BrendAn Posted May 6 Posted May 6 I have a question of my own though. Can anyone tell me if vh experimental have to be fitted with strobes , nav lights and transponders if they are vfr only not in cta.
turboplanner Posted May 6 Posted May 6 On 06/05/2025 at 8:20 AM, BrendAn said: Is this supposed to be for the never ending story. Expand I think you've summed things up very well. What's going on certainly doesn't have much to do with RAA documentation.
440032 Posted May 6 Posted May 6 There are no different specifications for lighting for experimental within the Part 91 MOS. See MOS 26.22 for anti-collision lights "required by type design" - Experimental amateur-built as an example have no type design. (not type certificated) LSA also is not type certificated. 26.23 for NVFR landing lights 26.26 for NVFR nav lights Transponder - Class D towers and G airspace (OCTA) - see AIP 1 1
BrendAn Posted May 6 Posted May 6 On 06/05/2025 at 9:23 AM, turboplanner said: I think you've summed things up very well. What's going on certainly doesn't have much to do with RAA documentation. Expand Neither did spacesailors question, he asked if wing loading was taken into account for vh experimental.
BrendAn Posted May 6 Posted May 6 On 06/05/2025 at 9:24 AM, 440032 said: There are no different specifications for lighting for experimental within the Part 91 MOS. See MOS 26.22 for anti-collision lights "required by type design" - Experimental amateur-built as an example have no type design. (not type certificated) LSA also is not type certificated. 26.23 for NVFR landing lights 26.26 for NVFR nav lights Transponder - Class D towers and G airspace (OCTA) - see AIP Expand thank you.
aro Posted May 6 Posted May 6 On 06/05/2025 at 7:17 AM, turboplanner said: it's best for the person involved to be contacting the organization responsible for registration Expand The SAAA are THE experts on this in Australia. SAAA Authorised Persons probably issue the vast majority of special certificates of airworthiness for amateur built aircraft in Australia - not CASA. So the SAAA documentation written to assist people to get their airworthiness certificate is an excellent source of documentation - probably the best there is. The next step is to talk to SAAA and an AP. 1 1
turboplanner Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 06/05/2025 at 10:22 PM, aro said: The SAAA are THE experts on this in Australia. SAAA Authorised Persons probably issue the vast majority of special certificates of airworthiness for amateur built aircraft in Australia - not CASA. So the SAAA documentation written to assist people to get their airworthiness certificate is an excellent source of documentation - probably the best there is. The next step is to talk to SAAA and an AP. Expand So are you saying that if you have an aircraft rejected on the grounds of safety by Recreational Aviation Australia Ltd, you just take it to SAAA and they will register it?
BrendAn Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 1:12 AM, turboplanner said: So are you saying that if you have an aircraft rejected on the grounds of safety by Recreational Aviation Australia Ltd, you just take it to SAAA and they will register it? Expand . saaa inspectors are not going to pass an aircraft that is not airworthy. 1
turboplanner Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 1:50 AM, BrendAn said: . saaa inspectors are not going to pass an aircraft that is not airworthy. Expand Well the owner should be told that rather than be given a different story.
440032 Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 1:50 AM, BrendAn said: . saaa inspectors are not going to pass an aircraft that is not airworthy. Expand For amateur-built aircraft, APs (of any affiliation) are not responsible for airworthiness. Full stop. (p.s. SAAA don't register any aircraft.) 2
aro Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 1:12 AM, turboplanner said: So are you saying that if you have an aircraft rejected on the grounds of safety by Recreational Aviation Australia Ltd, you just take it to SAAA and they will register it? Expand SAAA very explicitly DO NOT assess the airworthiness of the aircraft. Only the eligibility, paperwork etc. Airworthiness is up to CASA, and CASA do not set airworthiness standards for amateur built experimental aircraft. Neither do SAAA. You're Mr Public Liability - if SAAA start assessing airworthiness and rejecting aircraft they deem as unsafe, someone is going come along after an accident and say they should have rejected the aircraft involved. Much safer to just handle the paperwork and let CASA determine the airworthiness standards or lack thereof. 1 1 1
Thruster88 Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 1:12 AM, turboplanner said: So are you saying that if you have an aircraft rejected on the grounds of safety by Recreational Aviation Australia Ltd, you just take it to SAAA and they will register it? Expand You should read the provided link above a few times then you may understand how the whole system works. No individual approved person is going to pass an aircraft that are not airworthy. 1
BrendAn Posted May 7 Posted May 7 section 3 deals with inspections and explains wing loading requirements. advisory-circular-21-11-amateur-built-(abaa)-aircraft-certification (1).pdfFetching info...
aro Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 2:15 AM, BrendAn said: section 3 deals with inspections and explains wing loading requirements. Expand That's for ABAA aircraft, which is different to Experimental. I'd be surprised if anyone is going ABAA anymore. It's a lot more restrictive.
aro Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 2:01 AM, Thruster88 said: No individual approved person is going to pass an aircraft that are not airworthy. Expand They are not supposed to assess airworthiness, so it's hard to see how they could reject it? 1
turboplanner Posted May 7 Posted May 7 There's a lot of skipping around going on here; either a refused RAA Aircraft CAN be flown in SAAA or another category or it can't. The owner said 21 hours ago(these times will change as time goes on): "I believe the 95-10 Wing Loading" is not applicable to VH Experimental. Am I wrong?" 21 hours a document was posted: SAAA Controlled Document IppGen008-001 headed Convert RAAS amateur - built to VH Experimental. This was a general advice information paper which did not refer to cases such as where RAA has refused to approve/register and aicraft on safety grounds. There was no mention that an aircraft had been refused on safety grounds, no suggestion that this would be advised to SAAA/CASA. At 19 hours ago the owner said the advice which was being posted "does what is needed" Your advice, your responsibility. If CASA rejects this point blank, what are you going to tell the owner?
