Is this the end of microlighting in S.A. ?

[skybound®]

Don't want to get technical, but to my calculations, the replacement of spark plugs through a 300 hour cycle will be R480.00 and not R4800.00.

No problem there - always happy to be challenged to ensure that the facts are correct and that misinformation kept to zero

Given: The approved maintenance manual states plugs to be regapped at 12,5 hours. and replaced at 25.

As you are no longer allowed to regap or replace your own plugs (as it is maintenance and you can no longer do your own maintenance), requires AP to come do it.

So during first 300 hours will require:
12 x visits by AP for regapping x R150 = R1800
12 x (visits by AP for replacement R150 + plugs at say R100 for 4) = R3000

My AP cost may be a bit conservative and yes maybe you get 4 plugs at less than R100 but will be pretty close And yes the AP can also do some more of the 40 maintenance points during each visit also you may find an AP that is happy to let you do your own work - but you get the drift. It aint going to be as cheap as it used to be.

[Wargames]

Ok skybound.

I concede. You did a more thorough costing than I did.

[skybound®]

Surely a recommendation cannot be read as compulsory!?!?!

This is the crux of the problem - by the regulation it translates recomended into compulsory.

I will hopefully get a copy of that Rotax documentation tomorrow evening from a mate of mine stating what is required at overhaul time. He seemed to indicate some other shocks in there too - such as rubbers (like the intake etc) also need be replaced at 5 year intervals.

These are recomendations - and that is the point we need to make clear to CAA and should form part of the argument that is presented to them and re-draft the regulation to not translate recomendations into compulsory. Not all recomendations are even carried out on type certified aircraft.

The CAA needs to apply their minds and evaluate as to what is sensible. I still beleive that sense will eventually prevail.

[Petrodactyl]

When we were kids we had to accept our parents argument that we must do something 'BECAUSE I SAY SO!'

Has anyone had any feedback from the SACAA as to why they are enforcing these issues now? Is it because they want to get rid of NTCA? Is it because they were told to tighten up by the FAA and have chosen the easiest target first? Is it out of concern for ours or the general publics safety? Is it to generate more revenue for the SACAA? Maybe all of the above. Do we have any claim as to reasonable expectations based on the way things have always been?

Like so many things, we seem to have come to meekly accept major issues that affect us ( no electricity? ), as if they were some random occurance that we have to stand by and watch. Are we going to live by the ' dit help niks ' motto forever?

Who can I address these questions to at the CAA? For an organisation that purports to have the safety of all at its center, their communication on this sucks.

Petrodactyl.

[RudiGreyling]

Shoe you guys know how to stir, this on 2nd hand information, I still have not seen any evidence or information forth coming from the 2 individuals concerned. Who, what where why?

Have you thought it might be 1 or 2 CAA individuals on a power spike again, while the rest is trying to sort out the mess as evidence all over suggest?

Regards
Rudi

[skybound®]

Rudi whether the 2 ATFs were denied or not, is no big issue. The fact that it has been confirmed firsthand by at least two forum members that some ATFs have been issued with the big 'BUT' condition is still not acceptable.

viewtopic.php?p=62114#62114
viewtopic.php?p=61401#61401

In my books saying that if there is an incident/accidnet that you will be in hot water, or if they refuse to issue in the first place equates to the same.

[RudiGreyling]

Ja Ja I know, it is as clear as mud, while the rest is trying to change the laws ASAP.

viewtopic.php?p=62030#62030

Rudi

[lamercyfly]

Hi Folk.

I have been remaining rather quiet, looking with amusement at all the specualtion....

My, my.......save yourselves and just get the facts, dudes

2 ATF's were rejected by Mike Cathro, him of Panoramo Airfield fame,who is now a beloved inspector. He works under Andre Swanepoel in the ATF department.

The ATF's were for 2 members of our highly respected Snake Formation Team............ Hows zat........

Neill de Lange has asked them to see him about it.

I am aware that there is huge misinformation and total confusion amongst the microlights pilots.......

Herewith the FACTS, NOT SPECULATION:

1. Every microlight training school in South Africa, which is using microlights, is operating illegally!!!

Reason :

(a) they do not have part 96 commissioner approved persons to do their 25 hour inspections, therefore any aircraft having done more than 25 hours is grounded!!!
(b) All ATF's, by default, became invalid on 1 Jan 2008. You don't believe me, go speak to an attorney. Your ATF's validity is dependent on your maintaining the aircraft in an airworth condition. In terms of the new laws, any Rotax 503 or 582 motor which has exceed 150 hours and not been stripped down to measure tolerances of the cylinder walls and pistons etc., is foul of the law, and you are responsible. So, the fact that you have an ATF dated expiry some time later in 2008, means didly sqaut. You are illegal, klaar!
(c) You also need to gap the plugs every 12.5 hours. And you may not do it yourself........

