Hongie Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 no not A, you are still restricted to VFR only which I believe excludes us from A altogether regardless of rego Is experimental ifr available? Vh exp that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ave8rr Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Is experimental ifr available? Vh exp that is? Class "A" airspace is above FL180 so probably not that important for most of us sport pilots either VFR or IFR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drummer Dave Posted October 8, 2014 Author Share Posted October 8, 2014 Is experimental ifr available? Vh exp that is? I guess if its Vh registered, it complies with CASA requirements for GA. GA is exactly what it says.......... 'General' Aviation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 I don't have a real use for CTA airports but transit through CTA would add greatly to my personal safety. Easy way to do this is VFR Routes like Victor 1. Something like that up the Coast past Williamtown and Coffs and a few more would make a great deal of good sense. Too much to ask for from CASA/ ASA? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhysmcc Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 As discussed before, Victor 1 is outside controlled airspace, you'd need to completely redesign each airports airspace to come up with a route that can be clear of the tolerances required for the approach and departures of IFR traffic from those aerodromes, in most cases (like Coffs) it would be impossible. Having some botched rule giving access to CTA only in VFR corridors makes no sense, it should be all or nothing (all in my opinion, with the right training). What's the big deal with RAA being in CTA anyway, if they are equipped and trained? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank marriott Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 There is no problem using RAA aircraft in CTA so long as they comply with CAO 95.55 (e.g. LSA) - I do it regularly, the problem being that not all RAA registered aircraft qualify for use in CTA as per 95.55. As per ops manual 4.06 - 3 "IMPORTANT NOTE" at the bottom of the page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhysmcc Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 I more meant without the extra restrictions. The fact an aircraft can be registered VH and the pilot RPL and it's okay, the same aircraft registered 19- and the pilot RPC is a no go, i'm not saying all aircraft should be allowed, but a level playing field would be nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 I more meant without the extra restrictions.The fact an aircraft can be registered VH and the pilot RPL and it's okay, the same aircraft registered 19- and the pilot RPC is a no go, i'm not saying all aircraft should be allowed, but a level playing field would be nice. Do you really want a level playing field though? What if CASA said that maintenance had to be done by a LAME on your RAAus aircraft?.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhysmcc Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 Do you really want a level playing field though? What if CASA said that maintenance had to be done by a LAME on your RAAus aircraft?.... Isn't quite level though, when people can build the same kit under VH and do their own maintenance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 Isn't quite level though, when people can build the same kit under VH and do their own maintenance but when they sell it the next owner has to get it done by a LAME. the point I make is that RAAus has some advantages and disadvantages over GA. Asking for the same privileges as GA may come with the same requirements... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhysmcc Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 Yeah and that's a valid point. The problem is there is no consistency, for example take an RAA factory aircraft, maintained by L2 (not a LAME) and a RPC can't fly it in CTA, yet the pilot with RPL can. The maintenance of the aircraft hasn't changed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 for example take an RAA factory aircraft, maintained by L2 (not a LAME) and a RPC can't fly it in CTA, yet the pilot with RPL can. The maintenance of the aircraft hasn't changed. But a pilot with the RPL has either a casa medical or the drivers licence thing signed by their doctor. The RPC holder only has a medical declaration.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Its typical Australian bollocks...... Over regulate ...blah blah blah Its a ################ disgrace and CASA is a joke... Im all for safety...but you tell me how a student pilot can legally fly RAA at coffs harbour till they graduate then they cant .. How an RAAus plane is restricted to 600kg, but strap a set of high drag floats to it and its safe to fly to 700kg.. Absolute bollocks...and the morons makign these rules have no place in modern Australia.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 . . . you'd need to completely redesign each airports airspace to come up with a route that can be clear of the tolerances required for the approach and departures of IFR traffic from those aerodromes, in most cases (like Coffs) it would be impossible. Take Williamtown for an example, it has one runway roughly East/West aligned. A VFR Route that bisected the runway heading roughly North South at a sensible altitude should not interfere with any traffic (VFR/IFR) arriving or departing from East/West. There is a VFR route but not available to RA-Aus who have to trek up through Dungog at low altitude. The other problem with the military is the way that they chew up vast amounts of airspace and, in the case of Williamtown, 24 x 7. There is no discipline in that and no consideration for other airspace users. It is not as if they even fly on weekends and we are not in the middle of an air war on this continent. Have a look around southern Qld if you really want to see more of the same nonsense with Amberly and Oakey a stones throw apart. What a joke and not funny. Coffs would take a bit more of a head scratch but that's what engineers are good at. What's the big deal with RAA being in CTA anyway, if they are equipped and trained? Can't argue with that sentiment and it produces the safest outcome for all. Classic case is the RAA schools operating in Class D airports where it is OK for a student to go solo but the moment they get their Pilot Cert they are no longer allowed in the space despite having done the training and being in a suitably equipped aircraft and probably being considerably more current than many PPLs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhysmcc Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 the problem with the VFR route idea (like victor one) it would need the airspace along the route to be changed to class g, you can't do that overhead an aerodrome or where it would conflict with app/dep paths or circling area of an aerodrome. You can't be allowed to fly a "VFR Route" in controlled airspace because the ATC need to separate you from the IFR guys, you need to be under their "control" with a clearance, therefore you'd be operating in controlled airspace which would be the same as just being allowed without the VFR Route, basically it's an all or nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 Don stop your making sense and that has no place in aviation 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 RA aus ought to be tackling these exact issues. not just administrating us 1 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