RAA pilots in control zones
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
So once you have done your extra training and a medical...............Ohhh you have done your PPL with NIL Airpsace restrictions 
.
Said it before and I will say it again, why are the RAA going to the trouble
. 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!
J
.Said it before and I will say it again, why are the RAA going to the trouble
. 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!
J
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,
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,
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
