turboplanner

No, we didn't agree on anything. I said there was nothing there in my statement to John.

Both Oscar and Jetjr have referred to the post by kgwilson this morning which has some reference to the magic 40, and also refers to 1547 Jabs sold in total.

You'll note it is alleged the 40 figure came from RAA, and the 12 figure was after some study by Jabiru, i.e. 12 for the year 2014

For the other years, information out there in the public arena is available from the RAA magazine, ATSB and any published reports in Australia and overseas

Obviously all those figures are available to CASA as well.

So if you really want to know total figures you can research them yourself. You can't get figures for incidents reported to CASA of course and you can't get unreported failures, but you can get a lot more accuracy than people have been posting about.

Whether the numbers are of any relevance to the instrument is another matter.

Berryman v Joslyn; Wentworth Shire Council v Joslyn [2004] NSWCA (23 April 2004) - I haven't read this case tonight, but from memory this Responsible Authority had to pay out without having any prior warning at all, and it seems to me that CASA could find itself in the same position, so may not have the luxury of time to wait for significant numbers to build.

If you really want to do some good and move things forward, I'd suggest a study of the new engine might be worthwhile, and it may be different enough in design to warrant being free of the instrument.

So Turbs, it would appear that your very long answer to to the simple question in #681: Do you have "inside " information? is No. That makes the second question: would you care to share? irrelevant. All the rest is noise. It took a while to get there but we made it.Note to Oscar: Our seconds can sleep in.

Why don't you try to do something constructive instead of continually sniping.

Wrong about what Turbs?You said:

 

(bolding is added by me)

 

I asked you, because it seemed that you might have inside information that would be of benefit to your fellow aviators:

 

Your response:

 

You either misread my question or attempted to divert attention away from your earlier post by iimplicating Facthunter.

 

Others asked;

 

Your reply appears to reinforce the expectation that you do have inside information but for whatever reason want to keep it to yourself.

 

Jet asked again:

 

And the best you come up with is to say I am "wrong again".

 

Wrong to ask you to share? why would that be wrong?

 

Wrong to read into your post #680 that you might have data not known to others here? Well that was the reason for post #681 asking if you did have such information of if you were, as many here have done before you, simply speculating that CASA was holding back. But you chose to take your usual route of deflection and distraction rather than answer the question.

 

Wrong to think that you might put the promotion of the interests of recreational aviation above the promotion of your sense of self importance? Well, perhaps I was overly hopeful there.

 

Wrong to believe you have anything useful, informative or truthful to add to this discussion? Yes I accept that I was wrong.

 

Wrong to invest any time is seeking clarification from you? Yes I was wrong again.

 

Wrong to think that you might perhaps take the opportunity to restore your crumbling credibility here? Guilty as charged.

 

And you still refuse to answer the thrust of the initial question: Do you know something we don't about the data CASA has?

 

You go and testify under oath mate. We are all waiting with bated breath!

It is a known fact that the manufacturers of Jabiru Aircraft in Australia have already consulted Shine Lawyers for their expert opinion regarding this matter, & it is now considered that if Shine Lawyers were to take on a class action on a NO WIN NO FEE basis on behalf of all effected organisations & owners that have been subjected to this KANGAROO COURT by CASA, then the COURT would in all probability compell CASA to produce their evidence in support of these draconian directives that were actioned late last year.

That's right John, that would be the place where CASA would lay their evidence on the table, but be careful what you wish for because the dribble which has be stated on here over and over and over again is not likely to be what is tabled.

The sentence was not bolded, as you have bolded it, it was not cryptic, there were no implied secrets.

The information others have been using on this thread to clobber CASA with has been out of date almost since the instrument came into effect, and if it came to court CASA would be obligated to circulate its information. So the sentence was reasonable and correct.

In your post #681 you made the inflammatory inventions - all your work - You were wrong.

I was not implicating Facthunter in anything; he was responding to your suggestions as he had every right to do.

I told you to stop speculating, not him, and once again, rather bemused, I told you my post #670 was just a simple sentence.

Frank Marriott said in #674

Should the matter end up in court (which must be likely) some of the overt critics may well get an "invitation " for a bit of he said, I said , to explain their evidence for making public statements and involvement with CASA. Interesting times. True identities, when not already know, are not difficult to obtain if needed. Only time will tell.

If you're referring to me Frank, I'd be happy to accept an invitation to provide under oath, should the matter end up in court, details of any and all dealings I've had with CASA.

In answer to your question "Wrong about what Turbs?"

