farri Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 A recreational RAA registered ( Ultralight ) aircraft, may only be used commercialy for the purpose of instruction. Should RAA registered recreational aircraft be allowed to be used commercialy for purposes other than the sole purpose of the instruction of pilots?. If they should be used,why and what operations could they be used for and if not, why not?. Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 This is one I've been wanting for a while Frank. I would think that suitably qualified pilots ( IE: Lots of time in ULs, and overall experience, not only bloody instructors) should be able to apply for certain manners of commercial use. IE: Charter/ air taxi limited to one person carried obviosly. A certain level of aircraft would need to be supplied. Also outback mail delivery by contract, or general freight, parts, or food delivery to remote stations. A huge requirement out there that could be better provided by air more efficiently, and possibly cheaper, than the current system. I'm sure there are many others also...................................................................................................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mAgNeToDrOp Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 wouldn't mind doing shark patrols and the like if somebody would sponsor the operating cost, hell I may even donate my time if I could fly for free :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracktop Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I don't think passenger or freight / mail carrying other than maybe joy flights really come close to fitting our scene. Photography and shark patrol ( almost a community service ) probably align pretty well though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbo Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 mmm. This is a can of worms. :confused: Would using the aircraft to transport myself between job sites (everywhere!) be classifed as 'commerical use'. Business pays for hire of aircraft..... but no freight is carried with only myself as pilot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brett Campany Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Good topic Frank, I'm also one who would love to do something "on the side" of my part time job like shark patrols, delivery of goods etc. I think this is definatly something in this day and age that should be available to RAAus registered pilots. Bring it on I say! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraemeK Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Would using the aircraft to transport myself between job sites (everywhere!) be classifed as 'commerical use'. Private. The relevant part of the CARs is: an aircraft that is flying or operating for the purpose of, or in the course of:(i) the personal transportation of the owner of the aircraft; (ii) aerial spotting where no remuneration is received by the pilot or the owner of the aircraft or by any person or organisation on whose behalf the spotting is conducted; (iii) agricultural operations on land owned and occupied by the owner of the aircraft; (iv) aerial photography where no remuneration is received by the pilot or the owner of the aircraft or by any person or organisation on whose behalf the photography is conducted; (v) the carriage of persons or the carriage of goods without a charge for the carriage being made other than the carriage, for the purposes of trade, of goods being the property of the pilot, the owner or the hirer of the aircraft; (va) the carriage of persons in accordance with subregulation (7A); (vi) the carriage of goods otherwise than for the purposes of trade; (vii) conversion training for the purpose of endorsement of an additional type or category of aircraft in a pilot licence; or (viii) any other activity of a kind substantially similar to any of those specified in subparagraphs (i) to (vi) (inclusive); shall be taken to be employed in private operations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Bushman Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 aircraft hire does using the RAA 19 rego aircaft for mustering and being paid by ther land owner ?? be allowered James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vev Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Great question Frank … surely there must be a high number of operations (see Major Millards suggestions) a suitably qualified RAA pilot could perform using a well equipped UL aircraft that would provide a low cost, safe and reliable alternative. This would have my vote for the RAA to scope up a discussion paper to include some limited commercial operations. Cheers Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahlocks Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Commercial operations with a recreational pilots certificate and recreational aircraft registration....Yeah, makes perfect sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Walter Buschor Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Don't think this is a good idea. It would attract commercial insurance cover and most definately LAME maintenance - if commercial use was ever allowed. Then there is the real possibility of a "commercial endorsement" etc. It would make our operations more complex. It would therefore not be "cheap" flying anymore stay safe Walter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shags_j Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I think it would be sweet but good luck getting the board to think about it, yet alone casa... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I think it would be sweet but good luck getting the board to think about it, yet alone casa... I can tell you that at the last Board meeting and as written on my pad of notes at the meeting that John McCormick came straight out and said a big fat NO to any Aerial Work in RAAus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shags_j Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Yeah figured. I think there is a strong contingent of "lets just stay how we are cause it's working". I can see some of their arguments but hell it would be cool to be able to do all of this stuff without going the casa crap. Particularly for those of us who don't have a spare $80k for EDIT: CPL rather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying dog Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 It isn't that I want to antagonise the situation: If you are doing mustering and getting "buggs bunny" for it. KEEP QUIET! and hope nothing happens to you or the plane. ** Disclaimer ** By me saying that, it doesn't mean I support it. What is said there is only a thought. (don't wanna get anyone in to trouble - especiall myself.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahlocks Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 ... a big fat NO to any Aerial Work in RAAus .. And rightly so! The regulations were altered so people could go fly for recreational purposes and not to create light freight and single passenger charter opportunities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Relfy Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 I'll throw a pigeon into the cogs... how about paid joy flights to promote Recreational Aviation? A simple non-instructional flight (seperate to a TIF). I can understand that as recreational aviators, our whole mantra is about recreational aviating but why not allow the promotion of the sport we love through very limited, promoting specific activities? :stirring pot: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spin Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 I'll throw my weight behind Flying Dog on this one - also let's not forget that we operate under an exception to the over-regulated mess that General Aviation has become. As the Dog pointed out there are ways to slide past the regulations (if you must) and the TIF is a case in point - nothing easier than to classify a joy flight as a trial intro flight, the "passenger" doesn't even have to be a member of RA Aus for the first 3 flights I believe, just sign a temporary chit. Let's not mess with something that works. I'm going to ask again, what part of RECREATIONAL Aviation do people not get?:confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 'Cost recovery', you can now, i believe, share the costs of a flight with a passenger. Years ago in GA you could not ask your mate to share the costs of fuel and hire, but it was common to sell your friend a packet of ciggies ect for a grossly inflated profit. Dispensation not exception Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest basscheffers Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 'Cost recovery', you can now, i believe, share the costs of a flight with a passenger. Yes, but you can not publicly advertise this. So if you hear about a cousin of a mate of a colleague who is interested in aviation and you offer a cost-share flight, that's fine. Putting a sign by the side of the road advertising scenic flights, even if you cost share, is not allowed. I don't care much for air work or other commercial flying in RA-Aus. Heck, you can't even do this in GA without a CPL and AOC. So no matter how hard we wish it is not going to come to RA-Aus. Yeah, it can be frustrating that you go cost-share flying with your real estate mate all the time but he can't take photos of properties and use them for advertsing. But you have to draw the line somewhere and no commercial use is no commercial use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vev Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Please tell me? … Hypothetically, if I was to pay (or cover their costs) for an RAA certificate holder to ferry my new ac from Bundaberg to Melbourne, would that be considered commercial? Cheers Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spin Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Dispensation not exception Neither actually, its an exemption from the provisions of the Civil Aviation Act, which is what I meant to say but for doing three things at once. Work really does get in the way of pleasure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunlopdangler Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Sir Reg Ansett is famous for selling oranges to his passengers at an inflated price while he waited to get his transport AOC... As far as Recreational flyers doing any sort of commercial ops..a big NO!! if you want to do commercial ops, simply get a commercial licence and an AOC like everybody else has to.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simonflyer Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Reconsidered! I originally posted something supporting the idea in some way, but I must say that after a bit of thought, and removing my post quickly, it's madness to even consider it. RA = RECREATIONAL AVIATION.Pure, simple and perfect in the simplicity. It's the lack of over technical rules that makes RA so good.Lets keep it that way. If we want to earn cash flying,we can go and get an instructor rating or get a CPL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraemeK Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 it's madness to even consider it. +1 :thumb_up: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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