turboplanner

.........they often had trouble mixing with girls, particularly when the circling and sniffing started, but many went on to live very happy lives. Jack Black was one of them, growing up in Western NSW on a cattle property, where he could catch a calf from a quad bike at 40 km/hr, throw it, reach into his left back pocket for the ear tagger, then his right for the nutter, and be back on the bike before it rolled to a stop. He then went to Camden where he took a dislike to GA pilots, who were a whimpering mob of girls, and decided he wanted to give them hell so he sat the CASA FoI exam and passed with flying colours, throwing his collar in the air on graduation. He then moved to Longreach where he issued six defect notices on the Qantas 747 before he was transferred to .................

.....there was a queue each Wednesday when Artchie Smale from Smales Dogwear arrived by from Sydney and started unloading the truck.

There was a dog competition every Friday at lunchtime. These weren't poofy little poodles from the cities but good pig dogs, and they open the school gate just as the kids were leaving their classrooms tunning for the Tuck Shop. First pig dog to get one down was the winner, and handlers had to be quite to pull the dogs off before they choked the kid. Grong Grong kids grew up tough with quite a few strangling at least one pig dog before they graduated. It was .........

.......Kapooka Investments Pty Ltd, which operated out of Grong Grong where the dogs outnumbered the people and...........

[Turbo thanks Cappy for showing those photos. He had been engaged in a long and winding WF thread when he pointed out that towing and aircraft to start it was the best alternatove to a flat battery. Some had argued that it depended on the battery type, others, that as long as 3.762 KV existed you could still get it started with 42 AA batteries, while others ridiculed, RIDICULED Turbo and said he didn't know what he was talking about. Col Paxton who was a crop duster  said the others were wrong  and he just got out the rope jumped in the Landcruiser and started his aircraft every time. In fact he said he preferred towing it. Now these pictures emerge, vindicating Turbo. It looks like the horses, at full gallop may have shied when someone yelled at the and the pilot didn't respond fast enough. Accidents will happen. This aircraft btw was the first in the world to have a triangulated tubular stee fueselage. No other aircraft has ever been proven to be stronger.]

Loxie on a Saturday night at the BoB.

Loxie had become restless training new fairies on how to hold a hose, how to turn a tap on, how to start a pump and which direction to point the hose nozzle. His team was doing quite well regular getting high 35%s for the tests, but he was restless, and one day he decided to add Water Bombers to the fleet. He decided on ................

.......its novel use of Kyber Space in which the Kybers commnunicated and sang curry songs and...................

....over their heads, and that's when the ambush..........

9 hours ago, jackc said:

Most people try to stay under the 4.5T GVM with small diesel dual wheel trucks. They don’t need to ‘pose’ but just get the job done 🙂 

It all starts with the Application. We're trying to get someone 600,00 - 700,000 km total life.

All vehicles on the chart meet the 4500 kg GVM Car Licence requirement.

Local Tradie's vehicle in the Urban area (below 80 km/hr)

The application may not require towing or 100 km/hr highway cruise, so the two columns on the right are going to be able to handle that application.

Up to 3500 kg towing with low frontal area (not caravan type bodies)

We would be looking at the three columns on the right, and the Ford would do limited 100 km/hr at full GCM with caravan type body.

Up to 4500 kg Trailer - Urban area up to 80 km/hr

The Isuzu model is a downrated 6500 kg GVM truck so will carry heavy loads and has a GCM of 9000 kg on driver's licence

Up to 4500 kg Trailer - Highway 100 km/hr

The Ram has twice the power of the Isuzu to push the wind out of the way.

Pushing the wind out of the way:

The Chart on the left is for a ute/truck with tray body and low load

At 80 km/hr, Airpower demand is 40 kW, so not very significant

At 100 km/hr, it is 59 kW, still not a huge factor

The Chart o the right is for a Caravan/5th Wheeler/Van Body

At 80 km/hr even with the bigger body, Airpower demand is only 53 kW

At 100 km/hr it's exponentially more at 103 kW

On top of this, there is power demand for driveline resistance, rolling resistance (affected by the number of wheels), grade resistance and head or tail winds.

This is what gets the owners of vehicles into trouble with blown turbos, motors etc. The engine power output can't meet the power demand requirement at the top end of the envelope in some applications where the same vehicle would happily pull a heavy trailer around all day at low speed.

....his pathetic attempts to get on sick parade, so he could get home.

When General Smuts heard he had clapped a grenade bewteen the legs to get home, he hurried to the scene.

"Mah Guidness!, he explained, lucky you didn't pull it orf".

and added "Nah get up there, and give to the heathen as if they were Boarrrr!!"

There was silence from the troops who........................

2 hours ago, jackc said:

Being a realist in this life……I ‘arrived’ long ago 🙂.  Dodge RAMs in the city?  Yeah well maybe something about manhood…….so long as they don’t end up with wings 🙂 

The US utes replace the Morris Commercial 30 cwt trucks, the next tow vehicle up is a 5 tonne truck, so the are imported and converted to RHD fo the application. Plenty of 100 km/hr freeways and tollways in the city.

41 minutes ago, jackc said:

Everyday I see stuff ups in new road markings making it even more difficult for vehicles to negotiate, mainly bigger and older vehicles, although I get my best entertainment watch Dodge RAMs battling the shopping centre car parks.  I break rules every day on a have to basis.  Minor ones, but none the less they are rules. ALL of which we did not have years ago and didn’t  need back then nor need them today.   Rules are made for the DUMB people on earth…..the rest use their own judgement and commonsense to the level they have. 

Do you like the 100 hour learner driver log time?   Car drivers must be more dense the pilots since a RPC should be achievable in about 30 hours?   Would you think we need to change the RPC to 100 hours and that would make them better pilots? 

Change the rules for what some idiot bureaucracy wants?  In the AUF days there was nothing, you could almost jump in and fly……AND crash.    You can do the same today with all the qualifications you like…….I flew into a willy willy on approach the other day, saw no dust etc……..lucky I had a instructor or I could have been making love, to the ground.  

Now, we should have new rule that says Willy Willys should not come within a certain distance of an airstrip. Life will always have its elements of risk,   regardless of rules.

 

Focus; you were almost there.

(a) You're practising Self Administration

(b) It needs to be loaded; not much point with an empty weapon.

(c) The SSAA rules I mentioned earlier area a good way to see the steps, rules, reasons behind             them.

(d) Focus is first; forget solving the road toll or picking on RAMs for trying to squeeze into parking spots; they'll pull a 3 tonne trailer and carry a load in the tray all day at 100 km/hr and you can still pass slow traffic; they're for a specifica application.

That wasn't my quote: There will be a link between the two bodies somewhere.

...............he and Turbo were in the Khyber Pass. The Heathen had somehow got hold of a lot of ex German Army stick grenades and they were coming in fast.Turbo, Cappy and Loxie were catching and throwing methodically when one went a bit wide. Cappy snatched for it but fell awkwardly and it slipped into his groin which was clamped by the fall. Turbo grabbed the stick and pulled, and Cappy let out a squeal as the grenade body crushed his nuts, but it wouldn't come loose. It was too late and they heard a phssssssssss and then nothing, Cappy had clamped the only dud and ...................

2 hours ago, jackc said:

When I do anything, I make my own risk assessment for the safety of others firstly, the look at the risk for myself……so I am still here on Earth and must not have screwed up so far…..

Step 1

You're in fact practising Self Administration and duty of care to eliminate risks.

Step 2

Someone else sees you and wants to do what you're doing, so you sit there, scratch your head and quantify on paper what you said above.

They are the rules we are talking about; they usually start with: "For safety I recommend....."

The rules cannot be the thoughts of idiots; they must be based on provable benchmarks such as Australian Standards etc., something which will stand up in Court if you have complied with it.

