RPL from Sep 14 CASA fact sheet

[coljones]

Correct Doug, not even LSA, only if you want to fly VH aircraft or into CTA .

If you want to fly an RAA plane into CTA you will need as a minimum of a CASA licence with CTA endos in a suitably equipped RAA plane (radio plus transponder if higher than class D). There are some exemptions for RAA school planes in places like Bankstown but the rights are very much constrained and you will need a class 2 medical and under "training". Since all training is good for skill building putting an RPL (and DL medical) into your bucket list is a good idea.

 

The current RAA Ops manual provides for Controlled drome and CTA access - CASA has not agreed to allow these privileges to be used. Since RAA won't share the proposed changes to the Ops Manual we don't know what the changes are and what else might be included or excluded.

 

 

[coljones]

The DL medical is not a huge problem. Most of the test are on a threshold basis to gate out the biggest problems that would lead to bad situations if they were to occur in flight. In order to resolve borderline issues there is a route via a Class 2 medical but that can cost (lots) with, perhaps, trips to specialists and educators and other tests. If one passes a DL medical then that is a fast, cheap, way into a CASA licence. A DL medical review might well be a personal annual target to ensure your health is up to scratch to fly planes coupled with a serious discussion with your medico about the implications and mitigations if you are not up to scratch no matter which licence you want to hold.

 

 

[01rmb]

Don't be so sure that the RPL is just a straight swap for the RAAus PC with no downsides. It isn't...

I learnt to fly and gained a RAA pilot certificate with a cross country endorsement in class D airspace at a class D airfield which required me to get a class 2 medical, I also have a 24 registered aircraft that has a transponder (not required for class D btw) that is maintained by a LAME because it is used for hire then what more is needed?

Having finished my training I am now restricted from controlled airspace and controlled airfields - the same airspace where I trained because RAA does not have a CTA endorsement. If CASA will offer an almost direct swap for my pilot certificate but include CTA access whilst RAA is restricted from having a controlled airspace and airfield then I am up for that. I think there is a good argument by RAA to get the same CTA privileges but who knows if this will ever actually happen. Does anyone know if this is on the agenda?

 

The bonus of the RPL is that I can also use it to fly an aircraft up to 1500kg with more than one passenger which would allow a Cessna 182 with all seats filled. I could do a PPL but if I am not interested (at this stage) of doing multi engine or night flying then why bother if the RPL ends up being easy enough. Ease all depends on how much of a run around the GA schools give people. There is a high level of elitism from the GA schools on converting to a PPL when it should not be that big a deal especially if you have spent the same amount of time in the circuit as any of the GA students.

 

If someone who has only ever flown in open country with few aircraft around, has issues with traffic control or has suspect health issues then it is a good thing that they are kept away from controlled airspace until they have done the necessary extra training and are deemed safe and competent.

 

 

[jetjr]

Not sure about the difference in acceptance between 19 registration hours and 24 registered, first time ive heard this

 

Also the move an aircraft to VH experimental is not all good, cant do your own maintenence unles you built it or a similar one and this includes building the engine, next you have to do training via SAAA.

 

 

[horsefeathers]

K......................I can tell you this is a very grey area. The flying school has to acknowledge your RA-Aus flying hours (It is in the rules and can include any 24 or factory built aircraft hours. 19 or home built hours do not count................

 

Letitia

No, there is no stipulation from CASA that hours in a 19 registered or home built aircraft cannot count - As a matter of fact, you can put up to 100 hours of PIC time in an RAA 3 axis aircraft towards a PPL or even a CPL.The main issue is that RAA registered aircraft are not a "registered aeroplane or a recognised aeroplane".

 

Following is an extract from an email I received from an Assessor Flying Operations Team, Permission Application Centre (Canberra) | CASACPL that I received when querying what hours qualify towards a CPL

 

Hi Gerry

 

 

 

Flight as PIC of a 3 axis RAAus registered aircraft may count towards CAR 5.115 (a) PIC time.

