turboplanner

.....or he was about to say when overcome by a burst of stage fright at the Rat's scathing criticism of the States of Queensland and Western Australia; HiHo was struggling with how he should behave in this  Millenial World. "How far can I go?" he thought "What is too much?" He hesitated to tell the story of how onetrack had got his name. Not many people know this, readers, so please don't spread it around, but he was a track sniffer. There it is, out in the open. You'd see him around Cat D7s sniffing a track, but always the left one, and that's where the name came from. It was a dangerous habit becaise he'd progressed from Cats parked overnight to operating Cats. It didn't matter iof they were winching logs or dozing dams, he'd be right there behind the track, and there were many occasions where he jumped out of the way just.........

Not just me Turbo. This whole country is slipping away while we chase rainbows.

 

There are still small groups of people around the various industries who think like that, but the Governments are showing no signs of changing direction. What they are doing where people are winging it and not accepting self management is introducing a layer of safety regulation which make these people accountable, so you don't want to be getting caught up in that. A good example is what's about to hit the multi story building industry.

In this case reading back through the posts, there's a lot of speculation about 760 kg, but not much hard evidence in the form of a CASA announcement with the attached conditions such as LAME maintenance and Class 2 medical.

So you may have nothing to worry about anyway.

As far as the "missing" Part 103 MOS which several people have abused CASA for, what CASA have said is: "proposed regulations make provision for a Part 103 Manual of Standards which is intended to be introduced in 2020."    https://consultation.casa.gov.au/regulatory-program/cd-1910os/

The MOS will be subject to a separate public consultation.   

Some people on here are saying they have a problem with the legal wording, and with the order of discussion, and there always will be some people who struggle with that, but its common to have multiple people working on large documents, and it's common to have time commonality; for example these days freeways are built by separate contractors as section at a time rather than the old method of starting in one suburb

and continuing in the same direction until the next suburb is reached.

Leaving the MOS until last has the advantage that it can be written when all of the regulation parts have been set in concrete, so becomes a more logical document, rather than starting out as someone's thought bubble and having to be amended as each part of the regulation is changed, eventually becoming the dog's breakfast that people complain about.

I believe there is such a thing, it's just that our  we're too stupid (as a country) to understand how things really work.

 

The law of diminishing returns applies, and we have way overshot the point where the expense (both financial and freedoms) for the return is acceptable.

 

Unfortunately for you there’s the reality which we don’t get a chance to change on a case by case basis.

when was the last time an RAA aircraft killed someone on the ground? its an abstract risk

 

As we already know from previous discussions, there is no such thing as an acceptable kill rate, and there does not have to be a sample kill, just a reasonably forseeable risk of people on the ground being injured or killed, and even if you just stick to this site, over the years there have been lots of misses.

....said: "Who this Claptain, this fat lat"?   Turbo quietly explained for an hour or so the foibles of the falsely commissioned fantasy infused dude with the pips. "He used to be a comedian", said Turbo, "but........."

Apparently lawyers used to get paid by the word and so they learned to use 100 words where a few would have sufficed.

 

The  other thing is that  businesses add a new clause or two  to their contracts every time they lose a case in court, and so the contract grows as time goes by.

 

You sure pick up some weird information.

I'm not a lawyer, but I mix with them at VCAT, where at times a planning case can be decided by a legal definition of a single word.

The State Government tries to prevent any loophole by providing a succinct definition for every key word, but sure enough, a case will come up where a lawyer is arguing his/her case based on something we never dreamed of.

The clause quoted above does seem a bit convoluted, but it may well be that every word was required to remove the tricks of the good old boys.

You could precis it down to "An aircraft os listed with an ASAO if it complies."

With that in mind, when you see the clause, you can see the when what how why etc. Miss any of those and someone will complain somewhere, or even succeed in legally not complying with the spirit of the regulation.

"(1) A Part 103 aircraft is listed with a Part 103 ASAO for the purposes of this regulation if the aircraft is listed with the Part 103 ASAO in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Part 103 Manual of Standards for the purposes of this subregulation."

Perhaps you could post a link to the NTSB report? I cannot see how a falling leaf manoeuvre would allow an aircraft to reverse into the ground. A falling leaf is simply a sequence of consecutive incipient spins. 

 

It was about 25 years ago; look for 152 and 172 also in case I got the model wrong.

The engine was either knocked out in a mid-air or shook out.

......lifting a fat lady off the stage before she can sing........

“Nose dive” sits well with the journo’s terms like “plummets”, “narrowly escaped death” and “The Cessna” (for any aircraft other than an airliner. 

 

Can’t say I’ve ever seen an aeroplane tail dive or wing dive into the ground.

 

Well they can do both. There's an NTSB report where the pilot of a Cessna 150 used the falling leaf method to slow down his aircraft and tail dived into the ground for progressive crumple, and saved both himself and passenger. 

Slides into, and knocks over...........

...Turbo, who identifies as an Houthi, finishes cooking the steaks at a BNS Ball and starts doing the authentic Houthi Hydraulic Tappet dance with....

a rhythm that was..........

...up the subscriptions to cover the costs of the book I’m writing called, “Ir happened at Natfly; the amazing stories that couldn’t be written until now.” High on the list is a chapter about the Captain, seven carafes of Red, and the girls from a dancing troup which Turbo had hired to liven up the technical segments, although.....

