kgwilson Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 I think CASA's view on RA-Aus in the future is quite clear. The new Recreational GA license is an active move to gather more pilots on the GA side and less on the RA side. The creation of a new form of training organisation that does not require an AOC removes a good deal of the disparity between GA and RA training organisations. I guarantee we'll see more and more GA-registered Jabs and Tecnams out there being used by organisations to train in the Recreational GA License.They're actively moving to push RA back towards its roots in doing these things. The reasons are many and varied and there can no doubt be innumerate arguments one way or the other but actions speak louder than words. In my view CASA's using a good deal of common sense. The more RA-Aus pushed for heavier aircraft and to be allowed into controlled airspace the more they pushed towards the above results. Good result for aviation as a whole just maybe not the result the Board was hoping for? Have a look at what has happened overseas, our nearest neighbour is the closest example. None of what you assert has happened & the NZ CAA had the foresight to formalise the RPL in 2008 without the endless consultation & other money wasting exercises. The major benefactors have been ageing PPL holders no longer Class 2 medical fit but with a desire to continue to fly their beloved Cessnas or Pipers in their twilight years. Most of the time when their PPL was valid they flew, as I did with 2 empty seats anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Obviously no one outside of the RAAus exec knows any thing about his history. Google doesn't come up with anything on him. I've never heard of him before. When Tizzard lobbed onto the scene i could not find much on him other than he had a prang in Vietnam. Be nice to know exactly what background our illustrious leaders have and if their qualifications are suitable for our member's needs. At least someone here has spoken to him so we actually now know there is a voice behind the name. Seems everyone lately is a quiet achiever. Thread drift? SOP Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68volksy Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I believe Adam was employed by RA-Aus previously wasn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Yes I believe he was steve's assistant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I think he is a ex RAAF Aircraft Technician. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I hope this is NOT cronyism at work ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I hope this is NOT cronyism at work ... Hi David, I dont think it is, I only said he is a ex techo because I remember a few years ago, that Steves assistant was a ex RAAF Techo. I could be wrong. I never met him when I was a RAAF Aircraft Tech.I also believe that Adam would have got the job on merit.I honestly dont think it is a "Job for a mate, type scenerio". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I am sure you are right Dazz, I shouldn't throw loose suggestions like that around. I think we have had some pretty skilled people on board RA Aus over the years. I think it is just the monitoring systems that have been substantially lacking. I guess lessons learned the hard way are lessons well learnt. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Who knows what skullduggery is going on in the bowls of the RAA bunker David. Jobs promised, old scores settled, mum's the word. Best that we don't ask too many questions alas we may find out the truth. I certainly hope Adam makes a success of the position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 This seem to me to be a case of sour grapes. The Old Guard moaning about the demise of 95-10. I fthere were enough people interested in 95-10 it would have a much larger say in the running of RAAus, but the numbers are down. Maybe the whingers should recruit more people to their ranks, rather than saying those who want to fly bigger faster aircraft are ruining the organisation. Just look at any airstrip and see how many 95-10 are flying. None at my strip and I can't think of any in the area. I don't think any made it to Old Station Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I thought it was the RAAs role to promote all forms of recreational aviation. I can understand why the RAA wants the big buck LSAs in the organisation. Any news on the current membership numbers? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Anyway back to the RAA New Tech Manager.I think that anybody is prepared to take on the job, with all the turmoil that has happened recently with the RAA.Deserves a chance to get on with the job without interference and prove themselves. And Im sure he will be fine, peeps get the upset because he turned up all a sudden, without the normal advertising for the position.RAA needed somebody very quickly, especially with all the stuff that had happened. Good luck Adam I wish you well. Cheers 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Yea im with you Dazza. I know they interviewed a few people for the position, one of our old blokes was one of the last. Thank god he didnt get the gig or we'd all be in for it (but thats another story). Who better to step up into the job than the previous 2IC? He'd know the job and all it entails, he would know the lay of the land and hopefully hit the ground running.. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 It's a big job and I wish anyone who is taking it on the best. Also if you want to make his term short or cost us a lot of money/time, tell fibbers on the stuff you send in. Nev 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 This seem to me to be a case of sour grapes. The Old Guard moaning about the demise of 95-10. I fthere were enough people interested in 95-10 it would have a much larger say in the running of RAAus, but the numbers are down. Maybe the whingers should recruit more people to their ranks, rather than saying those who want to fly bigger faster aircraft are ruining the organisation.Just look at any airstrip and see how many 95-10 are flying. None at my strip and I can't think of any in the area. I don't think any made it to Old Station Back in ya box Yenn. Maybe a little support and backing from the majority (GA rejects) and a bit more respect for the old 95 10 for the effect they put in to kick off the game would see the 'old guard' pull their machines out of the sheds or those operating outside the RAAus would 'come in from the cold'. Of those i know still flying the real 95:10 most do not operate from any airstrip and what no part of the RAAus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Using derogatory terms like "GA rejects" won't get you support ozzie. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Same for the Old Guard being classed as a 'whingers'. It's either whinge or throw rocks. The majority of RAAus seems to be pilots coming down from GA either due to the higher cost of GA or not being able to pass a medical but still wanting their full GA privilages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 If you haven't noticed, I've supported your stand all along. I don't like to see any of those terms used as they are not constructive. Money can't be a problem with the classifications you promote. Is the legality the issue?. IF only a few turn up at Natfly then so be it. No-one is particularly to blame. "Homebuilt" is a small section of RAAus, but is a large component of SAAA, and they devote a lot of effort in that direction.. Some localities may be able to get interest up to a sustainable level as local chapters of SAAA have a lot of social etc activity and some don't . Holbrook may be the place to start a revival. Nev 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Don't see much incentive for someone to spend $3,500ono on the B1-RD that has been for sale in Sport Pilot last few issues when they then have to do 20hrs and plus all the add ons to be really legal for a 'ramp check'. The B1-RD should be well and capable of lifting all that paperwork. Respect your support for the stand FH and from the others, the place to really start a revival would really be in Canberra. Maybe moving 'Canberra' to Holbrook would could work. Understanding that there still healthy grass roots activity and start dealing with it at board level, most from what i have seen over the years is mostly 'underground' and look at a real 'Minimum Aircraft' category based on the 265lbs empty and certificated for same. Absolute basics! Fly it where it is intended to be flown, off airport. Really need that insurance if you fly on your own property? The RAAus is pretty high maintenance for a B1-RD.' Someone going to buy the thing? Be perfect for a little father/son bonding. Try and pass it off to the council ranger as a 'park flyer'. BTW, I really find the term 'rag and tube' as irritating as finger nails on a black board. The term has been around a lot longer than the minimum movement and really best describes the welded tube and rib stitched fabric types especially from the earlier period. Minimum Aircraft is there original classing and should be recognized as such. Grass Roots is a popular term that accurately places Minimum Aircraft correctly in the Time Line. The beginning. Viva Les Revolution! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Go for it. Rag and tube to me is early "normal" planes. Minimum weight sounds fine. There can be a purity of design in these craft that is quite impressive. They have to be well designed to work . Even though they look fragile frequently they are not. As I stated above they are not expensive, (as the top end of U/L's are). some of which are more expensive than GA planes. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Don't see much incentive for someone to spend $3,500ono on the B1-RD that has been for sale in Sport Pilot last few issues when they then have to do 20hrs and plus all the add ons to be really legal for a 'ramp check'. The B1-RD should be well and capable of lifting all that paperwork.Respect your support for the stand FH and from the others, the place to really start a revival would really be in Canberra. Maybe moving 'Canberra' to Holbrook would could work. Understanding that there still healthy grass roots activity and start dealing with it at board level, most from what i have seen over the years is mostly 'underground' and look at a real 'Minimum Aircraft' category based on the 265lbs empty and certificated for same. Absolute basics! Fly it where it is intended to be flown, off airport. Really need that insurance if you fly on your own property? The RAAus is pretty high maintenance for a B1-RD.' Someone going to buy the thing? Be perfect for a little father/son bonding. Try and pass it off to the council ranger as a 'park flyer'. BTW, I really find the term 'rag and tube' as irritating as finger nails on a black board. The term has been around a lot longer than the minimum movement and really best describes the welded tube and rib stitched fabric types especially from the earlier period. Minimum Aircraft is there original classing and should be recognized as such. Grass Roots is a popular term that accurately places Minimum Aircraft correctly in the Time Line. The beginning. Viva Les Revolution! Well reverend, your preaching for the RAA board who mainly take an interest in 100 knot is going to fall on deaf ears. I didn't quite know how to say that so I made it as gentle as possible. I've tried to do the same thing from a central position in Speedway and wore myself to a frazzle, receiving helpful abuse in the process. I think *ag and *ube (I was only kidding) Grass Roots Flying is probably a key market position between RC Aircraft (and don't forget some of these are as big as Tomo's) and 100 knot cross country aircraft. It's a market position where flying on a budget is possible. There is a group active in this area at the moment, and that's the Aerochute (and derivatives) group. However, the push for it, or revival of it has to come from people participating themselves - they can't be some sort of aerial dole bludgers expecting other people acting in a voluntary capacity donating their time fopr a grass roots group which doesn't do anything to get active or promote their sector. Despite the constant sarcasm against RAA, I haven't seen anything in RAA operations that inhibits grass roots activity. Everything we use including jetskis has a lot more safety gear on it today, radio is essential when you have 100 to 200 kts in the same circuit, so that's a hurdle that may need some lateral thinking. I notice that the Aerochute guys have quite big paddock based events where they all get to fly with instructors and controllers on site, and something like that could be organised for GR, perhaps even to temporary closed airspace between two airfields or two landing paddocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Well Ozzie, if the y don't want any part of RAAus, why is someone making so much noise on their behalf. I have respect for the 95-10 flyers and will give them all the support they ask for, but I fail to see why people who want to fly plastic fantastic or fast planes should be considered disrespectful. It is my belief that the members of RAAus want to be allowed to fly their aircraft of choice, without too much hassle and that is what RAAus seems to be doing. I am sorry if somebody thinks I should shut up just because I don't fly 95-10. At least the plane I do fly is fairly near to 95-10, being light weight and single seat, also owner built. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacesailor Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 oops" !, Can I go fly my kite with them too Ozzie, Bryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Most of the very early 95-10 types are largely incompatible with the high speed aircraft in the circuit. Even with the different circuit heights, my approach speed at 35 knots on final in the Javelin is hardly compatible. I can be at 500 ft half way down the strip, hardly appropriate to turn cross wind at that point right. The real early low cost 95-10 machines only need some local paddock to operate out of. In many ways they are similar to the Aerochutes and also need calm days. The 95-10 category is sadly underestimated. It is fantastic fun, teaches great basic flying skills, teaches you to maintain your speed or else and better still comes at the lowest possible cost. I was GA long before I flew Ultralights in the early 80s, I still love them (Ultralights) today perhaps even more for their versatility and sheer local flying fun. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piet Fil Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Guys, Coming from the military (non aviation) I've always known pilots have egos (and fairly huge ones most of the times) but seriously, watching some of the threads on this website ..... RELAX!! Just because someone does something different from what you do doesn't make it better or worse .... just different. There are enough anti-aviation lobbies around without us beating up on ourselves, let the infighting drop. You have driven me to sound like some sort of hippie Aviate in peace:thank you: Phil 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now