Blueadventures

41 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

As a non-member of RAA .

Can anyone , here on the forum , obtain those ' 26 & 013 

RAA forms , for me .

Just to save my face .

Many thanks in advance. 

spacesailor

Just do a google search for RAAus form 013 and then 026 and you will have them.

10 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

You can sell or buy an aircraft with numbers on the side without a condition report however the new owner cannot register with RAAus without getting a condition report.

 

For newbies to flying a condition report may seem like getting a maintenance release for a VH aircraft, it is not the same thing. 

Yep agree; if unflyable the seller completes a form 26 and the buyer arranges the condition report (form 013) at a later date then gets registration and can fly. 

Bert is a legend and better still shares his knowledge. I learnt much of Bert and last time had a cuppa with him in Speedy’s hangar in late September 2023. Checking over a bolt removal on the ASK 14.  Please post the article on here once it is published by GFA. 

21 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

l4s wouldn't care about raaus. plenty of ga work to do.  if the l2 is responsible for what he put on the condition report they are going to be looking pretty hard at it if the ac has an accident within the 30 day period.

I don't think so as its who did the annual maintenance IAW manufacturer, and the engine service IAW manufacturer, and propellor IAW manufacturer, etc. It's a condition report as presented that includes an engine run etc and flight details by the PIC.  Some things will stand out some wont.  I did an inspection (not a condition report) for a guy for a Sav VG; I listed 20 odd issues I was concerned about and advised him to show the images and report info to his instructor CFI who was also an L2.  I said his Inst / L2 will be able to further advise as some things may not be necessary to do now and others immediate and may amount to at least $6K.  He did not buy the aircraft. The seller later asked for a copy and I did not give it to him as was drafted by me for the prospective buyer.  I had told the seller of the issues as I went over the aircraft and told him to make notes so he knew. (No free lunches from me with poor aircraft and have a copy if RAA ever needed it) In short his L2 may say some of my comments are a bit harsh; although my standard. I'm an L2 so need to always protect my reputation.  I've been asked to overlook stuff or tick sighted for documents or log entries; my reply is always 'Nope' I don't want my name tarnished or highlighted at RAA or elsewhere.  I call it as I see it presented. Cheers.

15 minutes ago, Area-51 said:

Short podgy man with glasses directing aircraft seen waddling away briskly from scene shortly after incident.... Fake security ID tag found laying upon tarmac belonging to R.E.Joyce

What was the damage, a tap on the arse end?

10 hours ago, planedriver said:

Looks like a hospital recovery bed for people suffering from Rotartitis🙃🚁

8 minutes ago, danny_galaga said:

This is how it's hooked up

Maybe wrong but looks like fuel feed hoses exit out of top of tank through inline filters into a "T' then to Gascolator and then to the electric fuel pump and onto engine.  And maybe the tank vents from top of tank and exit lower fuselage. Is that how yours is hooked up.

53 minutes ago, danny_galaga said:

Let's just say that if the volume of liquid that dribbles out of my gascolator when I try to drain it was the same volume that accidentally dribbled into my undies after going to the toilet, I needn't be embarrassed...

If it dribbles i'd suspect the valve is blocked should run if all valves are on. 

6 hours ago, Roundsounds said:

Yep! Avoids lots of issues. 

Except; can't turn on strobe and landing lights🤪🙃

1 hour ago, jackc said:

Well, then give us an overview of the 30 non compliant issues, so that they are identified to ensure that people are aware of important requirements. 
Infact, ALL non compliant findings should be reported after any audit or investigation regime.

IF all this is not out in the open, then it’s being run as a secret squirrel operation. 
If RAA wants respect as a peak body, it has to show respect or people’s attitude to compliance etc will go backwards. 

They seem to style the tech reports in the Sport Pilot magazine from these findings.  I have a copy of the maintenance authorities and what L1, L2 and L4's can do on my hangar wall (it was in a past Sport Pilot) so any opinions people have can be sorted.  Saves any incorrect info getting shared around.