 

 

 

An RAAus aircraft is not a registered or recognised aircraft (see definitions) therefore RAAs time may not be credited for 5.115 (b) © or (d)

 

Regards

 

5.115 Aeronautical experience for subparagraph 5.104 (1) (f) (ii): persons other than helicopter pilots

 

 

 

(1) For the purposes of subparagraph 5.104 (1) (f) (ii), the aeronautical experience of a person who is not covered by regulation 5.113 or 5.114 must consist of:

 

 

 

(a) at least 100 hours as pilot in command; and

 

 

 

(b) at least 100 hours of flight time in a registered aeroplane, or a recognised aeroplane; and

 

 

 

© at least 20 hours of cross‑country flight time as pilot in command of a registered aeroplane, or a recognised aeroplane; and

 

(d) at least 10 hours of instrument flight time in a registered aeroplane, or a recognised aeroplane.

 

 

[68volksy]

I'm hoping the schools around the place will start looking at some of the very nice GA 2-seaters that are coming onto the market - the Diamond DA20 for instance. 138 knots, 20l/hour - even a rotax if you're keen. At $220k new not really much more than a Tecnam and with a proven record behind it in the US in a training environment. Even a few of the old 150/tomohawk's might start getting a clean-up. More bums on seats will help the bottom end of the GA market for sure.

 

I don't think RA-Aus has anything to fear. They may lose a few members but at the absolute very worst the organisation will find themselves back where it all began - low, slow, and grinning like loonies...

 

 

 

[Neil_S]

.....The main issue is that RAA registered aircraft are not a "registered aeroplane or a recognised aeroplane".........

OK - my Gazelle is registered with RAA. However it used to be registered VH. So how the **** does that make my RAA registered plane "not a registered aeroplane or a recognised aeroplane".

 

It would appear the b*llsh*t continues.........

 

Neil

 

 

[frank marriott]

Neil

 

Look closer - this is for commercial training.

 

 

[tafisama]

RAAus is here to stay.It`s cheaper to fly Ra-aus than the VH registered aircraft.If it costs $300/hr to fly a VH aircraft and $130/hr to fly a Jabiru 170D then I would stick to the Jab because I get more hours with $300.The excitement of wanting to fly heavier aircraft will make young people like me go for the RPL but the costs of doing so will send us back to Ra-aus.In the end Ra-aus is here to stay.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

The biggest barrier to RA-Aus pilots wanting an RPL is the deceptively titled "Drivers Licence (Aviation)" medical. The only people who could pass a DL(A) medical is a person who would breezew through a Class 2 medical. Most "senior" RA-Aus pilots would not get to first base with the DL(A) medical. It is a very cynical move by CASA to make it look to the casual observer (i.e. politicians) that they are following the USA example of removing health restrictions on private pilots that have no substance in evidence. The risk analysis that justified a genuine drivers licence medical was ten plus years of operation in the USA with zero problems. CASA has set a health standard for the DL(A) that is at a higher standard than for a Class 2.

 

Many RA-Aus pilots are ex GA because they couldn't pass a Class 2 but, they are not falling out of the sky as RA-Aus pilots.

 

RA-Aus officialdom has recognised the inequity of RA-Aus pilots having a "comparable" medical standard to a DL medical and yet not allowed CTA access or even passage through CTA while GA with DL medical are. This has been put to CASA and is likely to lead to RA-Aus being able to do CTA training at least for access through CTA. That would provide safe access past Williamtown, Coffs Harbour, Coolangatta, Brisbane, Nowra and many others.

 

 

[facthunter]

Good comment Don. Most of us would only want clearance through CTA, to avoid being forced over "Tiger Country" Flying IN IT,is not a goer as mostly you are over unsuitable terrain . The requirements for electrical power, navigation tolerences, reporting, radar visibility /ident, recency (experience) radio (dual is almost a must have). Forget it. It is too complex and not really necessary. The authority has to guarantee a standard which WE could never guarantee or train to and would bring massive cost increases. The RAAus is at the opposite end of aviation. Transit privileges and otherwise stay out of it. The need to travel to Servicing facility airports is the reason that the RPL "acquired" the extra restrictions. Nev

 

 

[01rmb]

RA-Aus officialdom has recognised the inequity of RA-Aus pilots having a "comparable" medical standard to a DL medical and yet not allowed CTA access or even passage through CTA while GA with DL medical are. This has been put to CASA and is likely to lead to RA-Aus being able to do CTA training at least for access through CTA. That would provide safe access past Williamtown, Coffs Harbour, Coolangatta, Brisbane, Nowra and many others.

