kgwilson Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 This whole affair smacks of a cover up by RA-Aus. Jill Bailey advised that she had inadvertently signed the pilot Certificate papers and stood down for a week. The deceased instructor would have submitted them with the recommendation that an RPC be approved. I reckon some heads will roll at RA-Aus based on the Coroners comments. The instructor may have been highly experienced and well regarded but a lot of experience in a paraglider counts for very little when flying a powered aircraft. I flew Hang Gliders for 20 years and also powered aircraft at the same time. It's chalk & cheese. I have flown an early paraglider & I know one thing for sure, you can't fly them in strong wind conditions. Modern versions are obviously better than when I flew them but after all they are modified parachutes. Why he chose to fly in such terrible conditions we will never know & can only speculate on the possibilities. Maybe a false sense of security in a heavier rigid aircraft weighing 5-600kg compared to the light flexible paraglider he could carry in a backpack. Whatever, that is not the issue that the coroner is going to be looking at, it is the process of the issuing of the RPC that is now front and centre of this inquiry. Did the process become a box ticking exercise based on history rather than due process requiring professional judgement and oversight? This could become very messy and very embarrassing for all at RA-Aus who were involved. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackc Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 Maybe WHY the CEO bailed out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrendAn Posted May 1 Author Share Posted May 1 1 hour ago, Love to fly said: Actually I think training in interpreting weather forecasts across different areas is really important for cross country flying. And without it it could be very difficult to make informed devisions as to whether a flight is safe to make. I don't disagree about training. I am saying the pilot in question made the decision to fly when another person left his plane in the hangar because the weather was bad and the airfield manager said when he heard Matt taking off he was surprised anyone would fly in those conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackc Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 On that day, the Pilot was his own worst enemy…..it’s happened in the past AND it will happen in the future, no amount of training can prevent a poor personal decision on the day. And jumping all over Instructors wont do anything either……except to convince them its time to give the game away, sadly 🤢 RAAus will be looking for scapegoats, to hound…….. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thruster88 Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 Jill has retired, the CEO has moved on and the instructor has passed away. The only good thing that could come from this "accident " is if it was added to the syllabus along with some others so new pilots can get real world experience. The junior GA reporter is one of the best things on Facebook. A new crash to read about each day. Same shite over and over. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueadventures Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) 1 hour ago, BrendAn said: I don't disagree about training. I am saying the pilot in question made the decision to fly when another person left his plane in the hangar because the weather was bad and the airfield manager said when he heard Matt taking off he was surprised anyone would fly in those conditions. I agree; seems the day may not have been suitable for circuits or local flying within 25 N/mls due to weather in the area. It seems he was a converting pilot (from class 'D') and had gone solo in the new class. The Coroner will take all that and other evidence on board and make findings and recommendations. The recommendations are not mandatory but best to seriously backup any decision not to implement them. I would not blame the instructor for any pilots decision to fly a plan of the pilots choice when they are not supervising (say XC endorsement etc) or if they are asked advice on the day about the flight plan. I expect they would have interviewed a number of soloed student pilots about post early solo flight progression of shills and endorsements and reinforcement of their current certificate limits (eg Pax, XC etc). Edited May 1 by Blueadventures 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyBoy1960 Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 Its not the first time RA-Aus has changed or withheld documents for an inquest its been happening for years! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 Note that this hearing is still in progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurnieM Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 Do we know whether MF held a XC endorsement ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackc Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 21 minutes ago, FlyBoy1960 said: Its not the first time RA-Aus has changed or withheld documents for an inquest its been happening for years! Under Part 149, CASA can withdraw their charter, or so I am told…… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markdun Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 Seems to me there is not a huge issue here as the pilot’s own poor decision killed himself and not anybody else. The substantive issue is whether RA-aus, or the instructor, gave the man a misleading belief he could fly in those conditions (including by omission). I’ll repeat, flying small aeroplanes is inherently dangerous; on every successful landing (one you can walk away from) you have once again cheated death. RA-Aus’s continued conduct suggesting flying can be safe recreational activity (if you comply etc etc) could be construed as misleading conduct/false representation etc, IMV. Unfortunately the Coroner will look at the cause of death & will inevitably recommend more training, more stringent rules etc, but not on individual responsibility and assumption of risk..,, that’s what is needed in RA-aus training. The fact there were not 3 px, & the plane didn’t take out 3 dwellings & a shopping centre when it crashed showed he was correct in flying under Ra-aus exemptions & the system is working. BTW the Jabiru PoH includes a section on carb icing; I assume the pilot could read, so even if he wasn’t ‘taught’ about it, it was still his responsibility to read the book. A flight from My Beauty to Wollongong is a pretty long leg for someone with such few hours over challenging terrain. What was he thinking, FFS? And what would a Qantarse trainer know about flying tiny planes…I’d suggest even less than a paraglider pilot. