Oh, we got both – Country and Western.
"Contrary to CASA’s assertions, the Bristell LSA aircraft have undergone extensive spin testing and have been demonstrated to be compliant with the ASTM F2245, section 4.5.9 standard," BRM says in the letter. "This spin testing was carried out by a professional Russian test pilot Mr Yury Vashchuk”.
![[Image: Vaschuk_%26_Putin.jpg]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Vaschuk_%26_Putin.jpg)
Remarkable, that CASA do not have a 'qualified' test pilot on staff, one with a commensurate engineering degree to refute the 'test program'. Test flights (the real certification deal) are a legal and technical nightmare; test pilots understand this – completely. They also understand the manufacturers 'need' to meet those requirements (financial and operational). However, they also understand 'aircraft' and flight envelopes; not to mention the legal ramifications of telling faerie stories.
"Our understanding is that CASA has rejected these declarations and apparently consider that Mr Yury Vashchuk is not sufficiently qualified to carry out this testing and make determinations of compliance against the regulations.
I would, very much, like to know who, in CASA made this decision. What the qualifications of that person are; and, in writing, the reasons for the decisions made.
"For information Yury is not only a graduate engineer but he also graduated from the Russian Test Pilots School in 1993. As a professional test pilot since 1993, he actively participates in the creation of new models of military and sports aircraft including those aircraft types intended for agricultural use and other civilian applications.".
Seriously - CASA?
“Despite CASA’s assertions, BRM maintains that your aircraft is completely safe to continue all flight operations provided the aircraft is flown within the aircraft operating limitations.”
A qualified test pilot (which you don't have), a company which provide data under a stringent flight test regime (which you've made a pigs ear of) ; a manual which clearly defines 'operational limitations' and yet – unqualified 'opinion' rules because why – exactly? Produce your expert, qualified test pilots – Yeah right, lot's of clerical pole climbers, but nary a real pilot to bless yourselves with. You shame this nation.
State your case – provide evidence – provide your 'qualified' expert. No: well consider this. The aircraft in clumsy, trainee hands is 'difficult' to manage – fair enough. A student or low hour PPL will have difficulty understanding the limitations in the aircraft operational manual, without 'training'. CASA have allowed junior flight instructors to teach basic flying to students in this aircraft. I'd say the 'blame' rest fairly and squarely with 'the Authority' for allowing this aircraft to be operated without a specialised training program. Same as many of the other LSA – it is a specialist tool.
Aye, well; Toot – bloody Toot.
"Contrary to CASA’s assertions, the Bristell LSA aircraft have undergone extensive spin testing and have been demonstrated to be compliant with the ASTM F2245, section 4.5.9 standard," BRM says in the letter. "This spin testing was carried out by a professional Russian test pilot Mr Yury Vashchuk”.
Remarkable, that CASA do not have a 'qualified' test pilot on staff, one with a commensurate engineering degree to refute the 'test program'. Test flights (the real certification deal) are a legal and technical nightmare; test pilots understand this – completely. They also understand the manufacturers 'need' to meet those requirements (financial and operational). However, they also understand 'aircraft' and flight envelopes; not to mention the legal ramifications of telling faerie stories.
"Our understanding is that CASA has rejected these declarations and apparently consider that Mr Yury Vashchuk is not sufficiently qualified to carry out this testing and make determinations of compliance against the regulations.
I would, very much, like to know who, in CASA made this decision. What the qualifications of that person are; and, in writing, the reasons for the decisions made.
"For information Yury is not only a graduate engineer but he also graduated from the Russian Test Pilots School in 1993. As a professional test pilot since 1993, he actively participates in the creation of new models of military and sports aircraft including those aircraft types intended for agricultural use and other civilian applications.".
Seriously - CASA?
“Despite CASA’s assertions, BRM maintains that your aircraft is completely safe to continue all flight operations provided the aircraft is flown within the aircraft operating limitations.”
A qualified test pilot (which you don't have), a company which provide data under a stringent flight test regime (which you've made a pigs ear of) ; a manual which clearly defines 'operational limitations' and yet – unqualified 'opinion' rules because why – exactly? Produce your expert, qualified test pilots – Yeah right, lot's of clerical pole climbers, but nary a real pilot to bless yourselves with. You shame this nation.
State your case – provide evidence – provide your 'qualified' expert. No: well consider this. The aircraft in clumsy, trainee hands is 'difficult' to manage – fair enough. A student or low hour PPL will have difficulty understanding the limitations in the aircraft operational manual, without 'training'. CASA have allowed junior flight instructors to teach basic flying to students in this aircraft. I'd say the 'blame' rest fairly and squarely with 'the Authority' for allowing this aircraft to be operated without a specialised training program. Same as many of the other LSA – it is a specialist tool.
Aye, well; Toot – bloody Toot.