Auster Type Certificate

Blue Max,
It’s clear that you know what you’re talking about. I’m not disputing that. And like I said, i know that there are pro’s to the permit… BIG pro’s. That doesn’t distract from the fact that I’m disappointed that we’re going to loose the CofA but hay, like you said, if it keeps up flying, then thats the main thing.

In all seriousness, and without wanting to argue with you, what i still don’t understand is this… Why are parts not an issue from Tigers and Chipmunks. I mean, both have CofA’s and both are of ‘similar’ age. Why does the Auster stand out in all of this? I know that DH at Duxford support the Tigers and Chippies, but why does that make a difference?… Why cant that be done with the Auster/ What would have happened if DH took on the type certificate, regardless of our opinions, wishes or desires?

It’s a point that could be argued both ways. I’ve not said that a permit aircraft is in any way inferior. I’m restoring an AOP9 and there is only one place she’ll be going… Onto a permit (low n slow – I think I’ll be dropping quite a few wings when she’s restored).

But the fact is that I don’t think that CofA Auster’s needed to go onto a permit system… Nor did many of the people I spoke with, so while I’m not saying that I’m in the majority, I do know that I’m not alone with my views.

I don’t think my views are blinkered I even accepted that there are pro’s and cons with both systems. But, on reflection, I don’t think that all Auster’s would be ‘grounded’ in the next couple of years if we stayed on a CofA. But I also don’t accept that it’s a fact of life… If i were a fact of life, then no 50 year old aircraft would have CofA’s. It’s just a difference of opinions…

I do want to keep her flying, and as I said earlier, this will certainly not be a reason for me to get rid of her…

Yoy dont seem to want to understand that the way the new legislation is going an A/C like the Auster will not be able to, or become very difficult to looked after. So you stay on a CofA, you aeroplane needs some parts that are broken, U/S or whatever. You can no longer get those spare,s with the required CRS so you or your engineer canot fit them so canot get your A/C airworthy, so your CofA aeroplane will sit on the floor. If however it was on a Permit, fixed and flying again. Not going round in circles anymore, you fight to stay on a CofA and in a few years time you want be flying over Lincoln or anywhere else:confused:

Blue Max, i couldn’t agree more! PFA (LAA) must be the way forward for the UK Auster world, this system is much more user friendly and a simpler method of keeping Austers flying, surely common sense will prevail, this should be seen as a golden one off opportunity which should be snapped up PDQ!

It’s a point that could be argued both ways. I’ve not said that a permit aircraft is in any way inferior. I’m restoring an AOP9 and there is only one place she’ll be going… Onto a permit (low n slow – I think I’ll be dropping quite a few wings when she’s restored).

But the fact is that I don’t think that CofA Auster’s needed to go onto a permit system… Nor did many of the people I spoke with, so while I’m not saying that I’m in the majority, I do know that I’m not alone with my views.

I don’t think my views are blinkered I even accepted that there are pro’s and cons with both systems. But, on reflection, I don’t think that all Auster’s would be ‘grounded’ in the next couple of years if we stayed on a CofA. But I also don’t accept that it’s a fact of life… If i were a fact of life, then no 50 year old aircraft would have CofA’s. It’s just a difference of opinions…

I do want to keep her flying, and as I said earlier, this will certainly not be a reason for me to get rid of her…

Sorry VX but i am getting kinda fed up with with the fact that you appear to think that Permit A/C are in some way inferior!!! And i had had a long day trying to keep old aeroplane flying in the face of more and more red tape!
I can asure you that on the permit system your Aircraft will be far better catered for. The blinkered view is that CofA is somehow better, not beter just different. Yes the Permit system has some restrictions but what would you prefer, fly within those limits or not at all?? Its a fact of life im affraid, we’re all getting older and so is your Auster, if you want to keep her flying and enjoying her then things must change. Many Vintage A/C will be impossible to keep in the air on a full CofA, they will just not be able to , or will get to expensive to comply with the legislation. And im affaid that is just a fact of life, as someone who daily deals with trying to look after old aeroplanes under rules compiled for airliners belive me i know how hard it is getting ( and its gona get worse) to look after some of these old friends. Permit has to be the way fwd for many of these A/c.