Don

I know you have said 'at least' but is the issue of using CTA Airfields with appropriate training for CTA being considered by CASA? I am not looking to land at a major airport like Brisbane, Mascot or Tullamarine (nor would most GA pilots anyway) but Archerfield, Jandakot, Parafield, Moorabbin, Camden and Bankstown plus ones like Coolangatta, Sunshine Coast, Coffs Harbour, Mackay, Rockhampton and Townsville would be extremely useful for many of the RAA pilots living near these areas or flying through and wish to stop there as a stopover or for fuel.

 

I am still at a loss as to why I can train and fly solo out of Archerfield but once certified am now restricted from the same airfield. I would even accept the need for a Class 2 or the DL medical.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Just a observation but I would think that in this modern era, people have a duty of care to themselves and passengers, if that means breaking the rules and going into CTA to remain safe and they only have a RAA cert but they know the procedures. Well who am I to judge them.

 

 

[coljones]

DL v Class 2 - for me the Class 2 process was a bureaucratic minefield because a CASA clean bill of health demanded zero defects otherwise it was a round of specialists ending up costing over $1000 and delaying the whole process by over 3 months - My Class 2 then had a validity of 3 months less. ie from the time I walked through the DAMA door.

 

The DL was extremely simple, I passed all the thresholds and my GP signed off on the day - Less than $100.

 

The downside of DL - for me. Max 1 passenger!!

 

Problems I encountered - CASA took 28 days, the max, to acknowledge receipt of the DL paperwork, so my DL has a validity of 1 month less. Upside - I flew RAA for the whole month and saved a big bucket of cash.

 

Will I go back to Class 2 - maybe just so I can carry more than 1pax. The DAMA didn't earn his money. Losing 30kg would help.

 

Upside of a PPL or RPL - controlled airspace - Sydney Harbour Scenic 1 is fantastic as is the GA lane around the back of Richmond and I am sure over the top or around Willy will be good and blowing through Coffs controlled space will be comforting.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

DonI know you have said 'at least' but is the issue of using CTA Airfields with appropriate training for CTA being considered by CASA?

I don't know about CASA but it has long been RA-Aus Policy to strive for access to CTA. It was put on the backburner by McCormick, ostensibly while he came to grips with the place for Recreational Aviation. He now leaves the job having made zero progress on this and we still have 1988 Legislation rather than the updated 1998. I could hardly believe the gall when he claimed what great progress had been made on Regulation especially after the RPL/DL(A) debacle.

 

I am not looking to land at a major airport like Brisbane, Mascot or Tullamarine (nor would most GA pilots anyway) . . .

And neither are any RA-Aus pilots I suspect.

 

. . . but Archerfield, Jandakot, Parafield, Moorabbin, Camden and Bankstown plus ones like Coolangatta, Sunshine Coast, Coffs Harbour, Mackay, Rockhampton and Townsville would be extremely useful for many of the RAA pilots living near these areas or flying through and wish to stop there as a stopover or for fuel.

That's quite true for some but more than a few of us would consider triple parallel runways and Bankstown traffic close to their worst nightmare and to be avoided at all costs. But Coffs Harbour could be very tempting.

 

My aircraft, a L2 maintained factory built LSA has a dual band radio and transponder and is barely distinguishable from the GA trainers of the same make. With a pilot trained and tested for CTA I can't see why that pilot and such an aircraft couldn't have access through if not to CTA. If we can't pass the test we shouldn't be allowed in. If our aircraft is not up to it it shouldn't be allowed in.

 

I've heard rumours that some RA-Aus pilots routinely transit Coffs Harbour to avoid the tiger country surrounds. They know and follow correct procedure and are offered and accept clearance. I don't know whether this comes under some form of "Don't ask, don't tell" policy but if there is an undesirable incident while illegally in CTA then there would be hell to pay. The ATCs can't tell whether you have a PPL or not.