With the two of you you have a Self Administering Organisation. 

I've oversimplified it but not by much.

25 minutes ago, aro said:

If you can explain what you were suggesting then?

Just because CASA have been altering down or deleting prescriptive rules, if they are to offload liability on to users,  that means RAA & you. You have the duty of care to prevent all reasonablly forseeable risks.

Newcomers to the industry are not going to know what those risks are, someone has to be able to tell them, and who better than the Self Administering Organisation.

Others like benchmarks where, as long as they are conforming to the benchmark they are safe from being sued.

If you look at the SAAA operations, from the time you get out of your car to the time you leave, common risks and mishaps are addressed.

From the time an RA owner or pilot gets out of his car to the time he leaves - crickets.

(except for a few admin rules and CASA rules)

25 minutes ago, aro said:

 

The areas where RAA are self administering are pretty well defined.

Other than what's missing - Rules, Supervision, Compliance and Enforcement

25 minutes ago, aro said:

They can't use their own set of rules.

I previously gave the comparison of SSAA with their own rules, but not overwriting Police rules.

This is the same; it wouldn't suprise me if a lot of people don't know the difference between RAA and CASA rules, and that's indicated by some students just receiving suggestions to buy a book on radio, nav,P&O instead of conducting Classes.

25 minutes ago, aro said:

(Technically I suppose you could have a RAA rule requiring a minimum of 3 legs of a circuit be flown, but I doubt that is what was intended when CASA abolished that rule.)

That wasn't what I meant; that's still a CASA rule of the air, so RA comply with the CASA rule.

46 minutes ago, jackc said:

Turbs, todays example 😞

 

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/two-men-wrongfully-convicted-of-murder-walk-free-25-years-later-after-podcast-uncovers-new-evidence/news-story/95b0a20d3664af2c310590950e33d5b7

Probably commercial pilots. They’ve got deep pockets.

3 minutes ago, jackc said:

Seems I mistakenly thought it was a place for a more professional hobby than staying on the ground.  I started by picking the wrong Flying School who could have been far better. What CFI tees up a beat up run on his mates house so his mate gets a photo op with me on board as a student?  Here I am thinking CASA will be waiting for us back at the hangar with handcuffs?   THEN keeps my flying hours money I am in credit because of COVID and can’t go back to use them up?

Does not send my log books on to my new school, calais he sent them by ordinary post, not registered 😞 

And YOU wonder WHY I have run out of F’’s to give about rules? 

And then do mention the flying death trap I ended up with as result of a dodgy LAME?  So I rely on the good old RAA and basically NO F’s to give there, either  😞 

F…..I should have stayed on the ground doing donuts in my rusty $300 Corolla, might have been more fun 🙂 

Well here you are complaining about someone who doesn't follow rules, which could have hurt you.

Flying safety is more complicated because it started earlier with public opinion on the frequent crashes of the early pioneers, then in WW2 when things like more people killed in Beaufighter training than active service created an Australian industry that proudly boasted it was the safest in the world.

Not surprisingly that resulted in a lot of rules. Goes with the territory.

10 hours ago, jackc said:

Yes, and people wonder WHY I get  pissed off  with b/s rules that we are overloaded with these days.  MORE chance on being wrongly accused, so long as they get someone to drop a nose around the neck of who they think should wear it……..

Why did you take up flying then?

.......jeans.

It had all seemed very funny at the time back at the Hacienda Pool Party and some of the girls had complimented him on his "big knotty bulge", but as the cupcakes melted a stain was spreading don the leg of his jeans.

General Wing Hung Hai pretended not to notice but by then the cholcolate had melted, not helped by the grinding as Cappy walked along. The stain was running brown as ..............................

7 minutes ago, jackc said:

And they won’t stop until they get that blood, even at the wrong person's expense?

Is there any evidence of this?

