turboplanner

I want to make it clear that anything I`ve said in the past or will continue to say in future, is only about RA-Aus registered aircraft and pilots!The way I see it! Speedway racing is completely different to flying. With speedway racing, all the participants are in one place, at a given time, so, controlling the event is possible....Flying doesn't only occur from a single venue, such as a fly-in, where there can be control of what occurs, it takes place from multiple locations, at any time, between sunrise to sunset, therefore, it`s the pilot who controls what occurs, in that situation.

I was giving you an example from another sport, where that attitude was not tolerated, and people solved the problem.

There's no point in picking the differences between the sports and saying "well that part doesn't apply to us" so we'll ignore all the things they did to succeed.

Sure, people congregate at race tracks, where RA aviation can be a solo sport, but a lot goes on between meetings. For example, volunteers check every car regularly while it is being built, and before each season starts at the builder's home. On race day, while the checks are thorough, cars are expected to be presented with no faults. That system would not allow a primary control fastened with either no locking nut or a nyloc nut instead of mechanical locking, it would not allow design or building faults affecting primary safety.

RAA has no similar structure.

Behaviour is monitored and controlled by volunteers whenever activitiy occurs.

RAA has no similar compliance and enforcement structure.

With the present disastrous rate of fatalities, solving the problem is what matters, and it's time people stopped being evasive and faced up to some of the obvious causes.

Obtaining an RA-Aus pilot certificate requires, being trained by an RA-Aus approved flying instructor at an RA-Aus approved flying school. Once a student obtains their pilot certificate, the expectation is that they know what is required of them and they are competent enough to fly safely.

There is no place for an "expectation" in training for critical safety areas, because the people doing the training are now putting themselves at financial risk. If they want to continue to do that, well fine, but if something goes wrong, their house is likely to be on the line.

I've raised several times, that Certificate IV in training is required by most companies to ensure that the trainer is qualify to judge whether the trainee has absorbed what he has been trained to do, and is carrying it out.

RAA doesn't require that, and that is a risk

When people are getting themselves into stalls in perfectly good aircraft, falling victim to weather and so on, eventually some relatives are going to look at recovering cost.

There are plenty of opportunities to improve the present situation.

"The secret is in LOGICAL regulations, and a strong Administration"[/Quote]

How is any logical or any other kind of regulation, going to have any influence on the individual who chooses not to apply it?

A logical regulation is one which is based on hard evidence. For example, flying at a minimum height of 500 feet.

 

If we do that, we may be exposed to swr lines, tree stags or other unexpected obstructions, for just part of each takeoff and landing, which will usually be at airfield where these areas are clean anyway.

 

At all other times, except perhaps in mountainous country, we will be safely clear of these things which have resulted in the death of hundreds of pilots over the years.

 

That's a logical regulation.

 

There are people who choose not to apply it; I recall one of the louder examples on this site, being caught out at a beach beat up by his mate who posted the video.

 

Compliance and enforcement takes care of most of those people, but is not being done today.

 

An illogical regulation is one which is virtually impossible to comply with. People become cycnical and ignore it. These regulations are better modified or replaced by something which can be used to prevent fatalities and injuries.

 

Totally agree, we only need 1 rule: don't crash or annoy the general public.How that rule is obeyed is up to those committing aviation.

One went through the plastic and hit a child. The claim started at around $2 million.

If the aircraft or pilot are attached to RAAus we offer to assist. There are many NSW Police who have also completed RAAus investigators consultant course themselves. Although not in policy we are cautious not to become involved in every crash when the aircraft and pilot are not connected to our association. It is hard for us to justify spending members money assisting with an investigation when it is not directly linked to RAAus. It then falls to the regulator.Regards, Jim Tatlock.

I've wrestled with this myself in the past, but it seems that the self regulator will carry the legal responsibility if there is a lawsuit.

That's where a compliance and enforcement section manned by volunteers comes in.

I was wondering if you could tell me the last time ,if ever anyone other than the pilot or passenger was killed by an raa plane ,and which school or kindy or shop etc that a raa plane has crashed into resulting in others deaths please ,,thanks As other dangerous sporting activities have a big record of these sorts of accidents,where others are killed or injured that are not involved in that sport,,ie:jet skis have killed many poor swimmers ,rally cars have taken out spectators ,motorcross has taken out crowds etc etc etc ,can you justify your statement with factual evidence and cases , and tell me why these other DANGEROUS activities are not banned or stopped {grounded}

Some are addressing is very well, some are tying hard but not quite getting to the improvement stage, some couldn't care which is leading to Government action on their activities.

The whole point about the effort made to improve safety is you don't want to reach the point where the first RAA aircraft takes out a Dash 8 full of people, or hits a polulated area - then your friends, the Daily Press, who some people on here have made antagonising an art form will start to prod the politicians, ad it will come down the line like a bushfire.

Apart from that, what about the children who have been killed, what about innocent passengers, what about pilots who leave behind dependants, what about pilots who have been illegally conducting commercial activities and kill paying passengers.