Watch this page, I am busy gearing up...............

Regards.

[JACO]

Skybound, please post that " required at overhaul time " document if and when you get it. It might help to build a case against an AP or even CAA.

On 300 hours my logbook only stated " General Overhaul as per Rotax maintenance schedule " sign and stamp. Try contacting Aviation engines for a list or something that was done, but no info. I baught the 582 on 365 hours.

Thanx

[Sad-Ham]

(c) You also need to gap the plugs every 12.5 hours. And you may not do it yourself........

Thats quite cool... so now every 12.5 hours I have to take off the wing , trailor the trike through to a certified Ratax agent to have them spend 5 minutes regapping plugs??????

Ridiculous

Why dont they just put down a law that states all aircraft have to be inspected by a qualified person before any flight may take place!

[skybound®]

Why dont they just put down a law that states all aircraft have to be inspected by a qualified person before any flight may take place!

It does. A licenced Pilot

[Mike Cordeiro]

Hi Folk.

I have been remaining rather quiet, looking with amusement at all the specualtion....

My, my.......save yourselves and just get the facts, dudes

2 ATF's were rejected by Mike Cathro, him of Panoramo Airfield fame,who is now a beloved inspector. He works under Andre Swanepoel in the ATF department.

The ATF's were for 2 members of our highly respected Snake Formation Team............ Hows zat........

Neill de Lange has asked them to see him about it.

I am aware that there is huge misinformation and total confusion amongst the microlights pilots.......

Herewith the FACTS, NOT SPECULATION:

1. Every microlight training school in South Africa, which is using microlights, is operating illegally!!!

Reason :

(a) they do not have part 96 commissioner approved persons to do their 25 hour inspections, therefore any aircraft having done more than 25 hours is grounded!!!
(b) All ATF's, by default, became invalid on 1 Jan 2008. You don't believe me, go speak to an attorney. Your ATF's validity is dependent on your maintaining the aircraft in an airworth condition. In terms of the new laws, any Rotax 503 or 582 motor which has exceed 150 hours and not been stripped down to measure tolerances of the cylinder walls and pistons etc., is foul of the law, and you are responsible. So, the fact that you have an ATF dated expiry some time later in 2008, means didly sqaut. You are illegal, klaar!
(c) You also need to gap the plugs every 12.5 hours. And you may not do it yourself........

Watch this page, I am busy gearing up...............

Regards.

Dave:
Why are you blaming Mike Cathro for the "groundings" ? Shurely he`s following orders.
It wasn`t him that came up with these new "legislation" ,and furthermore I don`t get it, first you speak of him in a degrading manner and then you go on to state that "yes all trikes are illegal" Sorry I don`t get it

[Ranger]

I fly and i fly and i fly and no matter how hard i try i just can't seem to get to 300 hours on my 503. The oddest thing.

[Boer]

Why dont we get Mike Cathrow to post a reply on this topic and end the
"speculation" once and for all. Surely he should be the one that knows
and should be able to give us the facts and not the rumours.

At this time that is all it is "rumours" until it is in writing!

Whatever was in writing before 1 Jan 2008 is nul and void as it was ignored by the same CAA that now allegidly want to enforce that, that was in writing - where is the consistency?

Or are they just as consistent as our beloved ESKOM????

[flying-i]

Now we are trying to fly legally without complying with part 24?, …if that much interpretation is required then things are definitely not right

All that creative energy that should be making MISASA stronger, our instructors better and our safety paramount, is being wasted and leaves a very negative picture of those that are supposed to look after us.

Suspend part 24 and rework it with the industry in mind - do it now and stop this madness, please.

Rotax discussing stuff with CAA?, the Aero club writing vague non commital letters, CAA cops doing what they were employed to do, MISASA wondering whats going on and so on. Everyone helping to stir the pot and create a general atmosphere of negativity and non compliance.

Nearly 18000 views on the AVCOM topic and still it appears that the CAA heirachy does not feel it is urgent or important enough to react. Did Obert not write a great article which certainly led me to believe that he was open to suggestions and that NTCA was very important to the CAA?? Maybe time for article number two Obert?? I am sure it would be appreciated.

In the mean time the only people out on a limb and vulnerable are the microlight pilots that are forced to fly illegally while part 24 remains.

I don't know who is wrong and who is right anymore, but it is obvious that the regs are not what the microlight industry needs or wants and therefore they need to be re worked.

Let LS1 rule while we rework part24.