PPL in RAAus

[csna172]

Hi All,
Struggling to find a straight answer on the topic so I thought I would throw it out there.

As a PPL holder, is one legally able to act as PIC in an RAAus registered aircraft? Does one need an RAAus membership? What kind of process is involved in doing so?

Thanks in advance for the help

[LeadSled]

Originally Posted by csna172

Hi All,
Struggling to find a straight answer on the topic so I thought I would throw it out there.

As a PPL holder, is one legally able to act as PIC in an RAAus registered aircraft? Does one need an RAAus membership? What kind of process is involved in doing so?

Thanks in advance for the help

???172,
You have to be a member of RAOz and the rest follows.
Their web site is very comprehensive. it is all there.
Tootle pip!!

[csna172]

Originally Posted by LeadSled

???172,
You have to be a member of RAOz and the rest follows.
Their web site is very comprehensive. it is all there.
Tootle pip!!

Thanks for the reply, I am aware of the website, however it appears if I want any useful information I'll have to take a few hours trawling webpages.

Their 'Fly with us' menu, for example, offers nothing unless I want to learn to fly or learn about scholarships. If you can provide an exact webpage reference I would very much appreciate it.

Would be great to hear from anyone who's been through the process.

[Aussie Bob]

I am sure Leadie is correct but doesn't my CASA licence allow me to fly registered Australian aeroplanes? Isn't an RAA aeroplane registered in Australia?

I detest the legal and bureaucratic system so I ain't pushing it, just saying ... And the RAA folk will probably make you do a minimum of 5 hours which you may or may not need.

[no_one]

Originally Posted by Aussie Bob

I am sure Leadie is correct but doesn't my CASA licence allow me to fly registered Australian aeroplanes? Isn't an RAA aeroplane registered in Australia?

I detest the legal and bureaucratic system so I ain't pushing it, just saying ... And the RAA folk will probably make you do a minimum of 5 hours which you may or may not need.

I think that CASA make the distinction between a Registered Aeroplane and a Recognised Aeroplane, though I am not sure i can recognise the difference.....

[Horatio Leafblower]

The short answer is no, you are supposed to be a member of RAAus and do a flight test.
However, about 12 years ago there was a PPL chappy doing tailwheel training in RAAus taildraggers. He didn't have a RAAus certificate and the RAAus chappy didn't have a tailwheel endorsement of any sort, so technically neither could be PIC.
Bloke in CASA told me they couldn't prosecute because he held a PPL with TW, and a licence to fly aeroplanes means you CAN fly the aeroplane. The RAAus system simply creates an *exemption* from the need to hold the licence, providing you do all the various other things such as join RAAus and get a cert from them.

...that was more than 10 years ago however, so it ain't gospel, and it only means you *might* legally get away with it.... not that you won't attract unwanted attention.

Best of luck.

[Kranz]

Originally Posted by no_one

I think that CASA make the distinction between a Registered Aeroplane and a Recognised Aeroplane, though I am not sure i can recognise the difference.....

A recognised aeroplane is one that can get of the ground. A registered aeroplane is a VH registered plane on the CASA register.

RA-Aus membership is cheap (relatively) and easy and provides you with insurance coverage.

[csna172]

More than willing to do things by the book, it’s just been incredibly hard to find any reliable information on the web relating to the topic.

Current situation; a student enrolled in an integrated CPL course, keen to do some flying outside of the course and gain some experience outside the bubble it seems to put me in; particularly in places a little more remote. RAAus aircraft seem to be obundant and a dime-a-dozen compared to some of the exorbitant rates I’ve been quoted for CASA registered aircraft.

Thanks all for the help, it is certainly appreciated

[andrewr]

Originally Posted by Horatio Leafblower

Bloke in CASA told me they couldn't prosecute because he held a PPL with TW, and a licence to fly aeroplanes means you CAN fly the aeroplane.

Not really. RAA exists under CAO 95.55. CAO 95.55 gives an exemption from various rules, specifically:
the following provisions of CAR:
(a) Parts 4 to 4D;
(b) subregulation 83 (1), in relation to VHF equipment;
(c) regulations 133, 139 and 157;
(d) regulations 207 and 208;
(e) regulation 230;
(f) subregulation 242 (2);
(g) regulation 252;
(h) regulation 258.

Somewhere in that lot is the requirement to hold a license, medical etc. but also the requirement that the aircraft is registered (i.e. VH), maintained to GA standards etc.

Among the conditions for the exemptions are:
a person must not operate the aeroplane, as pilot in command, unless the person holds a RAA pilot certificate
a person operating the aeroplane must do so in accordance with the requirements of the RAA Operations Manual and RAA Technical Manual

More than likely, if you do not operate according to the conditions of the exemption (i.e. hold a RAA pilot certificate and operate according to the rules set out by RAA), the exemption does not apply and you could be prosecuted for any of the regulations listed that you were not complying with. Fundamentally, it would be the equivalent of flying an unregistered aircraft that was not certified and maintained to the required standards.

[Stikman]

In order to get your RAAus pilot certificate, you need 5 hours on LSA aircraft (Foxbat, Bristell, Sling II, and the like), 4 of which can be solo, and pass a flight test. If you've done those hours already on a VH- registered LSA, all you need is the flight test.....and, of course, pay the RAAus membership fee. Having a PPL means that you'll automatically get your cross country endorsement and passenger endorsement, plus any other - such as tailwheel - that you may have.

[Squawk7700]

Supposedly it went as far as the courtroom some years ago and the magistrate determined that the PPL was a higher class of licence and decided on no action.

You could try it, but... that would be at your own peril, as you likely wouldn't be insured.

[andrewr]

Originally Posted by Squawk7700

Supposedly it went as far as the courtroom some years ago and the magistrate determined that the PPL was a higher class of licence and decided on no action.

That may have happened, but if so it suggests that CASA didn't understand their own rules or failed to argue them properly, or the magistrate didn't understand.

A PPL does not exempt you from the CARs. Nor does a RAA pilot certificate.

CAO 95.55 exempts you from certain CARs, provided you meet the conditions. I'm no lawyer, but it seems pretty clear that if you don't comply with the conditions for the exemptions then the exemptions do not apply.

There are many conditions applied in the aviation legislation e.g. flight reviews, recency requirements etc. It might be open for a magistrate to decide that being a week past the expiry of your flight review didn't affect your ability to exercise the privileges of your license and take no action, but it's probably best not to operate on that assumption.

[ViPER_81]

Depending on what you have been flying in your CPL course, you wouldnt be competenent to just jump in and fly an RA-Aus aircraft. Unless perhaps you have been flying something that can be VH reg or RA-Aus reg and you happen to find an RA-Aus reg version.

For example, if you have been doing your CPL course in a 172, you couldnt just jump in a Sling or a Jab, you'd find that they handle very differently. The RA-Aus plane might even be a bit harder, especially in high wind conditions.

Pay the RA-Aus membership and go find a nice RA-Aus plane to hire, go up with an instructor for whatever is required to be signed off solo. I think after your first flight with an instructor you will realise why you cant just jump in an RA-Aus plane (depending on what you have been flying in your CPL course)