kaz3g Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Hi TP,Hmmm, I would say just the opposite! Firstly and most important, he is still alive! Secondly, if he was being a naughty boy, then he will learn a very important lesson. I would say he was very fortunate... Cheers Neil If the photo is one taken of the aircraft involved at Lake Hume then he is very lucky he is alive although he may wish he wasn't in the weeks and months to come. I can see a "conduct endangering life" charge along with all the breaches of airnav stuff. kaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 is this the accident aircraft? if not who ever it is has done well to keep the rego un readable! Have a look at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-02/ultra-light-crashes-into-lake-hume/3755440. 10-312? Isn't that a digit short for a rego? kaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 As long as it is kept in context and not blown out of proportion ( as most things to do with flying are). Jet ski's and speedboats "mix" it with swimmers too. Just as dangerous and irresponsible. (Maybe more so)..Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Have a look at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-02/ultra-light-crashes-into-lake-hume/3755440.10-312? Isn't that a digit short for a rego? kaz Hi Kaz, There a few aircraft left with only 3 numbers in their rego.But they would be getting fairly old these days.They went to 4 numbers after running out of numbers in the 3 number format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pookemon Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Have a look at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-02/ultra-light-crashes-into-lake-hume/3755440.10-312? Isn't that a digit short for a rego? kaz It's actually 10-302 (I fell for the same thing) - 10-312 expired a couple of years ago and was for a Tyro. There's provision in the regulations that registration numbers less than 1000 do not need to print the leading zero(es). However when making radio calls you do need to pronounce the leading zeroes... In face CAO 95.10 aircraft don't even need the "10-" according to Section 4.09 Paragraph 2 of the ops manual... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 As far as rego numbers go!... Hands up all those with the size and placement of the numbers,absolutely correct with the requirements! Frank. Ps, Now now!..... Maybe best to leave that one alone! ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyian Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Hello Does anyone have access to yesterdays edition of the Albury-Border Mail newspaper? They were going to print an interview with the pilot. That could make interesting reading! Regards Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted January 4, 2012 Author Share Posted January 4, 2012 It's here in the Border mail in all its glory. Two stories. They obviously decided it wasn't worth talking to the idiot. http://www.bordermail.com.au/news/local/news/general/captured-buzzing-before-hume-crash/2409047.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Andy, I don`t know that anyone here is trying to be " Whiter than White ". As I said in my earlier post, " At times, we all do stupid things that we wish we had not done".Why shouldn`t the deatails of an accident be published or discussed here. If this forum is not for publishing and discussing the details of an accident, then what is it for?...We may as well not bother ! If we are serious about improving safety, I believe it is up to those of us who have more experience to make it quite clear where the pitfalls are. If possible, I prefer to call a spade a spade ( So to speak ) and tell it as it is! Frank. Frank I dont have a problem in general with what you are saying and agree with the sentiment around purpose of the discussions. In the example I gave I did infact come up with some things that upon reflection I would do differently in the same circumstances, however I cant help but think that with my lack of experience at the time, had it all gone pair shaped then the outcome as achieved relied more on luck than any extent of good planing on my behalf. Had I not had that luck then I would hope that any discussion would allow that there is an element of luck at play when you dont have the experience to call on. Of course, in this thread, with what is being discussed here perhaps those sentiments are less important than in general, and in this case the claim that luck was involved where experience was missing is hardly a claim that will engender any feelings of empathy from those that will sit in judgement. As Ben say's the fact that there are photo's available prior to the accident make it pretty hard to argue that its all a function of non flyers faulty interpretations of what he was doing etc..... However, I wasnt there and the photos merely show what was happening at a point in time, not why, and not what happened before and after the photos were taken. He still deserves that due process occur. Not that you, or any others were arguing agaisnst that. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahlocks Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 What's to investigate?! There's no carny ride or rivet line to confuse where the problem lay. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted January 4, 2012 Author Share Posted January 4, 2012 ..To be fair to those who want to wait for a final report before they comment, but in fact commented in telling us that, the water perhaps should be tested in case the unseasonaly late snow season made the water more dense, or a series of downdrafts occurred on the aircraft's track. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 HelloDoes anyone have access to yesterdays edition of the Albury-Border Mail newspaper? They were going to print an interview with the pilot. That could make interesting reading! Regards Ian Nothing I could see today... perhaps he has decided against an interview on legal advice? The video here gives an idea of the antics engaged in although I'm not sure about how close he got to the skier's toe line. http://www.bordermail.com.au/news/local/news/general/captured-buzzing-before-hume-crash/2409047.aspx kaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Plenty of "real" evidence mounting now. How would you expect to get away with this sort of thing? As Ben says everyone has a camera these days, and many of them amount to a "movie" camera capability. Stupid actions by a few have disadvantaged us in the past and appears will continue to do so. You are dealing with people with whom the "fun" element is paramount and the responsibility lacking. Pilots have enjoyed "buzzing" people from the early days, frequently with disasterous consequences. I really wouldn't want to be in this guy's shoes, but I don't believe the concept of "making an example of someone" is natural justice. The punishment should be appropriate and fair. I share some of F.T's feelings. Annoyance ( extreme) that another one has done something that our detractors can use as ammunition against us. