RAA pilots in control zones

[HarveyGee]

I've just been told that RAA pilots in transponder equipped aircraft can access primary control zones. I must have missed something - I thought the minimum requirement was for a PPL. Can anyone enlighten me - and is this a good development?

[Hugh Jarse]

Provided RAA pilots have the appropriate training, and their aircraft are suitably equipped - why not?

We need to foster participation in GA, not find reasons to lock people out. :)

[Ultralights]

at this present moment, you need a PPL and transponder to access CTA. but the CTA endorsement for RAAus licence holders is very near. it is almost identical to the old Flight radio operators licence gained with the PPL a while back.

[PlankBlender]

Let's hope the RAAA have got their varying training standards under control before they send Joe Lightie into busy control zones, otherwise the first accident will be only a matter of time.. :suspect:

[VH-XXX]

"Let's hope the RAAA have got their varying training standards under control before they send Joe Lightie into busy control zones, otherwise the first accident will be only a matter of time.. http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/cwm13.gif"

HERE WE GO, there's always one!!!!!

Seriously, BUSY control zones? So is an RA-Aus pilot with fresh CTA endorsement any more dangerous than an international first solo student with 10 hours under his belt? No? I think not.

Rest assured that when the endorsement does become active (as it's currently in the RA-Aus ops manual but not in force yet) that the instructors and their respective students will be appropriately trained, endorsed and experienced in order to conduct the flight into CTA so you and your family Mr Plank Bender in your 172 bug smasher can fly safely and sleep snug at night.

[the wizard of auz]

Bwaaahaha. Seems its a touchy point there xxx.
I have bumped into quite a few RAA blokes out in the sticks, and to be quite honest, they are a little behind with the radio work. Not to say I havent bumped into PPL's that are the same, but I think it might be a problem when in a busy control zone if they display the same sort of radio work.
as to the last part of your statement........ well, I hope your right, as they make a terrible noise as they are being ingested through the turbine. :}:E
Seriously though, I'm not bagging out on the RAA guys, but they really do lack in the radio work department. I would suggest its really only due to a lack of exposure to that sort of environment though. That being the case, who is going to train the new guys with the radio work, if the instructors dont have that sort of exposure and background?. Possibly instructors that hold both RAA and CPL?.

[YBMK Tower]

Planky!!
the RT standard of most low time PPL 's is an absolute disgrace.
Phraseology and RT with ATC needs a whole lot more time spent on it during early training.

[Ultralights]

if the instructors dont have that sort of exposure and background?. Possibly instructors that hold both RAA and CPL?.
right here... RAAus Instructor, PPL and CPL holder, since 1988

[Jabawocky]

I assume that the training will also require a flight test?:confused:

Check up on some accurate navigation and altitude holding.

Otherwise it should work fine.

My opinion for what it is worth is why do the RAA want to go for the extra complexity? Why not stick to a simple life. If one of their members wants to traverse CTA, do a PPL. If they have a bit of experience they would not need much more training to pass the tests.

J:ok:

[HarveyGee]

I'm not coming down on one side or the other until I know the facts - but there are other issues involved. For instance:

Is the medical standard the same?

Willl the RAA registered aircraft have current RAD 43/47 inspections?

How will AirServices (and others) know where to bill the charges, given that, unlike the CASA Register, the RAA Register is not publically available?

Let's encourage aviation, sure, but let's also have a level playing field with respect to such issues.

[Di_Vosh]

It all depends on the training.

Down in Devonport there is an RAA Jab flying school. Don't know who they are, but their circuits, general handling (from what we can see), and their R/T is excellent! :ok:

I wish the same could be said for some of the GA training schools that fly in and out of Mildura, where some GA aircraft can't even get North or South of the field correct. Let alone anything more challenging, like correct R/T, or even making radio calls at all! :suspect:

DIVOSH!

[Super Cecil]

Divosh, over use of radio in the bush would be as worse as none at all. If there is no traffic in the area why make (Apart from if you like the sound of your own voice) 8 calls from inbound to clear? Or if there are 2 or 3 Aircraft doing circuits all calling on all legs of the circuit, you can't get a word in and you can't tell me their "Doing the right thing".