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

Australian Aviation works?? under some quite ridiculous rules. First It's a Law of STRICT liability that no free and thinking person would ever volunteer to be bound by. Secondly YOU are REQUIRED to report within 48 hours if you become aware of any possible risk to Aviation that you may become aware of. No "IF's or Buts" and that applies to civilians too.. THEY have also designed CONFIDENTIAL CAIR reporting schemes  where you are Anonymous (supposedly). Does that seem strange?. The stated MAIN reason to Investigate has been to diminish the chances of a repeat anywhere by education and rule changes etc. NOT just Getting some poor "b" who erred and ground him/her forever. or hitting people with points loss and fines with NO real way oof defending themselves under the existing system.. Nev

You're talking about GA, which operates under prescribed regulation as we all did prior to about 1985.

RA does have to comply with some of that because RA aircraft use the same airspace, but also requires duty of care to eliminate all reasonably forseeable risks, so there are two regimes to learn, the second much more relaxing than the first because you know what you absolutely can't do.

.......Feline Investments Inc. which was owned by CatAttack Finance registered in Panama who were owned by 233358967410 Limited in Switzerland.

It's difficult to portray what is happening in real life on the NES, but Cappy had been talking about the obove as they walked down to the jetty on their Greater Spratleys Island getting ready to meet the Admiral's barge bringing General Wing Hung Hai for a top secret meeting. As they walked aloong there was a strange cracking sound. They stopped and the cracking stopped. They started walking and the crackling restarted. Turbo stopped quickly and the cracking continued as Cappy hadn't noticed ............

11 minutes ago, aro said:

RAA, GFA etc fly in the same airspace as everyone else. They are bound by the same rules as GA. RAA are not free to make their own rules in that area.

I pointed that out earlier in the SSAA comparison,  SAOs fly to dual rules just as  shooters operate on one set of SSAA rules plus Police Rules.

No one has suggested making rules that duplicate CASA rules.

1 hour ago, aro said:

You can bet if someone is shot at a firing range it won't be SSAA investigating it. Likewise, if someone dies in speedway it will be the Coroner investigating. Speedway participants will be witnesses, not investigators.

 

The problem with expecting RAA or GFA to investigate is that you have multiple organizations involved. RAA and GFA obviously, but the rules to avoid collisions are administered by CASA so they are involved too. Do you think RAA can realistically conclude that CASA is responsible for the accident - even if they find that everyone was following CASA rules, and the accident could just as easily involved 2 GA aircraft?

Words in Italics are what I said:

"The SAOs can decide to investigate accidents" - in the case of accidents where Police are not involved.   So for example a near miss where one of the airctaft comes down, and the lesson is separation, or an aircraft hit an object below 500 feet etc. Many more accidents happen than fatals.

"or just provide assitance related to the SAO experience to Police who request it for their brief to the Coroner."

That's the current situation, but possibly could be extended if there were lessons that the Coroners line of responsibility, i.e. cause of death didn't touch on, but where what happened is very important in avoiding a repeat. Under the current regimes this is not going to happen, and would need consultation with the Coroners offices and an agreed process which does not infringe on the Coroners findings. - similar to the way RAA and Police work together under long established guidelines.

1 hour ago, aro said:

 For private operations, there should be an initial assessment, and then only do an investigation if it appears that the causes are not understood, or part of a wider pattern.

See the paragraph below; the first thing is to identify all the reasonably forseeable risks. Then the procedure for avoiding them. Then the rules. Then any necessary investigations.  "We couldn't afford it" doesn't carry any weight in a PL case, but what you're saying is true, so there is still latitude for not having an investigation if the cause is already known, or if the accident won't provide any new information, because an SAO is not operating to the parameters of ATSB. 

1 hour ago, aro said:

 

CASA have been watering down the rules around uncontrolled airfields for as long as I have been flying.

Most of that which I've seen is shedding of legal liability to property owners, AOC holders, Instructors, Pilot and Maintenance people.

