turboplanner

Yes, the massive investment in software a few years ago should be producing huge savings now.

You can see from the posts on this forum that there’s virtually no chance of standard transmissions under the present circumstances.

If it can be condensed down to four pages it can be loaded on to the web site so that all pilots can print it off.

Just for the information of the two of you; I couldn’t care less if you get yourselves dragged into Court.i’m Not a lawyer; Kaz is, and as she has warned repeatedly, it’s IAN,s house that is put at risk when you do it.

All of this was previously discussed and documented in the original thread so why should a number of comments voicing opinions of those who were not there have any bearing on this. Everyone had an opinion about Pell & documented it on social media & his conviction was the worst kept secret in recent memory.

No it doesn’t. None of us are associated with the case and nothing anyone says here is prejudicial to any outcome. We are an uninformed group discussing a public event. 

You don't have to be associated with the case; already some statements have strayed very close to triggering explosive detail which would have an effect on the case; a pilot discussing the actions of another pilot or the status of a runway is well above uninformed status; most events in which someone sues someone else are public events.

This is getting very close to crossing the line.

You might remember, or care, that Kaz has had to wade in three times from my memory to protect Ian when similar comments have occurred.

 There's nothing new in what I've written. and it should apply to all ALA's.  Maybe Ferris wheels  Trees  etc will not be in splays, and that won't be a bad thing. Nev

This discussion of details needs to stop because of the current court cases in progress. 

(a) The plaintiffs have to prove that there was a duty of care, and it was breached, as they always have since Donoghue V Stevenson became the precedent in 1932, so there must be some very old members if they want to gripe about the "good old days".

(b) The cases are about to be heard, so it would be very unwise to speculate about possible causes or details of the incident.

This is about the average time it takes for lawyers to investigate all the details, decide if there is to be a claim, get the paperwork done, and for the court process to start. Normally they would go after all the people who had a duty of care at the airfield, so it wouldn't necessarily be just the Council.

Interesting claim by the pilot against the airfield.

Actually, Admin didn't say this - they simply posted it for our information.

 

This CAAP has got to constitute 37 pages of the most contradictory 'advice' one will ever read.  I ask you - 37 pages to tell us how to suck eggs?   The 'need' for this publication lies solely with the regulators meddling with frequencies for lower airspace when the industry was managing it.

One that comes to mind was a certain high volume training operation. One weekend four female students decided to hit the highlights of Sydney.

They landed the 172 in a paddock which happened to be owned by a pilot, and he quickly arrived at the scene to see if he could help. The women said they were fine; they'd just dropped in to find out where they were and could he tell them which way Sydney was. They had no maps, no gps....just winging it.  "You're not going anywhere" the farmer said "apart from all the regulations you've broken, you've just driven through one of my fences and wrapped half of it around the landing gear!" This conversation took considerably longer than that due to language difficulties, and the women tune on him, started up and flew off.

That doesn't really address the more likely scenario of having a Dash 8 stuck in your ear because they missed part of your transmission BECAUSE you were using the "correct" version, which is actually more likely than the reverse.

Many types of public address systems use a "prompt" to get your attention before relevant information is given.

A "ding dong" noise or other sound/voice ("attention shoppers...", "This is your pilot speaking, ...")

 

It is NOT important what it is as long as you can then "tune in" to what is being said, to hear the core message after this prompt.

 

For me when flying it is the word "traffic" at the start of a radio call which gives me the prompt to listen to the call.

 

The next word is the "location". This determines whether I need to keep listening or not.

 

If not, I can tune back out and do whatever it was I was doing before hand.

 

If the word "location" becomes the prompt, it is a pain because half the time I miss it, and have to listen intently to the end, to hear the location again.

 

Then find out the "location" was a strip 50 miles away and I listened to all that for nothing.

 

So..... "traffic" then " location", in that order, is just pure common sense...... irrespective of the regulation.

 

And where do regulations come from? God? Some almighty being? Satan? The alcoholic that lives on the corner? Nanna's dog?

 

No people, they come from HUMANS.  And humans are often wrong.....

 

I think the "All Stations Roma" worked much better, and catered for the "prompt", but it was changed to "Roma traffic",  perhaps without enough objection from the pilot community.

 

The point though, is once it changed, regardless of what we think, and regardless of whether we have a better idea, if we depart from standard phrases there will be other pilots who may not clearly hear our transmissions due to static or heavy traffic and we could finish up with a Dash 8 stuck in our ear.

 

Also, once the deviation starts, the comments like "It doesn't matter what you say as long as people understand" start, and before you know it we have the crap radio regime we have today where there's not enough time to decode "G'day Mate, I'm not familiar with what happens here, can you help me" or the classic one I had to contend with a few years ago "I'm just flying to the right of the airfield" from a pilot who knew which direction he was coming from even if we didn't.

I think format becomes important in poor reception conditions. If you know what information is supposed to be stated your brain gets pretty good at hearing through the static. If you have no idea of what was supposed to be said your brain doesn’t know what the context was to try and make sense of the sounds. 

