Ra Aus Not Goming To A Cta Near You

[superdimona]

I very well can bitch and moan. If people don't push for changes they will never happen (and I have pushed for change in places other then this forum). As for the IFR comparsion, it's apples and oranges. How many hours does a GA pilot spend learning controlled airspace? How many hours do they spend getting an IFR cert?

To repeat: 10-hour GA students are allowed to fly in CTA, as are gliders and RAA pilots operating under one of the exemptions. Why can I jump in a motor-glider and transit class D, but I can't in CT-shortwing? Am I somehow becoming less qualified by sitting in a different aircraft?

[Jabawocky]

Let's cut to the chase shall we.

RAA was all anout the recreational end of the industry....the old AUF.

If you start adding more training requirements, more GA like structures, etc etc and all the Head Office overheads, all of a sudden the RAA of old that appealled to the masses becomes too complicated and too expensive.

What happens........participation drops and the downward spiral has begun....and will not stop.

All for what........a CTA endo???? FFS it exists now....its called a Class 2 medical and training and a test. now that is exactly what will happen if RAA get it too, so why the **** double up?

It is just plain stupid.

In simple terms if you have an RAA registered (home built even) Savannah or Jabiru or a factory built one, or a Tecnam, and it has AN APPROVED engine, and a VHF and a Transponder (for C) and a PPL you can use CTA just as if it was a certified Cessna.

So the only difference is.........................a PPL vs a RAA Pilot Certificate.

So at the end of the day, if you do your PPL, which will be the same cost and workload, you can have the same privilleges WITHOUT loading up the RAA with all the admin and training etc overheads.

Everybody wins.

Why is it so many are so thick they do not get this???

Sunnie.........check your PM's

[superdimona]

If the CTA endorsement went through, being an endorsement it'd be optional. If someone thinks it's a PITA, then they pretend the option doesn't exist and life is the same as before. If someone wants to be able to operate in CTA (or even just to do the odd Class C transit to avoid bad weather) then they can do it. If instructors don't want to bother with the training then they don't have to offer it.

It's no different from any of the other endorsements they offer, ranging from simple radio, to wobbly-prop, glider-towing, formation, low-level flight or float endorsements - you don't see RAA members saying "this is all too complicated and expensive, save us from these endorsements". The training syllabus and associated documents are already written so no added expense there. Worst case the RAA could charge people applying for the CTA endo a small fee to cover the extra bookwork.

I also would be amazed if participation dropped, if anything the additional freedom would attract more pilots, which means more money to the RAA and increased political power.

Let's assume that it takes an RAA pilot 10 hours to do their CTA training. It'd cost maybe 10x$200 + maybe the cost of a medical (another waste of money but evidentally politically required). Call it $2200. Please let me know how much you think it would cost to get a PPL. Real-world figures please - factor in the more expensive training, extra textbooks, cost of the exams, medical, cost of the flight test, etc. Also assume that the RAA instructor already knows what you are capable of, but the GA instructor doesn't know you from a bar of soap.

Why aren't glider pilots required to get a PPL?

Edit: Yes I know you can get a PPL then use it as a CTA endorsement. As I said it makes as much sense as requiring a bus license to be allowed to drive your car on the highway.

[SW3]

VH-XXX just to fill you in from my first post, it was in fact a GA aircraft and not an RAAus aircraft seeking the clearance. However this is beside the whole point I'm getting at. It also reminded me of one GA pilot recently who stated that he "rings the tower ahead and tells them he is coming."

It is people like Superdimona out there whom I'm reaching out to. CTA is possible, legally and responsibly given the chance. These are the enthusiasts with a go ahead mentality who love flying and must be fostered.


MsGrath50 as I mentioned, this whole post wasn't for me to try and get somewhere cheaply. I have an ATPL (Began flying in RAA) and it was definitely not cheap so believe it or not I am attempting to help others, not just feather my own nest. I fly in CTA every day for a living and still fly for fun as well.

Somewhere this thread lost sight of the fact we all share the same sky so why is it so impossible to get along?? More flying, less politics.

[VH-XXX]

There is no doubt a bit of RAA jealousy from the GA guys. Those with a PPL+ did the "hard yards" and when the RAA members come along wanting to not have to do the same, we get upset. That's life, still cheese as hey say. Until it happens, bad luck!

Jaba, not sure if you've realized with your being busy with all of your Angel and flood relief flights, however the downwards spiral has already begun. RAA members are dropping lime flies as they say. I blame the GFC and the RAA executives broken promises plus the actions of certain board members making the RAA the place not to be.

[superdimona]

I don't understand why there would be any jealousy at all. As you know once you have a PPL it's trivial to drop down to an RAA cert. And unlike a PPL, the RAA has much smaller weight limits, only 1 passenger, no possibility for multiple engines, aerobatics, night VFR, IFR etc.

I think it's mainly the '2 seats max' policy that lets the RAA exist without as many rules. You can do an awful lot more damage with a PPL.

[VH-XXX]

You are probably right. Maybe the RAA pilots are jealous that we can fly an Airbus A380 on our licence and the best they can do is a 600kg Jabiru

PS: 249 posts and still an annoying typo in the subject.

[mcgrath50]

more expensive training, extra textbooks,

But you just said, you guys already had the knowledge to do all this? Surely the step would just be a simple top up and revision to pass the theory. A Cessna 152 (which shouldnt be a hard jump in terms of power) can be rented at a major BK school for $235 dual. I can't remember off the top of my head how much you can convert from RAAus to PPL hours but it should only take you all the minimum cause you are already at the standard.

I am on your side. We need to be measured by the same yardstick of competency but to do that for RAAus would increase the expense to so close to GA it makes GA (with the bonuses of multi, IFR, night, CPL etc.) more worthwhile.

SW3, fair enough, I respect your opinion. We can most definitely agree on this no matter which side of the argument we fall:

More flying, less politics.

[baswell]

I can't remember off the top of my head how much you can convert from RAAus to PPL hours

All of it if it was in the type of RA-Aus aircraft that could be VH registered as well.

So assuming you have done qualifying navs, all you technically need is the PPL theory exam, 2 hours of instruments, recommendation flight and check ride. If you go to a school that has your ultralight in a VH-registered version, even easier. Probably worth traveling for. (you can do all the training in an RA-Aus aircraft as well, just need the check ride to be in VH.)

Unfortunately, few GA schools seem to know this and instead of making it purely competency based, they generally make people jump through the hoops of getting an SPL first and then do the entire syllabus of navs. So a lot of people are looking at spending a lot more money than they need to.

(And then of course, there are people who simply need at least 10 hours just to just learn to fly a Cessna or Piper, just as there are GA pilots who need that many hours to get to solo a Jabiru. Both should probably find another hobby...)

[VH-XXX]

The 2 hours of instrument flying can be completed in a suitably equipped RAA registered aircraft so there is a small saving there.

The conversion can be completed in as little as 3-5 hours for someone who is on the ball as they say.

[VH-XXX]

Have a read of this first post in the thread and tell me that you believe that RAA in CTA is a good thing.

Help/advice needed on BFR with complications

(to view without registering, turn off your cookies (tools, options, privacy and slide up to block all cookies)

[Flying Binghi]

Yeah, ah dunno... perhaps we should just ban aircraft worth less then $300,000 from flying - that should solve whatever ..




.

[superdimona]

Have a read of this first post in the thread and tell me that you believe that RAA in CTA is a good thing.

Yep, let's tar thousands of pilots because of the actions of one person - who was told by the RAA that he needed a special flight review, then had said review terminated by the RAA instructor, and now has almost every RAA pilot responding asking him to be more responsible. How is this the RAA's fault again?

[mcgrath50]

It's not. I am sure there is at least one person in GA who does similar things but what worries me his attitude has been identified by instructors, administration and even admitted to by himself yet he still has his license. I'd really hope that if I publicly admitted this to CASA and my instructors knew about it, I wouldn't be flying anymore!

[VH-XXX]

Yep, let's tar thousands of pilots because of the actions of one person

I'd really hope that if I publicly admitted this to CASA and my instructors knew about it, I wouldn't be flying anymore!

That's another problem with the RAA. Nobody is "scared" of them and they just continue to do whatever they want. At worst they might make you do another flight review or take your certificate for a couple of months. Provided you have your aircraft registered with them there's little they can do and there are no fines or penalties. They did change the constitution a while back to be able to kick out members whom bring them into disrepute, however that is a legal minefield for them and I don't believe it has ever happened. When they tried, it was done incorrectly and they got some nasty legal type letters.

Question is, would you want to share your CTA with this guy whom would be entitled to use it with said endorsement?

What kind of safety culture are they running that would allow this?

What kind of technical qualifications are on offer to ensure that he correctly maintains his plane or than an annual non-compulsory maintenance seminar, if that?

Superdimona, do you think this guy is the only one that does things like this? Do you think he is the only one that has removed a piece of approved oil line and replaced with a pipe from his local Autopro store?

[superdimona]

Provided you have your aircraft registered with them there's little they can do and there are no fines or penalties.

Some people might not be 'scared' of the RAA, but if they misbehave they bloody well should be scared of CASA. Last time I checked having an RAA rego wasn't a blanket 'get out of jail free' card.

What kind of safety culture are they running that would allow this?

Let's suppose someone (and I am specifically not talking about the gentlemen on the other forum) has terrible judgement, but is skilled enough to pass a flight test. What magical method do GA schools do that stop people being idiots after they get their licenses that RAA schools don't?

Question is, would you want to share your CTA with this guy whom would be entitled to use it with said endorsement?

If someone can't demonstrate they can fly safely in CTA, they shouldn't get the endorsement. As for their behaviour afterwards, if they act like an idiot in CTA then CASA should come down on them like a ton of bricks.

I don't like sharing the roads with the bottom 1% of drivers either, but they will always exist.

Do you think he is the only one that has removed a piece of approved oil line and replaced with a pipe from his local Autopro store?

Probably not. This is really outside of my area of expertise, but I will say I've encountered more dud parts in GA aircraft (a park-brake handle coming off, radio nav equipment failing, and many instruments plastered U/S) then I have in RAA aircraft (A brief transponder glitch where the height information was corrupted). But with the GA fleet as old as it is that's not really surprising.

Consider this: If the RAA didn't exist, our bottom 2% who can pass flight tests then misbehave would probably be in GA instead.

[Frank Arouet]

Simple statement of fact; if RAA didn't exist there would be no private GA as we once knew it.

May I be so bold as to suggest XXX may have an axe to grind with RA-Aus. Or is it only me who noticed?

[SokPuppet]

No Frank, it's not just you that has noticed.

[VH-XXX]

No axe to grind here thanks Franko. Just annoys me when people try to get something for nothing.

It's like the couple of RA pilots I saw at Temora that fitted NAV lights made up from SuperCheap autos for when they have to do a night flight. News guys, you can't do that in RAA!

Next it will be NVFR and IFR after CTA.

If you want to do it, follow the proper route!

The hiring costs and governing structure are cheap for a reason.

[VH-XXX]

What do you mean about private GA Frank, RAA don't administer GA?

How has private GA changed with the presence of RAA apart from moving streets ahead with the experimental category?