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 This is exactly why we (RAAus as a whole) can't have nice things and are looked down on by other people and the general public.The photos regardless of if they were taken at the time of the crash or not, clearly show that the pilot was flying illegally and recklessly, the witness statements back that up. The crash could be considered a seperate issue in itself. This pilot deserves to lose his license and be banned from ever reobtaining one, after all, what he did was very serious and endangered the lives of every other person on that lake, and more so, those in the boat in the photos. He is lucky that the crash wasn't any more serious. He deserves the full investigation process, but he doesn't deserve to get off lightly. It is pilots like this that we do not want in aviation, the type that give us all a bad name even though they are a minority. Iggy As I recall with the Ferris Wheel incident, the interim report had a whole bunch of "clearly wrong" things that were subsequently shown to be not wrong. Of course the interim report never claimed they were infallable facts, but many who read them gave them that weighting. Im not saying that in this case this guy is without fault just that I want those who sit in judgmenet to be aware of all the aspects including facts know and tested to be facts rather than just ascertions......and then pass judgement! If its all as you suggest then there is nothing in your post I disagree with (after the jkudgement) after all I own something that could be a very expensive paperweight worse case as a result of the alledged activity of this guy and others. I also agree that no matter what happens to this guy in many peoples eyes those that fly ultralights will be diminished and that is something that is incredibly easy to do while the reverse takes enourmous effort and constant work...... I wonder if our CFI's should be teaching the AMA approach.....first do no damage in everything you do........ Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 ........I'm not sure about how close he got to the skier's toe line........kaz so thats why he ended up in the water.....unless the wakeboarder was standing on his head his toe line must have beenas close as possible to the water line:crazy:Have to say a toe rope sounds more like a means of torture than a way to have fun. Still there are other bodily attachments that could be worse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted January 4, 2012 Author Share Posted January 4, 2012 Andy, have a look at the latest series of photos and the story from the people in the boat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Andy, have a look at the latest series of photos and the story from the people in the boat. Turbo What ever you do, dont mistake me for this guys defence...... (In fact if theres a public stoning, I might be inclined to buy a rock!!) Based on what we've seen there is little to suggest that he should ever fly again.......but all that sits on the back of everything we've seen being everything there is to see. For example, the aircraft is clearly RAA licensed in the video (actually in thinking about that, that isnt even clear, rego might not be current...it could be even worse than it already looks ) .....whose to say the pilot is RAA licensed? Do any of us know that to be fact? After all 100% of RAA pilots <> 100% of all those who know how to fly in Australia. BTW that example is just one I plucked from my butt it may have exactly zero to do with what we are discussing but is an example of things we dont know (at least through these forums) For those suggesting that due process only needs to be due sometimes....where do you draw that line when in real life nothing is black and white but all shades of grey??? Why doesnt this guy deserve due process but in the next accident that happens (perhaps the trike example I gave before) I would want due process served? Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 ...I don't believe the concept of "making an example of someone" is natural justice. The punishment should be appropriate and fair .Very true, Nev. I don't ordinarily believe in hanging anyone until the evidence is in but it is awfully clear what was going on here and his lawyer would have to advise against making any statements to either media or investigators (probably too late for the latter). A possible problem for the prosecution is likely to be a defence claim that the evidence against the defendant has already been put out so publicly is will be impossible for him to receive a fair hearing (juries can be biased but magistrates never are ). I share some of F.T's feelings. Annoyance ( extreme) that another one has done something that our detractors can use as ammunition against us. Nev It won't do any of us who fly for pleasure any good. It's like jetskis and trailbikes where those that ride them are now all regarded as idiots because a few irresponsibles spoil it for the majority. But I can't help thinking there is more to this than meets the eye. I can't seriously believe that a person in full possession of his faculties would do such a thing in such a public way.... so I await with interest the eventual release of details sufficient to make an informed opinion. kaz 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ossie Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Bloody hell.... are you guys running for office or something.....?? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ossie Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 yep, there's certainly a few Julius Sumner Millers amongst this lot....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 NO. Does one have to comment in a particular way to be accepted? You just may have to elaborate for me to respond. I'm always prepared to defend what I have said. Or be corrected on it. . Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 yep, there's certainly a few Julius Sumner Millers amongst this lot....... perhaps thats closer to the truth than intended I do want to understand "why is it so", rather than "what is it so" where we only know a bit of the latter and nothing of the former at this point in time!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ave8rr Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 TurboBased on what we've seen there is little to suggest that he should ever fly again.......but all that sits on the back of everything we've seen being everything there is to see. For example, the aircraft is clearly RAA licensed in the video (actually in thinking about that, that isnt even clear, rego might not be current...it could be even worse than it already looks ) .....whose to say the pilot is RAA licensed? Do any of us know that to be fact? After all 100% of RAA pilots <> 100% of all those who know how to fly in Australia. Andy From the photos, the rego looks like 10-312. A post above suggested it was 10-302. A quick check of the RAAus Register does not show 10-312 exists. The register however, has not been updated since 31st Jan 2011. This is another area that could be kept up to date. It can't be too difficuilt to have the Register "live". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted January 4, 2012 Author Share Posted January 4, 2012 ...where do you draw that line when in real life nothing is black and white but all shades of grey??? Why doesnt this guy deserve due process but in the next accident that happens (perhaps the trike example I gave before) I would want due process served?Andy We are not involved in the due process, the guy is going to get due process and the police are not going to distract themselves with any of our theories or opinions. We are involved in a discussion among ourselves, where as usual a lot has been learned which will be put to good use by many, and will have served as a warning to a few who might have been thinking about doing the same thing. So due process proceeds regardless of what we are talking about, and unfortunately you can whistle and jump all you like, but unless ATSB steps in the last you'll hear publicly of this crash will be the newspaper reports, so we have to make the most of analysing it ourselves. Your experience is also well worth discussing in another thread because it involves a different lesson for someone landing on uncertain ground. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts