Should RAASA be scrapped?

[Jean Crous]

Hi Mauler, we would be happy to have your in-put on this forum, dont go away to "the other forum" and neglect this one
Regards
Jean Crous.

[bobthebuilder]

After reading the entire post on Avcom, i'm still not sure what the fuss is about.
Is all of this over the owner builder rule, nd signing out your own aircraft?

[John Boucher]

Nope...

[bobthebuilder]

Illegal operations?
How can that be?

[Tortoise man]

John hello
What do you mean by nope
greetings

[John Boucher]

The question was....

Is all of this over the owner builder rule, nd signing out your own aircraft?

And my answer was - No!

[Mauler]

After reading the entire post on Avcom, i'm still not sure what the fuss is about.

Nor are we! AOPA has questioned the legality of RAASA and AROs issuing licences, certificates, registrations and permits under the terms of the new Civil Aviation Act and insisted that the Minister of Transport and Director of CAA clarify the matter immediately without continuing to beat around the bush, as they have been doing.

The huge defensive reaction from RAASA, Aero Club, their affiliates and supporters is both amusing and suspicious. The vicious attacks on AOPA have been unrelenting! Talk about shooting the messenger!

On Friday there is a meeting scheduled between AOPA and RAASA to see what the commotion from their side is all about. Perhaps there will be less noise and more signal after that.

[Tumbleweed]

I don't understand the fuss. Someone has questioned the validity of something and have not been answered. Why the suspicion? I dont see someone else contesting for the job unless God forbid, it gets given to a BEE connection once the crinkles have been ironed out.

There are consequences, besides the life insurers honouring 'valid' legal' requirements. I'd hate to want to fly overseas and not have any licences credentials validated.

[John Boucher]

From AVCOM and posted by Athol Terrence Frans (African Pilot)

Statement from the Recreational Aviation Administration of South Africa (RAASA)
The RAASA team sincerely thank all our friends in aviation for the tremendous support received during the past year. It will definitely spur us to new heights in 2012! We continue to look for opportunities to improve our service, and welcome any suggestions and comments. For the moment though, we wish you blue skies, stable weather and remember, safety first.

Recently we became aware of uncertainties about our operations, and have noted some rather unfortunate, unfounded and even malicious statements. These seem to be based on misinformation.
This communication is dedicated to clarifying these uncertainties and providing the facts. We trust you will find the format of question and answer friendly and informative.

Q1 Was RAASA in fact designated?
Yes, the designation of RAASA was done in accordance with Regulation 149 of the Civil Aviation Regulations (CAR). This designation was a joint initiative of the Aero Club of SA and the SA Civil Aviation Authority (SA CAA). The purpose was to allow an industry driven group to deal with specified items relating to recreational aviation on behalf of the SA CAA and to report to the SA CAA.

Q2. What is the scope (duties / functions) of such designation?
Part 149 of the CAR broadly specifies the scope as:
(a) Establish safety standards relating to aviation recreation
(b) Exercise control over an aviation recreation organisation approved under the provisions of this Part
(c) Determine standards for the operation or airworthiness of aircraft involved in aviation recreation
(d) Issue special flight permits
(e) Determine standards for the licensing of personnel involved in aviation recreation
(f) Issue licences to such personnel; and
(g) Advise the Commissioner on any matter connected with the operation or airworthiness of aircraft or the licensing of personnel involved in aviation recreation.

RAASA formally entered into a Memorandum of Agreement with the SA CAA which contains the specific functions. These functions are published on the RAASA website: www.raasa.co.za/images/PDF/functions.pdf

Q3. What is the duration of this designation?
The designation took effect on 1 November 2008 and ran for an uninterrupted period of three years. Thereafter it is automatically valid for a further three years, subject to certain conditions. During this time it is subject to amendment, both in functions and operation.

Q4. Can the designation of RAASA be amended to accommodate changes in circumstance and legislation?
Yes. During the first three years of the designation two amendments were made by way of addendum and duly signed. This first added NTCA up to 600Kg to accommodate training ATFs and later added temporary parachute display jump approvals. Further amendments to allow RAASA’s inspection of Part 62 training facilities for purpose of renewal such ATOs are currently underway. During 2011, the Board of the SA CAA reviewed the current agreement, made further changes and is currently finalising the updated agreement. When this takes effect, the present agreement will terminate.

