John Brandon

If you currently operate in Class E (or may in the future) or at non-towered aerodromes which have (or may have) some RPT movements, then you should take note of the current CASA discussion paper titled 'Proposed Strategy and Regulatory Plan in support of the Australian Government's Aviation White Paper'. Comments will be accepted by CASA only up to November 30 (I think). It can be found on the CASA website. Civil Aviation Safety Authority - DP 1006AS The parts which will affect GA and RA VFR aircraft are the following: 1. Class E airspace will be expanded, presumably laterally and vertically into Class G. 2. Aircraft operating in Class E must be fitted with (expensive) Mode S transponders. 3. Forward fit requirements for new and replacement transponder installations and all new aircraft registrations to have Mode S transponder with ADSB OUT capability. This will affect all replacement transponder installations and all aircraft newly placed on the Australian Aircraft Register and the aircraft registers of recreational aircraft organisations, after end 2013. 4. 2020-2025 Electronic surveillance of traffic by either aircraft-to-aircraft or ATC will be assured for operations in controlled airspace generally, in all airspace at/above FL110, and from the surface within 20NM of any busy noncontrolled aerodrome having traffic densities exceeding a risk-based threshold. 5. 1 Jan 2020: Mandatory fitment of Mode S + ADS-B OUT transponder capability required for aircraft operating in Classes A, C, D and E airspace; in Class G airspace at/above FL110, and from the surface within 20NM of designated aerodromes (i.e. an aerodrome listed with safety criteria based on traffic density and having RPT services.) John Brandon

For those who have an interest in self-preservation and energy management a good place to start would be my tutorial on decreasing your exposure to risk. This tutorial is a series of seven safety briefings (totalling around 50 000 words) that aim to encompass the flight dynamics associated with some common events that sometimes lead to destruction. The series generally explores the flight envelope (flight loading limits and gust loading limits), plus angle of attack management and energy management. It does not cover other accident causal factors such as fuel system management (i.e. chemical energy management), flight planning management, wire strikes or flight into IMC. To find this tutorial hover over the 'Tutorials' tab on the menu bar then click 'Risk' on the sub menu bar. cheers John Brandon

BlackRod, You should also read www.recreationalflying.com/tutorials/safety/wind_shear.html#inertia Read the whole document, in fact read that complete tutorial titled 'Decreasing your exposure to risk'. cheers John Brandon

I think you may be confusing inertia with (linear) momemtum. Inertia is a property of matter that is directly related to a body's mass and does not change unless the body's mass changes. For example, as an aircraft's fuel load is consumed its inertia decreases. A particular aircraft's inertia has nothing to do with its aerodynamics or speed. Its inertia is the same whether it is parked or in flight. Linear momentum, on the other hand, is the product of an aircraft's mass and its velocity. (If you like you can substitute 'inertia' for 'mass' and say that momentum is the product of an aircraft's inertia and its velocity.) Thus a parked aircraft has inertia but no momentum. An aircraft in flight has momentum which will increase as speed increases. A more massive (i.e. heavier) aircraft will have greater momentum than a less massive aircraft travelling at the same speed and thus will be less affected by gusts etc. It is likely that a section of CASR Part 103, when finally promulgated, will refer to 'low momentum aeroplanes'. Those will probably be our single, draggy aeroplanes with a normal cruise speed not exceeding 55 knots or so. Air molecules, in having mass, also have inertia and it is that property which resists the passage of an aircraft and contributes to air resistance, drag etc. cheers John Brandon

Perhaps you might read the section on inertia etc at www.recreationalflying.com/tutorials/groundschool/index.html#inertia and also the section on aircraft energy at www.recreationalflying.com/tutorials/groundschool/umodule1b.html#energy cheers John Brandon

Jack, that is a policy decision which is properly a board matter. I suggest those who agree with Jack should present your views via emails to each one of your state representatives. For email addresses see www.raa.asn.au/contact.html. John Brandon

The NPRMs for Parts 103 and 149 closed about September 2007. There was a statement issued late 2008 or early 2009 that Part 103 was in an "advanced state of drafting". As the first work on defining Part 103 commenced (I think) in 1996, i.e. 14 years ago, I would not dare hazard a guess as to when it will be promulgated. I just hope there is no change in CASA directorship in the next 12 months as it might lead to another change in priorities. John Brandon

