Ra Aus Not Goming To A Cta Near You

[superdimona]

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

It's an endorsement that requires MORE CTA training then the GA one, only for aircraft with 2 seats max and a weight limit. How is that _possibly_ getting something for nothing?

Next it will be NVFR and IFR after CTA.

I've seen a heap of RAA aircraft with transponders and suitable engines, and they can already fly CTA with a PPL. I have not yet seen any with IFR instrumentation, and I doubt many would make stable IFR platforms.

But you know what? Perhaps the CTA will go ahead and it turns out that it's not the end of the world. Perhaps there will be a weight increase and there isn't a massive death toll (a 152 really isn't that hard to fly!).

If the above ever happens, and 10 years down the road a significant portion of RAA pilots put forward a case for NVFR, and the RAA prepares a training syllabus equal or better to the GA one, and mandates suitable instruments - why not?

I think IFR is at least 20 years away

Edit: What would be your thoughts on initially limiting a CTA endorsement to transit-only?

[SW3]

A CTA Endorsement is hardly in the same ball park as a Command Instrument Rating or a NVFR Rating.

Here's a thought for those GA pilots against RAAus in CTA. By your way of thinking I should be well and truly against holders of a Private IFR Rating because they didn't have to go through the same process which I had to to get my Command Instrument Rating and they don't have to conform to the same recency requirements either. And most don't have a CPL, yet it is a very real thing and IFR flight is much less forgiving of negligence or a lack of currency.

Different subject all together but as it seems, same thought process!

[VH-XXX]

Edit: What would be your thoughts on initially limiting a CTA endorsement to transit-only?

A little hard to manage. You'd need the full infrastructure for full-blown endorsements and the required changes and costs associated with it. I don't think the RAA would go for it. In reality, transiting CTA versus flying into it for a full-stop is not what everyone is after.

[Frank Arouet]

XXX;

Check out the BTRE figures for dwindling annual hours flown by private GA. These figures relate to VH registered aircraft. The reduction of those hours is proportional to the increase in RAA hours.

I didn't say RAA adminiser private VH registered GA. How would you assume that?

As for lights, my Sonex has nav lights and it is quiet legal to fly it at night in VFR where I purchased it in Seattle.

Because it has them, doesn't mean I use them in Australia, (where the air and darkness are obviously different), even though I possess a NVFR. It simply doesn't have the required radio nav gear. I also have a PPL which allows me access to CTR, but I don't fly the Sonex there either. I could if I lived at Seattle, but I don't. May I also add, there are many non NVFR aircraft on the Australian (yes VH) register with lights. Many people use them in times of low light just because they are there.

A lot of you have some sort of evil fixation when it comes to your assumptions that everyone is a crook and deliberately flout the law.

I own a model RC helicopter which I chase cats with, therefor I'm a potential criminal waiting for the chance to illegally fly someone's Augusta when he's not looking.

I don't think like you, so don't throw rocks in glass houses.

EDIT to add;

You'd need the full infrastructure for full-blown endorsements and the required changes and costs associated with it.

What tripe! Transitting CTR is what it is all about. Who wants to fly into Sydney in a drifter? How much safer would it be tracking direct over Williamtown in marginal weather than tracking via the inland lane over tiger country.

If you declare an emergency it is possible to fly into a CTR, even Sydney if the need arose, therefor the ability is not limited by physics, but by a piece of paper. What makes a 50 hour PPL any more experienced or educated than a 50 hour RA-Aus pilot. We have already proved there are idiots everywhere, mainly where RPT want to go, but since when was education a measure of intelligence?

Only happens in Australia. Give a bloke 100 hours and he's a bloody expert. When you've been flying 46 years you may claim to be my equal in experience. I'm still alive, so I must be doing something right.

[VH-XXX]

What tripe! Transitting CTR is what it is all about. Who wants to fly into Sydney in a drifter? How much safer would it be tracking direct over Williamtown in marginal weather than tracking via the inland lane over tiger country.

When I said full-blown infrastructure I was referring to RAA having to put the infrastructure in place through flying schools to implement the endorsements, in terms or training, paperwork and approvals. There is a significant cost element to that. They are already going backwards financially right now with spiraling costs and declining membership to the point that it is unsustainable.


I maintain that any pilot can fly into CTA with the required training. Right now that training is for a PPL. What I and others (including CASA) object to is it being an endorsement on an RAA pilot certificate.

[Icarus2001]

What makes a 50 hour PPL any more experienced or educated than a 50 hour RA-Aus pilot.

I noticed that you did not put a question mark at the end of that sentence so I guess that you do not want an answer.

The difference is what is covered during those 50 hours of flying. The PPL may have covered the syllabus for CTA and therefore by definition has "more experience" than the RAA pilot.

therefor the ability is not limited by physics

A specious argument. I am not a doctor but I can take your appendix out in an emergency, say 1000nm out to sea, it would be rough but I could do it, just that damn piece of paper standing in my way back on the mainland.

[Jabawocky]

Who wants to fly into Sydney in a drifter?

Frank...seems that I am the Lunatic Fringe according to you and your mates, so let me answer this question for you...........

The Fing IDIOTIC MORON that was crossing an ILS not far from Sydney without any radio comms, nor Mode C/ADSB and doing so in IMC conditions (not VMC).........well maybe he did not want to cross Sydney, but he was damned close enough for my liking.

J... The lunatic fringe!

[SW3]

How can standards be argued between RAAus and GA? I recently spoke to a GA pilot who, "Calls the tower ahead to let them know he is coming."
So how does one explain this? I've been told here a PPL is far more superior to an RAAus Certificate according to some. Just as some have mentioned standards are not as well supervised. Rocks and glass houses come to mind once again.
Funnily enough the only items not contained in the RAAus Pilot Certificate syllabus that are in the PPL is 2 hours instrument flying and the optional CTA component. SHOCK HORROR! Day VFR syllabus people. RAA aircraft fly under the same rules as the general PPL holder, DAY VFR.

[VH-XXX]

SW3, you and Bob are grasping at straws now.

How can standards be argued between RAAus and GA? I recently spoke to a GA pilot who, "Calls the tower ahead to let them know he is coming."
So how does one explain this? I've been told here a PPL is far more superior to an RAAus Certificate according to some.

Perhaps this pilot doesn't have a trasnsponder fitted in his aircraft and under the CASA regulations he is calling in advance to give the mandatory one hours notice. Or maybe he's letting the guy in the tower know that he's coming so he knows when to have his break so they can have a beer together. Seriously, a little petty don't you think? Does calling the tower mean that the pilot is sub-standard? I don't think so.

I used to call a specific tower in advance once upon a time to find out if they were open as I didn't have a radio; that didn't make me less of a pilot.

Funnily enough the only items not contained in the RAAus Pilot Certificate syllabus that are in the PPL is 2 hours instrument flying and the optional CTA component. SHOCK HORROR! Day VFR syllabus people. RAA aircraft fly under the same rules as the general PPL holder, DAY VFR.

What about Weight and Balance and performance calcs, first and last light calculations, CST to EST etc, density altitude, ERC, VOR, ADF?

[Frank Arouet]

The PPL may have covered the syllabus for CTA and therefore by definition has "more experience" than the RAA pilot.

Not if the same RA-Aus pilot has been taught that part of the PPL syllabus that pertains to CTR.

Balloons fly in CTR! Statement of fact, not a question, just in case the spelling police are still around.

Jabba;

Lets call my idiots Jabiru owner pilots and yours, Drifter owner pilots and allow me to apologise on behalf of all the idiots in Australia today who are unable because of lack of education, dullness of mind, or simply born fkucwits, to respond in case they are also dyslexic. Pertains to GA as well, the discrimination police could be about.

I owe you a XXXX when it stops raining.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

SW3...that's just PPPPPP!

ANDDDDDD, if you question why....you really aren't ready for the big time

It's not a standard....it's a rule. Until the rule changes, RAA certificate holders will not enter controlled airspace.

[Icarus2001]

Balloons fly in CTR! Statement of fact, not a question,

How is that relevant here?

The PIC either holds a PPL or a CPL NOT an RAA issued certificate.

[SW3]

Ozbusdriver you're a funny man. Not ready for the big time am I? Down boy down. Define "The Big Time"? And if you don't believe me on the syllabus go and do some research, you may be pleasantly surprised. And of course until the rule changes RAA pilots will not enter controlled airspace. (Just thought I'd write on here for the fun of it). It is a rule whereby there is no valid reason why it can't be changed subject to my points waaayyy back in the thread.