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markdun Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 While I’m on a rant, I’ll add, who is paying for RA-Aus’s costs in providing all these reports to the Coroners? I presume its members paying. We don’t get any meaningful reports on ‘lessons learned’ etc (well only useful to those members that can read). So I’m my view Ra-aus should charge the Coroners for costs. If that can’t be done, then it should be made a contractual provision for a member to reimburse RA-AUS costs for preparing a report to a Coroner if they crash & kill someone (inc themself). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackc Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 IF RAAus does not want to comply with CASA’s Part 149, then maybe it needs to negotiate a solution? But the whole setup is a mess, RAAus being a company, not a Govt entity like CASA is. You can’t have a regulator refusing to do investigations in managing the sector of responsibility, that it’s charged with regulating? OK, give it to the Police to investigate? But they will give the job to a suitable qualified? investigator, then it gets all legal and nasty………the investigator ends up in Court? Who legally covers his arse? Precedents are already set, like it not if RAAus tried to investigate me for anything, I I would tell them to bugger off, as a regulator you can’t pick and choose what they investigate? It’s all or nothing? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrendAn Posted May 1 Author Share Posted May 1 2 hours ago, BurnieM said: Do we know whether MF held a XC endorsement ? Yes. That's what all the dramas is over. He got signed off with everything after only 4 or 5 hrs flight training. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurnieM Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 I understand the RPC sign off but not anything else. Yes, RAAus has a problem. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litespeed Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 As an aside on personal responsibility and training issues.. Why didn't the pilots on ground at the airport radio him and say the conditions where dangerous and return to field immediately? Sure they have no legal need to, but common sense looking after a fellow pilot seems important. We all need to be confident calling out our fellow flyers when their judgement is suspect. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurnieM Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) If you are not Air Services then any advise has no power. What happens if you 'strongly recommend' over the radio, he ignores you and you take no further action ? Are you legally libel for not escalating it to CASA ? Remember the driver here is his girlfriend knowing his judgement was crap and saying he should have been better trained. Edited May 1 by BurnieM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litespeed Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 I know we have no power but sometimes we still need to stand up and try to protect our fellow flyers from them selves. It also means they might pick up our our failures and save us from stupidity/poor decision making. Casa has no bearing on it, it's advice, the pilot is in command. We can moan and bitch about regs etc and training but we all should be looking out to help fellow pilots. Yes, his judgement might have been poor but a word from experienced pilots can make a big difference esp when low on hours. I'd rather get roasted by him than watch a guy fly off into the danger zone unknowingly. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) A coroner's inquiry is substantially to identify any 3rd person's probable culpability regarding a death. This case, as so many others, can only find that responsibility lies solely with the pic. Training can only point the pilot in a direction. Decisions are always subject to irrationality. This man was mature age and had a history of operation in risk prone activity. A leopard cannot change his coat. Hopefully no further restrictions will be levied on us arising from the palpably stupid actions of one 'pilot'. Edited May 1 by Methusala spell check 1 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 Unfortunately the question of training has been raised; certainly at the conclusion of a full training course with satisfactory industry benchmark pass figures that's a good tick of responsibility, but behaviour is a risk factor. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 17 minutes ago, turboplanner said: Unfortunately the question of training has been raised Coroner's recommendations are just that, no obligation on bodies to comply. I know that politics enter into the mix, that's why I preface my conclusion with 'hopefully'. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 Some people thrive on taking risks. Nev 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrendAn Posted May 2 Author Share Posted May 2 1 hour ago, facthunter said: Some people thrive on taking risks. Nev well my wife is terrified i will have a plane crash, i put her mind at ease and bought an 1100 cc motorbike instead.😁 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skippydiesel Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 "well my wife is hoping i will have a plane crash," 😈 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 Surely not? Has she taken out a lot of Insurance on you? Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now