turboplanner

So are we going to have more of this Keith, because you should leave it lie, at some point. You have your show and it will go or not go. What we don't need is ongoing sniping , for the sake of aviation and those who sail in her. Nev

A recall a Mercedes advert listing the improvements on the earlier model that the later model had. It was really quite lengthy. The earlier one MUST have been a piece of crap would be one conclusion you could draw.

Very similar to the Google cars.

His story is featured in the air museum in Christchurch; a stunning effort.

I saw it a long time ago, can't remember whether it was just photos, or a part of the wing on display.

Those who do produce something of worth, such as dairy farmers are robbed by the middle man who has a monopoly.

Not quite on that:- RAAus can only discipline for breach of RAAus member obligations and the discipline powers are very limited with the ultimate being removal of membership

- CASA are the only entity with the power to refer to police or prosecute as they are the legislative body with that power under the Act

Motor Racing would be a graveyard, if their administering bodies took the same attitude and left it to the government to manage their sport.

You don't have to hand someone or have him/her thrown in prison; a six months suspension is a BIG punishment among peers; life suspension removes the person from the sport.

It's just a matter of DOING something.

I can only agree with this: in my 53 years in aviation there has always been under-reporting of incidents and non-fatal accidents. It's no different to road accidents where there are high numbers of unreported accidents. It's probable that if all incidents & accidents with road vehicles were 'reported', collated, interpreted and published - there would be a better targeted road safety program. The emphasis on speed and alcohol in isolation just doesn't cut it. In aviation, it's not that anyone has devised a new way to have an accident in 100 years. The common causes are well known. HF is included in the syllabus.CFIs impart 'safety' to students, and to hiring pilots: but you can only 'lead-the-horse-to water'. No CFI is able to identify the pilot likely to have a brain snap. We can, however, probably detect the impetuous, the over-confidants, the anti-authoritarians, and the less cautious: but there is nowhere in the aviation reporting structure, (in student files, review reports or in direct-to-Operations forms), where we can commit these observations to paper. Indeed, if we were to do this, (due FOI), we'd be pilloried from pillar-to-post by the aggrieved or offended pilot - probably have civil action taken against us - and all for what? Most of the extra 'safety' programs being thrown at us will 'fail', (accidents will continue), because human nature has not really changed.

 

I can clearly remember an incident in PNG during 1961, where a twin engine freighter disappeared in the Kokoda Gap area - and has never been found. The accident reports mentioned terms such as 'over-confident, impetuous, and low experience' - but if senior and supervising pilots and staff thought this - why didn't they do anything? The answer is - there isn't any quantitative criteria to identify these human traits, and the majority of senior pilots/instructors would not claim to hold any real skills in this field. I don't think that much has changed. There have been plenty of fatal accidents in this vicinity since then.

 

happy days,

Staying away from flying, in one multiple road fatality a group of us looked at a group of youths may have been drinking and may have been skylarking, but in any case the driver screwed up and slid off the road, hit a safety barrier, rolled, and they were crushed against trees.

Looking forward, we could have recommended more behavioural control of the driver.

We could have reommended a better car suspension design.

We could have reommended removal of trees.

But what we found was that the safety fence design did not have an anti-ramp device fitted; the car slid up the end diagonal which imparted a rotational force, which flipped the car into the trees.

By ensuring anti-ramp devices were fitted, we could prevent that exact same multi-fataility from happening again, regardless of the behaviour of the driver, end of story.

That's an extreme example, but it illustrates there are some measures you can take which remove the risk.

......in some areas where farmers haven't changed to match the market.

In others they are driving Totota Safaris.

Same as it has always been.

Except that most of those movements are happening inside a short timeframe, not over the whole day.Personally, I think that the radio culture is over done in RAA. Meaning that it seems that a lot of people are taught to broadcast everything they do, rather than what is necessary for safety. The usual safety type concept of "if a little bit is good, then more must be better".

Soon pilots will be broadcasting when they are leaving the house to go to the airfield, along with every turn on the way.

We've just had a good example of people saying too much at Narromine.

There are standard phrases and locations, forged in blood from the WW2 days, which optimise the communication/clear air mix, and they are the ones that should be learnt.

What amuses me is the number of people who have to use YMMZ, YBSO instead of typing the towns (away from flight planning documents), but insist on "What's the traffic like mate?" in the air.

Yen, what was the concern of the ELAAA guy? If you were over 500 ft agl and under 200 kts you are totally legal I would have thought.

There should have been a warning from the last piece of U500 news where the pilot killed someone, and was charged with manslaughter.

Each time I attend a Fly-In it's difficult to find a gap in which to make even the minimum radio calls. Worse, my first two calls were cut over by other aircraft, so I presumed nobody heard me. After that, due to radio traffic and workload, there was no opportunity to repeat those calls. As a result, I elected to make a "turning final" call to ensure other aircraft actually knew I was there. That's the worst time to be distracted from the task at hand and as a result my approach was not pretty.

