under RAA G category. The large majority of existing RAA flying schools are not set up for any of this, including instructors and CFI’s many have no idea of night flying. Will RAA be issuing a full GA type PPL syllabus to the RAA flying schools.

Back to the 750 KG max takeoff weight, this opens up some interesting possibilities as well, some questions automatically come to mind, will certain types be able to go night flying, there’s no real reason why we can’t night fly now except for a few instruments and training for those that want to. But again a lot of CFI’s and instructors aren’t rated for this unless they are GA rated.

With 750 kg can we take TWO pax as well that certain aircraft fit into with this weight? Also with 750 kg we can have true twin engine aircraft. I could co on but you get the idea what could be built or bought.

Do you think that RAA, could put out some sort of proposal to the members of what the intentions are vaguely how it would all work and how this would be incorporated into the RAA Heritage of ultralight flying. As I have not heard of any written proposal put out to the members of their future or am I under a rock.

Anyone have any further information on this?

Sorry over these sort of things that have an existing runway for years, and then people build and complain. You could make his life hell with some loud chainsaws, lawnmowers and music in the afternoon early evening. Fire with fire till he agrees to play nice and sign a nice letter to the council and withdraw any complaint. These people are just weird that they think have more rights then others who were there first and operating legally. Childish - but effective.

We have machines now available to fly at 700kg from overseas but are limited to RAA rules in Australia to 600kg. They could also be four seats.

My concern again is that the guys for example flying two seat drifters and say even single seat thruster types. Are these guys going to be forced to pay the same or have increases just because we are getting bigger faster heaver machines to 700kg. It also allows a lot of GA aircraft in, dose it not. It makes the one size fit all on training unworkable and a joke as well. Some CFI's and instructors don't have experience at this level also. Can or worms.

I keep saying we need to be specific in separate types, levels with costs in RAA.

Might be looking at the new two seat gyros coming in - big in Europe, they look cool and can fly and land easily in real nasty weather, control airspace with rating is ok, and the operating costs are low compared to RAA factory built I am told. Landing in a paddock style road in say 30 to 50 ft has some nice advantage out the back blocks. They tell me (have never flown one yet) much , much, much easier to fly and land than a LSA in crosswind.

Cruise is 80 to 100 knots. Oh and 10 hours ish conversion from RAA cert to gyro.

Did this a Mangalore at the fly in many years ago flying thrusters - just the two of us at the time were flying in very strong winds, but very smooth air. we were doing vertical takeoff and landings had to put the nose down to move forward and the downwind was really fast, then on final we could just hover - however the official's deemed it dangerous and stopped us. In reality is was not - due the smooth air. We were put in by other manufactures as they would not fly. You can do this at the beach in the right aircraft if the winds are good as its usually always smooth air coming from the water.

Deleted...mod. Insulting to previous poster.

Who Is doing the paperwork for the incident, could be a good read - also needs bigger tyres. If he wants to play on beaches. .

Or call up Brisbane on the radio just before you hit the line ( to triple check).They get a bit antsy otherwise, even it you just touch the control line.

Definition of a Acceptable Landing --- As long as you can crawl out, and get to a fridge and open a can of beer. (From a Seaplane Company).

Guys - We buy all the best pollies in QLD - other states get rejected lawyers and narcissists.

I concur.... As payment for his service as our fearless leader I would like to start a fund to buy this Italian man a decent coffee machine and some real Coffee.. Bleand 43 is NOT coffee ;)

I`ve already been told a couple of times on this thread, everything is in place to just go out and do it! Frank.

Morning President Frank - how's your blood pressure!

It comes down to risk, kids are raised to avoid risky activities, still plenty of kids learning to fly but only for a career in the airlinesthere are 3 drifters for sale on gumtree for under $14000

 

Free local classified ads

I think that if they are going around getting tatts and piercings, they have more disposable income than you realise. Those things are expensive. I don't see the point in trying to attract people. People who want to fly will find a way to do it, just like you and I did.

They have more of a vague idea of Gliders than RAA as they see them in the movies.

A flying group did a shopping mall display with aircraft years ago, and did very well with student enrollment.

We need the public to see the machines in malls with information etc and then they get excited they can fly them.

Take then for a quick 15 min free ride if they turn up to the school or club. Then the flying school and RAA can grab their wallet.

I like electric flight. I think RA-Aus will stay with RAAO of single engine piston driven aircraft up to two seats. No asymmetric thrust, contra rotating or jets and no electric. The reason for this is that these propulsion systems are traditionally either the bastion of aircraft over 700Kg or experimental. Sometimes both.That still leaves a lot of scope.

 

I would love to see an RAAO JUST for electric propulsion. Someone from SAAA chime in but I don't think there is any guidance in Oz for electric propulsion. Use the electric Lazair twin as an example. It is FAR 103 compliant over there and SSDR compliant as a float plane. As far as I know it could only be experimental in Oz but who would approve it?

 

As an aside I think youngsters would be very interested in an bare naked electric flyer (or motorbike) with lots of coloured wires peeking out and a tablet with blue tooth for a display. There just aren't any examples to show off at the local shops

Wheeler scout

Hi Nev, you said, "A high powered twin requires quick and correct handling or you die". That's a little bit misleading, in the sense of we have low powered twins, and they are pretty easy to control as long as you are above vmca. In fact a couple of them just need to hold rudder in and they fly ok without stressing or actual feathering or really doing anything. example Partenavia, Piper Dutches, etc.

Since we are talking about sport aviation class aircraft, I don't see to many problems with an engine failure in Sport again subject to enough rudder authority and maintain vmca once that airspeed is found out in flight. Off course engine failure on take off at end of runway and 50 ft where your are committed and is the most serious and is not fun in anything, unless you then have four engines.

I would expect however, some serious thought to anyone building a twin raa sport to do a couple of hours of asymmetric flying in GA twin to understand the reality of this flight state, which can get out of control quickly unless you do know what you are really doing in all phases of flight.