No axe to grind here thanks Franko. Just annoys me when people try to get something for nothing.
It's an endorsement that requires MORE CTA training then the GA one, only for aircraft with 2 seats max and a weight limit. How is that _possibly_ getting something for nothing?
Next it will be NVFR and IFR after CTA.
I've seen a heap of RAA aircraft with transponders and suitable engines, and they can already fly CTA with a PPL. I have not yet seen any with IFR instrumentation, and I doubt many would make stable IFR platforms.
But you know what? Perhaps the CTA will go ahead and it turns out that it's not the end of the world. Perhaps there will be a weight increase and there isn't a massive death toll (a 152 really isn't that hard to fly!).
If the above ever happens, and 10 years down the road a significant portion of RAA pilots put forward a case for NVFR, and the RAA prepares a training syllabus equal or better to the GA one, and mandates suitable instruments - why not?
I think IFR is at least 20 years away
Edit: What would be your thoughts on initially limiting a CTA endorsement to transit-only?