Unless things have changed a lot over the past few years, if it's got a DGTA registration it's State. If a CASA registration it's Australian. For the period an Australian aircraft (VH-) is flown on MIL OPS by an ADF pilot it is considered to be a State aircraft.
what is the correct category for aircraft operated by a private company, e.g. at Tamworth, for the purposes of ADF flying training
I suggest Australian Register. I could ask a colleague in the management side of the program for clarification if that would help ?
CAO 95.27
Regulatory exemption permission for production testing during assembly programmes - been the story for years .. similarly applied to the F18, Mirage and probably back to the Sabre (although I was only a young chap back then - can still recall watching night OPS at Williamtown with the searchlights tracking the fighters).
I presume that the post assembly testing is done with the helos on the Australian register temporarily ?
CAO 95.28
Likewise.
CAO 95.33
Likewise
BDA civilian employees (QFIs) captaining Kiowa and Black Hawk training sorties at the school to qualify new aircrew.
You mean like in CAO 95.20 ? QED and very likely the way the operation is authorised.
I was lead to believe the RAAF has teed it up through some reg/agreement for the CT4s to be recognised as state aircraft.
If they really wanted to make them State aircraft a revised TC process would do the job the same as the B300s at East Sale and Townsville. These aircraft were, in effect, rubber stamped by DGTA on the basis of the FAA TC process.
Short answer- not simple by any means.
On the contrary, I think fairly simple. However, the fact that nothing has been done suggests that the present arrangement works fine and it isn't worth the effort to change the TC basis to AMTC.
I recall the ct4s in East Sale, even though owned by BAE were state aircraft
VH- tails.