rhysmcc

It might depend what airport in Sydney you are training at? If it's one of the controlled airports (bankstown, Camden) you might want to touch base with the instructor early as I believe you'll need a medical and ASIC before training (or solo)? The RA-AUS part is the easy part. The instructor will be the best person to answer based on their requirements.

More money to spend on other things?

And risk losing our job? The statement is pretty much on the mark, back office jobs a lot which didn't exist 5 or so years ago. The sky isn't falling.

Pretty sure once you owe RAA membership fees you no longer are a member under the new constitution.

Pretty sure that's illegal

Call the office, once your membership expires you are no longer a member so makes sense you can't log into the members area

IFR doesn't mean you'll get a clearance through a control zone. Please don't plan IFR if your a RA-AUS aircraft...too much paperwork

Could be the current contract was coming to an end and the commercial company wasn't getting value for money. $33 a month seems steep, pretty sure my carsales ad was a one off payment until sold but I guess the cost of printing the magazines needs to be made somewhere

Have another check, pretty sure RA-AUS are exempt from Part 61? Is the 90day requirement listed in the CAOs or has RA-AuS forgot to include it in the new manual?

The 2 airspaces I know quite well wouldn't work with having such a lane as the arriving/departing aircraft would pass through any coastal lane. In terms of flying overtop again it would conflict, a lot of SIDS use over the top to avoid inbound stars. Could it work else where? Maybe on a case by case, but rules generally aren't written for each airport.

My guess would be 1000-1500 ft. When an RNAV approach is required depending on the runway config at Brisbane they need a slot (takes up a brisbane arrival slot on RWY 01)

Aircraft inbound to Brisbane overfly archerfield around 3-4000ft quite regularly (basically join the ILS overhead).

Good to see the rules are the same for both camps... oh wait

All old board members had an opportunity to stand for the new board. Don resigned from the executive prior to the change and who wouldn't after all the personal attacks on this site suggesting he was only looking after his own position. I do hope he and frank both stand again one day as we need active people on the board (even if they don't agree).

Yes I'm aware of L1-4 in the RA-AUS sense, but surely that has nothing to do with ELAAA and CASA? Thought it must have been something else. Can't really talk more as I'm not an ELAAA member and it's now banned to comment if your not a member

What is level 1 training (guess since I don't know maybe I need it)?

It's interesting to read the magazine is discounted again... does this mean members who don't get it will be paying more for the pleasure (off topic but since Don is gone this thread is useless much like the forum is becoming)

Clearly Don is trying to come up with solutions, why jump down his throat? Don I'd suggest the election of directors and the Calling of meetings and who and when resolutions could be made needs to be clearly defined. I don't think letting the board decide how they get elected is the best option.

I don't believe the RPL is either. Let's assume RA-AUS is requesting access to CTA only in Australia...does that bring a few more in favor?

Security levels are high so it's harder to get the green light from the powers that be. Give them a call and see how you go. Normally in the past I would like to be told from a visitor it was for some operational reasons (training famil) rather then just in town and thought it would be nice to have a look.

Are you a pilot visiting on holiday or do you have an operational reason (i.e. Famil visit cause you fly in a lot)? You could try give the tower a call (number should be in ERSA) and see how you go, but may have left it a tad late.

Dave it's a simple matter of typing in the callsign and then the matching flight comes up. However it only works with exact matches, so if you call up as Jabiru 1234, we would try searching as 1234 but if you put JAB1234 as your flight is in NAIPS we wouldn't get a match. If AIP/NAIPS made it clear that R1234 was the ID to use i'm sure the controllers would then know that's what to search for. So far I've come across JAB1234, UL1234, 241234 and 1234 as examples that were used. A standard would be welcomed

Nev, could to explain this difference between flying through CTA and flying IN CTA for those of us who don't have a million hours in CTA under our belt?

Aircraft change from 24 to 19 without changing their rego numbers though, Id be interested to know from RA-AUS if this is the case. Considering we use just the four numbers for callsign I would say no it's not possible for 2 aircraft to use the same numbers.

My point was the AUF started out with restrictions and over time these have been reviewed and improved/lifted. Why should access to CTA be any different? It could be an option for those who use it, those who don't want it are not forced too. You can jump up and down about making people "go GA" because you don't like the idea, at the end of the day we are all members of RA-AUS and the majority wanted us to take this path (based on the old board of 13 who represented the members voting in favor). If your so concerns about us going down this route, put together a resolution to direct the board to not pursue CTA access and see if you really have the numbers.