For those more familiar with AIP's, what are the "Required" calls?, not "Recommended", there is a difference.

[toronto_flyer]

If there is no traffic in the area why make (Apart from if you like the sound of your own voice) 8 calls from inbound to clear? Or if there are 2 or 3 Aircraft doing circuits all calling on all legs of the circuit, you can't get a word in and you can't tell me their "Doing the right thing".

Who could honestly say that they would rather a pilot not transmit his location in the circuit to other pilots? Anybody with a brain in their head and a little situational awareness should have a mental picture of the other aircraft in the circuit anyway.

[Chu Mai Huang]

Some RAAus aircraft have been allowed in CTA for years: factory built aircraft only, flown by a PPL+RAA ticket holder. (Cambridge TAS operates under a special arrangement for solo RAAus students.)
How's about all you armchair experts just read the RAAus OPS manual, and add to that the frequent recent reports in the RAAus magazine for the TRUE story about what's around the corner.
I'm not an RAAus flyer, but I easily keep my finger on the pulse. All the info is freely available (unless you have to buy the magazine)

[Fark'n'ell]

Anybody with a brain in their head and a little situational awareness should have a mental picture of the other aircraft in the circuit anyway.

Exactly. See and be seen,after all we are flying VFR aren't we.

[Stationair8]

A few that I know go through the zone anyway, why worry about ATC and clearances just charge through.

[Jabawocky]

HarveyGeeI believe these issues are all being addressed........ not sure about the medical issue tho.........J

[Howard Hughes]

I can hear it now...

"Yeh Gidday Syderney, I'm just over ere by the river and I'm gonna follow Bill in"!;)

[HarveyGee]

Let's stay on topic, guys and gals - R/T training? medical standards? RAD 43/47 inspections? the secret register? It's all relevant - I'm looking for factual input - so far it all seems a bit "wheels are in motion behind the scene" to me - this is not how policy should be made. I think this is an important issue, but I'm not seeing any transparency.

[Howard Hughes]

OK back on topic...
and is this a good development?
YES! Anything that gets more people up in the air has to be a good thing, properly trained why shouldn't RAA have access to major airports!:ok:

IMHO it as far harder to negotiate a country CTAF with 6 or more aircraft (of varying performance) in the circuit, than it is a control zone!:rolleyes:

[mostlytossas]

Spot On! That's the reason you shouldn't make all the calls that are possible. No one and I don't care who they are can possibly keep track of six or more aircraft all barking out base, clear of runway etc, calls in the circuit if busy. Try it and see at any country fly in. Just make an inbound , joining, and shut the f#@k up. Keep a healthy space in front of you at keep your eyes out of the cockpit away from them shiny knobs and things. But then who am I to say having lived and flown for years in both the country and city and fast approaching 60. Hell these new beaut pilots straight out of the academy invented flying didn't they?

[FRQ Charlie Bravo]

C'mon in fellas; the waters beautiful (once you've been in for a minute or so).

~FRQ CB

[VH-XXX]

A couple of points that need clearing up:

- You do NOT have to have a factory built aircraft to fly in CTA (RA or GA)
- You NEED a PPL to fly in CTA
- Therefore you currently have to have a medical by default
- Some RA schools have excemptions to fly in GAAP for training (instructors have PPL's minimum)
- RA aircraft entering CTA are required to comply with rules, eg transponder calibration, instrument checks etc as per GA standards

I hope that clarifies a few things, FOR NOW.

When part 103 comes in or CTA only gets pushed through (it's already in the ops manual but not yet active), then RA-Aus will issue CTA endorsements. The jury is out on whether or not you will need a medical or not.

[Integro]

Have to say I agree with Howard Hughes. I'd much rather be flying in CTA any day of the week. So much less to worry about, sure you have to keep an eye and an ear out but you've got some one telling you what direction to fly and at what altitude. It's pretty hard to stuff it up.

Write down what they say to you, read it back then do it.... Pretty simple system if you ask me :).

