CTA/CTR in 19 Reg aircraft

[Xavier]

Hi,

 

apologies if I miss the info on the forum but I am struggling to get a clear cut answer

 

CTA/CTR access with a 19 reg aircraft (Savannah VG)

 

PIC : with RPL and CTA/CTR endorsement (or PPL)

 

Aircraft with Rotax 912 ULS not certified

 

Serviceable Mode C transponder

 

Serviceable VHF Radio

 

I look at Civil Aviation Order 95.10 Instrument 2011

 

Section 6.4

 

Then 262AP of CAR 1988

 

and paragraph 6.1 of Civil Aviation Order 101.55

 

But honestly I am confused... :(

 

Any help is welcome.

 

Xavier

 

 

[coljones]

Hi,apologies if I miss the info on the forum but I am struggling to get a clear cut answer

 

CTA/CTR access with a 19 reg aircraft (Savannah VG)

 

PIC : with RPL and CTA/CTR endorsement (or PPL)

 

Aircraft with Rotax 912 ULS not certified

 

Serviceable Mode C transponder

 

Serviceable VHF Radio

 

I look at Civil Aviation Order 95.10 Instrument 2011

 

Section 6.4

 

Then 262AP of CAR 1988

 

and paragraph 6.1 of Civil Aviation Order 101.55

 

But honestly I am confused... :(

 

Any help is welcome.

 

Xavier

95.10 - 2011 has been repealed

The others talk only about built up areas.

 

CTA/CTR isn't about built up areas, but they may co-exist.

 

For CTA/CTR (in general) you need an RPC to pilot the plane and you need at least an RPL, or higher, with CTA/CTR endos and a current CASA medical to be in class A, B, C or D airspace. You don't need an Xsponder for Class D but you will for Class E. For built up areas in a Rotax you could talk to Bert Flood, the importer, about which Rotax engine is allowed over built-up areas.

 

 

[PapaFox]

I went through this process a while back.

 

Starting with CAO 95.55, your Savannah would be described in 1.2(e).

 

Follow the bouncing ball to 7.1(d)(iii) which otherwise states ops in class G or E only. Going to 7.3 to see the conditions where class A, B, C or D can be accessed, then (a)(iii) states that the aeroplane being approved under 262AP(CAR1988) for flights over closely-settled areas is one of the complying conditions, with all six main points of 7.3 being required.

 

Short answer is that Darren B can issue this approval, but unlike our SAAA friends, the approval here is limited to that airframe (obviously), for the named operator only, and ceases if the aircraft is sold or modified.

 

After a bit of paperwork, it all went through fine.

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

AS far as I am aware you need a factory built aircraft and RPL with CTA endorsement

 

 

[PapaFox]

AS far as I am aware you need a factory built aircraft and RPL with CTA endorsement

No, as I stated and have done with our aircraft, 19- can be approved. Factory built don't require this additional approval, which obviously makes them easier, and is possibly the source of the confusion. CTA endorsement on the appropriate CASA license is required, but just be prepared for controllers initially not providing clearance on the grounds of them assuming that RAAus aircraft shouldn't be in their airspace

 

 

[scre80]

Interested to know more about this. I have a 19 registered aircraft. What does Darren look at or require?

 

 

[ian00798]

Controllers won't question it. If you call up requesting a clearance we will assume you are allowed in CTA. We are air traffic controllers, not the police. Of course if you mess up and we submit an incident report and you weren't supposed to be there you will have some explaining to do to casa

 

 

[vk3awa]

Interested to know more about this. I have a 19 registered aircraft. What does Darren look at or require?

See PapaFox's post re 262AP - he has it correct.

 

 

[frank marriott]

but just be prepared for controllers initially not providing clearance on the grounds of them assuming that RAAus aircraft shouldn't be in their airspace

Not in my experience, been operating in class C @ Townsville for 10 years. In fact a flying school is operating one almost daily presently - circuits etc.

 

 

[PapaFox]

The details that I had to provide for the authorisation were the aircraft details and hours (type, engine, prop), list of modifications (including photos), pages from the maintenance logbook covering the previous 3 years, compliance with CAO 100.5 for transponder (if required), copy of CASA licence proving CTA endorsement, CASA medical (if required), and finally the type of authorisation being requested (Flight over built-up area OCTA, Flight over built-up areas within class C or E, or Flight over built-up areas only within class D).

 

My experience with CTA has been mixed, mostly positive with controllers responding regardless of aircraft type, while another just straight out denied clearance on the basis of being RAAus. After confirming that I did have all the authorisations to actually request the clearance in the first place, then the clearance as requested was granted. It might have only be an isolated case, however.

 

 

[scre80]

The details that I had to provide for the authorisation were the aircraft details and hours (type, engine, prop), list of modifications (including photos), pages from the maintenance logbook covering the previous 3 years, compliance with CAO 100.5 for transponder (if required), copy of CASA licence proving CTA endorsement, CASA medical (if required), and finally the type of authorisation being requested (Flight over built-up area OCTA, Flight over built-up areas within class C or E, or Flight over built-up areas only within class D).My experience with CTA has been mixed, mostly positive with controllers responding regardless of aircraft type, while another just straight out denied clearance on the basis of being RAAus. After confirming that I did have all the authorisations to actually request the clearance in the first place, then the clearance as requested was granted. It might have only be an isolated case, however.

Thanks for the insight.