Don’t worry VX….I’ve got firm evidence that BM’s been doping wings again!! 😉

Blue Max,
Not quite sure what your point is here. So far the posts you have made on this topic have at least been sensible. Please don’t loose credibility now.

If you really cant see the point that I was trying to make then we may as well end the discussion now. Yes, it does make you want to scream especially when people are so blinkered that they cant see others people points. Perhaps you’d like to go away, read the post again and then come back to us.

It says quite clearly that ‘ONE of my beefs’. I take a lot of pride in my aircraft, and I look after her well… Please don’t be so stupid as to think that the only reason I’m unhappy about a permit is because I wont be able to see Lincoln from the sky.

Will though the rules pertaining what you can do with a Permit aircraft remain? Rumour mill suggests not.

By way, have you considered that the introduction of EASA FCL will mean a complete re-write or scrapping of the ANO? Why have a national law when you have Euro-wide regs?

Absolutely… I couldn’t agree more with you. In the same way as the engine could stop in an aircraft regardless of age. But as long as we fly within the law, and more importantly, within the limitations of the aircraft, then there is no problem with flying over built up areas… And generally speaking, I think most pilots take this into consideration.

But this is one of my ‘beefs’ with the permit system. One day, my Auster will be safe and legal to fly over Lincoln cathedral… The next day, I’m going to breaking the law… Nothing will have changed on the aircraft, but the paperwork will be different. Is that fair? I don’t think it is.

I know that there are some Austers owners who will be feeling pretty smug about the decision, there will be some that don’t care either way, but I honestly feel pretty lousy about it.

So you dont want to go onto a permit because you will no longer be able to fly over Lincoln Cathederal in your Auster!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It really does make you want to scream dosent it:eek:

By the way steve, sorry to let you know but we wont be able to fly the BE over Lincoln Cathederal. I hope your happy with that, i know i am:D

You’re entirely welcome to your opinions VX. But if you want to spend your Sunday afternoons flying over built-up areas in a 50 year-old single-engined classic, please remember that CAA or PFA paperwork has no effect on the glide angle with a dead engine! 😮

Absolutely… I couldn’t agree more with you. In the same way as the engine could stop in an aircraft regardless of age. But as long as we fly within the law, and more importantly, within the limitations of the aircraft, then there is no problem with flying over built up areas… And generally speaking, I think most pilots take this into consideration.

But this is one of my ‘beefs’ with the permit system. One day, my Auster will be safe and legal to fly over Lincoln cathedral… The next day, I’m going to breaking the law… Nothing will have changed on the aircraft, but the paperwork will be different. Is that fair? I don’t think it is.

I know that there are some Austers owners who will be feeling pretty smug about the decision, there will be some that don’t care either way, but I honestly feel pretty lousy about it.

As far as I was aware no permit aircraft are allowed to fly over built up areas…

You’re entirely welcome to your opinions VX. But if you want to spend your Sunday afternoons flying over built-up areas in a 50 year-old single-engined classic, please remember that CAA or PFA paperwork has no effect on the glide angle with a dead engine! 😮

Joe. These were two very different situations. The previous party was persuaded against it because the club felt that they had neither the skills or the knowledge to take it on. Contary to popular belief, they weren’t persuaded not to take it on because everyone wanted to go onto permits.

The ‘other’ party that was looking to take it on was a completely different kettle of fish. One with engineering skills and support. They were let down at the last minute and thats why it’s only happened now.

Mudmover, I don’t think it’s a matter of how airworthy your aircraft is or whats common sense and what isn’t. I’d be interested to know what makes your permit Auster more airworthy than a CofA machine? I mean that with all sincerity. The simple fact is that by the true definition of ‘common’ sense, we don’t know what common sense is because no one ever found out the ‘common’ opinion. So in fact, what you think is common sense is actually personal opinion… Just like mine!!!

