The Last Minute Hitch: 20 May 2022
– Steve Hitchen
With the stall speed limit set to be removed from CAO 95.55, the last hurdle to an effective RAAus Group G has been removed. But although RAAus is jumping for joy, some parts of GA are not so impressed, particularly the SAAA. The types of aeroplanes Group G has been written for are legacy GA two-seaters like C150s and Tomahawks, or amateur-built experimentals with MTOWs of no more than 760 kg. Take note: it does not apply to LSAs or to ultralights. Some sectors of GA hold fears of a mass migration of aircraft to RAAus, which they believe would serve to strengthen the ASAO whilst simultanously weakening traditional GA. In the case of the SAAA, they hold a belief that RAAus shouldn't exist at all and that CASA should take back full administration of all types. To say Group G has generated a bit of controversy would be classic Aussie understatement. And the clamour is about to get louder. Before the year is out, I believe the regulations will be re-written in the USA to supercharge what we now know as LSAs, enabling new-build conforming aircraft to slot straight into Group G without having been certified in any other category first. The talk is of a Light Personal Aircraft (LPA) standard that is stacked with potential for new technology that LSAs currently are denied: retractable gear, turbo-chargers, non-piston engines ... technically unlimited MTOWs and no stall speed limit. Group G stands to become the growth category in Australia, which I suspect will angry-up certain sectors of GA even more.
"...That pulls the rug out from under the best bits of Part 43..."
Perhaps not quite as controversial (although still somewhat contentious) is CASR Part 43. This is the ruleset that aims to simplifiy maintenance regs for private and airwork aircraft. After a bow wave of support, CASA has elected to adopt the FAR system with some blending for the Australian way of writing legislation. Although Part 43 will encompass aircraft used in flight training, flying schools won't be able to actually use it. There won't be too many flying schools in Australia that don't use their trainers also for joy flights or charter work, and CASA has stated emphatically that the higher-grade ruleset must apply. So a C182 can be used for CSU conversions and powerline inspections under Part 43, but if you're going to use it for joy flights you're stuck with CAR 30 or Part 145 and have to maintain it like it was Metroliner. That pulls the rug out from under the best bits of Part 43. Sometime ago, CASA actually championed no AOCs for joy flights, which never eventuated. So somewhere inside Aviation House is a weight of research that shows joy flights don't present the risk to the public that is was once presumed. We need regulatory archaeologists to dig that out, dust it off and take another look, adapting the thinking so that joy flights can be done in aircraft maintained to CASR Part 43.
It all comes down to tomorrow. The red, the blue, the green and the teal have all had their say and the fate of the 47th parliament now lies with the voters. Will general aviation come out of this smelling rosy or more like decaying mulch? That's a condundrum with an evasive answer; regardless who wins, GA won't be on the first page of their priority list, if at all. Both the Coalition and the ALP have made their positions clear-ish, but as D-day draws closer analysts and pundits seem even surer that the parliament is going to be hung. That means whoever forms government will need the co-operation of the cross-benchers to do so, and other than a small few, the cross-benchers haven't really embraced the problems of a minority like GA. So whilst a good outcome for GA is very hard to get a handle on, a worst-case scenario is much more obvious: nothing happens at all. The time for revitalising our community is right now, not during the 48th parliament or any other parliament to come. The weight of work done to open the eyes of politicians has put us in the best position ever to get something concrete done, and if that is all ignored in the coming months because it doesn't gel with poltical will, then it all will have been wasted. There won't be any more chances; this is the one we have and somehow we need to make it happen for us, and that may mean deeper engagement with the minor parties.
May your gauges always be in the green,
Hitch
(P2 Uh..oh here comes Albo and the GWEP -
)
– Steve Hitchen
With the stall speed limit set to be removed from CAO 95.55, the last hurdle to an effective RAAus Group G has been removed. But although RAAus is jumping for joy, some parts of GA are not so impressed, particularly the SAAA. The types of aeroplanes Group G has been written for are legacy GA two-seaters like C150s and Tomahawks, or amateur-built experimentals with MTOWs of no more than 760 kg. Take note: it does not apply to LSAs or to ultralights. Some sectors of GA hold fears of a mass migration of aircraft to RAAus, which they believe would serve to strengthen the ASAO whilst simultanously weakening traditional GA. In the case of the SAAA, they hold a belief that RAAus shouldn't exist at all and that CASA should take back full administration of all types. To say Group G has generated a bit of controversy would be classic Aussie understatement. And the clamour is about to get louder. Before the year is out, I believe the regulations will be re-written in the USA to supercharge what we now know as LSAs, enabling new-build conforming aircraft to slot straight into Group G without having been certified in any other category first. The talk is of a Light Personal Aircraft (LPA) standard that is stacked with potential for new technology that LSAs currently are denied: retractable gear, turbo-chargers, non-piston engines ... technically unlimited MTOWs and no stall speed limit. Group G stands to become the growth category in Australia, which I suspect will angry-up certain sectors of GA even more.
"...That pulls the rug out from under the best bits of Part 43..."
Perhaps not quite as controversial (although still somewhat contentious) is CASR Part 43. This is the ruleset that aims to simplifiy maintenance regs for private and airwork aircraft. After a bow wave of support, CASA has elected to adopt the FAR system with some blending for the Australian way of writing legislation. Although Part 43 will encompass aircraft used in flight training, flying schools won't be able to actually use it. There won't be too many flying schools in Australia that don't use their trainers also for joy flights or charter work, and CASA has stated emphatically that the higher-grade ruleset must apply. So a C182 can be used for CSU conversions and powerline inspections under Part 43, but if you're going to use it for joy flights you're stuck with CAR 30 or Part 145 and have to maintain it like it was Metroliner. That pulls the rug out from under the best bits of Part 43. Sometime ago, CASA actually championed no AOCs for joy flights, which never eventuated. So somewhere inside Aviation House is a weight of research that shows joy flights don't present the risk to the public that is was once presumed. We need regulatory archaeologists to dig that out, dust it off and take another look, adapting the thinking so that joy flights can be done in aircraft maintained to CASR Part 43.
It all comes down to tomorrow. The red, the blue, the green and the teal have all had their say and the fate of the 47th parliament now lies with the voters. Will general aviation come out of this smelling rosy or more like decaying mulch? That's a condundrum with an evasive answer; regardless who wins, GA won't be on the first page of their priority list, if at all. Both the Coalition and the ALP have made their positions clear-ish, but as D-day draws closer analysts and pundits seem even surer that the parliament is going to be hung. That means whoever forms government will need the co-operation of the cross-benchers to do so, and other than a small few, the cross-benchers haven't really embraced the problems of a minority like GA. So whilst a good outcome for GA is very hard to get a handle on, a worst-case scenario is much more obvious: nothing happens at all. The time for revitalising our community is right now, not during the 48th parliament or any other parliament to come. The weight of work done to open the eyes of politicians has put us in the best position ever to get something concrete done, and if that is all ignored in the coming months because it doesn't gel with poltical will, then it all will have been wasted. There won't be any more chances; this is the one we have and somehow we need to make it happen for us, and that may mean deeper engagement with the minor parties.
May your gauges always be in the green,
Hitch
(P2 Uh..oh here comes Albo and the GWEP -
)