In post #706 you said:

Well Turbs, how unlike you to offer diversion, misdirection and obsfuscation! You've been asked by not only me but by others here to do more than coyly hint at what you know but you continue to play the primary school game of "I know a secret and you don't" . Hiding your lack of credibility behind weasel words, threats and attempts to intimidate. How sad that you put your ego ahead of the welfare of your fellow aviators. But why did we expect anything different?

........his seeing eye dog who was draped over the rudder pedals (avref, rare these days) at his feet, and who ha just........

Well Turbs, how unlike you to offer diversion, misdirection and obsfuscation! You've been asked by not only me but by others here to do more than coyly hint at what you know but you continue to play the primary school game of "I know a secret and you don't" . Hiding your lack of credibility behind weasel words, threats and attempts to intimidate. How sad that you put your ego ahead of the welfare of your fellow aviators. But why did we expect anything different?Stew in my own juice? Good one smeagol!

TP, a number of people have asked you to offer some evidence of your pro CASA stance and you wont even answer yes or noWhy would anyone call you to provide anything under oath?

Surely for the sake of the innocent children in danger you should present what you know, you might hold the key to the whole problem??

..............had been sideswiped by Hatso's Jab which had strayed into CTA with Hatso asleep at the controls, a straw hat down over his eyes, a hawaiian shirt, a martini banalnce on top of the instrument panel and lipstick all.................

Should the matter end up in court (which must be likely) some of the overt critics may well get an "invitation " for a bit of he said, I said , to explain their evidence for making public statements and involvement with CASA. Interesting times.True identies, when not already know, are not difficult to obtain if needed.

Only time will tell.

Gandalph went off on his own tangent in post #681 so he can stew in his own juice.

Turbs, that sounds like you know something. It appears from your post that you have information about data that CASA holds that either the RAA doesn't have or isn't disclosing. Would you care to share? Or are you simply speculating?

That's right John, that would be the place where CASA would lay their evidence on the table, but be careful what you wish for because the dribble which has be stated on here over and over and over again is not likely to be what is tabled.

..........smirk, because she had convinced Madge to show her an advance copy of the AGM agenda where......

Oi, it's not like I ever sold a yo-yo to a dwarf ........Seriously though, you keep the weirdest times TP.

This thread started out as an attack on the media, but as it's progressed it's starting to reflect more on the standards of the critics.

...name giving joy rides at the Old Station fly in every year, and..............

The Cessnock meeting which the board members attended, and the link is on here, somewhere recent

...peters (avref to several pilots0 out and becomes a nettle ridden dustbowl called..........

....extended BoB family will accost you in the street, and we all know where that leads.................

...elbows. As we know, Loxie is a slight little thing, and............

"......bolder"

Turbo had accidently been looking at another forum, when who should post a photo on it but Ahlock in his fireman's suit with the sleeves rolled up and the pants cut well above the knee. Those fireman's boots.............

I have a lot of sympathy for anyone around such an event, or attending Coronial inquests or friends and associates of those involved. . We all know we may not finish the day well, if our luck runs out, but it's always gut wrenching stuff.. I know Lee Ungermann attended many Inquests and I know it took a lot out of him.. I think we should bear in mind what some of our reps and staff do things that we don't always know of, and appreciate it. I will take this opportunity (if I may) and express my gratitude for their services.Nev

He turned to me, and his face turned sad, and he said "They just don't see what we see, do they"

What i should have done was Film the whole process , probly make more money selling the film !

I had a lot of archives stored in a shipping container, and last week found a hole had rusted through in the top, and a lot of paperwork was glued together. Didn't lose much, but some of my best design work was in there on original drawing paper. It's off to the drawing office scanners asap now!

Henry Ford is alleged to have said "No one was ever famous for what he was gunna do", or words to that effect.

So yes, if you pre-announce and then have problems, everyone else could have taken the project to conclusion in the first few weeks.

About four years ago I started a project where I had to pull together a complete vehicle from individual sub assemblies and components and turn it into a fully Australian - compliant model range. At about the six month point I thought it would take twelve months, but it still took three years.

Except that we all know it's a lie, and not only that, but plagiarism.

I am comfortable that raaus is acting within its legal requirements.

In Donoghue V Stevenson, Mr Stevenson was acting within his company's legal requirements when Mrs Donoghue became ill after drinking from a bottle with a snail in it.

Not only that, but he didn't know the snail was in it.

But he should have taken action to prevent it, and he had to pay out.

I am comfortable that raaus is acting within its legal requirements. We do not self regulate. We self administer. This isn't really the thread for this discussion.

Jim.