Jerry_Atrick

Deepest condolences to friends and family. A spital dive unchecked or pulled out of too quickly will likely lead to a break-up before you hit the ground (depending on altitude, of course). We had to practice them as part of the PPL and the acceleration is scarily quick and the ASI winds up accordingly. Also a tell tale if a dive over a spin is the increasing air and prop noise.. In GA aircraft I have trained in, recovery of a spiral dive is throttle back, wings level with aileron and then arrest descent with elevator - gently.. I don't know Aussie regs, but if an aircraft is a homebuild (are any Vans not homebuild?), how does it end up on the VH register (whcih I thought - possibly incorrectly - is for certificated GA aircraft?

Unf, like Australia, all EU countries are required to levy VAT. This is done at the point of sale and there is now't much that can be done about it when you hand over the cash. Note, if it is an imported aircraft,. chances are it has had import duties paid as well. While it is a legal requirement that EU countrues charge VAT, each countries rules are slightly different. The minimum rate is 15%, but they can charge what they like, and there are exemptions to the 15% as well (e.g. staple foods, etc). A quick look here gives you the rates of each EU country: https://www.avalara.com/vatlive/en/vat-rates/european-vat-rates.html. During the pandemic, VAT rates have been cut for some countries. As mentioned, each country's rules are different, and I am going off the UK rules, that haven't changed since leaving the EU (why get rid of a cash cow the population is used to paying for?) You can either run your purchase through an existing company registered for VAT, or you can form a company and register it for VAT. This is oiptional for companies with a revenue < £85k. Once registered, you can claim your input VAT paid (i.e. the VAT you are charged for when making purchases for your business) against the output VAT (the amount of VAT you collect from sales by your business). So, what happens is yoy buy an aircraft for say £150K + VAT. The VAT will be £30K. You will have to hand the seller £180K. It is illegal for the seller not to collect VAT for these types of transactions. But if yiour VAT registered company buys it, your VAT reigstered company can claim the £30K as input VAT. If you had no sales in the quarter you purchased your aircraft, you have no output VAT to offset you input VAT, so, assuming you made no other purchases, HMRC will deposit the £30K into your company account. But.. there are a couple of gotchas.. First is that any private use of the aircraft will have to have VAT charged against it. So, if you hire it out, VAT has to be applied. If you use it yourself, you have to work out a fair value of the rental you would have paid, and you have to pay VAT on that fair value. In other words, every time you privately use the aircraft, you have to pay a 20% tax based on the fair value rental of the aircraft. This doesn't have to me market rates, but it has to cover all costs of the iarcraft including depreciation, maintenance, etc. Secondly, you are simply deferring the payment of the VAT (i.e. lowering the cost of purchasing the aircraft, but not the total cost) If, for example you decide that it is a pain in the proverbial to pay that tax when flying, and make quarterly VAY returns, etc., then you can unregister for VAT or dissolve the company - or trasnfer ownershipo to yourself as a person. When that is done, you have to pay the VAT at the purchase price (no allowance for depreciation). Or, when you sell the aircraft, the buyer has to pay VAT on the sale price of the aircrtaft. This sounds OK until you realise that you have to doscount your selling prtice so the VAT inclusive price the buyer pays is the market price of the second hand aircraft. In the UK and Europe, you will often see used aircraft ads with + VAT or Vat Paid. The former means the original VAT had been reclaimed and it has to be paid again; the latter means the VAT is paid and not reclaimed. So, you think, "Hey, I know.. My company will sell me the aircraft at a discount price and I will pay little VAT in the end." Well, in the UK, HMRC don't like that very much. Firstly, if you do sell, you have to physcially transfer the sale price to the company (unles the company owes you at least that much in directors loans). And if you re-draw it even after a few months, they will consider it not a sale and you will be liable for the whole original VAT amount. If the HMRC deem you have trasferred at a materially lower than market value, they will top it up to market value and you will have to pay the VAT on that (+ interest at something like 20% + Bank of England interest rate). And they compound it every month or something like that.. One thing the HMRC hates - and since the merge of Inland Revenue and HM Customs and Excise they have more powers than the Spcial Branch of the police (anti-terrorism) - is being gypped out of money. The best that you can do is defer the payment - and possibly later reduce the payment of VAT - but it will still have to be paid. These are the UK rules as they were a few years ago (haven't kept up with changes relating to aircraft). The EU country you buy in will inevitably be different. The best thing is to find the lowest customs (if imprted from outside the EU) and VAT rate country within the EU to purchase your aircraft, make sure there are no gotchas and buy it there (assuming new) or find a used one there. Once VAT is paid in an EU country, it is paid across the EU - another country can't charge an equivalence VAT rate. Of course, if the VAT paid is worth it, an hour or so with a good accountant should give you better advice than I could ever give.

