Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Forced Landing on Collaroy Beach NSW

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Forced Landing on Collaroy Beach NSW

Old 30th May 2021, 23:33
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Cab of a Freight Train
Age: 38
Posts: 690
Originally Posted by mcoates View Post
Damm, now your admitting to dropping something from an aircraft ??? Section 29.5 of the Civil Aviation Orders

Off we go again
You really are a flog, aren't you? Then again, I guess such a comment is to be expected from someone who was found by the NSW Coroner to have a "litany of dishonesty" and rulebreaking for your own pecuniary interests. Maybe that's why you can't understand the requirements for a legislative reference to your claims, you just go and do what you want anyway and to hell with the consequences...

Originally Posted by The NSW Coroner
One could be forgiven for doubting whether any maintenance or servicing was ever performed on the aircraft while owned by Coates. His record keeping was so appalling and to the extent that it existed at all, inaccurate, that we will never know. Very little if any of his two days oral evidence could be accepted other than his own admission as to his deceptive, or fraudulent dealings with RA Aus in relation to the registration of aircraft and use of unregistered aircraft, his ‘re-registering’ of an unregistered plane, his continued use of Czech registration in Australia in contravention of requirements, and his wrongful use of the serial number of an aircraft in Australia, on an aircraft in the USA. He compounded the litany of dishonesty by having prepared the Condition Report in August 2004 required for the sale to JG despite being prohibited from doing so by his pecuniary interest (i.e. ownership) of the aircraft on which the report was compiled, and further, without the qualification required to do so.

There is a strong likelihood that records which he did produce to the court were prepared for court production, and also that ‘Logs’ were not contemporaneous but may have been fictionally backdated to ensure a sale. He admitted that much of what was written by him in his Sting newsletters stretched the truth or were ‘sales puffery’ for marketing purposes.

<SNIP>

Similarly there were clear deficiencies in the Pilot Log Book and Aircraft Log Book completed by Mr Coates with respect to this aircraft. They failed to comply with the requirements for such records Source.
Now, moving on to toe substance of your post, having checked both CAO29.5 and the overarching regulation CAR150 prior to agreeing to not only doing it, but also spending a bucket load of time & $$ to design, build, install and flight-test an RV-9 specific cremains dispenser, I'm pretty confident I complied with the requirements. Of course, if you're alleging a breach of the CAR's or CAO29.5, I'm all ears.

Care to put such an allegation in writing here? Because as you can see, I freely admit to doing it...
KRviator is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 00:01
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,006
—————————————————

The CAO’s are irrelevant in this instance, because Raaus aircraft are not considered Australian Registered Aircraft, therefore the extra passenger is not permitted.

Refer to ops manual for passenger limits etc.

—————————————————-
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 00:25
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 477
Originally Posted by Squawk7700 View Post
Refer to ops manual for passenger limits etc.
I did look for passenger limits in the ops manual, but only found seat limits. The most likely argument seems to be that CAO 20.16.3 doesn't apply to RAAUS, therefore section 13.2 which allows an infant to be carried on the lap does not apply and some other reg. that requires all passengers to occupy a seat and wear a seat belt/harness is the final word.

This whole idea of carrying a baby in your lap or having 2 children restrained by a single lap belt does seem to be very 1960s though (1950s maybe? Before my time anyway!)
andrewr is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 01:10
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,006
It is hard because there are references being used including:

- 2 place aeroplane
- 2 seat aeroplane
- 2 passengers
- Control seat
- Passenger seats
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 01:34
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Cab of a Freight Train
Age: 38
Posts: 690
Originally Posted by Squawk7700 View Post
The CAO’s are irrelevant in this instance, because Raaus aircraft are not considered Australian Registered Aircraft, therefore the extra passenger is not permitted.
I keep seeing this written, but have yet to see a reference as to why people believe it to be the case, so I went digging futher...From what I can tell, there is no definition of "Australian Registered Aircraft" to be found in the CAA or CAR's, however, the following appear:

From CAR(2) using "Register" as a search term:
"foreign aircraft " means an aircraft registered:
(a) in a Contracting State or in a foreign country other than a Contracting State; or
(b) under a joint registration plan or an international registration plan.

"military aircraft " means aircraft of any part of the Defence Force (including any aircraft that is being constructed for any part of the Defence Force), other than any aircraft that is registered under these Regulations as an Australian aircraft.

"power-assisted sailplane " means an aircraft that The Gliding Federation of Australia Incorporated has registered as a power-assisted sailplane.

From CAA(3)
"aircraft" means any machine or craft that can derive support in the atmosphere from the reactions of the air, other than the reactions of the air against the earth's surface.

"Australian aircraft" means:
(a) aircraft registered in Australia; and
(b) aircraft in Australian territory, other than foreign registered aircraft and state aircraft.
Note: Some references to Australian aircraft may be affected by the operation of section 4A.

<My note: The "registered" above hyperlinks to the below definition>
From CAA(30DS)
"register" means the register kept under section 30EG.

