68volksy Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 Just browsing through the list of "Initial Registrations" approved by RA-Aus during January 2013 out of interest and noted the registration of an aircraft that has been used for flight training for close to 12 months listed. Talk about lax standards and record keeping! Wonder if anyone in RA-Aus has made the connection? More to the point I wonder whether anyone in RA-Aus has or will be doing anything about it... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 Welcome to the RAA 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 Say its not so...Surly not!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Error404 Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 We should not be jumping to conclusions here, there may be a logical explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68volksy Posted February 1, 2013 Author Share Posted February 1, 2013 Well the rego matches the aircraft type and it's listed as one of only four initial issues. I'm all ears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 If thats true Volsky you need to bring it to the attention of the RAA. That sort of thing is not on, and has the potential to bring us all unstuck. The ramifications of training in an unreg'd aircraft are massive, particularly if things go pear shaped. Importantly, its part of a pre flight inspection to make sure the rego is displayed and current. If there is an issue then it could indicate a systemic one within the flying school. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 And trust me, the RAA will act. I have recently submitted multiple defect and incident reports. The RAA felt obliged to call me up and have a chat due to the high number of reports over the last few months. (and righfully so) They agreed that there is nothing systemic as they are all tottaly unrelated and just bad bloody luck, and also, I m reporting absolutely everything, particularly when it comes to a certain aussie manufactured engine. And I encourage everyone else to do the same. The problems wont be fixed if we dont report the problems.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 Its the only way forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Error404 Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 If it had a Rego numbers during the last 12 months and was being used for training then by definition it could not have had a provisional registration as it would be automatically approved so it must have been registered. It is clearly incorrectly in the initial registrations section. If it was unregistered and had fake numbers (highly unlikely) then there's no way they would ever match. This kind of drawing fire does nobody and good in the long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mothra Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 I thought there was a mistake in the listing, it arrived from the previous owner bearing that rego. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68volksy Posted February 1, 2013 Author Share Posted February 1, 2013 I think it's a valid question personally and the kind of thing that should be scrutinized very closely. Remember this is a business taking people into the air for reward. Error404 - you're saying that RA-Aus has stuffed up yet again and that the aircraft was not an initial registration at all? Any evidence to support such a claim? I'm dealing with published and known facts here - the aircraft is listed clearly as an initial registration and has been used for training for close to 12 months. Only plausible scenario I can think of was that the RA-Aus files and the aircraft owners files were in such a bad state that they had no basis for providing it with a renewed registration and could only provide it with a new registration. This still poses the same concerns about whether there are or have been any standards at all applied to aircraft used on a commercial basis in RA-Aus. In the same vein how many prop strikes do we honestly think are reported to RA-Aus? I hear you motz - there's plenty of guys out there trying their hardest to do the right thing and report as much as possible. I get very frustrated by matters such as this! I'm unfortunately not in a position where I can ask RA-Aus for more information about this matter directly so if anyone would like to do so please feel free. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Error404 Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 If you are a member just give them a call and they can advise. It's not a privacy issue, you are just alerting them to a potential error. Rather than post here implying that someone has done something really bad, take a step, make the call and report back to us that it was a small oversight. It wouldnt surprise me if it was in the wrong section given the number of hours they have all been working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Error404 Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 Sorted, storm in a teacup. it is an initial Rego......... Initial Rego for the new owner! It is actually a transfer. The form is the same for initial rego as for transfer however the website only says initial and not transfer. a simple misunderstanding really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68volksy Posted February 1, 2013 Author Share Posted February 1, 2013 Now that's not quite true - the form for change of ownership is the same as the form for re-registration. The form for initial registration is an entirely different form - generally filled in by the manufacturer when it is first registered. The form for transfer from GA to RA-Aus is an entirely different form again. So if they're claiming that it was on the form for change of ownership then the only other thing it could have been was a re-registration. Which begs similar questions. I'm still confused - is your information from a reliable source? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Error404 Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 The heading on the website update is incorrect, that is all and that is fact straight from the registration department. The aircraft should appear as a transfer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68volksy Posted February 1, 2013 Author Share Posted February 1, 2013 That still doesn't make sense - why would they be reporting registration transfers? Not sure I see how the transfer of a registered aircraft requires reporting by the CASA appointed overseer of registration renewals and new issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sain Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 Interesting question that one. The aircraft in question was first registered under that number on 9/11/2008, according to the RA-Aus aircraft register (here look for 24-5515 in the list). I assume thats the plane your talking about anyway Volksy? the other "initial" registrations are either amateur built) or not on that register. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapphire Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 All sorts of sneaky things happen on farms etc miles from "civilization", based on my aircraft search activities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahlocks Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 Perhaps the problem is 'civilization'.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 I have heard over the years that alot of AUF/ RAA aircraft are registered once & never again.I guess the owners know about GA aircraft that have a once only rego fee.These aircraft spend their time out in the bush on properties. Just sayin.I am not for or against.:peepwall: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XP503 Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 Welcome to the RAA Why don't you try out for a position at RAAus, you seem so critical of everything they do yet you still hang around like a fly on s$&t 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 Why don't you try out for a position at RAAus, you seem so critical of everything they do yet you still hang around like a fly on s$&t I gotta tip me lid to both yourself and the sh#t-stirring TF. Controversial old bastard makes us keep 'up and thinking' on everything by deliberately flaunting the down side. It took a fair while before I stopped being indignant by and started enjoying his 'dark side' comments. (side note - FT, if I've read you wrong - I'm gonna have to kill ya!) cheers 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentreau Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 Considering the other discrepancies in that published list of renewals/registrations, what's the likelyhood that there are factual errors in the list of aircraft too ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Why don't you try out for a position at RAAus, you seem so critical of everything they do yet you still hang around like a fly on s$&t I gotta tip me lid to both yourself and the sh#t-stirring TF. Controversial old bastard makes us keep 'up and thinking' on everything by deliberately flaunting the down side. It took a fair while before I stopped being indignant by and started enjoying his 'dark side' comments. (side note - FT, if I've read you wrong - I'm gonna have to kill ya!) cheers harden up boys. I've done my bit to fix the RAA, I was the one that got the ball rolling the massive discrepancy in the RAA income that led to your President acknowledging that the RAA doesn't have any where near 13000 members but less than 10000. That's money in the bank next time the insurance bill is due. What have you guys achieved? Anyhow, no one is going to vote for me when Myles is doing such a stellar job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nunans Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 That still doesn't make sense - why would they be reporting registration transfers? Not sure I see how the transfer of a registered aircraft requires reporting by the CASA appointed overseer of registration renewals and new issues. my understanding is that rego transfers are being overseen just like renewals and new issues. 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