VH-XXX you were clutching at straws in this thread a long time ago. The pilot in question calls ahead as he openly admitted his confidence and procedures weren't what they could be (But at least he admitted it). As far as I'm concerned this has run its course. I've put my view forward, you've put yours forward. You have an obvious dislike for RAA, I will fly anything and don't care if there are numbers or letters on the side. Tid for tad, I'm sure it won't be the end of the world for anyone if RAA is allowed into CTA and if that hurts your feelings I don't apologise. Times change, new pilots are born every day and although we are all entitled to our opinions just as you and I are, no one movement has more rights than the other to be in the sky. Here's a novel idea, why not promote aviation and encourage those keen to follow? I'm certain you do this too however don't lose sight of where you came from. You're entitled to prefer GA over RAAus however why should the likes of your opinion destroy options for other pilots where there are very valid points out there?
We could go around in this circle forever, we both obviously have much ammunition and are both within the industry. However I'm not about that, I'm about promoting aviation for everyone regardless of what you fly.

[Frank Arouet]

Icarus 2001;

Flying a bit close to the sun are we?

CASA does not issue a student or private pilot licence - (balloons).

This function is carried out by the Australian Ballooning Federation Limited.

A student desiring to obtain a commercial pilot licence - (balloons), shall hold an ABF private pilot certificate and be trained by the holder of an AOC authorising flying training in balloons.

Can we deduce from this ABF can and do issue SPL and PPL.

If a PVT balloon pilot wishes to fly in CTR, which must happen for him/her to be endorded such, for a CPL at Alice Springs for example, why can't RA-Aus with an AOC do the same?

A Student Pilot Licence holder (aeroplane) can and do regularly fly in CTR.

[Jabiman]

Since we are quoting stupid comments on these forums, then how about this one:
http://www.pprune.org/professional-p...hese-guys.html

ok heres the deal with hour logging. im doing my FAA CPL/ME/IR with a different school. 2 people can log time in the plane provided both pilots are wearing IFR hoods. one logs P1 time whilst the other logs safety pilot time. switch half way through the PICs and do the same again....i think thats the deal anyway. thats what our time builders do!

Here we have GA blokes wanting both pilots to wear hoods so they can log hours!

[OZBUSDRIVER]

SW3???? Surely, you do fly by PPPPPP?

Rules is rules! Only thing stopping me flying RAA is the weight limit.

Some yummy little ships in RAA but have very limited payload.

I have no problem with a RAA pilot flying in controlled airspace with an aeroplane with an approved engine, a radio and a transponder and the ability to use same properly. As long as you plan ahead...even if you have to ring and ask and learn BEFORE you make an idiot of yourself where it could become a very real serious safety issue...what is to say that would be a safe outcome

Look, I will type slowly Whilst it is also a question of ability or equipment...It is the law. Until the regs are changed there will never be RAA in controlled airspace.

[superdimona]

I've spoken to Air Traffic Controllers about this during a pilot information night. Every one of them I asked said they had no problems with properly trained RAA pilots using controlled airspace. When I told them about the time I got stuck for half a day waiting for clouds to clear in class G, where there was a nice clear path through a bit of class C, they were amazed that I didn't explain myself over the radio and (illegally!) get a clearance.

If the controllers themselves don't have a problem, why do some GA pilots?

[SW3]

Ozbusdriver, read slowly not type slowly
Look over my previous posts. Your view is the whole point I am trying to get across, a RAA pilot could fly in CTA with the right training and equipment quite safely. This is why I believe the oppurtunity should be made available to RAAus (IE a change of regs to allow it).

Superdimona, spot on. I have heard of controllers with the same view and funnily enough I've never recieved any different treatment from controllers whilst flying an RAA aircraft in CTA compared to when flying a GA aircraft. Again it's all procedures. Follow the procedures, everyone is happy.

[VH-XXX]

I'd consider flying RA but with the tick of a box from the right person at CASA all privileges could be lost. It would also be nice to think that they had their finances in order too, but sadly not. CTA would be a drain that they can't and don't want to afford.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

It's funny...when you get on an RAA forum and argue FOR getting Reg103 enacted, you get howled down by the "purists" who want nothing to do with heavier weights and airspace access.