From CAA(30EG)
CASA must maintain a demerit points register
(1) CASA must maintain a register that records details necessary for, or directly relevant to, the administration of this Division.
(2) CASA must, if it becomes aware of it, correct any mistake, error or omission in the register.
(3) The regulations may provide for other matters in relation to the keeping of the register.

My understanding of the above is RAAus aircraft are deemed "Australian Aircraft", however the definition of "Register" in the Civil Aviation Act refers to CAA930EG), which deals CASA's demerit points system only, as the "administration of this Division" in turn refers exclusively to "this division", or "Division 2" which handles AOC's. I have yet to come across another definition of "Register" in the CAA or CAR. Anyone else able to find one?

As an aside - how bloody ludicrous is it that we have to go to this level of detail to work out if an aircraft with numbers on its' side is actually an "Australian Registered Aircraft"...
KRviator is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 01:37
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: not where I want to be
Posts: 266
Originally Posted by Squawk7700 View Post
—————————————————

The CAO’s are irrelevant in this instance, because Raaus aircraft are not considered Australian Registered Aircraft, therefore the extra passenger is not permitted.

—————————————————-
I've no desire to get into the finer points of Australian aviation law, however a little like the difference earlier noted between 'seats' and 'passengers' I point out that CAO 20.16.3 (s1) states it is applicable to "to all Australian registered aircraft".

This is not necessarily the same as "[only] all aircraft on the CASA Australian Civil Aircraft Register".

I see 23-1600 is on the RAAus as serial# 159. Serial# 159 may also have been registered as VH-OIP, but in any event it is clear that:

(1) The RAAus is an organisation domiciled in Australia
(2) The RAAus operates a public register of aircraft showing "registration status of an aircraft registered with Recreational Aviation Australia"
(3) 23-1600, s/n 159 may be found on that register

Thus, while acknowledging there may be specific legislation or orders that say otherwise (but in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary), I'd advise caution around an assumption that 23-1600 - or indeed any similar craft - isn't covered by CAO 20.16.3.
First_Principal is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 01:42
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 3,881
RAAus documents here.

https://www.raa.asn.au/documents-and...ate-documents/

In a cursory look I'm unable to find any direct statement about the number of passengers that may be carried in a two seat aircraft, though they talk about "passenger" in the singular.

An example - NO PASSENGER IS TO BE FLOWN UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE TECHNICAL MANAGER HAS ISSUED THE PERMIT TO FLY

Wonder if the required cockpit warning is a get out of jail card - WARNING PERSONS FLY IN THIS AIRCRAFT AT THEIR OWN RISK. THIS AIRCRAFT IS NOT OPERATED TO THE SAME SAFETY STANDARDS AS A NORMAL COMMERCIAL PASSENGER FLIGHT. CASA DOES NOT SET AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT

megan is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 01:55
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,006
CASA do not consider Raaus aircraft to be Australian Registered and CAO 20.16.3 clearly says that it only applies to Australian Registered Aircraft.

A similar situation exists around using an Raaus aircraft for an CPL and ATPL. You can troll through the regs and you will not find a reference to the hours counting towards a a CPL and ATPL unless the aircraft is Australian Registered. Therefore, how are pilots using their Raaus hours towards their CPL and ATPL? Because there is a letter floating around from CASA that says that CASA will recognise 50% of the hours being flown in an aircraft on the Raaus register.
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 02:00
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by megan View Post

Wonder if the required cockpit warning is a get out of jail card - WARNING PERSONS FLY IN THIS AIRCRAFT AT THEIR OWN RISK. THIS AIRCRAFT IS NOT OPERATED TO THE SAME SAFETY STANDARDS AS A NORMAL COMMERCIAL PASSENGER FLIGHT. CASA DOES NOT SET AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT
That’s required for experimental aircraft in Raaus and GA, and yes, it’s a disclaimer for the purposes of liability.
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 02:02
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: not where I want to be
Posts: 266
A little further comment:

s7.2 of CASA AC 21-41(0) states "...LSA are Australian aircraft as defined under the Act...", which is essentially what KRviator quoted while I was typing earlier. Note the Civil Aviation Act 1988 is not the same as various regulations that may ensue from it.

Although it may not necessarily be the case here, in the event of things that are not defined in legislation the Courts will often refer to the meaning of a word from the Oxford English Dictionary. That august book states that a 'register' can be "An official list or record of names or items.".

Thus, even if it's not defined in your Act or CAR's etc, I suggest there's little doubt on what it means - from which I would take the RAAus records to be a register of Australian aircraft (for the purpose of CAO 20.16.3).