NO ... because I don't have time, I am supposed to be finishing reports and invoicing before we go on a holiday to Sth Oz tomorrow and if Shirley catches me on this forum I am dead meat . LOL.

I don't think that is correct Tubz. Neither is it fair or equitable to not give ALL members 21 days notice of any resolution especially if it involves significant issues and I think you will find the 'model rules' require a company to give all members 21 days notice of a resolution no matter what the individual constitutions state ... not to mention Corporations law.You should not read clause 27 in isolation of clause 21.

However if you're suggesting that members will need 21 days to make their mind up I would suggest a cattle prod or two.

Clauses 27 and 21 are not co-dependent, Clause 27 clearly shows the pathway.

You said not to mention Corporations law, but can you point to something which would overturn Claus 27 in this Constitution.

Talk about thread drift ... LOLI assume you didn't read the following ... my underlining ...

 

21 Notice of general meetings

 

21.1 Notice of a general meeting must be given to:

 

(a) each Member entitled to vote at the meeting, and

 

(b) each Director.

 

21.2 Notice of a general meeting must be provided at least twenty-one (21) days before the meeting.

 

21.3 Notice of a general meeting must include:

 

(a) the place, date and time for the meeting (and if the meeting is to be held in two or more places, the technology that will be used to facilitate this),

 

(b) the general nature of the meeting’s business,

 

© if applicable, any resolution that is to be proposed and the words of the proposed resolution, and

 

(d) a statement that Members have the right to appoint a proxy.

The clause I quoted clearly points out how a request, which is not in time for the 21 day Notice point, is to be handled.

The applicable resolutions sent out with the Notice of Meeting would be those in hand at the Notice send out.

As someone mentioned earlier, you have to get a Notice of a Meeting to know there's one on, and you may well decide to submit a resolution in response to something in the Notice.

You can do this via clause 27 right up to the meeting to the end point where the Company can no longer reasonably deliver the resolution(s) to all members prior to the meeting.

You were grounded?

David, I don't think there's a problem with the constitution in this case; I've put a detailed answer to you in this thread: Change is in the air

Yes,And the 21 days notice of a resolution is a definite requirement of the new constitution and the Corporations Law AFAIK. The fact that falls on a weekend means the Board cannot provide the required notice to members unless received on a business day in time to get the resolution to members. Its is unfortunate the new constitution is sloppy in this area, so it needs to be fixed.

"27 Members’ resolutions and statements

"27.1 Where the Company has called for resolutions, any current Member with voting rights may give: (a) written notice to the Company of a resolution they propose to move at the general meeting (Members’ resolution), and/or (b) a written request to the Company that the Company must make available to its Members a statement about a proposed resolution or any other matter that may properly be considered at a general meeting (Members’ statement).

"27.2 A notice of a Members’ resolution must set out the wording of the proposed resolution and be signed by the Members proposing the resolution.

"27.3 A request to distribute a Members’ statement must be given to the Company at least seven (7) days prior to a general meeting and set out the statement to be distributed and be signed by the Members making the request.

27.4 Separate copies of a document setting out the notice or request may be signed by Members if the wording is the same in each copy.

"27.5 If the Company has been given notice of a Members’ resolution under Clause 27.1(a), the resolution must be considered at the general meeting for which the resolution was called.

27.6 This Clause does not limit the right that a Member has to propose a resolution at a general meeting under the Corporations Act.

"28 Company must give notice of proposed resolution or distribute statement

"28.1 If the Company has been given a notice or request under Clause 27: (a) in time to give notice of a proposed Members’ resolution or a copy of the Members’ statement to Members with a notice of meeting, it must do so at the Company’s cost, or (b) too late to give notice of a proposed Members’ resolution or a copy of the Members’ statement to Members with a notice of meeting, then the Members who proposed the resolution or made the request must pay the expenses reasonably incurred by the Company in giving Members notice of the proposed Members’ resolution or a copy of the Members’ statement. However, at a general meeting, the Members may pass a resolution that the Company will pay these expenses." Source: Constitution of Recreational Aviation Australia Limited.

(a)

In the Meeting Notice, did the Company call for resolutions in accordance with Clause 27?

If so, then 27.1, 27.2, 27.3, 27.4, 27.5, 27.6, 28, 28.1 apply

If the Company did not call for resolutions, then the member is covered by 27.6 which notes that Clause 27 does not limit the right that a Member has to propose a resolution at a general meeting under the Corporations Act.

There are no 21 day limits mentioned here, just 7 days

(b)

If it isn't practical for the Company to include the resolution details with8ing the 21 day time limit for announcing the meeting then 28.1 (b) kicks in; the resolution is distributed before the meeting.

