Rob Judd

Wow, I can't believe I just waded through seven pages of this tripe. I think you're all missing a major point underlying this whole argument, that we are over-regulated and living in a nanny state. Read the US FAR 103 and find out what real freedom is, then come back and try to figure out why anyone would want to set up such a complicated system as the ones in Australia and New Zealand in the first place. Control. Empire building. https://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aviation-communities-and-interests/ultralights-and-ultralight-aircraft/getting-started-in-ultralight-flying/about-faa-part-103-for-ultralights We don' need no steenkin' CASA. We don' need no steenkin' RA-Aus. The ultralight "industry" started with a bunch of crazy guys strapping on a rogallo wing and a lawnmower engine and jumping off cliffs at Stanwell Tops. Where the hell did THOSE guys go? We're bloody wimps in comparison. A wit once remarked that you don't need a parachute to skydive, unless you wanted to do it twice. As far as I'm aware skydiving is a self-regulating industry and yet to my mind it's far more dangerous than flying an airplane. If RA-Aus hadn't spent so much time and effort trying to be an ersatz CASA and getting "rights" to controlled airspace, the vast majority of these issues would be simply resolved. Just do away with licencing and registration for single place aircraft (and pilots) engaged in local flying. But you can't build an empire that way. Any organisation that isn't currently arguing for reduced regulations and complexity will never have my support, because they're trying to kill my interest in the sport. I don't give a damn about the internal difficulties of administering an organisation that doesn't protect my right to fly unencumbered by bureacracy and arbitraries. Anyone with a brain the size of a pea could do a better job, as you all have proven here. So why doesn't it improve? Well I'll tell you why, it's because it's being KEPT THAT WAY by someone. I think a good start would be to boot out anyone who has ever worked for CASA, and to require that no RA-Aus employee be hired without agreeing they never will work for CASA. Separation is necessary to remain independent. We are not regulators, we are flyers, and need to keep that in mind. I spent 40 years in electronics and started repairing computers before anyone even knew what a computer was. A membership database such as is needed here is trivial, and requires almost no thought to implement. If we need to apply standards to the integrity of data, let's use the standards of the government that regulates us. Oh wait, my yacht registration from DoT QLD says that I'm sitting in a white yacht, but it's been beige for 6 years and this data was provided at change of ownership. Not my problem any more. You want to put a ship on the Australian register? All communication must be by mail. That's the standard they're setting - INCOMPETENCE AND INEFFICIENCY. You want that? Screw 'em, I say. And with such a high crossover between CASA and RA-Aus you're wondering why it's all pear shaped. Sheesh.

There's this one I just bought. Maybe you can help identify it. http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/ufo-need-info.120893/#post-436902

Yeah, these norty kiwis would do that. But still have no idea what it is ...

Hi guys. I've been registered here for years but this is my first message. Just bought an ultralight - well, it's in NZ so they would call it a microlight - and CAA NZ tells me they have no record of it. The tail suffix has only ever belonged to a long-deceased Tiger Moth. Maybe someone here can identify it for me. Single seat, Rotax 447, 3-axis controls, trailerable with removable wings. I'd tell you how little I paid for it but don't like to hear grown men crying. Rob Some pix to help with the task: