They may be able to transfer from an RAA certificate,to an RPL,directly,but the RPL certificate means that they will be answerable totally to CASA,not the RAA,and the aircraft must be VH registered not RAA registered,to enter Controlled Airspace,as it is at the present time.

Well I just hope the training as intense as going for a PPL. And that there are instructors out there like Jack with many years of experience in GA training these pilots.

Personally as some of you would know, I have not had the best experiences with RAA pilots, but I am certainly willing to put my past experiences behind me and give them a go!

I hope it regulates things more and if CASA is involved, I would imagine it will be well monitored.

Tam:
I know that there are a lot of GA trained instructors like Jack,God bless them,out there.But I hope that we are not going to see under trained RAA instructors putting up their hands to do the RPL training.Horses for courses I say.Let CASA trained GA instructors who fly real aircraft and know their business,do the training,not RAA trained instructors who fly nothing other than plastic fantastic's,and have never flown in Controlled Airspace.Oop's now I have put a cat among the pigeons.

Kinda have to agree with you there Raptor.......

Although I would rather be in CTA than OCTA with someone who is inexperienced! At least someone would be watching my back!(MR ATC)

But in all seriousness. I hope it all goes well for everyone involved, would be great to have more training out there that makes the skys safer.

Tam:
ATC can do only so much,to keep you safe.Far better to have an experienced person in the right hand seat,to keep you on the straight and narrow,in the first place.The rules and regulations we fly by were written in the blood of those brave pilots,who went before us.Let us all learn from their mistakes,and lapses of judgement.That way we all will be able to enjoy our flying.A good pilot will always admit to the fact that we never stop training,even after a career flying.Only birds can claim that they were born to fly,we can't so spend our time and money trying.

From where I'm sitting it seems that the main benefit of this could possibly be in the operating costs of the <1500kg aircraft rather than the issues around the medical and training (though the medical part is a bonus). If they can drive down the operating costs for an aircraft that you can use to go places with a "modern-sized" passenger and their luggage then that will likely make it easier to get into the air and open up aviation to more people.

As much as I enjoy being part of a special fraternity, I think if they can reduce the barriers to entry into aviation then that is a good thing for all. It'd be a lot easier to keep councils from wanting to close airports if more people in the community were actually pilots...

Bosk,
I couldn't agree with you more.

Hi Guys, FWIW There are RAA schools out there with Instructors that have alot more experience than some GA instructors.Eg- The CFI at AIrsports Boonah has 23000 hours experience.He was a Airline Pilot and is currently still a instructor on the Virgin Simulator in Brissy part time. The senior instructor has over 5000 hours and holds a CPL as well as a Senior instructors rating.
( I have both GA and RAA experience).I have seen just as many GA pilots doing the wrong things as RAA pilots do.

Raptor: the Piper Sport was nothing but an overpriced and overweight version of the Sport Cruiser that has been discontinued. The Sport Cruiser is well known. The Sky Catcher also has a weight issue for practical cross-country use but can be registered with RA-Aus. Once Cessna have delivered the first 1500 or so in the US, they may show up here too.

Factory built RA-Aus aircraft are also more than welcome in CTA if flown by a PPL and a simple change to the RA-Aus ops manual will allow this for RPLs too. No need for VH-registred aircraft. If you paid more attention when (if?) you fly in controlled airspace, a call sign like "Jabiru 1234" is not a Qantas code share operated by a regional.

Those comments about these aircraft and CTA also go to show you know very little about the RA-Aus scene, so I'll take it that your other opinions are equally ill-informed.

Tam: with all due respect, round tripping from Parafield and working with the CPLs (to be) there that know their every move is scrutinised doesn't give you a very good idea of what goes in on the real world of PPLs. Spend some more time at fly-ins frequented by private pilots that never trained for CPL and you'll notice there is no shortage of cowboys. And yes, 4 out of 5 times someone does something stupid at places like YMBD it is an RA-Aus pilot simply because 4 out of 5 operations there are in RA-Aus aircraft.

I hope you keep that in mind when leaving those past experience behind and not be so quick to judge a group when you see something improper; judge the individual instead!

Now, back to the subject of the RPL: A CASA representative working on this did tell there will be cost recovery. So getting your self-certified or GP medical approved will cost money, etc. Probably not a lot less than getting your class II issued.

Who will this be an interesting license for? In my opinion, absolutely nobody that doesn't already have a license. Who then? The 60+ member of a flying club who can't get a class II medical but can continue to fly the club's 172 solo or with one mate only. Those are the only ones RA-Aus might not get as member, which is a pretty small demographic.

I can't think of a single reason why someone starting ab-inito that wants to fly GA aircraft would stop at the RPL. If they want to fly larger aircraft, the go see CASA, if they don't, they'll go to RA-Aus, that simple. The amount of people unable to obtain a class II medical is very small. Stand on one leg, point finger at nose, pass!

On some level I agree with Bosk, but remember there are plenty of RA-Aus aircraft that fly faster than your daddy's 172, with longer range and can still take over 200KG for people and bags with full fuel. No, they won't take all your camping gear like a 172 with only 2 people in it would, but don't underestimate the capabilities of RA-Aus aircraft.

Wow baswel anyone would think you have your own agenda
Great answer , clearly demonstrating your unbiased approach to aviation and your quest to turn people off RA Aus