turboplanner

The 5000 metres is for visibility, and up here in gods country it is normally more than 20 miles, i'm talking about the distance from your aircraft and the nearest cloud.

.......................his droppings were green for a month, which disconcerted the guests at Chez Ratso B&B to the extent that..............

......but the story hadn't even started when there was a comma attack. "Restoration, my .................."

Doesn't take too long or people to lose the plot here does it.

CASA changed the regulations from something near impossible to get right, to 5000 metres to give ample warning that it was time to turn around, yet we have this silly discussion putting it down.

Just a question, how do you judge the distance from cloud base without actually flying to cloud base and noting it (illegal). Relying on the aviation weather forcast is fine but conditions change?

5000 metres is close to 3 miles, could you use your normal sight picture of "3 mile final" to roughly judge that distance from a cloud?

Just following on from Ayavner, 3 miles is not that much different to the length of a Downwind Leg, and you can practice a couple of three mile legs when you are out in the training area. You'll probably find that it doesn't take too much practice to get the distance into your brain, and this in turn will give you more confidence on a bad day.

Going back to the Downwind Leg equivalent - that's a very comfortable space to do a 180 in.

The picture below comes from the Visual Flight Guide

True but I wouldn't bother, it is one of those rules that isn't really policeable.

Yes and No.

I don't doubt that CASA's original action was public liability based, and this one appears to be an oily way of trying to eat their cake and have it too, but if the Pilot miscalculates his skills/knowledge of the aircraft to the point where an accident occurs, the question of who trained him becomes a very interesting issue.

I don't see the big fuss really, If your not competent to fly the aircraft, go and get the training so you are. If you are competent, that's all the law require. Isn't this what we usually ask for, simple common sense?

I would like to think that by the time a student has obtain an RA-Aus cross country endorsement, they would know how to recognize IMC and how to avoid it, if they don`t, then their instructor hasn`t done their job properly!Frank.

It would be interesting IF you did those things, but surely one can anticipate the change same as when you ferry an empty plane at half it's normal operating weight. It will leap into the air after a very short run and climb like a homesick angel. Another day at a hot high aerodrome when you are full of fuel and Peeps as well it's a dead slug at getting into the air as the threshold marks pass underneath, and you are just airborne. Same plane. different scenario.. I think you have to mentally prepare yourself each time as you would for an engine failure that you don't know the time in advance for., but must still be ahead of it. Nev

I think they are fixing the stuff up of deleting the endorsements, and trying to put it back again without telling us. I liked the endorsement system; it was simple, and ensured you were competent to fly the aircraft by having an instructor supervise you until he was happy with your standard.

Sure there are aircraft that are very similar, but my experience with a Grumman Tiger was interesting. I'd been flying Cherokee only, for about five years, and knew it inside out, knew the feel of a correct takeoff/landing/cruise etc., when I went for an endorsement on the Tiger which had a MUCH steeper climb out - much the same angle as you'd pull the Cherokee up for a power-on stall.

For the first two or three times I felt alarmed at the steep climb out - it didn't feel right at all, but the gauges were right on what I'd been trained to hold.

Now reverse that situation pre this General Competency, and imagine you'd done a few years on a Tiger, and today all that was left to fly was a Cherokee, which everyone knows is as docile as your pet labrador.

It would get very interesting if you flew it off the runway at the Tiger gradient, the only question being whether your hand was faster than the ASI.

Better yet, All Fatal aircraft accidents, regardless of their registration.It's actually 5000 meters visibility, and it shouldn't be confused with distance from cloud (which is 1500 meters horizontally).

All depends on the level of darkness selected, the right photocell units can be set to whatever level you like, even detecting an oxy cutter just making it's way into a vault.

Does anyone have a a NAIPS Area Briefing for Area 40 valid from 2300 UTC 18/04/15?

"Why are you laughing bull?' asked Ratso "they took my complete dash away from me; best part of the Jab. I had to sell it to someone from Newcastle who uses it to keep finches and canaries..........."

Not necessarily, with some good strategies; don't forget what my post #18 which refers to the Banyule Planning Scheme:

"18.04 – 2 Planning of Airports: Strategies Para 5 (Essendon)

The Banyule Planning Scheme is required to protect Essendon Airport in accordance with this clause"

My bet is it hasn't been discussed by either party at this stage

........................but-Turbo-had-staggered-back,-unable-to-follow-this-new-writing-style-of-midgevillebull-who-...........................