Not surprisingly, in the various Industries and Sports Activities governments haven't made that obvious, possibly to avoid outrage from the people who now have to spend the money.  I think you'll find the SAOs needed to  replace those rules. They are required to come up with a way to eliminate all reasonably forseeable risks. We've gone from the fun of getting away with it, avoiding a fine to the aircraft a crumpled mess on the ground, the passenger a quadriplegic and us shelling out around $11 million to support him for the rest of his life.

On 09/12/2022 at 8:41 AM, old man emu said:

While the integrity of the investigators is essential, they have to have an organisation to give them all those thongs we could lump together under the title "Business Administration". You can't expect the person who goes out to the site of an incident to investigate for causes to also have to worry if there is enough paper and tone in the office printer, or if there is an office to have a printer in. I can see no conflict of interest in aviation investigators being included in the business administration duties of the people who do it for CASA. However, you must remember that the ATSB investigates incidents in all areas of transportation where the Commonwealth has jurisdiction. So it is a separate organisation from CASA. Also, if a death results from a transport incident, the information discovered during the investigation must be given to the Coroner. 

 

The office of coroner was established by Richard I in 1194. It was a very high ranking office in the judiciary. Amongst its initial roles was to determine if the person who died was a Norman, and then to determine a cause of death. If the cause indicated foul play, then the coronial inquest turned into murder investigation. However, if the person was not a Norman, that is a Brit, the coroner was no interested any more. Obviously these responses were based on protecting the conquerors from the conquered, as was seen during WWII when the boss of the SS, Reinhard Heydrich was mortally wounded in Prague on 27 May 1942 as a result of Operation Anthropoid. Nazi intelligence falsely linked the Czech and Slovak soldiers and resistance partisans to the villages of Lidice and Ležáky. Both villages were razed; the men and boys age 14 and above were shot, and most of the women and children were deported and murdered in Nazi concentration camps.

 

The word itself is ancient. The term relates to when the deceased was entrusted to the coronator, that is to a necrofore who prepared the corpse according to custom and, among other things, put a small laurel or myrtle wreath (Lat. corona) on his head so that he might be accepted in glory in the afterlife.

 

Necrofore: a grave digger.

In this case the family quite rightly are grieving and want answers. They mistakenly went down the path of thinking ATSB would be the investigator when both the bodies involved in this collision were Self Administering Organizations where the normal practice is for the Coroner to investigate the cause of death, and that process would be under way.

ATSAB investigates GA aircraft crashes, for cause of the accident and even then doesn't automatically investigate every one.

The SAOs can decide to investigate accidents or just provide assitance related to the SAO experience to Police who request it for their brief to the Coroner.

This case is a lesson to those who boast about breaking the rules, or flying without licence.certificate, registration etc, who may be perfectly happy that accidents aren't investigated, but almost always their relatives are not.

RAA Ltd has made its comments on cutting back on investigatons.

OME has explained the Coronial process.

Which leaves RAA and GFA members wanting to know what actually caused accidents so they can avoid them.

In the absence of that we'll just see more people buying the latest $50 Chinese item that supposedly protects the pilot from having to do what he is supposed to do.

Calling for an arms length investigation body was fine in the prescriptive era before 1985 when taxpayers were paying for the sport of recreational flying, but that came to an end when the Self Administered Sports Aircraft section of flying was established about 25 years ago.

That changed the responsibility for safe flying from the government to the participants.  Arms length investigation might be nice, but it was expensive. Now members had to pay and they had to do it themselves. Unfortunately the results haven't been pretty; most just took the CASA exceptions and sat there flying as if the government was still responsible for risk, not them. Even today many are underinsured by millions. 

I've previously mentioned what Speedway racing did to transition into self administration and self responsibility, and its searchable on this site. It cost us and our insurers millions of dollars, so we learnt fast, and the claims dropped away to the point where we were asked to inspect US tracks every year.

Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. had the correct structure for this self-administration responsibility, but never really understod why the change had come, and never completed setting up the Constitution, instead voting for a Limited Company, or putting it another way since only a minute pecentage of Members voted, didn't vote to stay as they were and update for full Self Administration.

One example, which I've quoted a few times did. Sporting Shooters Association of Australia has ranges all over Australia and reasonably forseeable risks are many, so they all have  to be addessed.

And they've done it as an Incorporated Association, not as a Limited Company - so the members still control day by day changes and activity.

Disclaimer: the following is just for a loose relationship with flying; if you want any information about SSAA you should not use this, but go direct to SSAA, because here is could be incorrect, out of date or out of context.

Because several people got hung up on comparing speedway with flying, comparing shooting with flying also has major differences, but this information is about principles.  For example there's no point in saying "But you can't have Range Officers at every airfield." No you can't but you have to find a working model that achieves the same result.

SSAA Self Administration

The Sporting Shooters Association of Australia Inc, is an incorporated association designed for the self- administration era.

Safety Course

SSAA provides a detailed course addressing safety issues.

Link relating to operating rules at a specific Range

https://ssaavic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/SV-Range-Rules-SSAA-February-2018-Version-5.pdf

Commentary on link: disclaimer this is not necessarily the latest version, and I haven’t addressed all of it, just made some equivalent comments on what a Recreational Flying policy for today’s era might look like. Comments match the paragraph numbers in the link.

In some of the comments I’ve paraphrased showing aircraft or flying equivalents

Conditions of Entry

Ear protection

Eye protection

Closed toe shoes

No excessively open shirt tops or singlets

Minimum age 12   #1

12-17 yo require adult supervisor and consent from guardian  #1

No prohibited person allowed to be on range

Range officer must be present

Risk of lead dust rules

1.2       Victoria Police Range Standards (prescriptive legislation crossover same as CASA)

            Victoria Police rifle regulations

2          Legally owned firearms

2.3       Attendance confirmed 

2.8       Range Rule violations must be reported

2.11     Red Flag = Range Open

2.16     Controlled use of Clubrooms  #1

2.18     Procedure for unsafe firearm

2.19     Some firearms prohibited

3.1       Firearms loaded only on firing line

3.2       Specific safety instruction

3.3       Must have approval to use that range that day

3.6       Specific instructions for use

3.8       Specific area for operations

3.9       Beat ups (aircraft) prohibited  (Behaviour control)

3.10     No low flying, into cloud etc

3.11     Authorised person checks safe to leave area

3.12     Behaviour to and from range

3.15     Not permitted to walk away from operable aircraft

3.16     Only Duty Range   handle any firearm belonging to another shooter

4.1       Area made safe – comply

4.2       Emergency procedures

5.1       Alcohol & Drugs not permitted

5.4       No smoking on firing line

Other rules

Shooing alone

Range Officers

Holsters

Safe Handling Area

Malfunctions

12        Targets

12.1     Approve targets

13        Ammunition

14        Emergency procedure

14.1     Accident/Incident reporting

15        Responsible person

16        Range officer policy

18        Specific Rules – Ranges

All shooters must be covered by a current Public Liability insurance policy.

#1        Most public liability claims are not for the central activity.

SSAA Constitution

https://ssaavic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/SSAA-Victoria-Constitution-24-Sept-2020.pdf

Comments

3.1 Liability of Members is limited

47 Power to discipline Members

·         Penaties Caution, Reprimand, Suspension, Expulsion

·         47.2.1

·         47.2.2

47.3 Natural Justice, Panel for Review

47.5 Power to extend Inquiry (Review panel can investigate beyond what was provided)

SUMMARY

This combination of Rules and Constitution has worked very well for SSAA, made possible by being one of the many Incorporated Associations which were developed by the States and Territories for Self Adminitrative Sports and Recreation bodies.

Turbine Debt Recovery Inc because Al Gore hasn’t been paying subscriptions and...