convert 24 to 24E

[KRviator]

On 02/05/2025 at 7:07 PM, BrendAn said:

class 5 is based on the raaus model i thought.

It is, however is a subtle, but extremely important difference.

The CASA Class 5 rules you to meet the "Unconditional Commercial AustRoads licence standard". RAAus requires you to meet the Private licence standard, which is more lenient in some areas.

I can't meet the C5 standard anymore due to a minor yet very-well-controlled neuro issue (but this issue is specifically called out as not meeting the AustRoads Commercial standard), but I can hold a Class 2 if I want to be butt-phucked by the cretins at AvMed every year with never-ending assessments and reports or I can go back to RAAus and fly until my heart is content. I have a Cat 1 Rail medical every year that's far more stringent than a CASA C2 and my Neurologist specifically wrote in her report "We have no issue for The KRviator to drive trains or fly" - and she is one of the leading experts on the condition on the planet! Good enough for CASA you'd think?? Nope.

So if you're thinking of going RAAus - CAsA (either for registration or RPC->RPL) bear this difference in mind and double-check you'll be okay.

[Love to fly]

8 minutes ago, KRviator said:

It is, however is a subtle, but extremely important difference.

The CASA Class 5 rules you to meet the "Unconditional Commercial AustRoads licence standard". RAAus requires you to meet the Private licence standard, which is more lenient in some areas.

I can't meet the C5 standard anymore due to a minor yet very-well-controlled neuro issue (but this issue is specifically called out as not meeting the AustRoads Commercial standard), but I can hold a Class 2 if I want to be butt-phucked by the cretins at AvMed every year with never-ending assessments and reports or I can go back to RAAus and fly until my heart is content. I have a Cat 1 Rail medical every year that's far more stringent than a CASA C2 and my Neurologist specifically wrote in her report "We have no issue for The KRviator to drive trains or fly" - and she is one of the leading experts on the condition on the planet! Good enough for CASA you'd think?? Nope.

So if you're thinking of going RAAus - CAsA (either for registration or RPC->RPL) bear this difference in mind and double-check you'll be okay.

Nope. You're confusing Basic Class 5 and Class 5

[KRviator]

12 minutes ago, Love to fly said:

Nope. You're confusing Basic Class 5 and Class 5

You're right, but with a typo. Basic C2 needs the AustRoads Commercial standard. Class 5 is Private. Got my wires crossed.

I still can't meet the Class 5 though, because the Cretins Against Sensible Aviation specifically call out my condition. I hope they never need to travel on the XPT though - there's a damn good chance I'll be up the front of the train, with no co-driver and no Automatic Train Protection to stop me blasting past a red signal into the asre-end of the train in front and killing everyone because of the medical condition that they say is such a threat to aviation safety I can't hold a C5....

Oh... Wait... My Rail medical is fine. Thank god for CASA and their "evidence-based approach to aviation safety" 
 

[spacesailor]

Don't let it get you down ! .

' Autocide' ( USoA  ) is a new word & illegality  for suicide by automobile. 

my daughter. ( ses ) had to attend one , between Orange & Dubbo NSW ..

spacesailor 

 

 

[facthunter]

Don't we call them Cars Here. "Auto" means you don't have to manually change the Gears. Nev

[GolfWhiskeyHotel]

On 02/05/2025 at 10:04 AM, Neil_S said:

Hi,

 

I did it a few years ago.

As above but $770. I seem to remember it was Darren Barnfield who signed it off. He will also ask if you want an exemption to still fly over built-up areas.

Why not? So I have that.

 

Cheers,

Neil

Yes you are right its Darren's baby. part of his MARAP program ..BUT BEWARE not all aircraft are able to be changed to E reg. You have to check and see if your 'plane is TYPE CERTIFIED. if so its not possible, under any cicumstances (ask me how I know ) it MAY be possible to get a MARAP to have the engine go "on condition" but dont hold your breath.

[BrendAn]

58 minutes ago, GolfWhiskeyHotel said:

Yes you are right its Darren's baby. part of his MARAP program ..BUT BEWARE not all aircraft are able to be changed to E reg. You have to check and see if your 'plane is TYPE CERTIFIED. if so its not possible, under any cicumstances (ask me how I know ) it MAY be possible to get a MARAP to have the engine go "on condition" but dont hold your breath.

tecnams are type certified and can be run on condition even in flying schools.  

The aircraft my mate is changing to E 24 is a fly synthesis storch so I guess that must not be type certified as he was advised to go E24.

Edited Sunday at 03:38 AM by BrendAn

[BlurE]

It cost me about $5k to go from 24-XXXX to E24-XXXX on a 15 year old aircraft registered as with RAA as an LSA. 

Those last three letters are the problem. In L-S-A there is no mechanism for 'on condition' so you need to get a whole new certificate of airworththness as an experimental aircraft with a non-conforming engine. 

 

This is not a 19-reg RAA thing this is all in the CASA world. 

The airworthness certificate is issued by a 'CASA designated person' - The $5k was all paperwork. He reviewed photos but never actually inspected the aircraft personally. The scrutiny of the logbooks is very thorough.

 

No doubt this expensive, but if the original engine hours are low then it's hard to justify $30k++ for a new Rotax. But also it's certainly something to factor in if you're buying a 12 or 13 year old LSA.

 

 

[BrendAn]

4 minutes ago, BlurE said:

It cost me about $5k to go from 24-XXXX to E24-XXXX on a 15 year old aircraft registered as with RAA as an LSA. 