Q5. Does the SA CAA have oversight over the activities of RAASA?
Yes. In terms of the agreement between SA CAA and RAASA, RAASA is subject to SA CAA oversight. The SA CAA is in constant contact with RAASA on a number of issues. Data is shared and compared. RAASA supplies a monthly financial statement to the SA CAA, and provides the SA CAA annually with audited financial statements. Operations reports are supplied quarterly to the SA CAA Executive committee. RAASA has senior SA CAA officials permanently on its board. RAASA has been subject to a detailed audit by a forensic auditor appointed by the Board of the SA CAA. All items in the report have been addressed.

Q6. Does RAASA have associates or member bodies?
No. RAASA does not have a membership system. The body purely administers Recreational Aviation. RAASA and the SA CAA have been invited to attend meetings of the Aero Club of South Africa and where possible these meetings are attended.

Q7. Does RAASA ‘force’ people to be members of the Aero Club of South Africa?
No. In instances where NTC aircraft owners wish to use certain services of the Aero Club of South Africa Technical scheme, membership of the Aero Club is required. This is an Aero Club of South Africa requirement and relates to insurance issues. Should the applicant not wish to use the Aero Club’s service, he / she is welcome to source the service elsewhere from maintenance organisations and engineers. However, in certain instances Part 94 requires membership to certain Aviation Recreation Organisations and RAASA has no authority to waive this requirement.

The SA CAA was asked to supply some clarity to questions, and this is what they had to say:

Q8. Is it correct that some pilots do not have ‘legal’ licences?
It is not correct. All licences issued by the SA CAA and RAASA are issued in terms of the applicable Civil Aviation Regulations, i.e. being Part 61 and Part 62 respectively.

Q9. If so what is being done to rectify the problem?
There is no need to rectify anything as the designation of RAASA is in full compliance with both the Aviation Act and the Civil Aviation Regulations – in particular Parts 149 and 62.

Q10. If not, what is the true state of affairs?
The SA CAA designated RAASA to oversee the activities of the Recreation Aviation activities in line with both the Aviation Act and Part 149 of the Civil Aviation Regulations. The Aviation Act clearly states that the Minister is authorised to make Regulations pertaining to the designation of a body or institution for the purposes of this Act:
• To exercise control over the aviation recreational activities specified in the regulations
• To determine standards for the airworthiness or the operation of aircraft engaged in such activities
• To advise the Commissioner on any matter connected with the airworthiness or the operation of aircraft engaged in such activities and on the licensing of persons involved in such activities.

Furthermore, in terms of section 22(1)(v), regulations can be made ‘in general, (on) any matter which the Minister may consider necessary or expedient to prescribe in order that the objects of this Act may be achieved, and the generality of this paragraph shall not be limited by the preceding paragraphs.’ On the same note; Part 149 of the Civil Aviation Regulations1997 (‘the CAR’), promulgated in terms of section 22(1) of the Aviation Act, which relates to recreational aviation empowers the Commissioner for Civil Aviation (now the Director) to ‘subject to the provisions of section 4(2) and (3) of the Act, designate a body or institution to:
(a) Establish safety standards relating to aviation recreation
(b) Exercise control over an aviation recreation organization approved under the provisions of this Part
(c) Determine standards for the operation or airworthiness of aircraft involved in aviation recreation
(d) Issue special flight permits
(e) Determine standards for the licensing of personnel involved in aviation recreation
(f) Issue licences to such personnel
(g) Advise the Commissioner on any matter connected with the operation or airworthiness of aircraft or the licensing of personnel involved in aviation recreation.

RAASA is empowered to issue certain recreational licences in terms of clause 4.4.1(f) of the Agreement. As stated above regulation 149.01.2(f), as quoted above, makes provision for the issuing of licenses to be designated to a recreational aviation entity.

The Aviation Act was repealed by section 166(2) of the Civil Aviation Act. However, according to section 164(1) of the Act, ‘Any proclamation and regulation made under the Aviation Act 1962 (Act No. 74 of 1962), Civil Aviation Offences Act, 1972 (Act No. 10 of 1972) and the South African Civil Aviation Authority Act 1998 (Act No. 40 of 1998), shall remain in force until replaced by an Act of Parliament, or regulation made under this Act, as the case may be’ .The CAR 1997, is therefore still in force.