First_Principal is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 02:16
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: not where I want to be
Posts: 266
At the risk of further thread drift here I note that the New Zealand Civil Aviation Act (1990, and amendments) is a lot clearer on the matter of a register:

S2 Interpretation:

New Zealand Register of Aircraft means the register of that name that is established under section 73
New Zealand registered aircraft means any aircraft that is for the time being registered by the Director under section 6(1)(a)


I won't go on to replicate the various sections, I doubt it would add much to this discussion, but it's good to see some jurisdictions attempt to provide a reasonably comprehensive set of definitions...
First_Principal is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 02:22
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Cab of a Freight Train
Age: 38
Posts: 690
Originally Posted by Squawk7700 View Post
A similar situation exists around using an Raaus aircraft for an CPL and ATPL. You can troll through the regs and you will not find a reference to the hours counting towards a a CPL and ATPL unless the aircraft is Australian Registered. Therefore, how are pilots using their Raaus hours towards their CPL and ATPL? Because there is a letter floating around from CASA that says that CASA will recognise 50% of the hours being flown in an aircraft on the Raaus register.
That may have been the case in days of old, but it is no longer current. From this document:
Originally Posted by CASA
Registered and recognised aircraft—if you are applying for a licence after completing an integrated training course, you must have logged the minimum flight times, specified in the regulations, in registered or recognised aircraft of the same category. For example, to obtain a CPL(A), you must have at least 140 hours of flight time in registered or recognised aeroplanes. Registered aircraft have a VH registration and recognised aircraft are either aircraft that are on the register of an ICAO Contracting State or a State aircraft. Aircraft registered with Recreational Aviation Australia (RAAus) are not VH registered aircraft.

Flight training in RAAus registered aircraft is not Part 141 or 142 flight training. Flight experience in RAAus registered aircraft can be used to meet the 200 hour CPL(A) requirement.
[My bold. I (still) cannot find a reference as to "Australian Registered Aircraft" beyond what I've written above.

EDIT: Found probably the closest thing I can see thus far:
From CASR 202.900
"registered" , in relation to an Australian aircraft, means:
(a) in the case of an aircraft to which Division 47.C.1 applies--registered under Division 47.C.1; or
(b) in the case of an aircraft to which Division 47.C.2 applies--registered under Division 47.C.2.

Now those two provisions relate to RPA's and the CASA Civil Aircraft Register, that being the case, so far as the CASR's are concerned, an "Australian Registered Aircraft" would be one with VH- on the side, however per CASR 200.014, RAAus aircraft operating under CAO95.55 are exempt from the CASR's, and that definition.
From CASR 200.014
Certain ultralight aeroplanes
An aeroplane to which Civil Aviation Order 95.55, as in force from time to time, applies is exempt from CASR (other than the excluded provisions) if the conditions in that Order are satisfied.

And, because I know someone will ask...
"excluded provisions" means all of the following:
(a) Part 1;
(b) Subpart 11.G;
(c) Part 39;
(d) Part 99;
(e) Part 149;
(f) Part 200.

So per CASR200.014, RAAus aircraft operating under CAO95.55 are exempt from the CASR's, bar the few listed above, however, the definition of Australian Registered Aircraft found in CASR202 is not one of those excluded provisions, thus rendering ops under CAO95.55 exempt from that definition.

So....What is an "Australian Registered Aircraft" so far as a CAO is concerned? Fuctifino!

Last edited by KRviator; 31st May 2021 at 02:39. Reason: Added the CASR's bit
KRviator is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 04:21
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,006
Krviator, the link you posted clearly says that you can use RA type towards the higher classes but for the 200 hour route only.

› Flight training in RAAus registered aircraft is not Part 141 or 142 flight training. Flight experience in RAAus registered aircraft can be used to meet the 200 hour CPL(A) requireme
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 04:26
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,006
It also says:

Registered aircraft have a VH registration and recognised aircraft are either aircraft that are on the register of
an ICAO Contracting State or a State aircraft. Aircraft registered with Recreational Aviation Australia (RAAus) are not VH registered aircraft.
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 04:29
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by KRviator View Post

So....What is an "Australian Registered Aircraft" so far as a CAO is concerned? Fuctifino!
You didn’t look very hard because it’s written on the same page that you posted the link to.

An Australian Registered Aircraft has “VH” on the side.
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 04:37
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 275
All this is confusing as hell, but it still doesn't get you around the fact that an LSA aircraft according to ASTM standards, can only have 2 persons on board. The rest of this is just diatribe.
mcoates is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 07:59
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: not where I want to be
Posts: 266
Originally Posted by mcoates View Post
... The rest of this is just diatribe.
Pedantry (excessive concern with minor details and rules) perhaps, but diatribe (a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something), I think not...
First_Principal is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 09:42
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 275
Originally Posted by First_Principal View Post
Pedantry (excessive concern with minor details and rules) perhaps, but diatribe (a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something), I think not...

Damm, i was using voice recognition on the phone. I actually said "dribble" I don't even know the word Diatribe ?
mcoates is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 10:02
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by mcoates View Post
... the fact that an LSA aircraft according to ASTM standards, can only have 2 persons on board.
Looking through the ASTM standards referenced by CASA in AC21-42 for LSAs in Australia I don't see that requirement? All I see from CASA is "a maximum seating capacity of 2 persons" which has been discussed here.
David J Pilkington is offline  
Old 31st May 2021, 10:20
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 275
Well.... ASTM standards have references for compliance. they will refer you to FAA document 8130.2J which has the definition BUT it also refers you to other CAO or FAR's or whatever they are called now
mcoates is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.