Users of Ian's Avmet product should bear CAR 120 in mind (just in case). The following is the entry in http://www.raa.asn.au/students/auflinks.html PLAIN ENGLISH CONVERSIONS Ian Boag has produced an excellent, freely available, online, plain English conversion of current ARFOR, METAR and TAF for all Australian ARFOR areas. However pilots must still get the NOTAM from the Airservices site. Also student pilots should be aware that the ability to decode the BOM information will be tested in some of the aviation examinations. Bear in mind that CAR 120( http://www.raa.asn.au/operations/civilact.html#car_120 ) imposes penalties for use of forecasts that were not made with the authority of the Director of Meteorology and it may be that plain English conversions are not authorised by the Director. John Brandon

Those who scroll to the footer of The regulatory framework enabling RA-Aus operations will see I updated it to revision 21 on 7 June 2010. The CAO 95.10 limitations remain as stated. I don't expect any change until CASR part 103 is promulgated. cheers John Brandon

Perhaps the main users of the designated airspace handbook are the organisations (and individuals) who produce the VTCs, VNCs, ERC-Ls, GPS data bases, electronic nav systems and so on. DAH provides a 3-monthly update of the exact (3-dimensional) boundaries of CTRs, CTAs, FIAs etc. The vertical boundary of FIAs is from SFC to the lower level of the overlyng CTA, which is likely to be the high level Class A. These individual CTRs, CTAs, FIAs are identified by a code consisting of the international flight information region code plus a VHF frequency and, where necessary, a sub-sector code i.e A, A1, A2 etc. DAH is not intended as a ready-use navigation/communication publication so there is not much point in looking at it unless you are into coding electronic nav systems. John Brandon

Just to add a little more to that. If you are flying a two-place three-axis aeroplane with RA-Aus registration then you had better be flying an ultralight aeroplane otherwise your flight has no legal standing. The exemption legislation which allows such flights is CAO 95.55 which states as the preamble: Section 95.55 (Exemption from provisions of the Civil Aviation CAO 95.10 has similar wording, CAO 95.32 refers to 'weight shift controlled aeroplanes and powered parachutes'. So the ladies and gentlemen of the fourth estate are quite accurate when they refer to a RA-Aus Jabiru or Tecnam as an ultralight. cheers John Brandon Regulations 1988 — certain ultralight aeroplanes)

I think it may be worthwhile to review http://www.raa.asn.au/safety/excess_speed2.html cheers John Brandon

Exactly! I suggest members of the association might check our constitution, particularly section 5 (iv) and 7 (iii) 5. Cessation of membership. A person shall cease to be a member of the association if the person (i) dies, or in the case of a body corporate, is wound up; or, (ii) resigns from membership of the association; or, (iii) is expelled from the association; or, (iv) fails to renew membership of the association 7. Fee, subscriptions etc. (i) The Subscription payable by any Member shall be such as the Board may from time to time prescribe. (ii) The Board may levy additional contributions from time to time as required for the conduct of the Association's business. (iii) The Association shall cause notice of the subscription expiry to be sent to all Members on or before the last day of the month of expiry. If the renewal subscription remains unpaid thirty days after expiry, the Member's rights as provided within these Rules shall be suspended. (iv) If the renewal subscription or any amount levied remains unpaid ninety days after the date of expiry or imposition of the levy, the membership shall be terminated. The member shall not be required to be notified of such termination. And remember the constitution was established by people who wanted a thriving association and, to that end, expected that all persons who joined would be active participants in that association. No one expected that any members would have to be spoon-fed. John Brandon

I placed Lee Ungermann's advice to members and John Mc Cormick's letter on the RA-Aus website today. I've also added a listing of the 304 CASR Part 139 certified aerodromes and registered aerodromes where the proposed mandatory carriage of VHF radios imight become compulsory. John Brandon

Yes, AIP ENR 1.1 section 21.1 is what I have based the standard R/T procedures in the RA-Aus website on. However that does not change the fact that AIP ENR 1.1 section 68.4 states 'all stations' MUST precede a general information broadcast. (That AIP page is dated 12 MAR 09 and the section 21.1 page is dated 22 NOV 07). So, in my opinion, both formats are currently not equally valid in AIP because of the use of the term 'must' and the fact that section 68 specifically deals with R/T requirements outside controlled airspace whereas section 21 is headed 'Radio communication and navigation requirements'; i.e. it is more generalised. What it means is you can take your pick and still be covered by the AIP Book until such time as the AIP publishers make up their minds and tidy up AIP. There is another anomaly I have noticed in AIP which brings into question whether a hand-held transceiver is legal in Class E or other CTA. John Brandon

