turboplanner

Technically you can......

Technically you have been trained for Rate 1 turns before solo.

So never take off? You can avoid the low level flight after takeoff by not taking off but once you have taken off and got up to altitude you WILL be forced to do some more low level flight eventually.Just saying don't fly low is simplistic and totally misses the point.

This is a forum; there's not enough time to expand on training that works.

If you do take off, yes you will have a short period of low level flight on the way up and a short period on landing, but in those two cases you will, or ought to have been trained to be flying straight ahead with the wings level, so there will be none of the issues being discussed in earlier posts.

We share the same wind, and other effects, Oscar no matter what plane we fly. A plane is a plane is a plane. None run on rails.. All are subject to the vagaries of the wind. ALL pilots must cope when the situation arises. Not ALL will be recoverable. Good training gives a fighting chance. Nev

Well the RAA specifics probably don’t have anything to do with but at the same time they might have everything to do with it.The dangers of LL have similar results for a RAA or ga pilot and if (obviously I don’t know about this particular crash so am speaking generally) it is something that can kill experienced pilots then I think us recreational pilots should be even more aware of it. If talking about it causes one more person to do a little low level instructed flying then I am all for talking about it in every thread.

It was crashed in 1996 and rebuilt and put back on the register in the early 2000s, so if there was a damaged control that escaped replacement through all the rebuild inspections, it took 15 or so years to manifest itself ...

I'm certainly not raising this as a central issue.

There's quite a bit of time and money tied up right there....

I disagree with your first sentence here. Your second sentence is more on the money, yes if the wind is gusting ect that can and will change your airspeed BUT doing a nice balanced turn in a stable wind won’t have a different result going upwind or downwind. The only difference is in your ground speed.Flying downwind in no way whatsoever affects your stall speed, bank angle does increase stall speed but exceeding 30degrees doesn’t magically induce a stall.

This pilot had 9000 hours, 8000 of them with the added weight and drag of floats. At those hours, most pilots have got past doing beat ups, pulling tight turns, and have seen every wind there is. That's not to say they can't have a momentary lapse, but given that this airframe did crop dusting for years, condition of its components after its fatal crash in that life looked like it was ready for the tip, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a control item was fractured.

I was referring to the outer part of the 4500 ft step.It runs from Mt Pleasant through Callington etc and goes all the way to Mannum on the river.At Mount Pleasant, the step could be raised to 6500 on the outer part with no effect on West Beach traffic. The airspace is unused right now and has been since DC4's and probably not even then.

But it would enable VFR planes at Mount Pleasant to have enough height to glide to a safe landing spot in the event of engine failure.

 

This was put into a submission to RAPAC ( the airspace advisory group) with so far no written reply. I did hear that it was rejected for vague reasons. My guess is that they were not going to move Important Lines on Official Maps for the likes of no-account people like me. And reducing controlled airspace would impact on their budget arguments. Safety? Don't be silly. Who cares about safety?

Philosophy classes and politics are over on the other forum.

With the greatest respect turbo ... you've clearly not spent much time in the NT have you?SM Greg Cavanagh is well known, in fact Cavanagh St in central Dwn is apparently part of his family name, such uninterrupted longevity they have up there. I'm astounded to see he's still an SM, you'd have thought he'd have made it to circuit judge at least ... In my experience he had to be one of the driest and least prone to general worldliness that I have ever come across - no disrespect intended to the judiciary in general. Considering the relative 'wildness' of the NT it astounded me, and others, just how isolated from reality the Territory Courts proved to be, one would think they might be more down-to-earth than in other places, but in my experience the opposite was the case.

 

The consequence of which is the complete disregard often shown by everyone, including supposedly responsible helicopter pilots, for the police (telling them porkies after a fatality, assuming they'd get away with it) and the judiciary. People in the East think it's bad in Townsville with adolescent indigenous as young as seven running around drunk, drugged and armed all night, blatantly stealing from houses, stealing cars, some with 160 offences before they reach teen years, but you should see the shadier spots of Darwin, and then wonder why places like the Don Dale detention centre became what they did without particular notice being paid by anyone up to and including the Ministers responsible.

And what did we get out of the report that wasn't already obvious?I'm certain there are times an inquest is of great importance, but it seems that we spend a lot of Joe Public's money to have someone point out the obvious and at times to proportion blame to anyone but the those actually responsible.

It's certainly possible, that on occasion they can reveal useful information, but that one was a waste of public funds. It was actually the best possible outcome, one person screwed up and only that person payed the price. Stop throwing good money after bad.I have made a point of chasing up various coroner's reports for quite a few incidents (some aircraft, some automotive), and I would have to say that for the most part they are an incredible waste of resources for what little and occasionally useful information they reveal.

Although, that one was probably the least biased one that I have read, quite a few of them just seem to be a "witch pursuit thingy" (SouthPark reference), where they choose who to blame rather than detemine actual cause.

So you can see that even a Coroners report can show administrators where the weaknesses are in knowledge and training, how to improve standards and supervision, and where to focus compliance and enforcement.

Yet , I suspect that if he had done the same thing at 1000' in the middle of nowhere (obeyed the rules, but ignored the laws of physics), the result would have been the same.

He bought the thing, probably because his friend was able to demonstrate a faster aircraft and tighter turns.

He was a Plant Operator - Excavator, in the earthmoving business.