Getting back to topic, on my next trip to Aus (hopefully not too distant future - could use a forced 2 week break), I will be begrudgingly applying for my ASIC.. The reality, it has spawned a cottage industry of companies that handle the applications - and the CFI at the RVAC is certified to certify docs as originals, etc., so it looks to be a seemless process. But, because of the cottage industry, even if the guvmint wanted to get rid of it, they will find it difficult as whole businesses and employment have popped up as a result. I agree it should be fought at every opportunity, but as it will probably cost more votes to get rid of it than it will attract, I can't see it happening anytime soon (of course, when I get back to Aus, if you vote me in a PM and I stay for 2 terms to get the cushy pension and benefits, in addition to being a PM, then I will promise to look into it for you ;-))

Isn't that Greek, though.. Seems it to me! 😉

I inquired about lanfing at Heathrow for that episode... Would have cost more than the plane was worth...

We are even further away....

Enjoy your endeavours... Of course, I would also recommend taking a look at the EASA PPL.. I am not sure of the differences in the training and medical requirements, but I don't think it is that much.. and it gives you a whole lot more flexibility. As an example, I had everything organised for a Sojourn to Anzac Cove in the shareoplane for last year's Anzac day, but the pandemic put pay to that. You can certainly do it with an LSA and LAPL, but its a lot more pain. Also, the fleet you have access to in Europe has much more variety and I think (but don't quote me) you can fly LSA on your EASA PPL - though it may pay to triple check. You can hire Robins, AT-3s and all sorts - muchmore variety than in Aus or the US (or the UK for that matter).

I have always wondered what happens to GA pilots who fly into Aus in their own machines? Do they need to get an ASIC? If not, isn't that a bit of a loop-hole. I am sure there are N registered machines in Aus, and with my FAA PPL, flying an N reg and not resident in Aus, it would seem a little loophole - but it is likely the foreign pilot is going to be the one who is more likely to be a threat, surely? But even so, the 60 year old coming over to do some GA flying is not really going to be a threat, either. I htink it is fair to say the UK (particularly London) is at far more risk of a terrorist attack than anywhere in Australia.. We have about 10 or so major training airfields in the counties surrounding London, each about 10 minutes to get to London... The thought of a security clearance for the pilots even made the CAA laugh...

We get as dose every month in Pilot Magazine...

Hi Josh, Can't speak for Portugal, but French landing fees are a pittance (except Le Touquet, which is the mecca for British Piliots and as British pilots are used to being fleeced on Landing fees, the 25 or 30EUR is not unexpected). As an example, I few years ago, I flew to Angers (pronounced on-jzer), which is a decent sized regional airport (i.e. can take at least 737s and Airbus equivalents) and from memory the landing fee was EUR15 and no parking charge for the first 24 hours. Of course, smaller farm fields here don't fleece you, but that is the price I pay for staying GA. (there's a slogan there, I think). In France, airfields denoted AA are French speaking only - sometimes airfields are AA for certain periods (I think Le Touquet and Calais are AA on Tuesdays). You only need to know the joining call and circuit/landing/taxying/take-off calls... and oif course the numbers zero through 9. I take a cribb sheet, though have never used it as I have always used English coming into France. Flying in with a TB20 helped, of course, but that was only once. My examiner took me on a flight to France, we went to an AA field, he used all English.. Some cranky flying club official came out and was lecturing us in a rather animated fashion; my examiner game a Gallic shrug and that was it. His view was that most of them speak English and those that don't know an aircraft is around somehwere and keep a good lookout. I call the field in advance and get "permission" to visit using English. Not being a LSA pilot, I can't be 100% sure, but most countries have their own verion of a Rec Piliots Certificate, but you can also get an EASA LAPL (Light Aircraft Pilots Licence). This will allow you to fly in their airpsace in a LSA registered to another country, without prior permission. For example, Belgium I think require something like a 90 Euro payment and prior permission to enter., and it is per trip. Before Brexit, the UK, Germany, France, Spain, and I think Italy (not sure about Austria) had an agreement to allow LSAs to enter their airspace without prior permission for up to 90 days at a time, I think. Had great fun in a 2 seat trike crossing the channel once. [Edit] Phil Perry will know a lot more about it than me.... [/edit

You mean I wasn't meant to have sex in the Moorrabbin airport carpark???????? (Good thing, then.. and I hadn't and thought I was missing out!)

