jeffd Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 No Maj is not an instructor, nor do I know anything at this stage about any additional weight increase in the works. I do have a draft copy of the new ops manual however, that is with CASA atm for their approval. I am of the opinion that the current weight increase thing is done and dusted, as far as CASA is concerned.If I get time tomorrow I will look through the ops manual draft just to check, and get back to you on this post. As far as Cols suggestion that all the members should get a look at drafts before they go to CASA ...well that simply would not be workable in the real world. We barely made the tight deadlines this time set by CASA. If you put the whole thing out to 10,000 or so members, then there would be 10,000 or so amendments to make...just not going to happen, and that's what your elected Board reps and tech people are there for anyway, to check and approve things on your behalf. There has however, just before Xmas, been a major breakthrough in our operations allowed by CASA, which I know will make many of us happy, and has the potential to solve some of our problems of the past year, but it has nothing to do with weight increases. Stay posted...I'm sure it'll appear on the RAAus website shortly............Maj..... plus i think maj ,and even as i am only new to flying,anyrep could safely say that most members would be happy for some degree of mtow increase whether it was to include extra fuel or even extra safety equipment .but im sure this topic will always b spoken about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 A certain lightwing flyer is not a instructor I am pretty sure And Turbo wasn't refering to Maj Millard either I believe... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bandit12 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 As far as Cols suggestion that all the members should get a look at drafts before they go to CASA ...well that simply would not be workable in the real world. We barely made the tight deadlines this time set by CASA. If you put the whole thing out to 10,000 or so members, then there would be 10,000 or so amendments to make...just not going to happen, and that's what your elected Board reps and tech people are there for anyway, to check and approve things on your behalf. When the DSM-IV-TR (mental health manual) was due to be revised, a panel of experts first assessed all of the relevant research, and then put a draft proposal together. Then all interested parties (anyone, not just mental health workers) were invited to make comment, and finally these comments were reviewed, before the final thing was put together. If that can work across the globe, surely something similar can happen for a smaller organisation. Maybe once this draft is through and accepted, RA-Aus could publish it with a comment section for future reviews, and if time permits, put the next draft out for comment. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 If CASA and RAAus want people to follow the rules more or all the time on weight and balance then they should have a weight limit that allows a typical two seater, two above average passengers, small amount of luggage and enough fuel to fly most required legs. And that seems to be somewhere around 650kg rather then 600 or less. It has to be safer to allow slightly heavier planes then having everyone pushing the limits of light weight construction and pushing the aircraft to the absolute MTOW and balance envelopes all the time. After all what kills RAAus pilots. Its generally wouldnt be flying a well balanced aircraft that might be 80kg heavier. Its far more likely to be exceeding the weight, poor weight and balance, exceeding forces when at MTOW or a part failure because of minimising everything to conform to current weight limits. I have seen so many aircraft that use tiny bolts on critical parts all because they are trying to minimise weight to allow for the conditions mentioned in my first paragraph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Evans Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 mayb ultralights will slowly become lsa only in the future ? u be correct in what your saying, u will fined it very hard to find an true ultralight aircraft out there these days let alone a true utralight instructor or tail wheel trainer these day most train in lsa aircraft ! personaly I hope that we Don't lose our roots as the reason the AUF started was for Afordable Ultralight Aircraft Fun and cheap flying for all not just the well off It be ashame to lose what started it all Doug 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 And Turbo wasn't refering to Maj Millard either I believe... That's right Win 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 If CASA and RAAus want people to follow the rules more or all the time on weight and balance then they should have a weight limit that allows a typical two seater, two above average passengers, small amount of luggage and enough fuel to fly most required legs. And that seems to be somewhere around 650kg rather then 600 or less.It has to be safer to allow slightly heavier planes then having everyone pushing the limits of light weight construction and pushing the aircraft to the absolute MTOW and balance envelopes all the time. After all what kills RAAus pilots. Its generally wouldnt be flying a well balanced aircraft that might be 80kg heavier. Its far more likely to be exceeding the weight, poor weight and balance, exceeding forces when at MTOW or a part failure because of minimising everything to conform to current weight limits. I have seen so many aircraft that use tiny bolts on critical parts all because they are trying to minimise weight to allow for the conditions mentioned in my first paragraph. That all sounds workable to me , however there has to be a cut-off point, or line in the sand so to speak as far as CASA is concerned. they have determinined that to be 600 KGs for our aircraft. We must remember we have Probabily the most liberal UL rules in the world, and rules that are the envy of many other countries including Europe and the US. In the US for instance, anything over 254 Lbs, and you need a PPL or recreational license to fly it, and the aircraft has to be registered Experimental, with required expensive maintenance rules. Personally I feel we should run with what we have , and not make a lot of noise about it.................Maj..... And Turbo wasn't refering to Maj Millard either I believe... The only instructor in