The use of the collective terms (location) Traffic or Traffic (location) to precede a general information broadcast has presumably been promoted by CASA, but not in any authoritative document. However Airservices Australia's Aeronautical Information Publication Book — is an 'authoritative' document and legislatively 'superior' to the VFR Flight Guide (for example). AIP ENR 68.4 continues to state 'Use of the collective "ALL STATIONS" must precede a general information broadcast.' Note the word 'must'. So CASA is ignoring Airservices rules in pushing for either (location) Traffic or Traffic (location). However some time ago I opted for the term (location) Traffic in the R/T procedures section of the VHF comms guide — R/T procedures but I guess you can use any of the three variations. When I think about it now I still prefer the 'All stations' call, it fits better with the Class Licence. John Brandon

Glen, I think you will find the MT410G is approved by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority [AMSA] as a PLB so it meets the CASA requirements for a portable ELT. AMSA 'owns' the S&R system not CASA. In the aviation regulations ELT is a generic that also includes PLBs and EPIRBs and portable EPIRBs. John Brandon

CAR 252A of 1995 is the regulation that mandates carriage of ELTs in Australian aircraft. In the aviation regulation environment ELT is a generic term covering emergency transmitter locators, personal EPIRBs and PLBs. If you check our CAOs 95.10, 95.32 and 95.55 you will see that currently they exempt RA-Aus aircraft from the provisions of CAR 252A. Suggest you read what I have written at www.raa.asn.au/comms/safety.html in the section titled radio distress beacons, or something like that. For information here is the 1 February 2009 issue of CAR252A which adds the requirement for beacon registration with AMSA. 252A Emergency locator transmitters (1) The pilot in command of an Australian aircraft that is not an exempted aircraft may begin a flight only if the aircraft: (a) is fitted with an approved ELT: (i) that is in working order; and (ii) whose switch is set to the position marked ‘armed’, if that switch has a position so marked; or (b) carries, in a place readily accessible to the operating crew, an approved portable ELT that is in working order. Penalty: 25 penalty units. Note For the maintenance requirements for emergency locator transmitters, see Part 4A. See also subsection 20AA (4) of the Act. (1A) An offence against subregulation (1) is an offence of strict liability. Note For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code. (2)Subregulation (1) does not apply in relation to a flight by an Australian aircraft if: (a) the flight is to take place wholly within a radius of 50 miles from the aerodrome reference point of the aerodrome from which the flight is to begin; or (b) the flight is, or is incidental to, an agricultural operation; or © CASA has given permission for the flight under regulation 21.197 of CASR; or (d) the aircraft is new and the flight is for a purpose associated with its manufacture, preparation or delivery; or (e) the flight is for the purpose of moving the aircraft to a place to have an approved ELT fitted to the aircraft, or to have an approved ELT that is fitted to it repaired, removed or overhauled. (3)Subregulation (1) does not apply in relation to a flight by an Australian aircraft if, when the flight takes place: (a) an approved ELT fitted to the aircraft, or an approved portable ELT usually carried in the aircraft, has been temporarily removed for inspection, repair, modification or replacement; and (b) an entry has been made in the aircraft’s log book, or approved alternative maintenance record, stating: (i) the ELT’s make, model and serial number; and (ii) the date on which it was removed; and (iii) the reason for removing it; and © a placard stating ‘ELT not installed or carried’has been placed in the aircraft in a position where it can be seen by the aircraft’s pilot; and (d) not more than 90 days have passed since the ELT was removed. (4) For an emergency locator transmitter, emergency position indicating radio beacon or personal locator beacon to be an eligible ELT, it must meet the following requirements: (a) it must, if activated, operate simultaneously: (i) in the frequency band 406 MHz–406.1 MHz; and (ii) on 121.5 MHz; (b) it must be registered with the Australian Maritime Safety Authority; © if it is fitted with a lithium‑sulphur dioxide battery — the battery must be of a type authorised by the FAA in accordance with TSO‑C142 or TSO‑C142a. (5) To be an approved ELT, an eligible ELT must meet the following requirements: (a) it must be automatically activated on impact; (b) it must be of one of the following types: (i) a type authorised by the FAA in accordance with: (A) TSO‑C91a for operation on 121.5 MHz; and (B) TSO‑C126 for operation in the frequency band 406 MHz–406.1 MHz; (ii) a type that CASA is satisfied: (A) is operationally equivalent to a type mentioned in subparagraph (i); and (B) performs at a level that is at least equivalent to the level of performance of a type mentioned in subparagraph (i). (6) To be an approved portable ELT, an eligible ELT must meet the following requirements: (a) it must be portable; (b) it must be of one of the following types: (i) an emergency position indicating radio beacon of a type that meets the requirements of AS/NZS 4280.1:2003; (ii) a personal locator beacon of a typethat meets the requirements of AS/NZS 4280.2:2003; (iii) a type authorised by the FAA in accordance with: (A) TSO‑C91a for operation on 121.5 MHz; and (B) TSO‑C126 for operation in the frequency band 406 MHz–406.1 MHz; (iv) a type that CASA is satisfied: (A) is operationally equivalent to a type mentioned in subparagraph (i), (ii) or (iii); and (B) performs at a level that is at least equivalent to the level of performance of a type mentioned in subparagraph (i), (ii) or (iii). (7)In this regulation: approved ELT means an eligible ELT that meets the requirements mentioned in subregulation (5). approved portable ELT means an eligible ELT that meets the requirements mentioned in subregulation (6). AS/NZS 4280.1:2003 means: (a) the standard AS/NZS 4280.1:2003, 406 MHz satellite distress beacons, Part 1: Marine emergency position‑indicating radio beacons (EPIRB) (IEC 61097‑2:2002, MOD), as in force from time to time; or (b) a later edition of the standard mentioned in paragraph (a), as in force from time to time. AS/NZS 4280.2:2003 means: (a) the standard AS/NZS 4280.2:2003, 406 MHz satellite distress beacons, Part 2: Personal locator beacons (PLBs), as in force from time to time; or (b) a later edition of the standard mentioned in paragraph (a), as in force from time to time. eligible ELT means an emergency locator transmitter, emergency position indicating radio beacon or personal locator beacon that meets the requirements mentioned in subregulation (4). exempted aircraft means: (a) a high‑capacity regular public transport aircraft; or (b) a high‑capacity charter aircraft; or © a single seat aircraft; or (d) a turbojet‑powered aircraft; or (e) a balloon; or (f) an airship; or (g) a glider. high‑capacity, in relation to an aircraft, means permitted, by the aircraft’s certificate of type approval: (a) to have a maximum seating capacity of more than 38 seats; or (b) to carry a maximum payload of more than 4,200 kilograms. single seat aircraft means an aircraft that is equipped to carry only one person. (8) In this regulation, a reference to a particular TSO is a reference to: (a) the particular TSO, as in force from time to time; or (b) a later version of the particular TSO, as in force from time to time. cheers John Brandon