Nope - Aussie Rules fan (they still have a ruck, though) - and nope- meant ruck in the post

There's a ruck load of stars to see in blighty on a clear night in blighty if one doesn't live in London

UInsure about Aus, but over here, councils don't tend to pay the best, so they get monkeys...

What is the issue with Tyabb? I can see the council want it shut down, but why? It's not in the most populated area and from memory, it is sort of light industrial/agrigultural around there. I noticed in the article someone was complaining residents didn't get their democratic day in court? What's the beef?

Ver sad news to lose valued members of their community. Condolences to their family, friends and their community.

I think, even if it said it can be flown into CTA, as the ad would not constitute and offer, it is still OK from a contract perspective. From a false/misleading ad perspective, it would probably cross the line. On rules around RAA, from reading this forum, it seems a little too restrictive in Aus... and when I finally get back, I may be tempted to stay with GA. You sir, are a sad man 😁

@skippydiesel - are you not secretly a law lecturer and hoping to tease out legal knowledge? Although the subject of the question involves an aircraft, your question is actually of general legal principles. IANAL, but I have studied law in the UK (the law of England and Wales - Scotts and NI have separate laws and legal systems) and a bit in Aus/NSW. So, what I am about to carp on about is UK based... but should be roughly equivalent to in concept if not precision, to Australian law. There will be two areas of law that are involved in advertisements... Advertising standards (or equivalent in Australia). As this is a relatively modern branch of the law, it is likely to be codified and covers things like false and misleading advertising, etc. I don't know too much about the E&W law and nothing about the equivalent in Australia (which I am guessing is different per state). This law wouldn;t provide redress to the purchase of the plane, but it could cost the seller in terms of fines and/or jail, and maybe a criminal offence. I have no idea whether the ad would break those laws. Now, lets assume some hapless purchaser bought the aircraft on good faith and learned, because, say it was homebuilt, they can never enter controlled airplace with it (assuming that also means class D). What redress does the purchase have. It comes down to the law of contract (or I think commercial transactions, as OT described). Under contract law, which has been evolving since about the 1500's, the law is more codified in Aus than the UK, although there is still a heavy reliance on the common law. It is one branch of the law where casees in the US, Canada, Aus, and NZ are cited in cases in each other's jurisdictions. Contract law deviates a bit between the UK and Australia, with Australia preferring more American concepts (such as punitive damages, something never developed in the UK, which allows restitutional damages). There are two doctrines of contract law that apply: Offer and Acceptance, and misrepresentation (the latter, auctioneers work very hard to not violate). No representation can = misrepresentation, but only in very limited circumstances. Maybe, under UK law, the auctioneer and/or vendor of the dud earthmoving equipment could be sued for misrep through their silence if the fault was that obvious and there is an expectaton or industry practice that obvious faults are disclosed. OK.. First, to offer and acceptance.. Under the doctrine, a contract is only concluded when there is a definiite offer, a definite acceptance, there is consideration, and there is an intenton to enter a legal relationship. Let's dispose of the latter two, because the exchange of money for the plane is consideration, and a contract of such is an intention to enter a legal telationship in the context of the transaction. Let's even forget about acceptance - if the buyer has stumped up the cash and the seller handed over the plane, acceptance will be one of those two item. So we are left with... what was the offer. For a statement to be an offer, it must be able to be accepted without further clarification (i.e. it is precise and unambiguous), and convey to a reasonable person that the maker of the proposal (ie the offeror) intended to be immediately bound by the proposal if the offeror accepted it. It also must be directed to a person or class of persons (legal or living) that are identifiable. On that basis, most advertisements are not offers, but what are termed invitations to treat; i.e to encourage the buyer to make an offer. This goes for TV or even Facebook/Google ads, with or without news feeds.. This is a presumption, that can be rebutted and has been - the famous and seminal case of Carlisle v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company in the 1800s (can't remember the year, 1876 or 1856 pop into my head). Where the ad is sufficiently clear, contains wording that indicates it intends to enter into a legal relationship with an identifiable people (in that case the purchasers of the smoke ball), then it can be an offer, and the purchaser's cash is acceptance. However, normally, it will be the purchaser who is deemed to make the offer and the seller accepting it in the case of advertisied goods - this includes those items in a shop with a price tag on them. Given the wording of the ad, it would appear to be an invitiation to treat... So you would have to look at how the actual contract was formed and what representations were made during the formation of the contract. On that basis, there is nothing wrong with the ad... Which leads in nicely to a following doctrine of contract law - misrepresentation.. For a misrepresentation to be made, it has to directly relate to the subject of the contract and not be ancillary, it has to be directed or reasonably be deemed to be a factor in the decision of the purchaser to buy, and it has to be an expression of fact, not opinion. So, say, during the contract negotiation (or haggling), they hapless buyer asks, "Are you sure this aircraft is suitable to be flown into CTA?" and the seller responds with, "Yes, I believe it to be able to"... is he making a misrepresentation? Under English law, anyway, the answer is quite clearly no! The words, "I believe it to be" are a clear indication of an opinion and not a statement of fact. Now, the law in Aus may be different on this.. And there may be some codification that overrides the common law doctrine in specific circumstances where the buyer can only rely on opinion.. but the ad is perfectly legal.. it only expresses an opinion.. The advertisement could be for a 3-tonne lump of granite that the advertiser believes can be flown under its own power into CTA.. as long as it is opinion, it is fine.

