RecAv Community Meeting
Ottawa, 07 – 08 December 2004

Participants:

Jorge Alonso, Crossflow Aero, Inc.  LAMAC
Denis Browne, Experimental Aircraft Association, Canada Council
Jack Dueck, Experimental Aircraft Association, Canada Council
Marlene Gill, LAMAC
Sean Gilmore, Canadian Light Aircraft Sales and Service
Gus Gillespie, Canadian Technology Network
Chris Heintz, Zenair, LAMAC
Ken Hitchmough, National Research Council, Industrial Research Assistance Program
Frank Hofmann, LAMAC, COPA, EAACC
Tony Howard, Crossflow Aero, Inc.  LAMAC
Adam Hunt, Canadian Owners and Pilots Association
Kathy Lubitz, Ultra-Light Pilots Association of Canada
Jim McCollum, Soaring Association of Canada
Andre Nadeau, Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association of Canada
Chris Patten, Capital Air Sports
Daniel Schultz, ASTM International
Maurice Simoneau, Transport Canada, Recreational Aircraft
Ted Slack, Canadian Aerosport Technical Committee
Arlo Speer, Transport Canada, Recreational Aviation
Claudette Williams, Industry Canada
Gary Wolf, Recreational Aircraft Association Canada

The meeting opened with a brief overview of the previous meeting held on September 29th 2004.

A Power Point presentation of the LSA Sport Aircraft and Sport Pilot was given by Jack Dueck, followed by a presentation by Dan Schultz on the ASTM standards and their application internationally. Dan also explained the role and services that could be offered by the ASTM organisation.  

Chris Heintz followed by giving a talk on his opinion of the ASTM standards for the Light Sport Aircraft, and the consensus process in their development.  In his opinion, they were more complicated and difficult to comply with than what had been anticipated by manufacturers and did not reflect full consensus in his view. 

Marlene Gill gave a power point presentation on the implications of harmonizing the Canadian Advanced Ultra-light aeroplane with the LSA rules.  The conclusion  was that this option represented too great a risk and too large a negative impact on the manufacturers and current users of the AULA, to be considered.

A general discussion followed concerning future paths. The choices considered were do nothing, upgrade the AULA (to LSA) or create a new Canadian sport plane category? 

The following options were explored

a)                  do nothing (rejected

b)                  replace the advanced ultra-light aeroplane with LSA (rejected)

c)                  keep all existing Canadian aircraft categories (agreed)

d)                  create a new Canadian category similar to the US LSA (short-term)

e)                  establish broader standards for a variety of personal aircraft – standards into which the LSA (and others) could fit (long-term goal)

If options d) and e) above were to be considered, the following items should be incorporated in the discussion.

·        Design Standards

·        Manufacturing standards

·        Maintenance

·        Production

·        Continuing airworthiness

·        Flight testing

·        Import/export

·        Trans-border operations

·        Training and licensing

·        Accepted uses of aircraft

·        Terminology, naming and classification

It was decided that recommendations be made to attempt to achieve the following goals.

·        retain the manufacturing potential for Canadian manufacturers

·        allow the current ultra-light aeroplanes to continue to operate

·        retain the value for existing advanced ultra-light aeroplanes

·        retain the ability for schools to continue using ultra-light aeroplanes

·        permit Canadians to purchase an LSA from the US, register it and fly it in Canada

·        retain current privileges for existing aircraft

·        allowing Canadian produced aircraft into the US

·        make a space for powered parachute aircraft, trikes , gliders, gyroplanes, etc.

 LAMAC announced that it had a proposal to make to the manufacturers and the RecAv group regarding a new aircraft category that would achieve all of the above.  It was decided that LAMAC would provide the details of its proposal at the next meeting. 

LAMAC provided information on a document called a “Compliance Checklist” that would be made available to manufacturers as a tool to assist the compliance with the Design Standards for Advanced Ultra-light Aeroplanes. Transport Canada was receptive to this initiative. As a side note this Compliance Checklist can become part of the basic compliance documentation for any aircraft category.    