There hasn't been any suggestion from anyone that the weight increase will affect existing 600kg or less aircraft and owners in any way. I dont understand why there can be an objection from them.

 

As the operations have slid up the weight and performance scale, the aircraft and flyers which were the reason for the formation of the AUF, the self maintenance, and the simple, local, rules for the flyers have been eroded; some might say already on the way to decimation. I can understand why they would object.

......and the old Captain dreamed on in a fantasy world of his own, a gin bottle on the bedside table with feeble light coming from a candle stuck in the top, and which was about to..........

Sorry guys but I shouldn't have created this poll as whilst I was trying to find out what you wanted so I could give it to you, I didn't realise that Option 2 in the poll would not make the site sustainable. Users would not know about the conversations and posts in 80% of the site i.e. the actual conversations and posts made in all the other sections of the site as these can not be listed in their own blocks, only in the one main block. So to have all discussions and new posts listed we also have to have new items in there as well, just like we have new forum threads in there. Consider each new item in say the Aircraft section, the Tutorials section etc are like new forum threads, a new thread is shown and then any new posts are shown in Whats New...if that makes sense

 

I have had to change it back to the Whats New having everything listed and I don't know of an alternative other than those few people and as mentioned before, create their own Whats New page as previously explained...but then by only showing the forums threads and posts would miss out on all the other discussions and posts made over the other 80% of the site

 

OK, that's not a problem.

Could you please post a How To create a custom What's New page please? I know you've mentioned posting it in the past, but I scrolled through and found a how to, but it must have been for one of the interim versions because it referred to items on a page which were not there.

With a custom What's New, it's possible to have uninterrupted conversations, and then go back to the main indexes and scoll to see what's interesting and new.

That's it! The soul of RF!

That screenshot is ok, I can't see content being pushed off the screen

 

It's virtually all been pushed off; only 1 item left

What I'm seeing is:

Ad

Mapmarker

Tutorial

Testing a camera

Photo

Forum - Oldest member

Photo

Can you give me a screen shot so I can see what you mean as it is displayed ok for me

 

A restored Bell UH1 crashed into the sea off Anna Bay wit the loss of five people.

This was a long distance flight, and could have some important en route Meteorology lessons for us.

One TV report suggested very high wind conditions.

There will be an ATSB report, so we'll be able to get the facts in due course.

Was that the CPL in the Aero Commander who met Mt Disappointment in a hurry? RIP.

 

The only thing I found in the ATSB reports re Mt Disappointment was a collision in 2016, but it was a UAV; Lockheed Martin Stalker.

Sorry Turbs but strongly disagree with your generalised statement.

 

Many CPLs have indeed undergone significant extra training and accumulated considerable experience, including in decision-making. But a number haven’t and we read about the consequences.

 

There are also many PPLs, including a few former RPT captains, who have accumulated a lot of the necessary. I likewise accept there is a probably larger number which hasn’t. 

 

I think the correct marker for Angel Flight is a sufficient level of training and experience, utilised in a suitably equipped aircraft.

 

The licence doesn’t make the pilot.

 

Former RPT Captains will have CPL, or if they let it laps, CPL training completed, commercial type operations completed.

The difficulty with "sufficient level of training and experience, utilised in a suitably equipped aircraft" is that the statement is subjective, like telling a person walking along a cliff edge to "be careful"  Some think they are being careful, but don't know the edge is unstable.

My reason for suggesting CPL is that the pilot is qualified for commercial-type operations under pressure whereas the PPL cuts out at a fairly low level of demonstration of skills, particularly in regard to Met, Nav and P&O, and no demonstration of commercial type pressures.

I would agree that an organisation could come up with a level of extra training of a PPL to handle operations under pressure, and a higher level of Met, Nav, P&O, but you would still have the CPL hanging over your head as the benchmark for safety.

I agree with pmC.

No problem with ads next to the Forum, but currently the content is being pushed off the screen.

For anyone interested in getting involved in the planning process which could be about to happen if the land is sold, here are the planning basics:

Location: 995 Burragorang Rd,

The Oaks is listed as The Oaks Landing Ground.

Council: Wollondilly Shire Council 

Area: 16 Ha (So not enough area for a big developer unless surrounding land is packaged)

Zoning RU1, Primary Production Heritage,

The Oaks airfield significance: local (Pub. 23-2 2011) The Supreme Court of NSW, 10 Feb 2011 restricted the height of ant tower on the approved site to 18 metres.

Heritage Items (if any) listed and described in Schedule 5 of the Wollondilly Local Environment Plan (www.austlii.edu.au › download › legis › nsw › consol_reg › wlep2011368)  .  

Lot 1, DP795174 The Oaks Airfield, 955 Burragorang Road is listed in Schedule 5 as local 1238, but I couldn't find any definition (doesn't mean one doesn't exist). If there isn't a definition, any battle could centre around the planning definition of "airfield"

If you check the going rate for rural land in the district, and greenfield residential, you'll know what the intent is with that price.

(Regarding comments made in a thread in the Articles section - Admin)

It is the story that is interesting irrespective how old the story is...don't you think

 

That's true, but the What's New selection is being cluttered by so much peripheral information that the forum itself is becoming hard to follow and conversations are tailing off.   History will be interesting to some people, photos will be interesting to some people, classified ads will be interesting to some people, map pins will be interesting to some people, and even personal blogs will be interesting to some people, but the forum items are what make this site stand out from others.