"28 Company must give notice of proposed resolution or distribute statement

"28.1 If the Company has been given a notice or request under Clause 27:

(a) in time to give notice of a proposed Members’ resolution or a copy of the Members’ statement to Members with a notice of meeting, it must do so at the Company’s cost, or

(b) too late to give notice of a proposed Members’ resolution or a copy of the Members’ statement to Members with a notice of meeting, then the Members who proposed the resolution or made the request must pay the expenses reasonably incurred by the Company in giving Members notice of the proposed Members’ resolution or a copy of the Members’ statement. However, at a general meeting, the Members may pass a resolution that the Company will pay these expenses."

I don't see any room in that to refuse to accept a Member's written Notice.

Yenn,Again with respect, the constitution is NOT being ignored by the Board. The Board believe they have acted in good faith on behalf of all members, read their response to Bull.

Hi TurboYou have said clearly what I was alluding to if radio communication is short,sharp,precise and to the point it usually is quite easy to fill in the blanks.

 

I guess I should have been more proactive and spoken directly to the incomming twin and dissused his intentions so everyone in circuit was aware of him but it was hard to get a break in transmissions, with the extra radio chatter possability creating even more confusion and at the time one thinks that perhaps it is only me who is having this problem

IF you use radio badly enough, you can with a bit of effort, make it useless. How often do people check it before flight with another station? Having said that couldn't a section be available specifically for noradio aircraft or LP that like grass and don't need much strip length? Nev

CASA is NOT administering "safety". The biggest risk I take in flying is forced on me by CASA for no benefit to anybody else.It has been suggested to me that mishaps to people like me are actually of benefit to CASA. Their funding depends on the politicians being continually reminded by mishaps.

Personally, I don't believe that there is any malevolent faction in CASA. They are just bureaucrats doing whatever they think will ingratiate them with those who provide their funding.

Hi, I was that friend,the communication was very confusing ,you hear the radio calls from the whole area and regularly it gets all mixed up and you can't hear anything.Maybe we should get a designated CTAF only for Narromine when the show is on, starting from 10 mile out.

I agree with jetjr,one incident on 400 landings is not bad,but only trying to improve the system.

 

I really enjoyed the fly in,it was great.

While Narromine was a great result, and not deserving of any criticism, it compares to the 644 movements per day, 365 days of the year at Moorabbin.

Your experience, along with radios, even on relatively new aircraft, which are not transmitting correctly pose a new experience for the country flyer in a busy environment.

That's when making only the correct transmission, using the correct phrases and waiting for a clear spot before you transmit makes it so much easier for everyone.

Even if someone's radio is on the way out and you can only identify syllables, if he's using the correct phrase in the correct place, you'll know where he is and what his intentions are, and that reduces your workload and stress level.

I reckon CASA should be given what they pay for and no more. To use member's money to appease CASA is a backdoor taxation.So I say to charge them for information at whatever it really costs to provide it and say "NO" to freebies.

The first part might seem like a novel idea to some, and that's professional negotiation.

Even from a couple of comments made this morning, some people have no idea what CASA's obligations are, and what aviators, through their organisations, responsibilities are, but they are laid down in documentation.

If CASA go into a meeting and say "you have to do xyz" and you do it, and it costs your organisation $100,000 per year, but there's no statutory obligation to do it, then what an idiot are you for not knowing your obligations and not holding CASA to theirs.

The second part is digital.

If you are administering safely, you will be producing data daily and automatically, and that data can be supplied live to CASA at virtually no cost.

Also, there are not enough members or potential members in this country to have more than one coheasive,effective and financial association under which to fly and even that entity will struggle due to numbers.

CASA losts Sport Aircraft categories as:

Ultralight & weight shift microlights

Gliders

Gyroplanes/gyrogliders

Hang gliders, paragliders, weight shift microlight

Model aircraft

Parachuting

Warbirds

Amateur built and experimental aircraft

Recreational ballooning

While there appears to be some duplication in that list, I haven't looked to see if there are mistakes, or there are multiple family categories.

In any of those groups there could be multiple Associations if that's what people wanted.

There is nothing to stop anyone deciding they have a better way of managing things and applying to CASA.

Many members of the public think Motor Racing is administered in Australia by CAMS, but it is a relatively minor player.

At one stage I was given the task of researching the structure of motor racing in Australia, and found something like twelve National Bodies

In one case, one of the national bodies had about a hundred Associations they were co-ordinating.

********

You do know that's it's raining, but you don't know how much, so you phone your cousin (in our area it could also be your son, to find out the level of the creek.)

If the creek level is up to the big rock, you know there's a problem, but unless the lake downstream is full there's no problem in the lower back paddock.

You get the binoculars out to check the lake leve; you can't see the lake, but....

If the ducks have gone, you know it's too late, the lower back paddock is flooded and the sheep will be floating half way to Borambil.

You go back to bed.