Andy has spelled out the numbers going down; this isn't something to be ignored; this just might be the bad old days.

No chance asmol, that stunt was tried once before with long term consequences.

Andy, despite the statement that your comments do not directly relate to the incident triggering this thread, they are inappropriate. Given your involvement as a Board member, I thought you would have better judgement.

I`t been pointed out by several people on this forum,that accidents continue to occur, over and over, for the same reasons, since flying began..If we accept that as being correct, then it appears, there is no way to improve the situation!.If on the other hand, we don`t accept that is correct!. What is the solution?... Is there a solution?Frank.

It's also being claimed that no one has died in Formula One racing since Ayrton Senna, which is a long time ago.

The secret is in LOGICAL regulations, and a strong Administration.

I think it would be a good idea though, if you want to attract new members, to put the mag on the open section of the website.

If they take a tip from Murdoch, they can splash an ad for womens' formal wear right over the top of the story you are reading, and hold it there for twenty seconds by which time you will really be engaged, or they can avoid that, and run a selection of colour slides, videos, spreadsheets, engine sounds, and photos around the central reading area of the screen and gain and exponential increase in interest compared to print media. The electronic media is developing in a very exciting way almost monthly. Click an Ad link and you'll get the name of your local flying school, the aircraft online as of today, hire rates, hangarage, local Notams, Met etc. and you can decide not to fly and keep reading your story, or bolt for the door to make use of the calm weather and sunshine, having booked your aircraft with a click.

.......but he was too late. Turbo, who had simply dropped in hoping to see the Green Fairy (Ref #9883) was in orbit, well clear of those nasties on.................

My hangar is 16.00 x 12.49 m! The DA is only required for buildings in excess of 200 sq m. that ended my desire for a 18 x 15 hangar in one phone call. My strip and cross strip are my own concern on my own property.

I put in a DA with my local council for an "airstrip" and a "hangar", both were approved for that purpose. I did not want to have to fight them down the track if I ruffled their feathers, much easier to get the approval then you are in a stronger position legally and to combat any future complaints.Been in operation now a couple of years and no dramas.

Where people just go ahead and build without putting in a DA, any hostile neighbours have the strategic advantage that you look "dodgy". They don't always win, but you have to argue from a defensive position, and often may have to compromise the operation to avoid being ordered to cease.+

FTE I think it was pioneered that setup, although I may be wrong. I can't recall seeing to many still around over 15-20 years old though.

FTE was started some years later by the RP General Manager, and one of the draftsmen, still make them, and do a magnificent job.

Some of the 1965 vans have been on 7 or 8 cab/chassis, and usually the only maintenance required is a repaint. A few have been lost in major accidents, and several more failed after minor skin damage which was not repaired, allowing water in to the sandwich panel destroying it. I keep a watch around the eastern states, the old ones - RP and Athold Hedges can be identified by their front clearance light recesses, and I'd suggest that about 80% of all production is still in operation.

Oh I understand exactly what's being proffered. After the bond has broken, over time the back and forwards movement will grind it smooth and eventually slip around.Sure, that may be 100 years and millions of cycles ..... but maybe not. Who knows, you guys are only guessing and you have no empirical evidence available, that's the problem. You may have sealed up some static pipes, but this joint has constant cyclic shear stress applied along with constant expansion/contraction at different material rates trying to tear it apart - even when it's just sitting.

There is no bond to break; you'd have as much success bonding FRP to aluminium with polyester resin as getting a pelican to breathe under water.

There has to be a mechanical entrapment

As far as "guessing" and "no empirical evidence available", I can tell you about the design of one piece moulded, frame-free sandwich construction refrigerate vans where Australia leads the world, because I was directly involved in it.

When you see one of these on the road, have a look at the refrigeration unit, it's bolted to two pieces of MS flat enclosed in the FRP.

In the semi trailer refrigerated vans, the lights, heavy duty door hinges and cam locks are all bolted to small, localised steel plates, as are the skid plate and the tri axle

suspension. The one piece FRP box is structural, has no chassis.

About 14.5 tonnes static load is going through the skid plate and about 17 tonnes through the tri axle suspension.

As for empirical evidence, the first of these went on the road about 50 years ago; most are still in service.

I thought Maj already had

I'm not sure what your motive was in making this comment, but in trying to link his comments to as specific accident, you, or he could be called before the Coroner, traveling at your own expense to receive a fine or even worse.

It's in your own interest not to do this, and if trouble blow up you can be sure that RAA will quickly put an end to the reports, which will disadvantage all members.

I think RAA are to be commended for the lateral thinking which at least gives us a reasonably clear indication of why an accident occurred. We can learn a lesson without knowing the identity of the pilot or the location - it's what led up to the incident and how it was handled which is of most value to us.

In fact in some respects we are getting information more valuable than what is being churned out by ATSB, and I would expect this to be reflected in some lives being saved, and newer pilots being reassured that they can avoid silly actions and conduct their sport safely.

