Ra Aus Not Goming To A Cta Near You
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So while you may find it handy, about 4750 of your RAA fellow members would be funding yours and a few others privilege.
I don't see how this would cost much. The major cost (CASA negotiations and Ops guide changes) has already been incurred. From now it is nothing more than a few extra tick boxes for processing the endorsements. Besides, I also sponsor the 95.10 and 95.32 aircraft with my membership, even though I would never go near them. That's just the way things work.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Martin, the "rediculous" $160/year and $110 annual rego fee saves me at least $500 off my insurance as it includes a fair chunk of 3rd party.
Obviously, for the hiring pilot that does 50 hours a year, the $40/hour lower rental fee more than makes up for the $160 you pay for membership.
You can argue the individual charges till the cows come home, but what counts is the total cost.
Obviously, for the hiring pilot that does 50 hours a year, the $40/hour lower rental fee more than makes up for the $160 you pay for membership.
You can argue the individual charges till the cows come home, but what counts is the total cost.
I love it when the RAA guys froth at the mouth...
Bas...it's ridiculous...spelling police, to serve and correct...also I'd like to see Raa aircraft gome to a CTA...
There's no point arguing any of this, it was the actions of its own members in front of CASA that caused this decision. Clean up your own backyard then it might happen...
Bas...it's ridiculous...spelling police, to serve and correct...also I'd like to see Raa aircraft gome to a CTA...
There's no point arguing any of this, it was the actions of its own members in front of CASA that caused this decision. Clean up your own backyard then it might happen...
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
is it possible the CTA endo for RAAus licence holders was canned as a result of CASA having no faith in controllers in handling more than 6 aircraft at any time. ??? 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it was the actions of its own members in front of CASA that caused this decision.
Ultralights has a very good point. CASA is under great pressure to lower traffic in GAAP. It doesn't take a scientist to figure out where RAA CTA endorsements would be used the most. And it is not just existing pilots; I'd say many of the flying schools in GAAP would love to offer RAA to attract new customers. After all, it is not just cheaper for the students, also more profitable for the school!
But you guys didn't only want GAAPs and remember, GAAPs aren't technically CTA. Don't you think there are many many GA pilots who have CTA licenses that avoid CTA like the plague, due to expense/trouble.
Last edited by j3pipercub; 5th Aug 2009 at 00:47.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: In a caravan
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget J3, the ra pilots wanted this so they can *safely transit tiger country type cta areas* so they never intended going into GAAP with it
With the exception of townsville & canberra i can't see to many issues... & in the case of these 2 locations if RAAus members are so concerned why don't they push for a VFR lane as many locations around oz already have? would be much simpler than having to get a cta endorsement & cheaper
Join Date: May 2009
Location: In a caravan
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
missed the sarcasm bit 
and wouldn't that make life 'fun' 
The other problem that would likely occur, is that non-CTA endorsed pilot certificate holders would just be saying "RAA pilots can fly into CTA now, I'll just get a clearance." I know people that already do this but given that ultralights would be allowed to do it per-se, more will think that they can get away with it (and will).
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think by areas, he means the VFR lanes discussed. I know of some VFR lanes into GAAPs and Victor 1. Our local "Hope Valley VFR Route" certainly does require ATC clearance.
GAAP training in limitted numbers is already done with the exemptions. But limitting it to training in GAAP doesn't make a whole lot of sense as even after training, people will want to fly from their closest airfield anyway. (A proper FBO/school rather than just the club at Gawler would be a good solution for RAA near Adelaide.)
GAAP training in limitted numbers is already done with the exemptions. But limitting it to training in GAAP doesn't make a whole lot of sense as even after training, people will want to fly from their closest airfield anyway. (A proper FBO/school rather than just the club at Gawler would be a good solution for RAA near Adelaide.)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uhm, I am not sure why this is directed to me, but the gentleman in question seems to be a flying RAA aircraft on his PPL, which doesn't have the endorsements. Yup, he was trained by a real GA school and they didn't teach him he needed the CTA endorsment on his PPL!
And this is somehow RAA's fault, how?
And this is somehow RAA's fault, how?
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even more fun, earlier in the same thread qwerty says:
So he got his PPL solely to transit CTA and most likely told his CFI why he was doing it and still the CFI of this *GA* school didn't endorse him.
But somehow, that is an RA-Aus problem, obviously.