See the notice I put on the RA-Aus notice board today. The following is the first few paras. John Brandon April 6, 2009: Changes to CAOs 95.10, 95.32 and 95.55 It appears that promulgation of the proposed CASR Parts 103 and 149 (see earlier notices) may be delayed for at least one year, possibly two years. Subject to CASA legal drafting advice the CASA project team is proposing to now incorporate a number of publicly consulted standards (that are proposed for Part 103) by amending the CAOs 95.10, 95.32 and 95.55 (plus others not associated with RA-Aus operations). RA-Aus will then continue to operate under CAOs (rather than CASR Parts 103 and 149) for quite some time. The proposed CAO amendments of interest to RA-Aus members are: 1. Extend the range of aircraft covered by CAO95.55 by raising the weight limit for all aeroplanes to 600 kg for landplanes and 650 kg for seaplanes — where a certification standard does not limit them to a lesser weight. A weight increase to 750/760 kg will not be implemented in CAO95.55. 2. Removal of the 5000 feet altitude limitation. 3. Access to controlled airspace on the basis of an RA-Aus qualification instead of relying on a CASA licence as evidence of competence, or the granting of a specific CASA permission. 4. CAO 95.10 to be amended so that operators of these aeroplanes have access to the same privileges as pilots of other RA-Aus aeroplanes whilst retaining restrictions on operation of such aeroplanes that relate to the safety of third parties.

For a categorised listing of articles available in the online version of Flight Safety Australia, that are pertinent to recreational aviation under the visual flight rules, go to www.raa.asn.au/magazine/index.html. The listing covers 1998 to Jan/Feb 2009. John Brandon