BrendAn Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 2:47 AM, turboplanner said: There's a lot of skipping around going on here; either a refused RAA Aircraft CAN be flown in SAAA or another category or it can't. The owner said 21 hours ago(these times will change as time goes on): "I believe the 95-10 Wing Loading" is not applicable to VH Experimental. Am I wrong?" 21 hours a document was posted: SAAA Controlled Document IppGen008-001 headed Convert RAAS amateur - built to VH Experimental. This was a general advice information paper which did not refer to cases such as where RAA has refused to approve/register and aicraft on safety grounds. There was no mention that an aircraft had been refused on safety grounds, no suggestion that this would be advised to SAAA/CASA. At 19 hours ago the owner said the advice which was being posted "does what is needed" Your advice, your responsibility. If CASA rejects this point blank, what are you going to tell the owner? Expand i simply posted what i could find on the subject. i don't believe the comments about registering without inspection. someone has to do an inspection to provide a coa. stop trying to turn everything into some liability argument.
jackc Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 06/05/2025 at 10:22 PM, aro said: The SAAA are THE experts on this in Australia. SAAA Authorised Persons probably issue the vast majority of special certificates of airworthiness for amateur built aircraft in Australia - not CASA. So the SAAA documentation written to assist people to get their airworthiness certificate is an excellent source of documentation - probably the best there is. The next step is to talk to SAAA and an AP. Expand There is ongoing negotiations between CASA and SAAA on some changes to CASA instruments in relation to aircraft coming from RAA to VH. There will be a positive announcement shortly, to benefit many aircraft owners 1
BrendAn Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 2:00 AM, aro said: SAAA very explicitly DO NOT assess the airworthiness of the aircraft. Only the eligibility, paperwork etc. Airworthiness is up to CASA, and CASA do not set airworthiness standards for amateur built experimental aircraft. Neither do SAAA. You're Mr Public Liability - if SAAA start assessing airworthiness and rejecting aircraft they deem as unsafe, someone is going come along after an accident and say they should have rejected the aircraft involved. Much safer to just handle the paperwork and let CASA determine the airworthiness standards or lack thereof. Expand whether it is saaa or casa appointed people, someone has to do the coa.
turboplanner Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 2:52 AM, BrendAn said: i simply posted what i could find on the subject. i don't believe the comments about registering without inspection. someone has to do an inspection to provide a coa. stop trying to turn everything into some liability argument. Expand It's not a liability argument, its very unlikely that an aircraft which has been grounded on safety grounds will be given a tick by another Administrator if they are given the original reasons yet here we've seen irrelevant documents posted suggesting it can be done.
aro Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 2:52 AM, BrendAn said: someone has to do an inspection to provide a coa. Expand The SAAA Authorised Person does the inspection. But they do not inspect for airworthiness, despite the certificate name. They will inspect for documentation, passenger warning, EXPERIMENTAL placard etc. The special certificate of airworthiness does not in fact certify that the aircraft is airworthy. 3 1
BrendAn Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 2:57 AM, turboplanner said: It's not a liability argument, its very unlikely that an aircraft which has been grounded on safety grounds will be given a tick by another Administrator if they are given the original reasons yet here we've seen irrelevant documents posted suggesting it can be done. Expand which one suggests it can be done, i was wrong about wing loadings, there is a section on that. i agree with what you saying but his aircraft may fit criteria under vh rules. for instance if the stall speed is too high for raaus . it might be ok for vh. only an inspection by a vh exp inspector will provide the ultimate answer.
BrendAn Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 3:04 AM, aro said: The SAAA Authorised Person does the inspection. But they do not inspect for airworthiness, despite the certificate name. They will inspect for documentation, passenger warning, EXPERIMENTAL placard etc. The special certificate of airworthiness does not in fact certify that the aircraft is airworthy. Expand so what do they do when buiding a kit or plans built ac. i thought they had inspections for each stage . i would not want to fly in one that hadn't.
aro Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 3:07 AM, BrendAn said: so what do they do when buiding a kit or plans built ac. i thought they had inspections for each stage . i would not want to fly in one that hadn't. Expand Inspections are recommended and there is builder support to help it happen, but it's not required. The airworthiness is 100% the responsibility of the builder and later operator. If you wouldn't trust the builder to build an airworthy aircraft, don't fly in it. SAAA are not in the business of assessing airworthiness, otherwise they would get dragged into court to justify why they didn't reject particular aircraft. 1
turboplanner Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 07/05/2025 at 3:05 AM, BrendAn said: which one suggests it can be done, i was wrong about wing loadings, there is a section on that. i agree with what you saying but his aircraft may fit criteria under vh rules. for instance if the stall speed is too high for raaus . it might be ok for vh. only an inspection by a vh exp inspector will provide the ultimate answer. Expand RAA aircraft are only allowed to fly if they can achieve the designated stall speed range in order that landing collisions will result in a lower level of damage/injuries. In this case the structure isn't going to be redesigned, tested and rebuilt to GA standards and stall speeds, so there's no rabbit hole there.
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