Alphabet if’s and but's.

(11-30-2022, 05:11 AM)Kharon Wrote:  (12) Across – Interesting timing.
(13) Down - A Tiger – by the tale?

Dear Members,

It is important to share with you an update on RAAus’ recent decision to not investigate a fatal accident that occurred at Kybong in Queensland involving an RAAus registered aircraft and a VH- Registered Glider, resulting in the death of two Australians.

In recent years, as a result of the ATSB choosing not to investigate sport aviation fatal accidents, RAAus has played a crucial role in formally supporting state police and Coroners, to assist them in understanding the circumstances around how/why an accident occurred. An artefact is that our participation has masked the fact that the ATSB have not been involved. Because of this our staff have endured WHS risk associated with deploying to accident sites, our reputation has at times been tainted due to our inability to share the reports we write as they ‘belong’ to the Coroner thus impeding the safety benefits for all aviators, and our members have funded a function that is not a core activity of RAAus. Moreover, this activity is one that is funded for other airspace users while our members are excluded from such safety dividends while contributing to the funding of the ATSB via the tax system. We have also been subjected to strong criticism due to the lack of independence in our findings despite us being faced with little alternative but to investigate our own. Nevertheless, we are proud of the significant work performed over the years to improve safety and provide some degree of closure for the loved ones of fatal accidents.

During recent discussions with the ATSB Chief Commissioner we were informed that the decision as to whether or not to investigate lies within the ATSB prioritisation system. That is, where can they focus their efforts (and funding) for the ‘greatest public benefit’. For the recent accident at Kybong we contend that in applying their prioritisation system, the ATSB should have investigated this accident given the high airspace risk that is evident and that an investigation would yield significant benefits for ALL airspace users, not just sport aviation organisations. RAAus is strongly of the view that an independent understanding of the circumstances into this accident is essential and that the ATSB is best placed to do this. This is a view shared by many others in the industry.The ATSB enjoys a host of protections under the TSI Act 2003, whereas RAAus does not. It is for this reason and those mentioned above that we have made repeated (unsuccessful) representations to the ATSB Chief Commissioner and that we will once again be making representations to the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport to seek the appropriate level of funding for the ATSB. This would mean that RAAus members are afforded the same status that is given to other aviators and transport users in our community in recognition of the role we play in the sector and our position in the industry as Australia’s largest cohort of private aviators.

The Board has therefore resolved that RAAus’ default position will be to not deploy staff/investigators to future fatal accidents, irrespective of ATSB’s position, to ensure we protect our people and the organisation. The CEO has been charged with making the assessment on our level of involvement which may still involve deployment however the role we would play will be significantly different from what we have done previously. We remain committed to supporting police, local authorities and Coroners wherever we can. There will be further work done on this matter including the continued seeking of legal advice. Should we shift our position in the future we will advise members accordingly.

Michael Monck
Chairman(for the board)

Courtesy AOPA Oz, via FB:

Quote:Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Australia was live.

AOPA Australia CEO Benjamin Morgan discusses the recent announcement by RAAus withdrawing from performing its own accident investigations.  The recreational self-administration has called on the independent ATSB to investigate fatal accidents for the sport sector.  The change in RAAus policy follows years of strong advocacy by AOPA Australia, seeking independence and transparency in recreational accident investigations to protect the rights of aircraft owners and pilots.

MTF...P2  Tongue

FAA MOSAIC NPRM: AOPA explains what it means!!Wink

1st the FAA NPRM:

Quote:FAA Proposes Rule to Enhance Safety and Performance of Light Sport Aircraft

Wednesday, July 19, 2023

WASHINGTON – The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is planning to enhance the safety and performance of Light Sport Aircraft operations. The proposed Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certification (MOSAIC) rule would put performance safety standards around larger aircraft that innovators are building by expanding the definition of Light Sport Aircraft.