 

 

[frank marriott]

I've heard rumours that some RA-Aus pilots routinely transit Coffs Harbour

 

If it is more then a rumour then they should be charged. Just selecting which part of air leg is suitable and ignoring the other parts is very poor airmanship and contributes to the cowboy tag that is attributed unfortunately to ALL RAA pilots. Whether one agrees with a rule or not is not an excuse to disregard it.

 

Rumours, whether correct or not, give the same impression unfortunately.

 

It is not an ATC function to check licence (even if you have one of any class) but is our responsibility as RAA members to have these type of offences investigated, if occurring . It is this type of behaviour which makes, for example, the gaining of CTA access harder - if the current rules can't be followed "why trust them near higher density traffic attitude".

 

If something of this type came to my attention I would have no hesitation in having the matter addressed.

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

I'm a newly endorsed RA, but immediately noting the restrictions on my flight planning with regard to not holding a CTA. It seems the bigger issue is not so much aircraft type(s) but limitation on use of controlled airspace.

 

Why is there no resolution to the issue of RA pilots gaining CTA endorsement as part of these new measures. I'm not au fait with ICAO, which CASA seems to be leveraging to indicate these new rulings are based on some sort of 'international equivalence'.

 

So, is there anywhere else in the world that an LSA pilot can utilise CTA with correct training and certification? If so, then it would seem there is still a big gap in the new CASA certifications.

 

To this end, I rang a training facility and they immediately pressed me to go PPL, which would resolve this issue. Why do I need to obtain a completely different licence in a completely different aircraft just to have the ability to traverse CTA? It really seems quite absurd.

 

To use a loose analogy, I'm being asked to get my taxi drivers licence in order to ride my moped (for which I'm already licenced) on the freeway, otherwise I'm confined to the back streets to get around.

 

Bewildered,

 

Ramjet

 

 

[ave8rr]

So, is there anywhere else in the world that an LSA pilot can utilise CTA with correct training and certification? If so, then it would seem there is still a big gap in the new CASA certifications. Bewildered, Ramjet

Yes NZ. Only need serviceable transponder and ultralights can operate in NZ CTA.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Frank, the reason I used the word rumour as it came more than second hand to me and as such is an unsubstantiated rumour.

 

I fully agree that if you don't like a particular rule, then get to work and get it changed. In the meantime abide by the rule of law.

 

Silly, that is unreasonable laws, can drive otherwise reasonable people to ignore them. This must be the case across Australia with road rules regarding speeding, particularly on a good day on a good road with low traffic volumes where almost everybody exceeds the posted speed limits.

 

Coffs Harbour as CTA and Class D airspace comes pretty close to being a very a silly rule. However, I recognise that I am about as far from an expert in these matters as you can get (as pilots go). So, I follow the rules and campaign to have the ones that look silly to me changed. Williamtown active 24 x 7 is another classic. We can fly past Australia's busiest International Airport, Kingsford Smith, at 500 feet all day but we can't fly past a regional/ military airport like Williamtown at 500 feet - ever! It really isn't that busy and the military don't even fly most weekends. Really dumb / selfish sequestration of airspace and hardly generates respect for those who set these rules.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Keith. Please, please, please do not spend $20,000 + on this just to be screwed over; please (Don’t get me wrong; I know of a couple of RA-Aus instructors who have done the same thing to their students).

I find this whole RPL thing to be completely useless. I think that anyone wanting to convert should just attempt a PPL (unless you are unable to hold a valid Class 1 or 2 medical then go for it)!

 

I think that RA-Aus and CASA should remain separate and continue to offer their services irrespective of each another.

 

RA-Aus is currently very unstructured and offers pilots a chance to experience flying without worrying too much about the hassles of CTA/CTR, ICAO and CASA, all the rules etc. also seem to be unflustered about low flying, mustering etc.

