RAA HQ - legal issues and claims

[BrendAn]

26 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

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.

There are a lot of hummelbirds flying so why is spaceys special.

 

[turboplanner]

2 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

There are a lot of hummelbirds flying so why is spaceys special.

 

Flying in Australia legally, under 95.10 regulation?

[jackc]

When it comes to Aviation, I have never seen such a disorganised bureaucracy amongst so many organisations, with their fingers in the aviation regulatory pie. 
There are restrictions and conflicting rules and the people administering them, it’s just a hopeless mess, much of it that Joe average pilot and aircraft owner have little idea, nor can understand.

 

[aro]

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

 In this case the structure isn't going to be redesigned, tested and rebuilt to GA standards

The standards you refer to don't exist for GA experimental. They are a figment of your imagination.

 

22 minutes ago, jackc said:

When it comes to Aviation, I have never seen such a disorganised bureaucracy amongst so many organisations, with their fingers in the aviation regulatory pie.

A large part of the problem is that so many people make up rules that they think ought to exist, rather than refer to the actual rules.

 

I'm not actually sure why this Hummelbird can't be registered under 95.55 instead of 95.10.

Amateur built?

Less than 600kg?

Stall speed less than 45 knots?

 

Why does it need to be 95.10?

[turboplanner]

17 minutes ago, aro said:

The standards you refer to don't exist for GA experimental. They are a figment of your imagination.

No standards, no oversight, make your own decisions, at your own risk...............doesn't sound like the CASA I know.

[aro]

3 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

No standards, no oversight, make your own decisions, at your own risk...............doesn't sound like the CASA I know.

Join the SAAA and learn?

[turboplanner]

10 minutes ago, aro said:

Join the SAAA and learn?

No point in silly trolling.

[Red]

Just how many airworthiness classes are there in Australia? 

Reads like a right mess

[BrendAn]

2 hours ago, turboplanner said:

Flying in Australia legally, under 95.10 regulation?

i meant around the world. hummelbirds are popular.  you are giving me a headache. i need a rest .

you cleared my constipation anyway.🙂

[spacesailor]

Spacesailor said ! .

My aircraft was registered under " AUF " without problems . 95-10-1103 .

RAA was audited , then I was told , " when attempting to get " final inspection " .

out of specification  for 95- 10 category.  

when attending an airshow , I approached a RAA official who told me to lie for the 

" grandfather  clause " .

that would have left me open to a fine for ' unlicenced flight '  & unregistered aircraft .

At no time was I informed  by RAA about the impending change to my registration .

There is no " safety problems " with the Hummel design . In fact it appears a really same aircraft

To have your crash in .

It is also very twitchy for a low hour pilot .

spacesailor

 

 

 

[turboplanner]

33 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

i meant around the world. hummelbirds are popular.  you are giving me a headache. i need a rest .

you cleared my constipation anyway.🙂

Focus on how many are in RAA, many basic aircraft are popular in other countries. We have to focus on the ones that are legal to fly here.

 

[aro]

46 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

My aircraft was registered under " AUF " without problems . 95-10-1103 .

RAA was audited , then I was told , " when attempting to get " final inspection " .

out of specification  for 95- 10 category.  

Couldn't you drop the 95.10 registration and register it under 95.55 e.g. change to 19-1103? What was the obstacle?

[spacesailor]

I was suffering from a crook hip. ( Now replaced ) .

Taking large doses of pain killer pills .

Then told by my ' CFO ' I'll never get that RAA flight certificate .

now it's my eyes  , going to get measured for new lenses on the 23 this month, then that

365 day wait for the operation,  ( the letter came today ) so a long long wait & hope 

I don't loose my eyesight by that time .

The 19- registration is possible : if I  had any chance of getting that elusive certificate. 

spacesailor

[FlyBoy1960]

My aircraft was registered under " AUF " without problems . 95-10-1103 .

 

You can register a broomstick (ask the wife),

 

There is a big difference between being allocated a NUMBER and completing a CofA. The number allocation has NOTHING to do with registration.

Edited May 7 by FlyBoy1960

[spacesailor]

Just my ' piece of paper ' that says " registered as " 95-10-1103 .

Stamped & engraved into the aircraft parts .

And ' money changed hands ' .( rego fee ) .

spacesailor

[FlyBoy1960]

1 minute ago, spacesailor said:

Just my ' piece of paper ' that says " registered as " 95-10-1103 .

Stamped & engraved into the aircraft parts .

And ' money changed hands ' .( rego fee ) .

spacesailor

 

Yes but its ONLY a number you have been allocated, read the fine print, it will say its not a certificate or permission to FLY.  You need to find the appropriate category and then get the CofA completed, then, and ONLY, then will you have a REGISTERED aircraft thats approved for FLIGHT.