"This rule will encourage manufactures to make Light Sport Aircraft operations safer, more versatile and accessible while maintaining rigorous safety standards," said Acting FAA Associate Administrator for Safety David Boulter.  

Under the proposal, the aircraft’s weight limit is based on its stall speed. By permitting higher stall speeds, the proposal would bring within the Light Sport Aircraft regulatory framework aircraft weighing as much as 3,000 pounds. This more than doubles the weight of aircraft under the current definition of Light Sport of 1,320 pounds, allowing larger and stronger aircraft to qualify as Light Sport.

The proposal would also expand the type of aircraft sport pilots can operate and allows them to use their aircraft for a wider range of operations such as some aerial work. Although sport pilots could operate aircraft designed with up to four seats, they would remain limited to operating with only one passenger.

The public has 90 days to comment on the proposed rule once it is published in the Federal Register. The FAA will publish a final rule and respond to comments after the comment period closes.

Via Youtube:

Meanwhile here in Oz, RAAus are all over this... Rolleyes

Via LMH:

Quote:RAAus to go the Full MOSAIC

10 August 2023

[Image: matt_bouttell1.jpg]

Recreational Aviation Australia (RAAus) yesterday told Australian Flying that they are aiming to be allowed to administer aircraft that comply fully with the new MOSAIC regulations.

The Modernisation of Special Airworthiness Category (MOSAIC) proposal would redefine Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) to have no proscribed MTOW limit under a new standard produced in the United States.

RAAus is on the cusp of being granted permission to administer aircraft with MTOWs of up to 760 kg under the new Group G category, but the MOSAIC rules are expected to produce aircraft with MTOWs in the vicinity of 1360 kg.

"Group G is almost with us; the final review of our manuals is being done by CASA as we speak," said RAAus CEO Matt Bouttell. "The new proposal from the FAA [MOSAIC] really talks about performance standards, and I think that's the way that CASA needs to go rather than be prescriptive about the weight.

"Someone may develop a new wing that allows a higher MTOW, but does stall at 54 knots, so we're better off not limiting the weight, but actually using the performance standards and having that prescribed in CASR Part 103."

RAAus is a member of the ASTM F37 committee which is developing the new LSA standard, so naturally they will be advocating for CASA to adopt the new standard as a whole.

"RAAus will be seeking for CASA to adopt the MOSAIC standard completely, and the result of that will be more permitted activities and access to larger aircraft," Bouttell said.

"The Americans have absolutely recognised the benefits of LSA over the past 20 years, which has led to this new proposal."

Although MOSAIC is an aircraft standard, the FAA is expected to also vary the Sport Pilot Licence to allow pilots to fly the larger and faster aircraft that will fall under MOSAIC. In Australia, the Recreational Pilot Certificate (RPC) allows pilots to fly LSAs registered with RAAus, but Bouttell believes there is potential for the RPC to be varied similarly.

"I absolutely believe CASA will allow us to vary the RPC," he said. "As it stands today, the RPC and Recreational Pilot Licence are equivalent, with the only difference being who administers that. We are authorised to administer the RPC, so it makes absolute sense that we'll be allowed to vary it."

Bouttell, a former CASA manager, is a realist, and he understands the challenges of asking CASA for an MTOW limit in the 1360-kg range when the 760-kg Group G is yet to be implemented and the veracity proven over time. He understands that although MOSAIC might be due in the USA in 16 months, RAAus may not be able to leverage that for some months afterward.

"CASA is trying to proceed with CASR Part 103, and our approach to CASA will be that MOSAIC is such a significant change, and that Part 103 should have that within it. 

"When Part 103 comes out, we can then implement it as we would do with any new freedom."

As it stands in Australia at the moment, an LSA can be registered with either CASA or with RAAus, raising the prospect that even though CASA may adopt MOSAIC, they may still restrict RAAus-registered LSAs to a 760-kg MTOW. 

