Permit to Fly

[Hwansey]

Lodged all paperwork by email as instructed by helpful lady at Ra Aus 28/9/2018. Confirmed by phone on the 5/10 that paperwork was indeed lodged on 28/9. Still no permit. How long does this usually take?

 

 

[old man emu]

[SSCBD]

Simple - Phone and ask them - where it is and time expected.

 

 

[Hwansey]

In answer to my own question - 12 working days.

 

 

[M61A1]

Now .....Imagine you walk into your local transport office with all your car rego paperwork. You correctly submit it to the clerk, pay your money, then they tell you 12 working days......

 

Do you reckon that would be accepted anywhere else?

 

 

[old man emu]

A HWP constable said on on 13 August 2018 that he was booking me for an alleged traffic offence. He said that I would get a ticket in the mail. Two months later, I'm still waiting.

 

However, I don't mind. By the time it gets to Court for a hearing, it will be over six months and they can't drop anything else on me when I get the matter dismissed through lack of evidence.

 

 

[facthunter]

There's an infinite number of conditions relating to a permit to fly. Some would be easy, (Few) some would be refused or require conditions or more information. It's nothing like what happens on the road. Nev

 

 

[M61A1]

I disagree...Either it complies or it doesn't. Yes some may require more documentation (as sometime happens at the transport dept), but, essentially that's RAAus's only real job, to administer the regs as defined by CASA. It should happen exactly like "what happens on the road"

 

 

[M61A1]

A HWP constable said on on 13 August 2018 that he was booking me for an alleged traffic offence. He said that I would get a ticket in the mail. Two months later, I'm still waiting.However, I don't mind. By the time it gets to Court for a hearing, it will be over six months and they can't drop anything else on me when I get the matter dismissed through lack of evidence.

Might want to get online and check your licence.....They may have suspended it, if they think they've sent the documentation and follow up summons to the right place (but haven't) and assumed you have elected not to pay or show up at court.

 

 

[Downunder]

Now .....Imagine you walk into your local transport office with all your car rego paperwork. You correctly submit it to the clerk, pay your money, then they tell you 12 working days......Do you reckon that would be accepted anywhere else?

But they're just making some photo copies...... in their "aviation certified" copier...

 

 

 

[Mike Borgelt]

Imagine if CASA/RAAus/GFA had been in charge of the internet. You'd now be using a 4800 baud dial up modem (OK maybe 300 baud), you would need a government issued licence to be an internet user, emails would cost 50c each to send and you would need an expensive licence and government approval to run a website like this one. Allow 6 months for that. There might even be government vetting of all posts. Would probably take 12 working days.

 

 

[facthunter]

None of that really adds a lot to the argument Mike. Permits to fly different aircraft condition and types of aircraft require expert oversight and I really doubt that road or any other have any bearing on it. Every case is different. You can't pull over or drive slow if things go wrong in the sky. Look at the ferry flight of the Convair 240 in Africa as well as many other flights where planes were not in normal condition or had sat for a while and were ferried . The whole scene is full of incidents. You need to know what you are doing to sign off on those things as well as flying them.. Multiples of normal risks. Nev

 

 

[Mike Borgelt]

facthunter, aviation isn't reasonably safe because of regulation. It is reasonably safe because we've been doing it for 115 years and learned to improve the technology and methods. The regulators are merely parasites.

 

 

[facthunter]

The issuance of a permit is against strict regulation. It's a considered exemption from the normal requirement for airworthiness RULES. Rules evolve from learning the hard way if it's done as it should be. Accidents produce improvements if WE Learn from mistakes.. I wouldn't like to fly in any country where there were no regulators. I've seen some of the planes that fly there, and unless you're a suicidal maniac or desperate you wouldn't get into one.

 

Saying "the Regulators are merely parasites" makes me wonder what your IDEAL flying world would be like. Flying does require a lot of discipline to be reasonably safe either discipline from the individual (preferably) or by other oversight and rule making. You are aware of the fact that I don't agree with the system of strict Liability that applies here. I've mentioned it often enough so don't put me into the lover of the present system category because. I'm not. Nev

 

 

[Mike Borgelt]

See what I wrote elsewhere this morning on this forum about RATIONAL, EVIDENCE BASED REGULATION.

 

All the rules in the world don't stop the "hold my beer and watch this!" mob. The regulator cannot be everywhere at all times especially once you are airborne and the danger with excessive regulation is that inexperienced people cannot differentiate between the sensible rules (usually the ones based on physical science and engineering) and the merely bureaucratic ones designed to find punish scapegoats in the event something goes wrong.

 

Funny thing is that the vast majority of aircraft accidents occur with the paperwork in place.

 

 

[facthunter]

Since most accidents happen when multiple factors get aligned , I don't agree with your last line. and there's paperwork and paperwork. Some operators don't like pilots writing up faults. That should be where the "Regulator " comes in. In your ideal world there isn't one?

 

. Multi crew and human factors training get rid of the cockpit tyrant and the cowboys. and the incompetents in RPT and recurrent training/ testing in sims holds a pretty good standard. World wide no one was killed in 2017 in RPT operations. That's quite an achievement, perhaps (unfortunately) not easily repeated.. Nev.

 

 

[onetrack]

Imagine if CASA/RAAus/GFA had been in charge of the internet. You'd now be using a 4800 baud dial up modem (OK maybe 300 baud), you would need a government issued licence to be an internet user, emails would cost 50c each to send and you would need an expensive licence and government approval to run a website like this one. Allow 6 months for that. There might even be government vetting of all posts. Would probably take 12 working days.

You forgot to mention that inspectors would regularly show up at your house, to check if your computer was being maintained to the regulations, sub-regulations, paragraphs, sub paragraphs, and sections and sub-sections, contained in multiple volumes, of Internet law.

They would also check to see if you had been drinking within 8hrs of using the Internet. That check alone would eliminate a huge volume of Internet traffic!

 

 

[M61A1]

Since most accidents happen when multiple factors get aligned , I don't agree with your last line. and there's paperwork and paperwork. Some operators don't like pilots writing up faults. That should be where the "Regulator " comes in. In your ideal world there isn't one?. Multi crew and human factors training get rid of the cockpit tyrant and the cowboys. and the incompetents in RPT and recurrent training/ testing in sims holds a pretty good standard. World wide no one was killed in 2017 in RPT operations. That's quite an achievement, perhaps (unfortunately) not easily repeated.. Nev.

Sounds great for RPT. Given that we're talking about recreational aviation, it's really unnecessary. I reckon there's whole bunch of people out there that don't actually like the flying.....what they do like is a complicated set of rules to follow that makes them feel more superior with every tick of every box.

 

 

[Mike Borgelt]

Yes, I thought we were mainly taking about small recreational aircraft, mostly flown by the owner.

 

M61A1, you are correct about most people not liking flying and do like not only following complicated sets of rules but dreaming up ever more complicated rules.

 

See RAAus and GFA for examples.

 

 

[Yenn]

I agree that we need rules and I flew in the sixties, with just about the same rules as we have now. We have CASA forever meddling with the rules to such an extent that they do not make sense and they are no better than in the good old days. CASA costs billions to run and does not do the job. We could adopt FAA or New Zealand rules and have the advantage that they are understandable and sensible.