Common sense prevails at last.My Auster has been on a PFA Permit since 1978,it is by far more airworthy than most of the Austers I have seen that have’Certificates of Airworthiness’.

What I don’t understand is why anybody makes it known that they want to take the TRA on, presumably knowing that the Auster Club had already persuaded the previous interested party out of this course of action, then keep us all in limbo for two years and then not bother.:confused:

If by PT you mean public transport, then it’s not PT flying… As far as I was aware no permit aircraft are allowed to fly over built up areas… PT or not.

Of course there are pro’s and cons to both sides, and I do see the points that you are making. But that still doesn’t stop me feeling pretty fed up about it all!! 🙁

What did surprise me was that they were saying that the owner can choose to have a PFA permit or a CAA permit. I found that quite strange. I would have thought that responsibility should have been handed over to one body. Has anyone any opinions as to which permit would be better?

My ‘beef’ is that I don’t think that the aircraft needs to go on a permit… And if the permit system is oh soooo fantastic, then why aren’t the tigermoth boys, chipmunk boys (to name but a couple) etc all jumping up and down asking for permits?

I feel (personally) that the permit system is inferior to a CofA. Weather I’m right or not, that is my opinion. I do think that the rules on permit aircraft will be tightened up and well, who knows what will happen.

I guess my days of scenic flights around Lincoln are finished… What is it… No flying over built up areas… I better start taking an interest in fields!!!!

Please tell me, apart from the fact that you can all put dodgy parts on your aircraft, what is the great appeal to the permit? In all seriousness, perhaps I’m uneducated on the matter, but i really don’t see the great appeal…

I can think of many Tiger Moth owners who would jump at the chance to go onto a Permit!!! they canot as DH Support ltd holds the TC. “Dodgy” parts as you call them are original parts, still in there wax paper, still in there original manufactures packaging that canot be supplied with an EASA form 1 or any other form of approved paperwork or CRS, therefore they canot be used on a CofA aeroplane. They can however be inspected and certified as servicerble to be used on a Permit A/C. also on a permit no longer available parts can be manufactured without going to an A1 approved company and incurring the relavent and huge cost!!!
The Permit Vintage Aeroplanes i have had the pleasure of dealing with are usually looked after to a much higher standard than you average C150 on a CofA.

If your concerns are based on the fact that you will no longer be able to carry out PT flights in your Auster then that is a different matter, i fear however that PT flights in vintage Aeroplanes may well be under threat whether on a CofA or not:(

Just thinking about AJRB down at Eggesford. It would be interesting to have views on those Austers presently being resotred to fly, which doubtless have been collating the paperwork and using approved parts. Will now they wait? Kick themselves?

My ‘beef’ is that I don’t think that the aircraft needs to go on a permit… And if the permit system is oh soooo fantastic, then why aren’t the tigermoth boys, chipmunk boys (to name but a couple) etc all jumping up and down asking for permits?

I feel (personally) that the permit system is inferior to a CofA. Weather I’m right or not, that is my opinion. I do think that the rules on permit aircraft will be tightened up and well, who knows what will happen.

I guess my days of scenic flights around Lincoln are finished… What is it… No flying over built up areas… I better start taking an interest in fields!!!!

Please tell me, apart from the fact that you can all put dodgy parts on your aircraft, what is the great appeal to the permit? In all seriousness, perhaps I’m uneducated on the matter, but i really don’t see the great appeal…

VX, what exactly is your beef with the Permit system that for years has kept many otherwise hard to look after and spares source vintage aeroplanes flying Quite happily. Your Auster will be much easier to keep in the air once its on a Permit.

Come on VX, loosen up! At least you will now be able to sleep easy because you will be able to legally use parts from the usual sources that would immediately invalidate your current CofA if the CAA took any notice of them!