Of course that can be a bad thing because your brain is really good at converting something into something else that it is expecting.  But often it’s enough to understand it provided you know what it should be. 

Might just point out that I abide by the book, I just believe, in common with a lot of CASA stuff, that it could be better!

labor aren't too keen to spend money on public transport

I'm not a Labor voter, but Victorian Labor have bought more trains year after year than any other government in Victoria's history.

The problem with Avalon is it's built out in the country where there's no requirement for public transport other than the few connectors for an airport about half the size of Coolangatta, and it's built on a windy plain, and it's developer would probably prefer to cover it in buildings like Essendon rather than trees.

Sorry about your day Red, it must have been a nightmare.

As Facthunter said, they don't like advice from out of the ranks. It was ever so... once on a sailing ship fleet, a bit lost, a sailor from the ranks dared to say that he calculated they would be wrecked on the Scilly Isles if they didn't alter course. Well he was immediately hung, but he only lost a few hours because the rest all drowned when they were  wrecked on the Scilly Isles.

I think we do a bit better now, but those forces still operate.

At the time the brisbane west wellcamp name did seem like CASA thought the whole thing was a bit of a laugh. It's a shame that so many people took it so seriously.

Oh Turbo,. . .I have looked at it Longingly on Goggly Earth. . so sad. . .that place contains some wonderful memories for me.   I doubt of CASA would allow me a licence, since DCA said at the time, that my vision was so bad ?) that I should not be allowed to engage in international navigation, as I had no useful sight in my left eye. . .odd that they allowed me a GA PPL,. with which I flew to PNG and Indonesia. . . and that I got a commercial in the UK later, and flew cargo, ferry and Air taxi for money for quite long time. .. but that aside, I'm getting on a bit now mate, 68.5. . .so If I ever get the chance to visit again, I'd need some young buck in a Stol to do that for me. . .  a Dornier 17 would be nice. . . ( ! )   They used to use one of those from Berwick for towing banners, with such messages as. . 'BUY A FROZEN MARS BAR'  etc. . .lovely machine ( 235 HP I think ) but they wouldn't let me near the thing after I bent Keith Hatfields DH82A  ( VH-TIG )! Although it wasn't really damaged, I just nosed it into a very shalllow ditch in a crosswind whilst taxying . . .!  Hit the switches and stopped the prop first though. . .

Good to see someone is teaching the results written in blood after WW2 Phil.

BTW, if you could get hold of a STOL you could probably still get in and out of the paddock which remains at Berwick. Monash Uni failed on the site, and half of it it still grassland.

Not sure the comparison of the skills of a taxi driver and the ordinary driver being totally relevant. The fact is the CPL is a much higher demonstrated level of skill and knowledge, but even that won't get you a job anywhere till you have logged more hours and experience on suitable aircraft. Night VMC is also a concept with issues. It's harder to see if you are going Ito become in IMC  PIFR is better. but recency is a factor.

  Even shows like air ambulance etc have had issues with pilot fatigue related incidents in the past and   a lot of their work is single pilot in BAD weather. I've done a few "searches"  for missing planes, people etc  and you do break a few rules of commonsense if not at law ie. fly low near  sea surface and cliffs etc. the job in that instance is under a pressure that's part of it to make it effective.. You have to get close to be effective.

 

  Inherently an angel flight is a" normal" flight just like what Pilots can do privately if they wish. EXCEPT there  is no doubt some pilots will go when they wouldn't go privately, considering the "urgency" to merit it. This is probably misplaced as it's non urgent transport not medically required but more convenient for people to use to avoid a more onerous road trip. They feel they are providing a service, (which they are) but it's nature is not such as to justify significant  extra risks. Nev

Turbo said, "There is nothing to stop CPLs volunteering their service for the same aircraft for these flights."

There's possibly an economic cost to the CPL. Don't they have a maximum limit on the number of hours they can fly in, say, a month? If so, would the hours involved in a volunteer flight reduce the number of hours the CPL had to earn a living? 

I would not try to save stupid people from themselves- the alternative is to legislate for the lowest common denominator which in CASA terms is to ban people flying in aircraft.

Flying in a private aircraft has always been associated with higher risk than RPT .... and the populace at large knows this. A large placard on the side of the aircraft along the lines of " All who proceed to fly in this aircraft risk death" may stop some people but then who believes everything they read?

In this case the operation expectation fits the CPL category but has been allowed to occur in the PPL category; that's the issue.

How the F**k do you get "double standard" out of that?????.....that is exactly the difference. Commercial = for money/reward, Private = not for money/reward.

If I drive a taxi and take a neighbour to the doctor, I need a taxi licence, if I pick them up in my private car I need nothing more than a driver's licence. Not complicated.

 

It's not broken, leave it alone. Sometimes bad decisions are made by pilots whether they have a CPL or not.

 

In a newspaper article I read the other day on interviewee summed it up when they said something along the lines that they felt that CASA was insulting in that they felt CASA thought that they were too stupid to understand the risks in using Angel Flight.

 

I think they were right.

So what CASA is trying to do here is legislating against stupity which has never worked.