"I think that's a fair point," Bouttell said. "CASA can absolutely make that decision, but our case will be that there is no safety reason why that should be. If their decisions are based on safety, we should have access to the full MOSAIC capability.

"We're a mature Part 149 organisation that has been around for 40 years and has demonstrated a benefit to the Australian aviation industry. We have a like-for-like safety record and we believe CASA has confidence in our ability to administer and our members will be able to take advantage of that."

The FAA released a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NRPM) on MOSAIC in the lead-up to Oshkosh this year, and is expected to publish the final rule no later than early 2025.

Hmm...err no comment! -  Rolleyes

MTF...P2  Tongue

RAAus Group G approval stalled - Karma a bitch??

Apparently no LMH this week? However I did note an interesting Mark Newton comment in reply to a 2 month old comment in reply, to this nearly 4 month old Oz Flying article... Rolleyes

Quote:Group G Approval Imminent: RAAus

15 December 2023

[Image: c150_ga.jpg]

Recreational Aviation Australia (RAAus) CEO Matt Bouttell has said that the start of the 760-kg Group G aircraft category is getting "awfully close".
In an communique sent to members yesterday, Bouttell said that a key step in the CASA approval process had been completed, clearing the way for a full approval to administer aircraft up to 760-kg maximum take-off weight (MTOW).

"I’m pleased to say that we are getting awfully close to obtaining our 760 kg MTOW (Group G) approval," Bouttell said in the communique.

"Pleasingly, CASA recently gave in-principle approval of the RAAus Flight Operations and Technical Manual revisions that are necessary to align our manuals to CASA regulations for this new group of aircraft.

"With this, I’m confident that our final approval shouldn’t be too far away.

"With the increased certainty around what will be approved by CASA, our staff are now busy, readying internal business systems, creating new forms, developing education and training programs and implementing a detailed member communication plan, to make this transition as easy as possible for members."

Group G will permit RAAus to administer aircraft with an MTOW in the 601-760-kg range. This is expected to include aeroplanes such as the C150 and many of the RV amateur-built experimental range.

Group G approval will not mean that aircraft with an existing MTOW below that range can automatically start carrying more useful load. The aeroplane's original certification needs to be adhered to. It does mean that GA aircraft that have MTOWs that fall within that range can be taken off the civil registered and registered with RAAus.

RAAus has created a series of FAQ surrounding Group G, which can be found on the RAAus website.

Matty in reply to Mike Borgelt
2 months ago

I think the question here is if you own an RV you built yourself and lost your PPL or RPL or Class 5 due to diabetes, would you choose to register with RAAus and fly with a pilot certificate, or sell the RV and take up golf?

Mark Newton in reply to Matty
5 days ago

“Lost your class 5 due to diabetes,” is a very funny what-if.

Three months ago, the hypothetical would have been “lost your class 2 due to [almost anything].” Now that Class 5 is operational, the set of conditions which make RAAus attractive over PPL/RPL is significantly diminished.

If you have diabetes, the CASA and RAAus standards are virtually identical anyway. In both cases, you don’t qualify for self declaration.

If your position is that RAAus is the natural home for pilots who are too dangerously unhealthy to fly safely, then maybe it’s okay for a diabetic to throw caution to the wind and lie on their RAAus MED002 form so they can fly a Group G RV-7 with numbers on the side. If they’ve given up on compliance, they could even fly aerobatics in it!

But it’s all a bit up in the air, isn’t it? It’s April now, nearly five months after this article was published, and RAAus is still “… in the final stages” according to their mail out three days ago, and all their target dates on the implementation plan are “TBC,” and Matt Boutell isn’t the CEO anymore.

But at least RAAus members can get RPLs and Class 5’s, which give them a MTOW increase up to 2000kg and CTA access. Maybe if RAAus should have got behind the medical reform effort a decade ago instead of lobbying against it; the extremely patient members would have been a lot happier if this’d all landed in 2014 instead of 2024.

MTF...P2 Tongue

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)