I know how you feel about the $$$$, I paid heaps for my PPL, 1) to improve my flying and education and importantly, 2) to be able to transit CTA and occasionally land wherever the hell I wanted.
But somehow, that is an RA-Aus problem, obviously.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So now we've gone from him flying into CTA into saying he flew an ILS into Essendon? You have a vivid imagination.
The fact that it was an ultralight is irrelevant. A pilot without the proper endorement flew into CTA. That's a no-no and we all agree on that. The fact remains that he was doing this on his PPL.
When I had my RA-Aus check ride, my CFI (also GA grade 1) made damn sure during the verbal part I knew where and when I was allowed to fly. Obviously, this has not happened here or he would have known he wasn't going to be endorsed for CTA.
The fact of the matter is that the moment he realised he needed a separate endorsement he booked in to get it. That shows more responsible behaviour on his part than his old CFI of ATO.
I'd also like to mention, he's not the only one that didn't know a PPL doesn't give him CTA access. The forums are full of PPLs not realising they need an endorsement, and one each for CTA, CTR and GAAP.
RA-Aus on the other hand has been speaking about the CTA *ENDORSEMENT* for a long time. I would imagine most pilots are well aware they need training, unlike, it seems, a lot of PPLs.
The fact that it was an ultralight is irrelevant. A pilot without the proper endorement flew into CTA. That's a no-no and we all agree on that. The fact remains that he was doing this on his PPL.
When I had my RA-Aus check ride, my CFI (also GA grade 1) made damn sure during the verbal part I knew where and when I was allowed to fly. Obviously, this has not happened here or he would have known he wasn't going to be endorsed for CTA.
The fact of the matter is that the moment he realised he needed a separate endorsement he booked in to get it. That shows more responsible behaviour on his part than his old CFI of ATO.
I'd also like to mention, he's not the only one that didn't know a PPL doesn't give him CTA access. The forums are full of PPLs not realising they need an endorsement, and one each for CTA, CTR and GAAP.
RA-Aus on the other hand has been speaking about the CTA *ENDORSEMENT* for a long time. I would imagine most pilots are well aware they need training, unlike, it seems, a lot of PPLs.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 49
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's interesting seeing the constant bashing of RAAus and its members. Obviously the CTA endorsement is a touchy one but lets just say, it's not over just yet, it's just on hold for now. It will be more than likely that RAAus pilots will be allowed into CTA in the future once completing the correct training AND that the pilot and aircraft meet the required standards.
1. Aircraft is fitted with an approved engine
2. Pilot holds a Class 2 medical
3. Aircraft has approved radio and transponder
So no matter how much you like it or not, it is going to happen.
1. Aircraft is fitted with an approved engine
2. Pilot holds a Class 2 medical
3. Aircraft has approved radio and transponder
So no matter how much you like it or not, it is going to happen.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wentworth
Age: 59
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to mention the alleged inbound radio call asking passengers to fasten their seat belts D-J. Every group has its warts, but we need to focus on the big picture.
The old GA aircraft are just going to get beyond our capacity to maintain, so where are we going to get affordable new ones?
We need to be looking at the future objectively, making sure safety is not reduced and at the same time ensuring there's a bigger critical mass of Pilots resisting the encroachment of Direct Factory Outlets. (At Moorabbin, the local Councillor is desperate for support, but can only call on GA pilots).
The old GA aircraft are just going to get beyond our capacity to maintain, so where are we going to get affordable new ones?
We need to be looking at the future objectively, making sure safety is not reduced and at the same time ensuring there's a bigger critical mass of Pilots resisting the encroachment of Direct Factory Outlets. (At Moorabbin, the local Councillor is desperate for support, but can only call on GA pilots).
Join Date: May 2009
Location: In a caravan
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to mention the alleged inbound radio call asking passengers to fasten their seat belts
I do agree re the age of the current ga fleet, I like a lot of the real a/c in the RA sector & they are / will be great replacements imparticulary for training fleets.
Although I'm dead against the thought of having to deal with trikes & the like in CTA after they've bolted in an approved engine & zippy tied on a radio / transponder.
What I would like to see is improved training focused on correct procedures & use of the radio for both GA & RA alike, This is one of our biggest problems in both sectors! getting pilots to communicate effectively. I think more FOI's that spend time on the ground & listening to what some of these clowns are doing may help esp if they start issuing directives for pilots to receive further training.
RAaus will from what I can see become the new ga, so they need to step up their game big time & so does casa but we all know that wont happen