Wow.. what a rort... The auction style is very similar to a now defunct penny auction site, madbids.com (or madbid.com)... They would run auctions where you had to pay per bid.. Your bid would increment by a penny - you couldn't bid a price... The clock would cound down from I think a minute and if there was no new bid by the time the clock count down, the current bid won, but as soon as a bid was placed... the clock would reset.. Sounds like Pickles used to use these guys for inspiration.. Of course, I would watch the clock and with a second to go, a new penny bid was submitted.. Now, call me cynical, but somehow, I think some of those bids many have been automated stooge bids... From how OT described the auction process at Pickles, I would not be surprised if some of the bids they receive are...... I may be drawing too long a bow.. but those fees are enormous, given I bet they aren't paying storage fees on the aircraft... But, it is simple.. Work out the max total you are willing to pay, workout the max you are to bid by subtracting the costs from the amount you are willing to pay, and, using OT's technique, but up to you max bid (with any luck, you will win). If someone outbids you, assuming your max price to pay was realistic, let them be the suckers and look for your next steed on the open market... Simples. If everyone did that, and was reasonable about their valuation (i.e. not OTT), then the higest bid would always be lower than value and vendors would eventually realise they are getting shafted and go somewhere else... Hmm.. I may have to read the pickles Ts&C's.. I feel a dusruptiuve business coming on...

In Somerset, we haven't had the snow other parts of the country have had... In fact, we have had bone-dry gin clear days hovering between -3 and 1 degree. We have had mornings that, although cold, of almost no frost. Perfect flying weather (with the appropriate attire). Pity I am back to renting aircraft, as we are in lockdown, and I can't rent one.

Maybe I should clarify what I meant by "And those who are supposedly well educated have doors opened too easily for them..." Which means that those who have passed their exams but haven't really learned anything or how to apply what they have learned.. I have seen MBA graduates who probably don't even know what the acronym stands for, let alone how to manage or administer anything. I have seen engineers who are crap, but because they have a masters, are given project management jobs ahead of good project managers. I have seen the same with traders - and the results were a very expensive failed project... Yes, it is probably tinged with who one knows, as well... But not always.. Anyway, back o the classified numbers - up to "14", but I notice, it is really 13, as one of the aircraft ads is a portiable hangar... or some such thing.. Noticed on aviationtrader, there are more rotors than other aircraft for sale...

I just wanted to know if it were more than that (RAA is a small world as far as I can see, so wanted to know if there were other potential ramifications)... Although, sometimes, the principle is more important than the money - it will be @New2flying's judgement... as long as he is getting impartial and good advice - his decision to make.. If the school is that bad (and there are always 2 sides of the story) and it goes further, it can be a warning to other potential students. As I said, there's always two sides to a stroy, so not casting any aspertions on the school..

I have to admit, my first thoughts were, "why?", so would be interested in your thoughts... If there is a legal obligation that is not being fulfilled and there is no reasonable way to see it being fulfilled, then, the question would be "why not?" Before one can asnwer either question, the natural question to ask is, what was th elawyer instructed to do? But, lets assume it was to seek specific performance to hand over the log book and training records, I can't see an issue with that - will no other school touch @New2flying as a result? I have no idea how much lawyers charge, but I am guessing it is about $250/hr up... so on a practical level, if it is going to cost you $1,000 to recoup $500 worth of training, it may be worth just moving on. However, most letters written by lawyers will demand their fee be paid as well (assuming the lawyer believed their client had a case and exhausted reasonable avenues to obtain their outcome). One would hope the lawyer would act in their client's best interest and advise appropriate action to obtain their records without unduw personal reputatrional or financial damage.. Back to the question - what was the lawyer instructed to do?

Has Top Gun II come out yet?

Darn! Wish I was back in Aus.. That is a shame it isn't open to RAAus pilots - surely it should be f they have the requisite endorsements and the plane has the speeds.. Even as a GA'er, I find it unproductive.