the North that I am aware of training in a LW is Carlo Prete at Innisfail.........and his may be Jab powered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarly Gnu Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 When the DSM-IV-TR (mental health manual) was due to be revised, a panel of experts first assessed all of the relevant research, and then put a draft proposal together. Then all interested parties (anyone, not just mental health workers) were invited to make comment, and finally these comments were reviewed, before the final thing was put together. If that can work across the globe, surely something similar can happen for a smaller organisation. Except that it didn't work, the only success of the current DSM has been to reduce the entire psychiatric profession to a laughing stock. It really is a stupid book, just read some of the new 'disorders' such as excessive caffeine addiction - or yes its opposite (lack of caffeine). Regarding the possible weight limit increase how would this pan out for existing aircraft in reality? If a factory built aircraft has been certified as 600kg MTOW at the time it was sold it would have to remain as this weight right? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mAgNeToDrOp Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 I'd rather see the extra weight being used in strengthening the aircraft so there is less chance of the wings ripping off if you inadvertently get into a situation where this could happen., but that's a whole other can of worms. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmccarthy Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 As owner of a FS Texan I was particularly interested in this link to an "aerobatic display". However, it seems to be a formation flying display with no aeros, as the plane isn't certified for them. So no encouragement there about extra structural strength. Still, a nice display.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DITvbsZ_Oak I take that back, looks like aeros toward the end to me. In an LSA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Evans Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 I'd rather see the extra weight being used in strengthening the aircraft so there is less chance of the wings ripping off if you inadvertently get into a situation where this could happen., but that's a whole other can of worms. U pass out before ya rip a wing off an lightwing 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 Except that it didn't work, the only success of the current DSM has been to reduce the entire psychiatric profession to a laughing stock. It really is a stupid book, just read some of the new 'disorders' such as excessive caffeine addiction - or yes its opposite (lack of caffeine).Regarding the possible weight limit increase how would this pan out for existing aircraft in reality? If a factory built aircraft has been certified as 600kg MTOW at the time it was sold it would have to remain as this weight right? Well when 650 Kg was being discussed, there were the greedy ones who wanted 750 Kg...where does it stop ??....well CASA made the decision at 600 Kg so there you have it..............Maj.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 Nice little display there with the Texans...and well flown in what appeared to be windy conditions.....Maj.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 This gimme more weight thing has been a problem right from the first ANO 95:10 draft. There was always a group that deliberately built and operated aircraft that did not conform to the rules. Seems to be still a problem today and probably will always be using whatever excuse they can dream up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bandit12 Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 Except that it didn't work, the only success of the current DSM has been to reduce the entire psychiatric profession to a laughing stock. It really is a stupid book, just read some of the new 'disorders' such as excessive caffeine addiction - or yes its opposite (lack of caffeine). There were plenty of knockers when the DSM-IV came out too. The process was sound, even if some people didn't like the outcome. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 snip snip snipAs far as Cols suggestion that all the members should get a look at drafts before they go to CASA ...well that simply would not be workable in the real world. We barely made the tight deadlines this time set by CASA. If you put the whole thing out to 10,000 or so members, then there would be 10,000 or so amendments to make...just not going to happen, and that's what your elected Board reps and tech people are there for anyway, to check and approve things on your behalf. There has however, just before Xmas, been a major breakthrough in our operations allowed by CASA, which I know will make many of us happy, and has the potential to solve some of our problems of the past year, but it has nothing to do with weight increases. Stay posted...I'm sure it'll appear on the RAAus website shortly............Maj..... Ross, the board has to stop using CASA as a whipping horse and it should stop treating the membership as a bunch of idiots. If the board had put out the overview of what was proposed at an early stage it may well have received support and genuine suggestions, but I doubt that it would have received many comments at all. The number of active members of this forum and those who vote in RAA elections a good indication of this. What does exercise the members minds is being treated like children, like fools and idiots. The result is what you saw at the end of last year. Quite clearly the board still hasn't heard the message, or if it has, still thinks we are just a bunch of clowns. Not good enough Ross. CASA puts proposals out to a Notification process and a request for comments. It doesn't get killed in a rush but does get a lot of serious comment that get incorporated in whole or in part (or not at all). CASA has bowed to the weight of comment over Part 61, which has been modified and now held back for nine months to allow the industry to formulate their own processes to meet the changes. Does RAA intend to just legislate and force the result down the throats of the membership and the rec. aviation industry? You have our support as a new board member. Remember that the membership is not only a boss to serve but a resource that is able to help you do your job. Keep well and have a great Christmas and a very flighty new