skippydiesel

Hi Turbs, No idea what topic /point you are addressing here. How about you use your well known legal interest, to address the question of landing fees not being advertised.😈

I accept your word that this is in fact the regulations / bureaucratic nonsense (aircraft registration determines flight training) BUT what are the reasons, if any, behind such an illogical ruling. I would like to revive my PPL currency (lapsed about 2 years ago). My strong preference (economic/familiarity) would be to the flight review in my own (RAA registered) aircraft. My Sonex has the potential to be GA registered and is compliant with entry to Controlled Airspace, having the necessary, recently checked, communication devises. What practical reasons can their be for not using my own aircraft, other than some bureaucratic "territory" (RAA v GA) ruling???? 😈

This is a very "long bow" onetrack. I, along with most of you, are private pilots, exercising our right to access a publicly open/available facility. The only business in this equation is the facility supplier.😈

I am aware that , along with many Australian laws, Consumer Law/Price advertising, is not universally/strongly enforced, that does not change the law itself. I made a tactical error - Not wanting to be pursued by AvData, I payed the requested fess - I should not have.😈

Thanks Thruster - Great suggestions/options. Concerned about the changes in TO'B manufacture, I am researching for future repairs/maintenance. My brakes have only just over 200 Hobbs hours at this time & still look/work okay.😈

Wow!!!!! The question was asked on the Sonex Forum. I as a Sonex owner & user of TO'B brakes didn't know the answer and for future needs, thought I should. Thank you for the AI answer - be interesting to see how acurate/helpful it is.😈

True but thats not my beef. The airports listed, incommon with most, are open to the aviation public (us) ie access in not resricted. As such any terms conditions that are expected of the user (us) must be easily found/available ie published in ERSA. Its my contention, that failing to make fees readily available, renders the charger, in breech of the law. Any lawyers on the Forum???😈

Anyone know where to source Tracy O’Brien brake parts (especially pads). 😈

ERSA is an official document (regularly updated for accuracy) that all Australian pilots revere to for precise details on the airfield they may land at. There can be no excuse for not publishing airport fees, conditions of use, in ERSA😈

Not so - ERSA under REMARKS, gives the following for : Dalby - "AD an AVDa Charges apply" - no amount conditions etc Armidale- "1. AD Charges: All ACFT" - as above no fee or details. Imagine if you pulled into a fuel station - no advertised $/L. After you filled up, they demanded say $10/L. You might feel a little taken advantage of. Not sure you are correct on this. My understanding is as stated earlier. Anyone offering a good/service must disclose the cost up front ie before good or service provided. In an airport context, the fees & schedule/conditions (weights, duration, etc) should be in ERSA - Some airports do give it all, some do not. Its my contention that if no fee is published, no fee can be legally demanded. I await the advice from our Forum legal experts. 😈

Back to Landing Fees: Reference : ERSA It's come to my notice (two landings at two diffrent airfields) that some airfields state that they charge a landing feed but do not say what that fee is. I believe it is against Australian Consumer Law, to charge for any Good or Service, without disclosing the fee befor the Good or Service is provided. This makes sense, as accepting the published/posted fee, is tantamount to the customer (me) agreeing to a contract to pay the provider, for the good or service provided. No fee no contract! If I be correct (??) would it be appropriate to refuse payment, when AvData bill for the landing(s)?? 😈

I may have this next speculation all wrong; At about the time of this accident, was it not common for airlines to give preferential training to "ab initio" applicants? My understanding of this term is, applicants with little or no prior (flight) training. The idea being that the airline flight school would train the aspiring pilot in their way/culture. In doing so the pilot would somehow be more appropriately skilled/safer An unforeseen by product of this is, that the new pilot may have had little or no time/experince in small aircraft. Small aircraft flying is often regarded as "seat of the pants" in that it instills basic responses to aircraft behaviour eg In a stall, lower the nose/add power. No airspeed indication , maintain straight & level add/decrease power , etc Captain Sullenberger of A380/Hudson River fame & glider pilot, is often sighted as an example of the desirability of those who advocate for commercial pilots having a grounding in small aircraft flying.😈

Very similar looking to my GME 😈

And - Is that sand/earth drifting across the road - desert/coastal . I visited Rainbow Beach (Qld) a few years back, in my Zephyr. The Z had tyres much like a wheel barrow and struggled with the sand/soft going. There is no way my Sonex would get off the ground , assuming it survived the landing😈

Without a ground inspection, might be okay in a STOL/big wheel/long travel suspension, job. For my Sonex, I would need either an in person or trusted/knowledgeable other, to do a pre use/landing report😈