 

However, by the same token GA flying is just as rewarding. More passengers and general storage space; more speed and HP; the ability to fly into controlled airspace; aerobatics; mustering; low-level; formation etc. (you can get some of these endorsements with RA-Aus). However, with this type of flying you have to be much more aware of the rules. You have to know your AIP, the CAO’s and CAR’s and there is less chance for error. They demand so much more of you.

 

Lately, I have been wondering which flying schools will be awarded a Part 141 or 142 by CASA to carry out this training (to the best of my knowledge; currently; none exist)? I doubt that it will be offered to any RA-Aus training facility.

 

This then raises for me a couple of issues. Under the GA system to be able to instruct a student you would need to hold a current CPL and have a current instructor rating; Class 1 medical; English speaking test; radio/telephony licence; required endorsements etc. (None of this includes the requirements for the actual training facility; COA’s etc)

 

Under both the GA and RA-Aus training syllabus the instructor signs you off when you are deemed competent!

 

Now having just gone through the GA process myself with a couple of different flying schools I can tell you this is a very grey area. The flying school has to acknowledge your RA-Aus flying hours (It is in the rules and can include any 24 or factory built aircraft hours. 19 or home built hours do not count.) but do not have to sign you off until you are deemed competent in a VH registered aircraft.

 

This is why some people take 5 hours to convert to GA and some take 50. It all depends on your ability as PIC.

 

I also suspect that training will be conducted in Class D or Class C airspace so extra time is wasted in airspace and aircraft familiarisation. Any instructor who knows his/her stuff will also test your procedures. This includes emergencies, circuit procedures; precautionary search procedures; everything! The whole thing about GA flying is you must know what you are doing at all times… all the checklists BUMFTHAW, HASEL, FCMOST, CLEAROFF, DIVERT etc. All of them MUST be done and done accurately! And let’s not forget the compulsory 2 hours of instrument flying.

 

Just so you know. RA-Aus does require the same standards for GA pilots converting to RA-Aus.

 

Most of the RA-Aus instructors I know prefer to put their GA students into heavier feeling aircraft; like a Jabiru instead of the Savannah’s, Foxbat’s, Texan’s etc. because they generally feel heavier and are easier for the GA pilot to handle (mostly during landing)! (They also have slightly more lag time in the control feel. Air cooled engines much like the Continental and Lycoming’s; where you are required to think about engine cooling and heating). The rules tell us that we must do a minimum of 5 hours instructing with our students; however, once again it’s all competency based. If the student can’t handle the situation then we spend more time with them until they can fly without hurting themselves, someone else, the aircraft etc.

 

Please also note that to best of my knowledge all VH registered aircraft have to be maintained by a qualified LAME unless the aircraft is experimental. However, to maintain an experimental aircraft you need to have completed the relevant course by the SAAA. So even if you do use a VH registered Ultralight it would need to be registered as an experimental (to do your own maintenance) and you would legally have to do the course(s).

 

On top of this you have all the overheads to pay for. The ASIC (renewed every 2 years), the annual maintenance (unless you break something; in which case it’s more), the Class 2 medical (depending on your condition to be re-done every 6 months to 4 years).

 

I think that if you are willing to fork out so much money for training why would you want to get the RPL? It is basically the same as a GFPT! (You are restricted to 25NM, probably still have to do a check flight every month (3 landings), not allowed to navigate; however, I am under the impression that you be allowed to sign out the MR like a PPL! (Not sure yet if this is true…)) I think that if you have been trained correctly by your RA-Aus instructor you should technically use the same amount of time training for this RPL to obtain your PPL.

 

If you look at the training syllabus you are required to do the same amount of training time in the VH registered aircraft as the RA-Aus aircraft (20 hours for the test and another 20 total for pax and navigation). Looking at the cost also makes me scratch my head… it can cost you anywhere between $150 an hour (Ultra-ultra lights; Drifter, Thruster etc.) to $350 an hour (Modern Ultralights; Savannah’s, Jabiru’s etc.). Compared to the cost of GA training (The cheapest I’ve found $300 an hour (C172 older model) to $500/600 an hour (C172 new models to SR22 etc. (Twins are worse L)

 

However, if you do choose to get this RPL please just remember to do some research and find yourself a decent GA instructor who will assist you and not attempt to screw you over!