year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 Col, I am at least one on the current board who does not take the membership for granted in any way shape or form. My support for rapid communication with membership has , and continues to be, high on my list of priorities, which is why you see me continuing with my normal use, and participation on this forum, which I have done now for several years. Not all board members hold the same views unfortunatly, but together with several other areas that need some adjustment, I and other members are endeavouring to see that rapid communication with members is maintained, as it should be, as a priority. As far as using CASA as a whipping horse, well the reality in past months appear to have been just the opposite, with them wielding the whip not us. They are the ones who set and demanded that the Ops manual draft be presented at a certain date..or else, and all we did was comply as best we could in the time allowed. It was certainly not a very cooperative relationship as it should be, but more a them Vs us, with them needing to be the dominate party. I believe this attitude is one reason that there is a current Federal enquiry under way, into how the regulator operates and conducts its business. Additionally any current member has the right and opportunity to present suggestions to any RAA work in progress, at any time. It is your organisation after all, and it is certainly not a closed shop. You can do so by contacting any board member who may be participating in a draft exercise, or by channeling your thoughts through the office itself. Unfortunatly since becoming a board member my direct communication on say this forum, is limited due to the need to sign a Board member confidentiality agreement to stay in the board communication, and decision making loop. Of course it is an option not to sign, but then ones' position would then simply be symbolic only, totally non productive, and certainly pretty useless to oneself, and the members. This is not what a board member needs to be doing that's for sure.........Wishing you and your family a happy and safe Xmas and new year, and thank you very much for your valuable imput, which I look foward to seeing a lot more of in the new year. cheers.......Ross Millard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffd Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 Ross, the board has to stop using CASA as a whipping horse and it should stop treating the membership as a bunch of idiots. If the board had put out the overview of what was proposed at an early stage it may well have received support and genuine suggestions, but I doubt that it would have received many comments at all. The number of active members of this forum and those who vote in RAA elections a good indication of this. What does exercise the members minds is being treated like children, like fools and idiots. The result is what you saw at the end of last year. Quite clearly the board still hasn't heard the message, or if it has, still thinks we are just a bunch of clowns. Not good enough Ross.CASA puts proposals out to a Notification process and a request for comments. It doesn't get killed in a rush but does get a lot of serious comment that get incorporated in whole or in part (or not at all). CASA has bowed to the weight of comment over Part 61, which has been modified and now held back for nine months to allow the industry to formulate their own processes to meet the changes. Does RAA intend to just legislate and force the result down the throats of the membership and the rec. aviation industry? You have our support as a new board member. Remember that the membership is not only a boss to serve but a resource that is able to help you do your job. Keep well and have a great Christmas and a very flighty new year. yes thats right if u want changes or to be heard then thats the reason to vote plus your local rep is there to call and discuss things with , and being on any board can be a two edged sword where where the member would like to discuss what he/she hears at meetings but has signed that confidentialality clause which is not unusual for boards but is there to protect every1 till final decisions/discussions have been done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 Don't forget that a weight increase without increased stall speed won't amount to much change The comments on moving to GA if you want more weight are simplistic, will need further training, re registration of existing aircraft and full maintenance under LAME. Away from many major centres this isn't available. No matter how you skin it will cost lots more. I for one regularly have to leave fuel at home to fly under weights......crazy stuff 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 When the DSM-IV-TR (mental health manual) was due to be revised, a panel of experts first assessed all of the relevant research, and then put a draft proposal together. Then all interested parties (anyone, not just mental health workers) were invited to make comment, and finally these comments were reviewed, before the final thing was put together. If that can work across the globe, surely something similar can happen for a smaller organisation... All the consultation didn't mean everyone was happy with the final product...KazKaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 All the consultation didn't mean everyone was happy with the final product...KazKaz Would everyone have been equally happy if there had been no consultation? Happy Boxing day and a great 2013. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PA. Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 Would everyone have been equally happy if there had been no consultation?Happy Boxing day and a great 2013. not to mention a great 2014 folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 Would everyone have been equally happy if there had been no consultation?Happy Boxing day and a great 2013. Yes...never mind the quality...just feel the width. (With thanks to Roy Rene) Ka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 As it is your flat out finding ultralights in our RAA magazine most are LSA Craft we lost the plot in my opion Hey Doug! What`s with the ' WE ' bit.? Don`t include me! Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Evans Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 Hey Doug! What`s with the ' WE ' bit.? Don`t include me!Frank. We In Genenal Frank dont mean all but me thinks most ? 1 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