Let’s cut through the CR@P with facts please ...

[Fairy Flycatcher]

Hi Rudi. Please explain what your interpretation is on these laws and why you quoted them here?
<SNIP>

Annie, you managed to conveniently miss the in my post, indicating Twisted Evil Smile. I am not getting drawn into a debate with you again.

They trained you well for your post at MISASA

[RudiGreyling]

<SNIP>
They trained you well for your post at MISASA

Hi Annie,

I have no post @ MISASA, I am just helping out, trying to make things better, instead of being one of the complaining masses.
Your continued attacks on MISASA (and me) makes me wonder what you've got up your sleeve.
Being 'new on the scene' I have got no history of the politics at MISASA, but i smell a rat.

Regards
Rudi

[John Young]

They trained you well for your post at MISASA

I have no post @ MISASA, I am just helping out, trying to make things better, instead of being one of the complaining masses.

Your continued attacks on MISASA (and me) makes me wonder what you've got up your sleeve.

Hi guys,

This thread was intended for the amateur trike pilot (like myself) to be able to understand his / her position a little better come 1 January 2008.

As per the topic “Let’s cut the CR@P with facts please ….” now.

Regards
John ZU-CIB

[Fairy Flycatcher]

Hi John

You are right and I appologise.

Rudi, you are amoderator now, please remove these last few posts. Incuding this one. I would, but dont want to upset you more. I think its great that you are doing your bit for the sport. I am just sorry that I upset you so much that you feel there is an us and them thing goiNg on. I would support a functional MISASA 100 percent. Will pm you some of the MISASA history so you can understand our frustration...

[Tumbleweed]

Just hang out all the washing here, maybe give the plebs a better insight.

[lamercyfly]

Hi Folk.

I am so weary of repeating myself, but for the sake of folk who have not yet grasped the enormity of the situation, I say for the last time the follwing snippets. (Please read my post to Rudi under subject - what MISASA is up to)

1. Persons who can do maintenance (and this especially for you John)

Please note that an AP is NOT included in who may supervise (directly) you. Only an AMO or an AME. So this affects you hugely John.

In the new laws, an AP is only approved to do the Annual Inspection.


Sure, in the Aero Club AP ARO, AP's are rated to do repairs etc., but I have yet to find out which law is the greater.........CAA's Civil Aviation Regulations, or the Aero Clubs ARO manual of Prodecure .........you go figure.

So, yes, we will all fly illegally from 1 Jan 2008 (you included John), but I simply do not have the energy to educate the masses any longer. It is not just part 24 (maintenance) that will make us illegal........

The full volume of the ANR's, CAR's and CAT's are all available and can be purchased and studied - as I have done.

Remember that shait happens. I know of a number of pilots who spent fortunes because shait happens. The late Martyn Walker settled 'out of court' for injuring a passenger. There are many others...........

By the way John, are you aware that the folk who you refer to as your AP's are no longer authorised. Evidently did not join the new scheme within the cut-off period.......Heard through the grapevine.........Hope they can sort it out soon, as Natal is seriously short of practicing AP's......Please don't attack me in your reply John....I am not attacking you, just concerned that you don't grasp the situation....And I know that you are a stickler for doing things properly, and it's for folk like you that these new laws should NEVER have gotten this far.......Hey, the rest of us, we just belong to the wing-it brigade

Cheers,

[skybound®]

To add to your question David as to which is the greater law - I think even interpreting the CARS one has to make an interpretation call on which CAR is the greater

24.03.1
(2) The Approved Maintenance Schedule, referred to in sub-regulation
(1), shall-
(a) prescribe which Approved Person(s) with the appropriate repair
rating, which licensed AMEs and which approved AMOs may carry out
maintenance on the aircraft;

43.02.2
(3) Any person may carry out maintenance on an amateur built aircraft or a
production-built aircraft, or any component thereof, if such person –
(a) is authorised by the Commissioner or by the organisation designated
for the purpose by the Commissioner in terms of Part 149, as the case
may be, to carry out the maintenance; or
(b) carries out the maintenance under the direct supervision of a person
authorised by the Commissioner or by the organisation referred to in
subregulation (a).

So if CAA recognise the Aero Club's AP scheme - you could interpret the above as an individual being able to do maintenance under direct supervision of an AP.

But at the very least by 24.03.1 (2) an AP can work on a NTCA.

[John Young]

Please don't attack me in your reply John....I am not attacking you, just concerned that you don't grasp the situation....

Guys,

As a group, we are capable of making the KGB Misinformation Division look proletarian or amateurish.

There are many parts to this whole saga 24, 62, 64, ANR's, CAR's, ARO, AMO, AME, CAA, MISASA, CAT's, AP’s, etc. as well as the little guys like me.

What has been debated over and over is that many parts are in direct conflict. One has the prerogative to choose to take just one clause such as 24.1.10.13.234.56(a) through (g) stating “all aircraft” and a Y2K scenario is conceived.

I ask you all - if three conflicting speed restriction signs (being 60, 80 and 120 kph) were in full view on the same pole, would you pay a speeding fine for doing 80 kph?

David – I have no reason to attack you – besides it’s not my style anyway.

Regards
John ZU-CIB

[lamercyfly]

thanks John.

Also thanks for not being a pole sitter. Your contributions are alway pertinent and very much pragmatic.............

I have had good, positive conversations today, with senior role-players.

I remain optimistic that our drive to protect ourselves is paying off.

Will post news as soon as it is fact. I am happy to say that senior staff within CAA, both in terms of part 62 and part 24's implications, are very aware of the problems facing the industry............

Regards.

[Brian Young]

Hi Annie,
Just for the record I wrote the first MOP for the ARO when I was the Chairman this was completed in Febuary and submitted to CAA in the April of that year. some one kept delaying the application and Misasa never got ARO status but Phasa and the soring boys got there ARO now I wonder who put the brakes on that application????? I think we should ask the Aero club what happened????
As far as whats misasa doing Ha Ha Ha what a joke
Rudi I think you should find out a bit of misasa history it might just help you.
Brian

[nicow]

I agree....what a joke!!