Fiberglass does not permanently bond to metal, roughened or not, and again, not my opinion, that's factual science. The joint will eventually fail, go ask 3M, Selleys, Cyberbond or someone similar.

Yes, it was resolved there was no need for the arguments, the pilot wasn't up to standard on the radio and could have solved the problem with a Mayday call (remember he had no map, and only a memory of where the other airfield was). Without that the Tower Operator was attempting to protect the pilot from the substantially lowered visibility around the airport.

...Compose himself to he can unlock the gate.*

"I hope he unlocks the gate if my aircraft ever catches on fire" said Madge

"In your case" said Chariot (would was no appreciating the close attention his antics had been receiving over the past year), "he'll probably start the fire and........"

* About five years ago, Young Ahlox let a Jabiru burn to the ground on an airport runway on the grounds that the emergency gate was locked.

Why can you not do both? Surely that would be the 'sensible' option!

Of course you can do both, and you need to do both.

There are a few strident people on this forum who seem to believe that once you learn to successfully manipulate the controls and do some maintenance, then that's it.

This philosophy seems to come from people living out in the country, flying a basic aircraft and only flying on their own patch - the local paddocks or local training area.

The inference is they just want to fly, and don't need all the regulation crap.

They don't do radio, they don't do P&O, they don't do Navs, and they don't do Met.

They more or less approach flying the same as they approach mowing an acre with the lawn tractor.

That's fine, but they shouldn't condemn everyone else who may have to fly in some tricky corridors which may require being right on the ball with radio and positioning, or who may do cross-countries, where some of the routes may involve three distinctly different weather patterns, may have to load the aircraft to MTOW, balancing fuel and luggage, may have to plan some routes to meet their obligation not to fly over routes they can't land.

As an example that you may need a little more training than you think, I had been flying out of Moorabbin to and around the training area for nearly a decade without taking a map, and without bothering about fuel as long as I had the minimum hour and forty five minutes fuel. During that decade the weather was always flyable around the Moorabbin area even though I had been diverted elsewhere, so the brain more or less was ingrained to expect that if the weather was flyable on takeoff, you could go and do your thing for an hour and it would be flyable when you came home.

Then someone flew out of Moorabbin, a front came in behind him, and when he decided to come back the Tower told him the airport was closed. There was a colourful exchange between the two and the Tower told him to find another airfield. He knew of one not too far away, but in the murky conditions he needed a map he didn't have, and as he approached, he realised there wasn't enough visibility to continue to land, and he was well into his fuel reserve. So he turned back to Moorabbin, and now, with virtually no fuel, he was trapped. The Tower told him the airport was still closed and another round of expletives took place between the two ending when he told the Tower Controller to get stuffed, he was coming in, and somehow made it through the low visibility.

This example shows that even if you are taking off from your won paddock, you need to plan for and be able to get to at least one Alternate, and should carry a map. Hopefully, as has happened to me, you will get through a lifetime of flying without even needing it.

So, nothing has changed over the years. Pilots still kill themselves in the same ways that they have for years. What benefit is there investigating the obvious, and at great cost, Other than to satisfy someone's curiosity?

For example, the answer to your question has been provided many times and is stored on this forum.

People react to what happened last week though, and talk about it as they do here, so lessons are learnt by the new ones.

There are always unique twists, particularly for those who come unstuck flying into poor visibility - many ways to flatten yourself against a rock without losing your spatial sense.

It also reassures some who see the statistics and think they might be next. They are usually the careful ones who are never likely to feature in the news. Giving a clear cause of the crash, such as the pilot was a serial showoff who loved to fly with his wheels in the canefields until he hit the wire and expired, or loved to fly his Drifter a metre above the beach until he copped a wind shear, gives these people the knowledge that the injured and or deceased actually did something which he could avoid.

The tail spar roughen up to attach the glass rib, the glass is always shrinking to the tube and making the bond tighter over time. its not going anywhere, and vibration is not going to have any effect over time. its the best of all worlds.

And As I have said many times on these forums if ATSB were to do the investigation for all FATAL accidents then we would have an interim report within 30 days or so and a full report some time later. No waiting for a Coroners Report.

I think what RAA has started to do, talk about certain crashes without identifying the location or people involved is a good step forward, and allows lessons to be absorbed by all members.

......i could tell yous (sic) what goes on in the back of a fire truck now and then.

"It's all the time" said the WW Fire Chief, "we often have houses burn down while we are stopped waiting for him to ......."

.........and added the creme de menthe marinade.

Turbo froze; this was something he didn't want brought up on RF for security reasons. He'd done his time at Nellis AFB near Las Vegas, on the F16, and part of that was low level attack, but he became homesick, and taking advantage of training exercises, worked his way across the Pacific with a full weapons platform, refuelling from tankers, and busting for a leak by the time he entered Australian airspace around Newcastle (after being told "the RA clowns breach CTA there so often that we don't worry about them) and headed down towards the Riverina where he saw.......

..........often fed them in the garden and felt he was part of the family, especially when he posted something on RF about.........