RAA HQ - legal issues and claims

[Keith Page]

On 10/04/2025 at 5:32 PM, turboplanner said:

So what did they do to upset you?

 

Turbo.. Big question here are you a member/shareholder/or other of RAAus or own a RAAus regestered aircraft?

Just interested..

[BrendAn]

38 minutes ago, Keith Page said:

Turbo.. Big question here are you a member/shareholder/or other of RAAus or own a RAAus regestered aircraft?

Just interested..

He is ga as far as I can tell

[turboplanner]

On 04/05/2025 at 7:53 PM, Keith Page said:

Turbo.. Big question here are you a member/shareholder/or other of RAAus or own a RAAus regestered aircraft?

Just interested..

No, tried RAA as a low cost alternative, but when I ran the spreadsheets found it was more expensive than GA, but my interest is in cross country.

[Blueadventures]

2 hours ago, turboplanner said:

No, tried RAA as a low cost alternative, but when I ran the spreadsheets found it was more expensive than GA, but my interest is in cross country.

Is that because you did not do your own maintenance, annuals etc. 

[turboplanner]

17 minutes ago, Blueadventures said:

Is that because you did not do your own maintenance, annuals etc. 

No it was more based on the distances, however RAA has stuck with aircraft ownership and maintenance from the AUF days so an owner pays for any mistakes in the aircraft specification or design, and pays the full cost of maintanance, annuals etc. where by a hiring regime/aircraft on the flight line you may be paying for only 100th of those costs.

[facthunter]

When you hire you KNOW what you are up for, but you don't know how the plane has been operated by other flyers before you get it. Aircraft ownership costs are High particularly if you don't use it that often.  Hiring at weekends can be difficult and you can be under pressure to have it back at the time you said you would. Nev

[BrendAn]

39 minutes ago, facthunter said:

When you hire you KNOW what you are up for, but you don't know how the plane has been operated by other flyers before you get it. Aircraft ownership costs are High particularly if you don't use it that often.  Hiring at weekends can be difficult and you can be under pressure to have it back at the time you said you would. Nev

I watched a video once about a piper I think it was. The owner had it available for hire . Anyway she got sent a GoPro of some clown doing aeros and pushing it way beyond the Poh limits. 

[440032]

22 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

I watched a video once about a piper I think it was. The owner had it available for hire . Anyway she got sent a GoPro of some clown doing aeros and pushing it way beyond the Poh limits. 

Wong Warrior it was. (THE Wong Warrior - Christie Wong's)

[BrendAn]

8 minutes ago, 440032 said:

Wong Warrior it was. (THE Wong Warrior - Christie Wong's)

they hired to the wong pilot

[aro]

2 hours ago, turboplanner said:

an owner pays for any mistakes in the aircraft specification or design, and pays the full cost of maintanance, annuals etc. where by a hiring regime/aircraft on the flight line you may be paying for only 100th of those costs.

That's an owning vs. renting comparison, not RAA vs GA.

 

I fly GA because with a GA license, RAA just seemed to add a layer of bureaucracy on top of what CASA already provide.

[spacesailor]

I believe that the 95-10 ' wing loading ' is not applicable to VH EXPERIMENTAL  .

Am I wrong ? .

spacesailor

 

[BrendAn]

9 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

I believe that the 95-10 ' wing loading ' is not applicable to VH EXPERIMENTAL  .

Am I wrong ? .

spacesailor

 

 

IPP-GEN-008-002-Convert-RAAus-amateur-built-to-VH-Experimental.pdf

[BrendAn]

no mention of wing loading

[turboplanner]

23 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

no mention of wing loading

You're quoting an SAAA document there.

[BrendAn]

6 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

You're quoting an SAAA document there.

read it. its raaus to vh experimental.

[BurnieM]

Its also a SAAA information document.

 

This may or may not be all the current CASA requirements.

 

 

 

[BrendAn]

10 minutes ago, BurnieM said:

Its also a SAAA information document.

 

This may or may not be all the current CASA requirements.

 

 

 

It's saaa listing the requirements for ra to vh. You would get the same thing off casa.

[turboplanner]

9 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

It's saaa listing the requirements for ra to vh. You would get the same thing off casa.

Not necessarily, but certainly it's not safe to provide advice from third party documents.

[BrendAn]

5 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Not necessarily, but certainly it's not safe to provide advice from third party documents.

Crap. Why are trying to stir up shit.

I bet you have not even looked at it

[Blueadventures]

31 minutes ago, BurnieM said:

Its also a SAAA information document.

 

This may or may not be all the current CASA requirements.

 

 

 

Its a great guide, it alerts you to where you need direction from CASA about additional information to support the application.  Best guide available.

[Blueadventures]

5 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

Crap. Why are trying to stir up shit.

I bet you have not even looked at it

Agree was going to say the same, very, very rare to be provided definative and total advice these days even by the regulators, they will only advise generally and say to apply and they will then specifically address your application.  

[BrendAn]

7 minutes ago, Blueadventures said:

 

 

21 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Not necessarily, but certainly it's not safe to provide advice from third party documents.

I was rude to snap at you but if you read it you would see it explains the subject very well.

Edited yesterday at 06:40 AM by BrendAn

[spacesailor]

It does what is needed. 

Very well written , thanks .

spacesailor

[turboplanner]

33 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

 

I was rude to snap at you but if you read it you would see it explains the subject very well.

It might explain a subject very well, but when you are talking about an aircraft which has been refused registration for, as far as I remember, over a decade then it's best for the person involved to be contacting the organization responsible for registration rather than a third party who may not have an "Amendmment", "Sunset Clause" "Proviso" or any number of items the outside party might have missed in his opinion.

[BrendAn]

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

It might explain a subject very well, but when you are talking about an aircraft which has been refused registration for, as far as I remember, over a decade then it's best for the person involved to be contacting the organization responsible for registration rather than a third party who may not have an "Amendmment", "Sunset Clause" "Proviso" or any number of items the outside party might have missed in his opinion.

Is this supposed to be for the never ending story.