Some remarks in this thread decrying the performance of Magistrate Mary Jerram's recent coronial task are ill-founded and need correction, lest that NSW State Coroner — and her colleagues — opinion of RA-Aus members is further eroded. Her opinion of one member is clearly expressed in her inquest findings dated 4 February 2009: "Very little if any of his (Michael Coates) two days oral evidence could be accepted other than his own admission as to his deceptive, or fraudulent dealings with RA Aus in relation to the registration of aircraft and use of unregistered aircraft, his ‘re-registering’ of an unregistered plane, his continued use of Czech registration in Australia in contravention of requirements, and his wrongful use of the serial number of an aircraft in Australia, on an aircraft in the USA. He compounded the litany of dishonesty ..." The coroner's task is quite clearly defined: "Coronial findings and recommendations (NSW)." "The coroner's court is not bound by the rules of evidence but may inform itself in any way it considers appropriate. The coroner's court may order a person to attend the court to give evidence or to produce something. If the person fails to attend the court may issue a warrant." "The coroner holding an inquest concerning the death or suspected death of a person shall, at its conclusion or termination, record in writing his or her findings as to whether the person died and, if so: (a) the person’s identity; (b) the date and place of the person’s death; © the manner and cause of the person’s death; (d) and refer the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions if the inquest reveals that a known person has committed a serious criminal offence in connection with the death." "Also the coroner is bound to protect lives and well being by (a) bringing to the notice of relevant authorities any practices, policies or laws which could be changed to prevent similar deaths in the future, and (b) exposing other matters of public importance." If you read the findings CAREFULLY you will see that the coroner has done exactly what is specified. It must be clear to all reasonable persons, pilots or otherwise, that the prime cause of the deaths was the catastrophic crankshaft failure. No crankshaft failure then no deaths. Everything else followed from that. Perhaps the pilots may have saved themselves if they had acted differently; who knows, certainly not me — or the coroner — or anyone else who wasn't in that cockpit. The coroner wasn't required to speculate as to the prime cause of the crankweb failure; all she could say was that "One could be forgiven for doubting whether any maintenance or servicing was ever performed on the aircraft while owned by Coates. His record keeping was so appalling and to the extent that it existed at all, inaccurate, that we will never know." These forums have quite a large readership and I would be surprised if anything stated in them, which could be offensive to a section of Australian society, is not soon disseminated. Can I suggest that authors in this thread review any posts where criticism of the coroner is unfounded bearing in mind the coroner's brief outlined above? One other thing. Please do not delude yourselves that we have a good safety record. We had a good year last year but 15 people died in RA-Aus aircraft during the 24 months of 2008-9 which is rather horrific. Be very wary about any statistics produced comparing GA to RA-Aus, they are generally nonsensical. The only indisputable statistic is the number of coffins. Nowadays we usually produce two coffins per fatal accident and we are averagin 4.5 fatal accidents per year. See http://www.raa.asn.au/safety/intro2.html#fatal_accidents cheers John Brandon

Published in The Age today: WE WERE WRONG The article "Light plane deaths up by more than 50%" (The Age, 30/12) incorrectly stated that the 36 fatalities which resulted from light plane crashes last year involved a significant number of ultralight aircraft. There were two fatalities involving ultralight aircraft registered with Recreational Aviation Australia in 2008. The remaining crashes involved other types of light aircraft registered by other authorities. The article also incorrectly stated that Recreational Aviation Australia represents glider and gyroplane pilots. It is the policy of The Age to correct all significant errors as soon as possible. The Age is committed to presenting information fairly and accurately.

False reporting in Australian national daily newspapers RA-Aus members should not be alarmed by the articles written by Paul Bibby appearing in the December 30 issues of The Age (Melbourne) and the Sydney Morning Herald. The report "Light plane deaths up more than 50%" states: "The death of a NSW farmer in a crop-duster crash yesterday brought the number of light plane crash deaths to 36 for the year, up from 23 last year. The figures show that more than half of the deaths involved planes in the category weighing less than 2250 kilograms, including a significant number [website author's emphasis] of ultralights and other recreational aircraft." The statement pertaining to a "significant number" is totally unfounded; if there were 36 deaths in light plane crashes then 34 are certainly not attributable to Recreational Aviation Australia. At 3.00 pm AEST, December 30, 2008 there has been only one fatal accident in an RA-Aus registered aircraft during 2008, though unfortunately both occupants died. There were no accidents where long-term injuries were sustained. Since the AUF/RA-Aus was established in 1983 there has been one other year (1996) where only one fatal accident occurred. So, considering the 145% increase in members since 1996, RA-Aus members have achieved our safest flying year ever. The remainder of Mr Bibby's article mainly concerns the ambitions of Recreational Aviation Australia. It seems a deliberate attempt at public disinformation, the purpose of which is unknown. You can read the complete article at Light plane deaths up more than 50% | theage.com.au A protest from individual members is appropriate. Try [email protected] or someone may know the email address of The Age and SMH editors. John Brandon

For those who are interested the Group A election results were posted on the RA-Aus home page on Monday. cheers John

G'day Vince, Where's the inconsistency? Both statements are absolutely true. Perhaps it is a valid view that our association is foolish to expect to sell our material to non-members in print, or perhaps CD, form when the same material will be available from the RA-Aus website in pdf form? Perhaps, in the current internet climate, we ARE foolish but so what — it is of little consequence; and we have achieved such sales in the past. Or do you suggest, to be consistent, we should give CDs or printed versions to non-members? cheers John ps the link to the Ops Manual at www.raa.asn.au will be restored on the effective date - August 1.