How long until RAA get a weight increase approved?

[facthunter]

Fuel used to run down (from cowl to the top) of the windscreen of the chipmunk and you had to let it idle when back upright till the oil pressure indication was steady, before giving it power, as it got air in the oil system when inverted. You could always smell fuel. when you were doing these things. When I first went inverted on the DH 82, I was surprised it actually glided upside down as It didn't glide that far upright. It's not that hard really but maybe flying control line combat made it seem easier. Nev

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

good points Nev. Yes, the Jabiru has an oil system which can't go negative. Nor can the carby.

I didn't want to make a smarty comment but I did think it was more likely that the person in your anecdote probably just 'pushed' a little while going over the top of the loop which needn't give negative G. Even going closer to zero G can be quite a thrill without starving an engine which has carby fuel bowls, or affecting the oil pickup(s).

 

 

[Blinky Bill]

Getting back to the subject of "How long until RAA get a weight increase approved?"

 

If CASA approves the increase, RA Aus then will have a problem of what Rego Numbers to issue!

 

As RA Aus is currently running out of Rego Numbers, and I believe they are currently re-issuing old expired numbers!

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

I dont think numbers are a issue at all. add a extra digit so its 5 digits or a different preceeding number

 

I still think its a long long way off

 

 

[440032]

RAAus have been using low vacant numbers for quite a while now. Magazine is full of them. Nothing shocking about that, CASA do it with VH. Motor registration branches can do it with cars. If the number is not used, it's usable by the next punter. They won't run out until past 9,999 aircraft registered, and with about 3500 or thereabouts aircraft registered at present (was it?) they won't run out any time soon.

 

Nothing to see here, move along.........................

 

 

[spacesailor]

Even number's issued & payed for ?.

 

"RAAus have been using low vacant numbers for quite a while now"

 

No chance of a refund, Do all company's rip off their clients, by changing rules.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Even number's issued & payed for ?.

"RAAus have been using low vacant numbers for quite a while now"

 

No chance of a refund, Do all company's rip off their clients, by changing rules.

 

spacesailor

I don’t understand why it’s a rip off. 

 

It’s just a label to put on the item so it can be identified. 

 

Phone numbers, car Regos, boat Regos, GA Regos, amateur radio Regos- the list goes on and on- are recycled. 

 

They don’t take them off an active aircraft do they? 

 

And they have to be paid for ( renewed) every year so once it’s no longer in use or not renewed it’s no longer applicable to that old airframe whether it’s an airworthy frame or a heap of scraps in someone’s shed. 

 

I can’t see the problem. 

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

Why not issue VH to RAAus - no valid reason not to - registration has nothing to do with airworthiness

 

 

[Thruster88]

Getting back to the subject of "How long until RAA get a weight increase approved?"

If CASA approves the increase, RA Aus then will have a problem of what Rego Numbers to issue!

 

As RA Aus is currently running out of Rego Numbers, and I believe they are currently re-issuing old expired numbers!

RAA have 9999 combinations and only 3350 aircraft,  VH has 17576 combinations and 15,556 current registrations.  

 

 

[spacesailor]

Add the R letter to the number's, & be 24 times greater.

 

All the Hummel-Bird aircraft Not flying were removed from the registry, Flying were "Grandfathered"

 

After the unknown aircraft wing loading was implemented.

 

Aircraft registered & payment accepted (interim) & told to re-register as 95-19xxx instead of original 95-10.xxx.

 

OR  VH experimental !

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

ICAO rules on registration would enable VH-R???, VH-X??? etc - we are not stuck with 3 letters following the VH. I think also South Africa has:

 

ZS-AAA to ZS-ZZZ (type certified aircraft)

 

ZT-RAA to ZT-RZZ (type certified rotorcraft) and ZT-TAA to ZT-TZZ (civil RPAS)[18]

 

ZU

 

ZU-AAA to ZU-ZZZ (non-type certified aircraft). From 1921 to 1929, G-UA.

 

but  Germany does it this way:

 

D-AAAA to D-AZZZ for aircraft with more than 20 t MTOW

 

D-AUAA to D-AZZZ (test registrations) for aircraft manufactured by Airbus at Finkenwerder

 

D-BAAA to D-BZZZ for aircraft with 14–20 t MTOW

 

D-CAAA to D-CZZZ for aircraft with 5.7–14 t MTOW

 

D-EAAA to D-EZZZ for single-engine aircraft up to 2 t MTOW

 

D-FAAA to D-FZZZ for single-engine aircraft from to 2–5.7 t MTOW

 

D-GAAA to D-GZZZ for multi-engine aircraft up to 2 t MTOW

 

D-HAAA to D-HZZZ for rotorcraft

 

D-IAAA to D-IZZZ for multi-engine aircraft from 2–5.7 t MTOW

 

D-KAAA to D-KZZZ for powered gliders

 

D-LAAA to D-LZZZ for airships

 

D-MAAA to D-MZZZ for powered ultralight aircraft

 

D-NAAA to D-NZZZ for non-powered ultralight aircraft

 

D-OAAA to D-OZZZ for manned free balloons

 

D-0001 to D-9999 for gliders.

 

 

[spacesailor]

Jim

 

I say it's the best rego no,.s of the lot. (D Germany)

 

Problem is VH will grab them before RAA has even thought about it.

 

Have RAA even got this on their agenda?

 

spacesailor

 

 

[kasper]

On rego numbers in RAAus 

 

9,999 in each sequence

 

10- will never hit the limit as very few go there any more

 

25- are a closer favtory group so no issue

 

28- as old 101-28 homeguilt saaa aircraft will never hit their limit

 

32- trikes will never hit their limit - the hgfa trikes have T not 32 leading so no practical reason duplication can’t occur 

 

now we have 18-  19- 23- etc all with 9,999 options.  

 

I dont see that that RAAus really needs to recycle numbers any time soon because there are large gaps in sequences when over the years they have done odd sequence blocking’s.  

 

moving to VH-1234 would actually substantially reduce the total available and don’t forget we have to label them 6” high with proper gaps so racking on extra digits is problematic. 

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

kasper, you didn't mention my category, 19!

 

I tried to look up how many 19 reg there are but failed. My guess is about 300.

 

 

[kgwilson]

My homebuilt was registered in September 2015 & is 19-8664. I could have asked for a different number if it was available either lower or higher but there was a fee, I think $100.00 so I just took what they gave me. Kasper did mention 19.

 

 

[Downunder]

I'm thinking the last four digits have to be unique across all prefixes.

 

You cannot have 19-1234 and 24-1234 as the callsigns only use 1234....

 

 

[kasper]

I'm thinking the last four digits have to be unique across all prefixes.

You cannot have 19-1234 and 24-1234 as the callsigns only use 1234....

Nope.  There are and have always been numbers issued in seperate sequences that are the same.  

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Nope.  There are and have always been numbers issued in seperate sequences that are the same.  

The use of last numbers is pretty much just going to be when making calls on the radio.

 

These days I think the correct callsign when using the radio is “jabiru 1234” or “lightwing 1234” not just the digits  etc so chances of two aircraft of same make and numbers being registered in different categories and at same location at same time is probably close to zero.