[Howard Hughes]

That is of course until they say track to 'the old fire station', or some such and you have no idea what they are on about...;)

HELP!:ooh:

[Sunfish]

Super Cecil:

If there is no traffic in the area why make (Apart from if you like the sound of your own voice) 8 calls from inbound to clear?

And after you have had a near miss and land, the guy says "Well I could hear you and thought I knew where you were."

Sheesh!

[Horatio Leafblower]

I'd much rather be flying in CTA any day of the week. So much less to worry about, sure you have to keep an eye and an ear out but you've got some one telling you what direction to fly and at what altitude. It's pretty hard to stuff it up.

Integro

You seem to assume that RAAus pilots are capable of
1/. understanding what they've been told;
2/. complying correctly.

I have my doubts! You and me and Howard will be flying through Class D in blissful ignorance while Barry Bugsmasher in his Warp Borer 3 clogs up the radio for 20 minutes trying to get the readback correct, and then won't be where he was cleared to or where he says he is.

:ugh:

What do the controllers think of this?

It is not fait accompli, CASA lodged several objections to assumptions and assertions made in the RAAus submission.

RAAus do not have the ability to control this, and it WILL end in tears.

[the wizard of auz]

Now where did I leave that "grabs popcorn" emoticon.....:E

[Awol57]

If they are training properly then its not a big deal, at least not for a GAAP. Just yesterday at work I heard some woeful radio work. We did a lot of chasing for correct readbacks and getting people to comply with relatively simple instructions.

These ones were all VH rego'd. Admittedly its a training aerodrome, but my point is, if the training is correct it shouldn't matter. We have a few RAAus aircraft come into the control zone and they are fine (well I assume they are RAAus, they don't have VH regos).

[Wing Root]

I thought the whole point of RAA was to have as little to do with CASA's rules and regulations as possible - an aim which I fully support. But at what point do you end up with the RAA licence being a pseudo PPL? If you want all the flexibility and "go-anywhere" appeal of a PPL you can walk into any GA flying school and get one and your RA hours will count too. However if you want the simplicity and low red tape of an RAA licence then there may be some things you'll have to do without. Landing at Tullamarine is probably one of those things.

[VH-XXX]

I meant to add earlier that a medical WILL be a requirement to go with the endorsement.

[Mach E Avelli]

I agree with Howard Hughes that CTAF work is much more difficult than flying in CTA. If the RAA aircraft AND pilot are appropriately equipped, CTA won't be a big deal - with or without 'word perfect' R/T phraseology. In fact it will probably be the safest place to be around some of the less aware RAA pilots.
There's some awful phraseology comes out of the mouths of airline pilots too. My pet hate is those who, obviously (from the callsign and aircraft type) flying an RPT service in a large-ish type, have to embellish the CTAF calls with 'an IFR jet". WTF else is a Boeing or an Embraer if it's not IFR, and who cares if it's a jet? Does it make a difference to other users of the airspace? A bit like those naff 'Baby on Board' car stickers - as if this message will modify a hoon's behaviour, or make any difference to those who are responsible anyway.

[Johnny_56]

I'm happy to be told I'm wrong.

But I thought the CARs limit experimental aircraft above populated areas. Since most CTA is around populated areas won't that limit it?

I'm not sure if all RA aircraft are experimental or even if the CARs are applicable.

[VH-XXX]

RA-Aus aircraft are not all experimental, but many are. The bulk of the ones that will be entering CTA will be flying school aircraft, mainly factory built like Jabiru's etc and of course private aircraft. Much of the fleet is modern these days so you won't be getting Thrusters and Drifters etc attempting to enter CTA, plus they won't be allowed to anyway.

There is no current limitation on experimental or limited aircraft over populated areas (thus Lancair & Glasair etc can freely operate IFR over surburbia for example) and contrary to what many people believe you don't have to have a factory built RA-Aus aircraft to fly into CTA, just the same as in GA.

[mostlytossas]

Machi E Avelli
That is very funny and very true,I have often wondered the same.
Maybe we should start a new thread.........Cockheads in RPT:ok:

[Flying Binghi]

Maybe we should start a new thread.........Cockheads in RPT

Ooooh, the fights on :ooh:


Now where did I leave that "grabs popcorn" emoticon.....