8 minutes ago, facthunter said:

If there's widespread disregard for keeping aircraft log books what action if any do you think RAAus should take? It's necessary for good maintenance and is a requirement that certain entries be made in certain circumstances. In the event of an incident or accident you would have to produce it by people like the coroner and intending purchasers would expect you to have kept these records as a matter of course.  Nev

Maybe 7 years ago they said they did a check of one months renewals; an audit type check of 300 rego renewals and found 30 non-compliant, that's 10%.  This would be a good guess at what they are wanting to fix. 

10 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

I agree with (1) holding inspectors of any kind/level accountable for their report(s) - (2)what I don't agree with is (2) RAA somehow being responsible for the condition of an aircraft, at any stage of its operational life including being sold/purchased.

 

My opinions above, may sound the same/similar BUT (1) is holding an authorised person to account  (2) is making RAA accountable/liable needing more staff/insurance for very little if any gain. Why? - If this is to be an effective authority, it will require enforcement, an inspectorate/police, punishment, sufficient funds to fight the inevitable court battle(s) brought by aggrieved members and authorised persons. This will all need funding - do I need to spell out to the RAA membership where the $$$$$ will come from? 

The fault lies at the feet of the owner / maintainer who does the annual, 100 hourly other maintenance repairs etc in the first place.

50 minutes ago, FlyingVizsla said:

We are doing 3 ACR's this weekend, so we'll see how it all goes.  2 planes returning to the Register after years non-flying and one sold.  Two owners who don't believe in Log Books will complicate things.  The other owner got caught up in early RAAus log book audits, so that one "might" be OK, but there's no serial number for the engine installed, or any entries for the last 4 years.  "Trust me, I did what needed doing..." no longer cuts the mustard.  When were the hoses replaced?  Dunno. 

 

Fingers crossed.

Sounds good, remember being shown through your hangar and some other aircraft at a flyin at Childers club house a couple of years back.  Be good to have them back in the air and the one off to a new owner. Look forward hearing how things go.

1 minute ago, BrendAn said:

Sorry, I should have read this post. I just said the same thing.

No worries, all good, Cheers mate.

2 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

However if you issue an official Condition Report you are responsible for your own advice (which is why mechanics issuing roadworthy certificates photograph every single item they look at).

Agree; would be responsible for the correctness of inspection and it is good that its being checked by RAA; need to eliminate dodgy work regarding these inspections; like RAA reported finding dodgy bfr's (400kms between the instructor and pilot as one example) and like dodgy car road worthy's being picked up and actioned.  Will make things safer and compliant.  

3 hours ago, BrendAn said:

I don't know but the new office lady told me they are going through every acr with a fine tooth comb from now on.  The L2 responsible thing may well have been there before and they just decided to enforce it.

Were they saying they are changing the tech manual in this area?; I wouldn't think an L2 would take on any owners responsibility; only responsibility for maintenance work that they perform to an aircraft.  Regarding the condition report it specifically states wording about responsibility - "The Level 2 / 4 inspector (or LAME) does not assume responsibility for the airworthiness or otherwise of this aircraft. Airworthiness of the aircraft rests solely with the owner."  Any detailed attention to ACR's is good I reckon.

This is the pdf of the Gazelle maintenance manual that a forum member did a number of years ago.

Skyfox CA25 Service Manual.pdf

skyfox story-dgc.pdf

I found this article when I owned a Skyfox and found it a nice overview of the models.  Hope its enjoyed.

Ok send me an email or pm yours again.  I did sell my trailer supports to a guy who bought a Gazelle.  They were the ones from the wing tip end to the attachment lug on the fin, both sides and from the leading edge tube to the undercarriage.  Aileron hangar repairs would best be advice for Coastal Aviation.  There is an alloy repair method and have heard of repairing the ply wood originals.  Maybe post an information question on the Skyfox forums.  I do have a pdf of the Gazelle maintenance manual I can email to you as well.