Those last three letters are the problem. In L-S-A there is no mechanism for 'on condition' so you need to get a whole new certificate of airworththness as an experimental aircraft with a non-conforming engine. 

 

This is not a 19-reg RAA thing this is all in the CASA world. 

The airworthness certificate is issued by a 'CASA designated person' - The $5k was all paperwork. He reviewed photos but never actually inspected the aircraft personally. The scrutiny of the logbooks is very thorough.

 

No doubt this expensive, but if the original engine hours are low then it's hard to justify $30k++ for a new Rotax. But also it's certainly something to factor in if you're buying a 12 or 13 year old LSA.

 

 

Yes, I know it is casa.   he was told it will be most likely be approved without inspection because of the low hours , so you are saying $5000 anyway for the paperwork. scary stuff, that charge may have gone up.

[facthunter]

Lots of things in the aviation game (and some others) have a "Shelf life". I really can't see how someone can just sign that off.   Seals and O rings go hard. A Rotax 912 etc relies on sealing to send the oil back to the tank. 2 strokes run lean if the crankshaft seals let air in.. Nev

[BrendAn]

4 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Lots of things in the aviation game (and some others) have a "Shelf life". I really can't see how someone can just sign that off.   Seals and O rings go hard. A Rotax 912 etc relies on sealing to send the oil back to the tank. 2 strokes run lean if the crankshaft seals let air in.. Nev

can't see why an engine that is still returning good test results should not run on condition. how many ga aircraft are on condition. i know 2 debonairs that have been on it for 20 years.

and we know how reliable the 912 engines are. good for way past 2000 hours.

[BlurE]

6 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

Yes, I know it is casa.   he was told it will be most likely be approved without inspection because of the low hours , so you are saying $5000 anyway for the paperwork. scary stuff, that charge may have gone up.

$5k was actually all for the time of the 'CASA Desintated Person' to be satisfied that the aircraft was airworthy. (About 30 hours at $150+GST) This aircraft had 700 TTIS hours at the time. 

That's not counting my time. For example every AD in the CASA database had to be marked off actioned or NA. (there was about fourteen thousand of them) Sure 99.9% were NA and you can search and group etc. But each one still needed ruling.   

I think there might have been a small RAA fee as well.

 

I think the olf joke was that an aircraft could only fly when the weight of the paperwork matched the weight of the machine.

 

Your expierence might be a whole lot better that mine. I didn't have any real issues so to speak but did have to track down extra information that was not in my possesion and seek explainations for a few historical log book entries that were unclear.

Is it 5291 that we're talking about?

[BrendAn]

1 minute ago, BlurE said:

$5k was actually all for the time of the 'CASA Desintated Person' to be satisfied that the aircraft was airworthy. (About 30 hours at $150+GST) This aircraft had 700 TTIS hours at the time. 

That's not counting my time. For example every AD in the CASA database had to be marked off actioned or NA. (there was about fourteen thousand of them) Sure 99.9% were NA and you can search and group etc. But each one still needed ruling.   

I think there might have been a small RAA fee as well.

 

I think the olf joke was that an aircraft could only fly when the weight of the paperwork matched the weight of the machine.

 

Your expierence might be a whole lot better that mine. I didn't have any real issues so to speak but did have to track down extra information that was not in my possesion and seek explainations for a few historical log book entries that were unclear.

Is it 5291 that we're talking about?

i am only asking on behalf of the person doing it. 550 hrs airframe and engine. 912 2007 model. very detailed and well kept log books from new.

he is sending off the casa form tomorrow so it will be interesting to see if he gets put through the ringer too.

[BrendAn]

13 minutes ago, BlurE said:

$5k was actually all for the time of the 'CASA Desintated Person' to be satisfied that the aircraft was airworthy. (About 30 hours at $150+GST) This aircraft had 700 TTIS hours at the time. 

That's not counting my time. For example every AD in the CASA database had to be marked off actioned or NA. (there was about fourteen thousand of them) Sure 99.9% were NA and you can search and group etc. But each one still needed ruling.   

I think there might have been a small RAA fee as well.

 

I think the olf joke was that an aircraft could only fly when the weight of the paperwork matched the weight of the machine.

 

Your expierence might be a whole lot better that mine. I didn't have any real issues so to speak but did have to track down extra information that was not in my possesion and seek explainations for a few historical log book entries that were unclear.

Is it 5291 that we're talking about?

i don't even the know the reg on this one. its a storch. i only have 1 pic of it. 

[BrendAn]

3 hours ago, BlurE said:

$5k was actually all for the time of the 'CASA Desintated Person' to be satisfied that the aircraft was airworthy. (About 30 hours at $150+GST) This aircraft had 700 TTIS hours at the time. 

That's not counting my time. For example every AD in the CASA database had to be marked off actioned or NA. (there was about fourteen thousand of them) Sure 99.9% were NA and you can search and group etc. But each one still needed ruling.   

I think there might have been a small RAA fee as well.

 

I think the olf joke was that an aircraft could only fly when the weight of the paperwork matched the weight of the machine.

 

Your expierence might be a whole lot better that mine. I didn't have any real issues so to speak but did have to track down extra information that was not in my possesion and seek explainations for a few historical log book entries that were unclear.

Is it 5291 that we're talking about?

got an update but i won't share it until its signed off. far better than the ordeal you went throughj.