Lookin for it myself...;)

[LeadSled]

VH-XXX,
Whether an Experimental, Restricted or Limited Cert. aircraft can fly over a populace area depend entirely on the operating restrictions contained in the Annex. to the certificate.

There is no "one rule fits all".

The great majority of "Experimental" aircraft are "Experimental Amateur Built", and after the test hours are flown off, almost always the same rules apply as apply to CASR Part 23 aircraft.

As to the airworthiness of "Experimental Amateur Built", the overall standard and quality of build puts many "factory built" aircraft to shame.

Tootle pip!!

PS: Have a look at the CASR 101 definition of populace area, of the three conflicting definitions in the regs., this is the only one that makes sense, ie; it actually has a rational safety basis.

[NOtimTAMs]

Drifter in CTA? Been done - legally, too....

Drifter at Archerfield (http://www.pprune.org/d-g-general-aviation-questions/238969-more-photos-41.html#post3215978)

[Howard Hughes]

well I assume they are RAAus, they don't have VH regosYou sure they weren't septics...:}

[Awol57]

Hahaha well I guess you can never tell... :cool::O

[VH-XXX]

As Mr Leadsled stated, there is a test period for all experimental aircraft be they RA or GA rego. It's usually 25 or 40 hours depending on whether or not it has a certified / approved engine. You're not likely to get many RA aircraft banging around in CTA under their test flying period but it is possible, especially in GA as I have test flown aircraft from Moorabbin GAAP before.

Other than that you are free in experimental to do what you want within CAR's and CAO's as long as you don't do it for hire or reward and also there is a 6 pax limit on experimental.

The Drifter would have been in CTA if it complied with part 95.55 of the CAO's which means a PPL and approved engine which would have been a 4-stroke dual-ignition. If not, it would have been there under a special arrangement which is not uncommon, OR if Archerfield tower closes does it become a CTAF like Moorabbin?


Is this what you were looking for?

http://users.netconnect.com.au/~njah1/MichealJacksonPopcorn.gif

[Jabawocky]

So once you have done your extra training and a medical...............Ohhh you have done your PPL with NIL Airpsace restrictions :ugh:.

Said it before and I will say it again, why are the RAA going to the trouble:rolleyes:. It should be kept simple for those who want it that way and the more complex stuff left in the GA arena. All this will do is drive up their costs, which is directly opposite to what their charter is I believe.

I race cars and enjoy the competition at club and state championship level, and there is no way I would want that to become like V8Supercars..... or otherwise we could not compete at all!:eek:

J:ok:

[poteroo]

RAAus in CTA?

There won't be too many starters for this 'endorsement' - for the reasons already given, eg, wanting to stay clear of hassles.

The RAAus Ops Manual course is one thing - but the 'standard' is going to be at least what a PPL includes - nothing less will be acceptable to us...regardless of what is mooted. Provided there is a strong discipline applied in the CTA training, there won't be any more incidents than currently.

As someone else pointed out - CTAF(R) ops are far higher workload, with a mix of jet,turbine,RAAF,GA twins,singles and RAAus. Once RAAus students learn correct radio discipline, they are no better, or worse, than GA. It's all in how well they are trained.

There are only a limited number of RAAus instructors qualified to teach CTA anyway. Many RAAus instructors may hold a Class 2 Medical - a requirement, but not the PPL - which isn't a requirement. In the case of our location, both the RAAus instructors are Class 1 GA - 1 is a GA CFI. Both have plenty of GA-CTA experience.

The aircraft must have TXP + C, (RAD checks included), and an 'approved' engine = 4 stroke Jab or Rotax. In our case, the J-160 also has a G-296 GPS, and a full panel incl EFIS. By the time a pilot gets to do CTA, they will be very practised on all of these - and will fly to an acceptably accurate standard. The pilots who just want to doodle along won't be those going CTA - not with a ticket anyway!

happy days,

[VH-XXX]

It is actually a fact that the majority of RA-Aus instructors on record hold a PPL or higher, eg CPL. The PPL theory is a requirement to be a Senior Instructor or a RA Theory instructor.