Where was the administrative responsibilty for these two people, where was the instructor to take this person up to a safe altitude and train him on the new wing?

By flying below 500 feet the police could have charged him with culpable negligence if he had killed a passenger, and his estate still could be sued if his death has disadvantaged someone.

Read it all. All that for an Ultralight crash? Sounds like they're trying to convict a man who seemed perfectly legal & sane to me. He messed up the wing, fixed it. End of story.I knew you Aussies were burdened with excessive rules & regulations but that long winded pile of horseshit by attorneys & bureaucrats who don't know **** from beans about ultralights or aviation but looking to prosecute somebody in general..... was rediculous.

 

If the guy is guilty of anything it's the fact that he should've given the victim more training with the 912. And why all the delving into the victims personal life history which had nothing whatsoever to do with the crash?

Oh, thanks to Turbs's analysis and information, the maths is pretty simple.Going by this forum, there are about 8,995 RAA members who are sufficiently satisfied with how RAA is travelling, that they do not choose to engage in debate about it. (I am not one, I am not a current member of RAA) There appears to be about five - assuming all are RAA members - dissatisfied and querulous.

I'd suggest many of those 8,995 people have not been made aware that they have a responsibility to take a close look at how their future is being managed.

Another way to view it is that we have what the majority of those who got off their behinds and cast their vote, voted for. Until voting in RAA elections becomes compulsory that's how the views of the RAA electorate will be reflected. Whether the results of that election reflect the view of the majority of members won't ever be settled to every ones satisfaction, however, it is the view of the majority of those that voted. That's a simple form of democracy. If you don't like the result, either stand for election or rally enough support to put forward candidates that reflect your views.There is another embryo organisation being set up that claims it will do better than the RAA. So wouldn't it make sense for those who take the time and effort to point out here the shortcomings of the RAA, if they used some of that time and effort to give some concrete support to the fledgling organisation to help get it up and running?

It's not often we find a Coroner's report, but I was doing some searching and found this one:

PARTIES: –––––

What strikes me about this thread is the ease with which we have given away our property rights. Who does the darn plane belong to anyway?Imagine this applied to your household... you may be denied the use of your bathroom unless the bath manufacturer agreed to your cleaning schedule.

I say do what you want and don't tell.

Ok , well as you say 8000 members , and a deficit with our educated well paid executive team we have now,,is a bit different to over 10 000 members and a 2+ million dollar bank account with the old raggetty self serving mismanagement you say where too dumb to run the show ah,,,,,

You might be correct, but you have to count the trees first to decide if you have a forest, or putting it another way, if the basic numbers are not there, or not correct, it would be easy to go off at a tangent. I'm not saying what you're talking about shouldn't be debated, but this is the first I've seen of any real discussions based on published evidence, which is either there, or missing, or either correct or wrong. Maybe you can start a separate thread on it, but if we get too far away from those raw annual report figures, the obfuscaters will have won again.

So that would be a YES....The problem is that the SMS, and the associated crap is of absolutely no benefit to anyone (except those it keeps employed) that doesn't hold an AOC.

Private pilots in the GA system have no SMS and are not required to, just like private motorists. Our hobby , is not a "sport" like racing, I could maybe see the point if we were form a Drifter air racing club, or competitive aerobatics of some kind, but until we do, we are the same as Joe Bloggs with his Commodore.

 

Why people have to make stuff more complicated than it is, annoys me. I was going to say, it's beyond me, but I know why they do it, and it's only self serving.

Private Motorists and Private/Commercial Pilots, including Joe Bloggs, the Commodore Driver are administered by State and/or Federal Government Departments, and those Government Departments look after risk management.

RA pilots are not permitted to operate under those departments; they are permitted to take advantage of some exceptions to that system, provided they operate under Self Administering Bodies. This is whether they race or just hand around doing circuits. The Self Administering Bodies, as their name implies are responsible for the safety and risk management of all their operations. If someone wants to call it crap, rather than making an effort to comply, the Self Administering Body may find it easier just to shed them.

"Explanatory Notes".. Hmmmmmmmm? Normally when one needs to get a view across every point must be covered, not a stone left unturned. A believable story.Could be called, "Fibbing by way of exaggeration".

KP

Certainly the Annual Report figures are no clearer than they were in 2010, and that's not acceptable to a Member organisation, and I would suggest the directors do them again so Members can draw their own conclusions. But its also not acceptable just to egg things on without some facts.

Someone has to pay to manage all those "management systems" (to keep us safe, compliant and trained), and those managers will have to have assistants.

Based on the last major vote + proxies, members voted for a structure to pay people to do those jobs.

When the big one eventually occurs, and there are reactions such as a demand for an SMS of bigger capacity, and supervision of operations pay with a big P is going to be the operative word.

If the members decided to handle it the same way as the Sporting Shooters Association and convert to an Incorporated Association, with volunteers and some admin employees, then those two operations would be handled by volunteers at vastly less cost.

It's just a matter of the structures; both work.

Yep, could never understand that either, surely the govt should be running at a cost neutral situation, any surplus should be applied to ongoing programs to benefit the populace? After all, I, obviously mistakenly, thought that governments were there to look after the country and its people, not to run deficits, support the rest of the world and set up financial feeding troughs for elected members, both state and federal. I must be naive to think that..charity begins at home, look after your people first and live within your means...sorry...just some rambling from a disillusioned voter and member of the masses.