The contents of Section 155(1)(g) of the Civil Aviation Act is identical to the provisions of section 122(1)(g) of the Aviation Act, except as insofar more than one body or organization can be so designated. Section 155(1)(00) is to the effect that regulations can be made ‘generally, (on) any matter which the Minister may consider necessary or expedient to prescribe in order that the objects of this Act or the Convention may be achieved and the generality of this paragraph must not be limited by the preceding paragraphs. This provision is basically the same as section 22(1) (v) of the Aviation Act, quoted above.

It is emphasized that there is a legal difference between the concepts of ‘delegation’ and ‘designation’. In the matter under consideration, the concept of ‘delegation’ does not play a role.
From the legal provisions quoted above, it is clear that the concept of ‘designation’ is applicable to the matter under consideration and that designation can be legally effected.

It is also important to highlight that the practice of designating an industry body in the Recreation Aviation sector to perform certain oversight functions on behalf of the Civil Aviation Body is consistent with international best practices. In Australia, United States, United Kingdom, France, etc., industry bodies such as RAASA are designated to carry out certain oversight functions on behalf of the Authorities.

Q11 Has there been an incident where an insurer refused to pay out due to the fact that the licence was ‘illegal’?
The SA CAA is not aware of any incident where the insurer has refused to pay out any claims due to the deceased holding a licence issued by RAASA on behalf of the SA CAA.

I would also like AVCOMers to note that I have been personally threatened legally as well as insulted in writing by AOPA board members who appear to be rather embarrassed about their statements to the general media and conduct towards General Aviation in particular. These silly people are taking on a statutory organisation that has been legally designated. At the same time if my memory serves me correctly a few months ago the AOPA board were scrounging for funds to host their 'world conference' in South Africa in Stellenbosch early this year and the SA CAA came to the rescue. Is this called 'biting the hand that feeds you?'

Perhaps AOPA SA should learn from AOPA elsewhere in the world that cooperation between the various bodies representing General Aviation is far more important than 'bad mouthing' them in an effort to score members. Frankly aircraft owners and pilots are simply not interested in the politics, but they are interested in good service!

Regards,
Athol Terence.

[Bundy]

Perhaps AOPA SA should learn from AOPA elsewhere in the world that cooperation between the various bodies representing General Aviation is far more important than 'bad mouthing' them in an effort to score members. Frankly aircraft owners and pilots are simply not interested in the politics, but they are interested in good service!

Regards,
Athol Terence.

....This is what it comes down to in my humble opinion....

Thank you to all at RAASA for the high std's you have set.

....now if only we could convince the same Dept of Transport for you to take over the re issuing of Drivers Licences!!! What a pleasure that would be!

[weedy]

Quiet frankly I do not give a continental s#%t who issues the licence, infact a piece of paper is not what makes an aeroplane fly nor does it impart the ability to an induvidual.

The issue is,do the insurance companies accept that piece of paper?

Claude

[Tumbleweed]

Well said Weedy.

[CVStrong]

Quiet frankly I do not give a continental s#%t who issues the licence, infact a piece of paper is not what makes an aeroplane fly nor does it impart the ability to an induvidual.

The issue is,do the insurance companies accept that piece of paper?

Claude

Surely this is something anyone who is concerned about their coverage should merely get an answer from their insurer...

It appears from the press release shared by Athol, that the piece of paper is valid in the eyes of the SACAA, so, if you are unsure or uncomfortable (weedy, this is not targeted at you, just anyone who is unsure) just send a letter to your broker and get them to give you confirmation in writing that the RAASA documentation will be accepted, file it away, and no worries...

Cheers,

Craig

[John Boucher]

Kindly note that we are not aware of one single case that has been repudiated by insurance companies because of the CAA-RAASA connection! There are cases where the claims have been repudiated because the said pilot had not done his renewal or his medical and thus did not have a valid licence as he was not current....

Licences issued by RAASA ARE LEGAL AND VALID!!!

[alanmack]

NO absolutely not!