To stop unqualified pilots from flying into cloud is pretty easy. Remove the instrumentation that allows them to do it.ASI ALTI and a bit of string is good enough for RAAus aircraft. Any more and you are GA.

Flying into cloud is one of the biggest killers in GA flying too.

Yes, some of them have no scruples either.

when I read all this. I think about my own mortality when flying aircraft. you start to second guess every thing did I do a proper pre flight should I fly near these mountains is the wind a bit strong. it can be a real brain f...k

How often have you seen Facthunter and Farri write "Never fly over something you can't land on" That would have avoided this one.

Never think of an RA flight Plan as a straight line.

It is a difficult area to deal with Andy, you really do have to leave out the words which might identify the incident. In some cases that will work, in other cases it just gets watered down and looks like propaganda to some people. The best outcome is to get within the ATSB umbrella and be able to call a spade a spade.

http://planningschemes.dpcd.vic.gov.au/schemes/combined-ordinances/Banyule_PS_Ordinance.pdf

11.02 Urban Growth

Both political Parties have, for decades, allowed developers to subdivide outer areas without adequate infrastructure provision, and to land bank – e.g. buy 1000 Ha of farmland but only subdivide around 3% per year, thus creating an artificial price of several hundred thousand dollars which should have been going to infrastructure costs like power, water, sewerage, roads, rail, schools etc.

The government these days is in a position where they are forced to cram several million people into the inner suburban areas where there is infrastructure.

18.04 Airports

18.04 – 2 Planning of Airports: Strategies Para 5 (Essendon)

The Banyule Planning Scheme is required to protect Essendon Airport in accordance with this clause

http://services.land.vic.gov.au/maps/pmo.jsp

DDO5 Design and Development Overlay

The Overlay applies to built design – not any Aviation requirement, so I imagine the Applicant will be arguing that given more people have to be fitted in to the existing infrastructure, their height is in line with stated Government objectives, and the Council will be arguing that 28 metres, and with the profile set out in the Planning Scheme is the maximum to avoid loss of amenity and built form for the location.

http://services.land.vic.gov.au/landchannel/content/propertyReport?reportNo=1&reporthtml=11

DDO5 Design and Development Overlay Schedule 5

This is the schedule to Overlay DDO5 (like a specification) where details of the Overlay are spelled out. There is a specific reference to this property.

Paragraph 3.2: “443 Upper Heidelberg Road – Height Maximum 28 metres”

http://services.land.vic.gov.au/landchannel/content/propertyReport?reportNo=6&reporthtml=51

This report says: “This propertyis notaffected by the Melbourne Airport Environs Overlay”

This might make your argument problematical

443 Upper Heidelberg Rd.pdf

443 Upper Heidelberg Rd.pdf

443 Upper Heidelberg Rd.pdf

OK, sounds good - the objectors do qualify to be heard at VCAT along with Council.

You mention overlays - has anyone checked the Planning Scheme for any Overlays? (Department of Planning Transport and Infrastructure) www.dtpli.vic.gov.au/planning

There probably isn't an aviation overlay, but worth checking.

If the developer lodges an appeal and the objectors decide to appear, the paperwork will usually ask for the grounds.

This is a very important strategic phase. You cannot talk about anything you haven't lodged in your paperwork, yet you don't want the developers lawyers given a month or two's start to rebut your argument, so simple, all encompassing statements are best (you get to put your detailed submission in VCAT).

At this stage the project might be dead.

It's up to the developer to decide whether to go to Vcat and he has about 90 days to appeal to Vcat.

If he does, you are excluded from this process because you didn't submit an objection within the timelines.

So if it's an issue then your idea of briefing the Council ( contact the Planning Manager). Or if that fails the Fed Min/ Vic Min call in

In the past 35 years I have produced many inquest briefs for Coroners (Magistrates officiating coronial inquest). The brief is basically a collection of statements, photos, plans, a detailed summary and conclusion made/obtained by the police investigator. The coroner is immediately informed of a reportable death and a case number is issued. Preliminary reports are submitted immediately (form 83's) and within a few days the investigator is given a date within a month or two, depending on the complexity of the investigation, to have the final inquest brief completed and submitted.If safety issues arise out of an investigation the member includes these in the conclusion. The coroner may or may not take further action or give directives. I would not want to be the person ignoring a coroner's direction.

The public can only learn from the Coroner's report, if they can find it. Maybe I've been looking in the wrong places, but I've been waiting for nearly a decade for one to come out involving three incompatible semi trailer brake couplings, some which lock the trailer brakes on when connected, some which release the trailer brakes when connected.