Guest Andys@coffs Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Two groups would be fantastic, much better than we have at present....we just need to know what to do with the rest.......RAAus, HGFA, Gyro's, SAAA, GFA, MAAA and Im sure there are more...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Two groups would be fantastic, much better than we have at present....we just need to know what to do with the rest.......RAAus, HGFA, Gyro's, SAAA, GFA, MAAA and Im sure there are more...... Right o I will be more specific, if there was two groups looking after recreational flying WHO REGISTER ULTRALIGHTS AND ISSUE PILOT CERTIFICATES FOR 3 AXIS PILOTS, would it be so bad ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Ok, I'll try and be more serious as well..... So today because I fly an RAAus registered Trike I can fly any airborne trike (as a single example) that is registered with RAAus and has a rgo number starting with 32. If I want to fly a HGFA registered trike I have to take up registration with HGFA or pay to transfer the registration from HGFA to RAAus despite the aircraft being identical. If Im an RAAus student I can go to any RAAus instructor. If however all the local instructors belong to ACME Inc RAAO then I cant go to them unless I transfer from RAAus to ACME inc. If I want to just hire a 3 axis aircraft for a few hours fun, then all good as long as the aircraft I want to hire is an RAAus registered aircraft. BFR same issue.... I cant see that there are any benefits.....I mean you guys argue that competition is good, in general I agree with that except where the pool of potential members is so small that in dividing to allow competition and competitive tensions downward affect on cost the remaining pool is so small that diseconomies of scale undo any benefit obtained. I mean RAAus has for the last 10 years been a basket case for quite a number of those years through poor oversight at board level and poor senior management in my personal opinion. If getting the right folk for one org was hard enough how much easier (not!) will it be for 2 orgs? Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kasper Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Ok, I'll try and be more serious as well.....So today because I fly an RAAus registered Trike I can fly any airborne trike (as a single example) that is registered with RAAus and has a rgo number starting with 32. If I want to fly a HGFA registered trike I have to take up registration with HGFA or pay to transfer the registration from HGFA to RAAus despite the aircraft being identical. If Im an RAAus student I can go to any RAAus instructor. If however all the local instructors belong to ACME Inc RAAO then I cant go to them unless I transfer from RAAus to ACME inc. If I want to just hire a 3 axis aircraft for a few hours fun, then all good as long as the aircraft I want to hire is an RAAus registered aircraft. BFR same issue.... I cant see that there are any benefits.....I mean you guys argue that competition is good, in general I agree with that except where the pool of potential members is so small that in dividing to allow competition and competitive tensions downward affect on cost the remaining pool is so small that diseconomies of scale undo any benefit obtained. I mean RAAus has for the last 10 years been a basket case for quite a number of those years through poor oversight at board level and poor senior management in my personal opinion. If getting the right folk for one org was hard enough how much easier (not!) will it be for 2 orgs? Andy So on that basis should the current HGFA/RAA duplication be removed by: a. RAA giving up all 95.32 and weightshift 95.10 control and responsibility: or b. HGFA giving up ll 95.32 and weightshift 95.10 control and responsibility? Interesting question because a few years ago there seemed to be a few HGFA members crossing the waters to RAA due to dissatisfaction with HGFA. And at the moment I am so pissed off with RAA Tech on their actual understanding of the requirements and their application of them to weightshift I am thinking of doing the reverse ... but I hate to turn my back on an organisation I have supported for coming up a quarter of a century. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Yeah I was one that was trained in HGFA and turned to RAAus for 2 reasons, 1) HGFA did nothing for us and seemingly spent any income associated with Trikes on gliding related activities, 2) I could see down track that I would want to play 3 axis and I didn't see why I should have to pay 2 separate orgs $$$ each to split up my air time. At least for trike we had that duplication, had I wanted to play Trike and gyro then there is no alternative but to pay 2 orgs. In an ideal world of my making one org will cover all recreation so that playing what ever I fancy for this years extension of learning requires merely another group endorsement on the same license. Can anyone point to the benefits of competitive tension as it relates to Trike? I never saw any decrease in costs, or increase in efficiencies etc.... The one thing it did do, is when(separately) each org looked like it might be in a spiral dive towards oblivion there was simply the alternative available if and when the crunch occured ...... I also think its interesting that you were discussing going HGFA because of technical prowess.......maybe things have changed there sure wasn't any of that back when I was with HGFA....but back then seemingly the standard of normal and poor were perhaps so low that you needed to have eyes at snake level to see the difference.......again all personal opinion, not a statement of fact. