Recreational Aviation Working Group has completed its study, and will be presenting its recommendations to the CARAC Part V Aircraft Maintenance & Manufacturing Technical Committee on January 11th, 2007.
The primary goal of the working group was to recommend removing unnecessary bureaucratic burdens, while maintaining or enhancing existing safety levels, and bringing the technical and operational standards into line with current and future technological advancements.
Working group members reviewed the regulations and standards relating to the operation of Powered Parachutes, Basic Ultra-light aeroplanes, Advanced Ultra light aeroplanes, Amateur Built aircraft, Owner Maintenance and the personal use of Limited category aircraft. In their deliberations, the group did not consider any commercial use operations conducted under Part IV subpart 6 or Part VII of the CARs. Subject to these limitations, the working group will provide recommendations to the Maintenance & Manufacturing Technical Committee as to how the regulations and standards can be amended and simplified. In particular, they have addressed the following questions, including, but not limited to:
1. Are the current separate classifications of recreational aircraft necessary, or could some of them be combined?
2. Should new kinds of recreational aircraft be recognized, either by the introduction of new categories, or by inclusion in the existing categories? e.g. US Light Sport Aircraft category or the LAMAC proposal for personal aircraft.
3. Can the existing standards be amended to take into account the recent and future technological advances in amateur built construction? Conversely, should the criteria for amateur built aircraft be limited to the construction of conventional, relatively low performance aeroplanes?
4. Are the present weight and capacity requirements for amateur built, owner maintenance and limited category aircraft, appropriate?
5. Should advanced technology aircraft be dealt with in a new category or group subject to unique standards?
6. Do we have the right definition for high performance?
7. Should we make provision for “builder assist” programs and other aircraft that do not meet the 51% home-built requirement?
8. Should skill and / or knowledge requirements be established for persons who maintain recreational aircraft, such as those that are applicable in the USA? If so, should “grandfather provisions” be established for existing owners who may not meet those standards?
9. Do the regulations/standards adequately address the maintenance of recreational aircraft such as, amateur built, owner maintenance, limited and ultra-lights (basic and advanced)?
10. Is it appropriate to continue to have classifications that are not subject to the need for a flight authority or can there be a wider range of aircraft that are not subject to the requirements?
11. Can changes be made to Advanced Ultra-light Aeroplanes flight authority or equivalent requirements without imposing additional construction or maintenance requirements?
12. Are the existing (operations) regulations adequate to address these aircraft?
13.
Is there a viable way to amend the standards so that all classes of
Canadian recreational aircraft would be acceptable for flight in
14. With regard to Limited category, does the current Minister’s Exemption appropriately address the recreational use of aircraft groups that are identified within the exemption? e.g. Non-type certificated aircraft, or ex-military aircraft.
15 Should there be a centrally managed system for reporting and notifying recreational aircraft owners of design and maintenance deficiencies?
16. Will any changes or recommended changes affect the existing use of recreational aircraft?
In addition, two extra issues were requested to be added to the list by Transport Canada Aircraft Certification and were addressed by the Working Group:
17. The relative safety of type certified and non-type certified aircraft
18. The potential impact for type certified aircraft
These specific questions will be addressed at the conclusion of this report.
The Working Group held five meetings, one in each month from February to June 2006. The final report of the Working Group was agreed to by all members of the Working Group at the June meeting. To keep this final report as brief as possible many of the intermediate steps, debates and interim deliberations of the Working Group have not been referred to.
To read the final report, click here