 

Letitia

Good Morning Letitia

You have no fears with me not supporting RAAus.

 

RAAus has to be kept, grown, developed and expanded of which I will do my best. In the not to distant future RAAus will be the entry level for the student to aviation industry as it will be affordable.

 

The aviation industry has to be developed as more and more of society is relying on quick transport.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Letitia,

 

As the regulations are written at the moment, if you can't get a Class 1 or 2 Medical you can't get a Drivers Licence (Aviation) medical. Any condition that would prevent you from getting a Class 2 would automatically make you invalid for a DL(A). Oddly enough, you could get a Class 2 (through the DAME's discretion/judgement) but would be refused a DL(A).

 

How crazy is that?

 

Don

 

 

[Bennyboy320]

Hopefully the CTA transit approval be happen at some stage, speaking as an airline pilot it's no big deal flying in controlled airspace once you've recieved the appropriate training, I think the GA training schools pushing to prevent this from going through as it would be another nail in their coffin, as I have said before who what's to fly a 30 year old dinosaur when you can fly a wide variety of modern RAA a/c at an affordable price.

 

 

[rhysmcc]

I've not flown into Coffs or Sydney, but just by looking at the VTC's I don't think you could even begin to compare possible transit lanes. The Sydney route (outside of the control zone) is far and low enough not to impact RPT operations. Where's coastal through Coff's zone even at 500ft would conflict with the aerodrome traffic.

 

I would be in favour of CTA endorsements for RAA, provided the correct training.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

The issue with Coffs Coastal not above 500ft is that it would end up with a small separation for controlled aircraft on late final 21 and the transiting aircraft just above the marina where people may very well be rubbernecking. Anyone who has spent a pleasant afternoon down at the marina will have seen the virgin and QLink -8 go over the top at not much more than say 700 ft.

 

Country to the west outside the class D is horrible.....directly west you can be nice and high and in the event of an engine failure could comfortably land at coffs airport....To the south however as you duck down under the step to go east to the beach you have to extend to the south west if you want to retain a good amount of height (which doesn't really help cause all you can then do is take your time picking the tree.....or get down low to go under the step early....less time to pick the tree but pick a tree you will! )

 

What rankles is that back at Port Macquarie, or further north at Ballina, the same RPT aircraft get to play with all the RAAus aircraft cause those airports aren't class D and aren't surrounded by tiger country, and have the same or substantially similar amounts of RPT movements.......Why do they have to pick the choke points and make them CTA? I think in regard to Coffs the likelihood of anyone being able to answer that question would require me to go back many iterations of the current CASA to answer.....assuming they are even still alive....

 

Andy

 

 

[DonRamsay]

I've not flown into Coffs or Sydney, but just by looking at the VTC's I don't think you could even begin to compare possible transit lanes. The Sydney route (outside of the control zone) is far and low enough not to impact RPT operations. Where's coastal through Coff's zone even at 500ft would conflict with the aerodrome traffic.

Good point. I don't know the area well (from the air) as I've had to avoid it. But if 500' is not a good idea how about 2,500' or 3,500' wouldn't that be well out of the way of incoming/outgoing RPT? At Williamtown they opened up a GA lane that goes right over (across) the runway at a safe altitude. Why not let suitably trained and equipped RA-Aus pilots through as well?

 

I would be in favour of CTA endorsements for RAA, provided the correct training.

It's not so much CTA Access as CTA transit - all we need is a VFR route that is a similar principle as Victor 1, i.e. day VFR at a height that is not going to interfere with GA/RPT traffic or put us into the trees (or the drink).

 

Many of the Airspace reservations that currently exist were determined before TCAS became universal. RA-Aus aircraft mostly didn't carry or use VHF or have transponders and GPS was unheard of. There really needs to be a thorough rethink of airspace classifications that tie up vast areas on a "just in case basis" but are active 24x7 - like Williamtown. That point has been made to the (Warren Truss's) Government inquiry. Hopefully, somebody just might actually do that.

 

Don