Jan 2008

[Slider]

Ok so its now Jan 2008 and what is going to happen with our beloved NTCA and with CAA????

Main question is May i still fly tomorrow?

[Aerosan]

and the problem is as long as you dont tell the date to the plane it is fine as a precautionary I will be sticking to the previous calender that should make me safe then.......

[skybound®]

Main question is May i still fly tomorrow?

I think there are going to be a few owners answering 'Not legally' from tomorrow.

[FAWGie]

So has the new rules kicked in yet?

[Slider]

Me thinks (ok that also happens) CAA knows my aircraft reg and my address and they need to send a letter to me to tell me "what" will be happening, from "when" and what to do to be a legal driver, on a legal aircraft. Until i get that mail (registered post) I will just keep on flying.

The last i heard is something about a tech team that will look at this issue This could take MONTHS, and i am a fly-druggie........................

[skybound®]

The regs were published in the Government gazette and the fact that you are asking the question would be indicative that you were aware of changes. Ignorance of the law is not a legal standpoint to argue why you broke the law.

There was no relief and these are in effect now whether we like it or not.

I was reminded this morning of a time I lost a good friend in a micro crash in 2000 - she was a pax. In the CAA executive summary accident report it was stated

During the investigation it was determined that neither of these aircraft had valid Authority to Fly documents.

I am certain the pilot did not take off with the intention of having an accident. Having such a finding could end up with any insurance not paying out, not to mention any 3rd party claims against you or your estate or at the very least being fined. Really not worth it. It would be cheaper to comply.

Also makes me wonder if the pilots at the particular aerodrome had reported the illegal activities - perhaps 3 people's lives would have been spared.

[John Young]

Thankfully I am legal and compliant for now.

Flight test renewal scheduled for March 2008 (thankfully the language proficiency requirement now delayed until at least June 2008).

My 582 crank scheduled for 45 hours time – my resident appointed AP will have to deal with this one.

Transponders – on the table for discussion again by SACAA.

Class 4 medical will still apply in March 2008 – not the SACAA suggested Class 1 medical for all pilots.

In summary – 2008 should hold no “stoppages” for me.

However, I will still be reliant on Collette van Zyl to get the paperwork through the SACAA “seestim”.

Regards
John ZU-CIB

[Slider]

For all the "know it all" pilots out there, plse HELP me and tell me what do i need to do, to get on the right side of CAA.

Im blond so PLEASE give me the steps

PS: "CAA" on Avcom said they will come back to Avcom when they have answers on the issue. Does this mean i must wait for ever until its resolved, and WHAT do they want to resolve, if it is "Set in stone in the goverment gazette"

[FAWGie]

The regs were published in the Government gazette and the fact that you are asking the question would be indicative that you were aware of changes. Ignorance of the law is not a legal standpoint to argue why you broke the law.

There was no relief and these are in effect now whether we like it or not.

I was reminded this morning of a time I lost a good friend in a micro crash in 2000 - she was a pax. In the CAA executive summary accident report it was stated

During the investigation it was determined that neither of these aircraft had valid Authority to Fly documents.

I am certain the pilot did not take off with the intention of having an accident. Having such a finding could end up with any insurance not paying out, not to mention any 3rd party claims against you or your estate or at the very least being fined. Really not worth it. It would be cheaper to comply.

Also makes me wonder if the pilots at the particular aerodrome had reported the illegal activities - perhaps 3 people's lives would have been spared.

Skybound,

Where can we get access to these new regs/changes? Can we download them from somewhere?

[skybound®]

Slider - I agree some of the issues are not answered by CAA - as you may have seen I have bounced some Part 61 & 62 questions at them since August and they still remain unanswered. Very frustrating.

My understanding is that in order for your ATF to be valid, your aircraft must be airworthy at the beginning of each flight. The regulations as to what is airworthy is one of those items that has changed - ie all recommended maintenance (as per manufacturer's schedule) must be up to date. (Regulation 24.03.1)

So to use the ridiculous, extreme example is that your spark plugs on your two stroke Rotax must have been regapped (by an AP or under direct supervision of AP) in the last 12,5 hours and replaced within the last 25 hours and all the other items contained in the schedule.

[FAWGie]

Okay, found a link on CAA's web site....here it is....
http://www.caa.co.za/resource%20center/ ... NDMENT.pdf

[Slider]

Ok so i need to have a look at the scedule in the windlass manual, and everything needs to be done at the time intervals stated. Cool now im starting to get it

thanks guys

[Boer]

I feel that it is very unfair of the CAA to expect us all to comply and adhere to the law and then create a situation where most of us are unsure of what compliance is and what is not. If they dont know themselves they should at least set up a temperarory set of rules with a time limit so that we can at least have a period in which to get our planes compliant whithout having to fly illegally. What can we do about it? I am so confused that I am too scared to fly - One AP tells you one thing and the other something else. Certain AP's wont sign my plane out because I've done more than 300 Hrs and I know others will sign my plane out.

[skybound®]

You got to read this post from Obert - http://www.avcom.co.za/phpBB2/viewtopic ... &start=240

Signs of good things to come?

[Chunky]

[quote="BOER"]I feel that it is very unfair of the CAA to expect us all to comply and adhere to the law and then create a situation where most of us are unsure of what compliance is and what is not. If they dont know themselves they should at least set up a temperarory set of rules with a time limit so that we can at least have a period in which to get our planes compliant whithout having to fly illegally. What can we do about it? I am so confused that I am too scared to fly - One AP tells you one thing and the other something else. Certain AP's wont sign my plane out because I've done more than 300 Hrs and I know others will sign my plane out.[/quote]

Hey Jacques

Its simple. If an AP signs out your plane with 300 hours or more without the crank exchange he is doing so illegaly. If you fly and have an accident, your insurance will NOT cover and your life insurance will NOT cover.

As to the time frame to get things in order...... These new rules have been in the pipe line for over 2 years. They have been discussed in the Panorama clubhouse for the last 2 years.

The easiest thing to do is put a new crank in and comply with the rules. there is no way of getting around it and the longer you put it off the more chance of getting into an expensive mistake.

Its a hard bullet to bite but there is no way around it. The CAA will not budge unless Rotax change their TBO hours.

A new crank is going to cost a few grand, just buy the thing and put it in.