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kasper Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 YeahI was one that was trained in HGFA and turned to RAAus for 2 reasons, 1) HGFA did nothing for us and seemingly spent any income associated with Trikes on gliding related activities, 2) I could see down track that I would want to play 3 axis and I didn't see why I should have to pay 2 separate orgs $$$ each to split up my air time. At least for trike we had that duplication, had I wanted to play Trike and gyro then there is no alternative but to pay 2 orgs. In an ideal world of my making one org will cover all recreation so that playing what ever I fancy for this years extension of learning requires merely another group endorsement on the same license. Can anyone point to the benefits of competitive tension as it relates to Trike? I never saw any decrease in costs, or increase in efficiencies etc.... The one thing it did do, is when(separately) each org looked like it might be in a spiral dive towards oblivion there was simply the alternative available if and when the crunch occured ...... I also think its interesting that you were discussing going HGFA because of technical prowess.......maybe things have changed there sure wasn't any of that back when I was with HGFA....but back then seemingly the standard of normal and poor were perhaps so low that you needed to have eyes at snake level to see the difference.......again all personal opinion, not a statement of fact. Andy But your ideal can be achieved within the current duplicated HGFA/RAA if CASA wanted to as they could allow any airframe under a CAO to be registered and operated under an organisation and allow any pilot operating under an organisations ops manual to operate any airframe within the CAO provided it was operated within the Ops Manual on one of the RAAOs. Under this any RAA trike could be flown on HGFA certificate and vice versa. This would remove the need for - as I know one school does - of operating 1 trike with two wings so it can operate both training schemes. Also allow the introduction of other RAAO's like a "minimum" group where their focus is on politically looking after the low end - or any other part of the Rec Flying they want to. I'm not saying I want this to happen or want to create a third way BUT in my opinion its a very closed view to say its one or the other just because the current system is driven in that way due to design of the system. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 It would certainly be an interesting experiment, Im prepared to bring a bag of popcorn and watch! If I was one of the other RAAO's I might be a bit concerned because I would be surprised if RAAus doesn't already have >50% of the total available members.... Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kasper Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 It would certainly be an interesting experiment, Im prepared to bring a bag of popcorn and watch! If I was one of the other RAAO's I might be a bit concerned because I would be surprised if RAAus doesn't already have >50% of the total available members....Andy Agreed - it would indeed be interesting. BUT if there is a desire from low inertia groupies to set up an RAAO of their own then fair play to them. The main area of impact I imagine they would be looking for is a seat at the table when other RAAOs are looking at bargaining with CASA ... ensuring that basic low end freedoms are not traded away to CASA in any deals that allow CASA to bring the rec field 'more' into GA line by process and cut off the very non-GA bits that they may perceived to be critical if not essential to their members interests. Not to say that the larger players are not looking after the smaller sections of their membership that are not the growth areas, its just what i imagine they would say ;-) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Competition... Would you want two separate railway lines between Sydney and Melbourne? Duplication without any guarantee of benefit. Not economically sensible. We have elections ( but no one votes unless dragged along so get off your bum). The whole lot should be operating under one umbrella and work with each other not fight over chairs, as the ship sinks. Nev 6 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ave8rr Posted June 22, 2015 Author Share Posted June 22, 2015 NZ, US, UK and Canadian systems seem to work. All aircraft registrations under the National markings (VH-xxx) and registered as class 1/single seat class 2/2 seat, 3 axis or W/S) and let the various RAAO's train and issue the Pilot Certificates. No more of who can fly what based on the Registration. 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 NZ, US, UK and Canadian systems seem to work. All aircraft registrations under the National markings (VH-xxx) and registered as class 1/single seat class 2/2 seat, 3 axis or W/S) and let the various RAAO's train and issue the Pilot Certificates. No more of who can fly what based on the Registration. I like it, it will save paying through the nose every year for aircraft rego when our GA brothers only pay for it once. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bull Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Hear, hear awesome idea, but i think you,ll upset the fraudster GA escapolagists............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Hear, hear awesome idea, but i think you,ll upset the fraudster GA escapolagists............. ummm why? wont they (lets play your game and assume they exist) benefit equally?? or even more cause in addition to being " fraudster GA escapolagists" they are also rich beyond reason and can likely swap aircraft/types like you swap undies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Page Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I like it, it will save paying through the nose every year for aircraft rego when our GA brothers only pay for it once. dazza 38.. You are part correct here.. Our GA brothers pay once for rego and that is all they get, correct. However we pay yearly and with that comes some insurance and admin for our organisation. The tax payer "us" pay for the admin of GA. What the insurance portion is? Who knows these days. Regards KP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rankamateur Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Keith, What part of a rego needs administering on an ongoing basis? It is right that GA registrations are paid for at establishment, after that the maintenance has to be kept up to go on enjoying the benefits of registration. The ramp check is the compliance inspection! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Page Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Keith, What part of a rego needs administering on an ongoing basis?It is right that GA registrations are paid for at establishment, after that the maintenance has to be kept up to go on enjoying the benefits of registration. The ramp check is the compliance inspection! "Administration of the structure of the organisation":- The organisation needs funds for all of this and insurance for the aircraft where as GA is tax payer funded. Road vehicles have a yearly rego to pay and a number of roads a goat would break a leg on plus you have all these freeways, tunnels they have tolls and foreign organisation make a profit out of them. Imagine the squawking if GA went to a user pay system. Regards KP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bull Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 ummm why? wont they (lets play your game and assume they exist) benefit equally?? or even more cause in addition to being " fraudster GA escapolagists" they are also rich beyond reason and can likely swap aircraft/types like you swap undies... Because Andy they wont be allowed to fly their heavy missiles because they dont meet the :safety standards/medicals of GA 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank marriott Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 "Imagine the squawking if GA went to a user pay system" Keith Although not available in RAA, but substantial costs in GA add up in air Nav charges when you file IFR and thus use the system. I would not be surprised if a charge is introduced in the future for submitting a SAR time (or flight following) - would suit those who support the "user pay" mentality. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I also understand a levy on avgas pays for it. Why this GA bashing? It's generally uninformed and speculative and hardly endears us to the rest of the people who fly. If sections of GA were as vocal in reverse we would condemn that. If you want general support you are going the wrong way about it.Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgwilson Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 It has been said before but I will say it again. There should be a SINGLE REGISTER FOR ALL AIRCRAFT. If we stick with alpha characters we will probably have to increase the length from 3 to 4. Also there should be an annual registration charge for ALL AIRCRAFT. It is as simple as that. The database should be available for all to check without releasing any personal information. There could be multiple classes within the database and registration fees would vary based on the class. Each of the RAOs could administer their respective classes and the fees charged based on a cost of administering the register, insurance and other costs/benefits that the RAO determines it needs. The levy on Avgas could be removed as the registration process may cover the loss of revenue however that is unlikely as governments do not like removing revenue raising when it is done by stealth (e.g. Petrol Tax). This is no different from registering a motor vehicle each year. Even though it is a State based function it does not need to be. Rego charges cover or partly cover among other things CTP, road safety, regulations, enforcement, road maintenance and education. There are multiple classes such as motorcycles, scooters, cars, trucks, semi trailers, B Doubles, tracked vehicles, vintage and classic cars & even caravans & trailers etc. The vehicle register is available to anyone. You can get an App for your phone that will tell you the make, model, year, colour etc for any vehicle you key in the Rego number for. No personal info. It would be simple to install cameras on taxi ways to check if registrations are current. All this is dead easy with relatively simple technology. It just requires a bit of "Outside the Square" thought and commitment. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Because Andy they wont be allowed to fly their heavy missiles because they dont meet the :safety standards/medicals of GA bull I can't keep up with your thought processes, why if changing to a single once in a lifetime registration for all aircraft handled by all RAAO's will the "bad guys" suddenly have to stop flying? the supposed health issues and lack of ability are completely separate to one single whole of life registration system.... actually dont bother answering, you haven't yet answered a single question I asked just replayed over and over the same baseless claims. I'm not playing this game with you anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bull Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I also understand a levy on avgas pays for it. Why this GA bashing? It's generally uninformed and speculative and hardly endears us to the rest of the people who fly. If sections of GA were as vocal in reverse we would condemn that. If you want general support you are going the wrong way about it.Nev Well when raa had a 544 kg mtow the GA boys did put drama on RAA and looked down their nose at us, but now that they have hijacked our sport its a differant matter hmmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Nothing I say will make any difference to your ranting. Keep it up and we won't be able to share an aerodrome. It was the CASA's idea to go to 762? Kgs, which just happened to be the c-152 and Tomahawk AUW. " looked down their nose at us". You might have a perception of that but why give them reason to? Stir it up if it makes you feel good but it's all damage and not advancing our interests. What is you aim Bull? make it like you want it or destroy it if you don't get it your way. It's not perfect but it's all we have to build on and a lot of people have put a lot into it in the last few years. Nev 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 What in the *&xx##@$$## is any of this got to do with sport pilot magazine 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 That's a hard one. What's the prize for getting it right? A years subscription to the mag. Nev 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