 Marlene Gill recommended that a permanent Recreational Aviation Council be formed and circulated the structure of such a council for review.  The recommendation was adopted, and Jorge Alonso was appointed Chairman of the Council and Kathy Lubitz the Secretary. It was agreed that further evaluation of the details concerning the structure for the Council will be made and any recommended changes would be forthcoming from members.

 Andre Nadeau gave a presentation on the activities of the Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association of Canada.          There was a discussion on the appropriate classification of motorized hang gliders.  Should they be classified as an aeroplane or a glider?

Gary Wolf addressed the subject of co-operation between the Industry and TC on issues related to airworthiness and safety of flight and used a recent incident involving a Kitfox IV aircraft which experienced a propeller related failure in flight. His experience was that in other countries he experienced no difficulty in having them accept the information and disseminate it, whereas in Canada he was unable at that time to establish a means of disseminating the information via TC. The outcome was that Ted Slack will look into the previous occurrences and what action took place and propose suitable candidate mechanisms for airworthiness information dissemination. 

Working groups were established as follows:

 1. Class 4 Medical Review

·      A project team was established to investigate, conduct a risk assessment and make recommendations about available alternatives including using a driver’s licence to validate pilot permits or licences.

·     The project team consists of Adam Hunt, Jim McCollum, Denis Browne and Kathy Lubitz.  The team will decide upon a team leader, develop a project plan and advise the Chairman by 01 February 2005.

 2.     Canadian response to the Light Sport Aircraft

·      A project team was established to recommend a response to the US Light Sport Aircraft.

·      The project team consists of Gus Gillespie (chair), Jack Dueck, Gary Wolf, Ted Slack, Paul Sharpe, Chris Heintz, Frank Hofmann. 

·     LAMAC has agreed to make their  proposal for a new category aircraft available to the project team.

·      The project team should review the LAMAC proposal, initiate appropriate further action and make recommendations to the Council.

 3.      Powered Hang Gliders and Powered Paragliders

·     A project team was established to review the classification of powered paragliders and powered hang gliders

·     The project team consists of Andre Nadeau, Adam Hunt, Gary Wolf and Kathy Lubitz.  The team will decide upon a team leader, develop a project plan and advice the Chairman by 01 February 2005

·      The project team should form a risk assessment committee investigating options for reclassifying powered-hang gliders & Powered paragliders

 4.      Disseminating safety information

·      Ted Slack will research past accident data to determine how    often this sort of bulletin would need to be distributed.

·      Ted will report back to the Council by next meeting.

·      Possible mechanisms for distributing information include:

·              Council website

·              Members’ magazines, websites, newsletters, etc.

·              Mandatory Actions for advanced ultra-light aeroplanes

 5.      NavCanada Fees for Recreational operators

·     COPA is a member of the NavCanada Advisory Committee and will keep the Council advised of upcoming fee changes or actions. 

6.      Next Council Meeting

·     Proposed for Tuesday & Wednesday 10 and 11 May 2005 in Ottawa

·     Jorge will contact Arlo to book room for meeting.

 7.      Evaluation of what went well throughout the meeting.

·      High degree of consensus about LSA issues

·      Group decided to be proactive, not reactive

·      New tools

·      Good to have Industry Canada and National Research Council present

·      Good for other government departments to appear to be supporting  recreational aviation

 8.      What Changes recommended for future meetings?

·     More comments and feedback from Transport Canada

·     Encourage representation of future pilots (air cadets, young eagles, colleges, universities ...

·     Involvement of non-pilot aviation career opportunities and publications

·     Listing “expected outcomes” for each agenda item is good thing

·     We need to limit agenda to those of general application to the council as opposed to items related only to one member

·     We should circulate information material ahead of time—the information should be kept short, but should contain required details.