I sold the Skyfox 7 years ago.  It was 0606 and originally fitted with Aeropower and suffered a prang and was rebirthed as 0637 in 1994 with an 80 hp Rotax.  I don't have the maintenance manual.  Maybe Rob Stowe at Coastal Aviation may be of assistance.  I did work out how to make new undercarriage bungees same as factory and if you want a copy of the procedure I made up let me know your email.  Mine was a 21 went well and had 490 hours when sold.  Rob is on Sunshine Coast are you based near there?

57 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

The aircraft condition report was exactly that . The condition of the AC recorded at change of ownership, the onis was on the new owner to ensure airworthiness.  Now it seems raaus is taking this into their hands. 

Also for an aircraft presented in flying condition at time of sale otherwise a Form 28 would be the change of ownership and do the form 13 before flight is undertaken.  Might be a good article for the Sport Pilot so we all know the procedure.  

As oil discussion is for Rotax and they take less than 3 litres (usually 2.8lts) at $19 per litre so only $57 every 50 hours; therefore even if your alternate oil choice is free it's only a $57 saving every 50 hours.  No worth any searching for an alternate product especially considering the gearbox internals needs regarding oil properties.  In my opinion anyone running a Rotax 912 and chooses to run oil other than recommended needs an upper cut, clip under the ear or even a kick up the arse to wake them up.

4 hours ago, BrendAn said:

1.   They wanted confirmation that the L2 had heard the engine running smoothly even though it was packed up on a trailer. Luckily he had flown it himself.

 

2.  They wanted the placard in the panel changed to 450 kg mtow even though it has been registered for 24 years at 544 mtow.

 

3.  It had a prop change which is in the log book verified with a photo of log book page even though it has been transferred with that prop change before. It is 19 reg prop changes are allowed .

 

 

 

Regarding #3; When I emailed RAA about a change of prop (DUC replaced with E-Props) so my registration details could be correct I got a call from Jarrod at tech and was told would need an engineering report etc, I was shocked and as the conversation continued he became aware that my aircraft was 19 reg, I was the builder and the actual weight of the DUC and the fitted E-Props had the change in weight well under the allowable percentage that would trigger a further w&b all was now satisfactory to allow the update of details without the additional paperwork being required.  I had in fact conducted a weigh of the aircraft and just have a record of that data.

Re #1; My take is any aircraft that cannot run its engine is noted on the report as not run and the reason and note that the engine is to be maintained IAW Rotax before its next flight, including when last run or flown if known and such would be acceptable to RAA.  Sounds like the report needed more comment detail.

Re #2; MTOW can be an issue and needs to be supported.  A mate up here has a factory built Sav S and it has had the 600kg upgrade done and in the log book but RAA shows it at its original MTOW; he is going to contact RAA to get 600kg on its file; I ask him on Sunday where he is at with that.

Overall I reckon the reports are an opportunity for RAA and the Owner to get an independent appraisal of the aircrafts condition.  We hear of owner's shortcutting the maintenance privilege we have that leads to accidents and incidents, so these reports are a good thing in my view.   We also hear of examples about poor quality inspection reports and this is another thing for RAA to address and same occurs in GA with certain LAME's and both are unfortunate situations.

16 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

anyone contemplating selling an raaus aircraft now make sure you tick all the boxes. we have had a condition report come back 3 times for additional information. i spoke to the raas office and they told me from now on every condition report gets audited and any missing info no matter how trivial will be required.  the acr is effectively now an airworthiness report and they are going to hold the l2 who signs it off responsible .  so i imagine we expect acr's to become quite expensive due to insurance cover now.  

and referring to a point skippy brought up a while back. when you transport your ac with the wings removed you have to get it signed off by an l2 once its reassembled.    

What were the 3 missing details; fair request from RAA I hope.  Any missing or incorrect detail has to be of benefit to the present owner; aside from any inconvenience.

On 24/02/2024 at 8:28 AM, facthunter said:

"T" tails have very high Loads compared to a conventional tail,  Nev

A comparison example would be the Piper Arrow and I hear the conventional horizontal stabiliser setup is a better aircraft to fly than the 'T' tail version.  I have only flown in a "T" so unable to compare from experience just what I have heard.