jackc

53 minutes ago, facthunter said:

In THAT event IT would be investigated because of it's significance. It's COST that limits investigation of all incidents. RAAus doesn't and never could afford the resources to do it.  Nev

Well, I guess we wait and see if it is? 

From comments in another thread, it seems that  RAAus don’t want to participate in investigation of crashes involving RAA aircraft? 
I was under the impression that CASA under Part 149 has told RAAus they must carry out crash investigations involving RAA aircraft, however the required framework for this to happen, has not been completed etc?
I am commenting based on my limited knowledge of the subject, but in my opinion there seems to be some deficiencies here?

Does RAAus not want to be involved?  Or is the development of the required framework a large task to undertake?  
An enquiring member wants to know……..

51 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Well I've read the 2010 documents; many people haven't; but they are key documents making things clear.

When you're managing an operation where others have a duty of care, then it's not that smart to come in issuing orders because then if something happens, it was under your instruction. I've handled that situation in the past by conducting Audits and reporting the results to the independent self administering Association which then made the decision to remove the risk.

In which case RAAus does nothing and the members never get to see results of any investigations etc.  Best we could ever see is a statement on incidents/crashes etc from RAAus and nothing more.  A summary of opinions and safety suggestions will be it, nothing more. 

56 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Members of Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. had a Committee of Management which could have been tasked to draw up the necessary clauses in the Constitution to add Compliance, Enforcement, Natural Justice etc. or they could have done it by presenting a draft to Members for a Member vote. When the Clauses were approved and the Powers emended RAA Inc was ready to start making decisions. The COM could then have appointed the necessary Officials. No real problem there.

 

However the people with the Agenda to concentrate the power into a few positions by converting to a Limited Company means that if the Members wanted to avoid a disaster theoretically caused by behaviour, or shortcomings in management, the Members would first have to deal with the process to get their powers back by reverting to an Incorporated body, or RAA Ltd would have to decide to go through the process of adding the extra functions and powers.

 

That's the context under which I mentioned the Members. can solve compliance with Part 148.

 

 

And what if CASA put the pressure on RAAus to attend to this situation?

Can only hide under a rock for so long?

18 hours ago, turboplanner said:

We've covered this ground before; the only reason RA Aircraft are flying is because it's the policy of Commonwealth and State Governments to offload public liability costs off themselves and on to the participants in sports, so CASA are unlikely to be silly enough to march in and start issuing orders. If they did they would reassume liability for those orders but with out the control they have on GA aircraft and pilots.

 

It's not a too hard basket, just bone laziness and other agendas.

 

It's the members that have to get on and do it.

So in that case members have to solve the problem about RAAus investigation incidents and crashes?   Has not CASA delegated this requirement under Part 149? For RAAus to undertake this work? 

32 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

No one has stepped up to built the extensive structure into the constitution, so no point whining.

Turbo, was my statement correct?  If it is and you intimate it’s in the too hard basket? 
Maybe CASA need to make RAAus get it done?  
Organisations need to get on the job to at least make an effort to meet their obligations and inform the membership of their progress? 

On 18/1/2024 at 12:48 PM, Lightwing Bill said:

ATSB Commissioner Angus Mitchel's resume states:

 

Mr Mitchell joins the ATSB from Maritime Safety Queensland (MSQ), where as General Manager he oversaw the safe and efficient movement of vessels into and out of Queensland’s 21 ports, and was responsible for compliance activities and safety investigations for Australia’s largest recreational maritime fleet.

 

MSQ investigates all maritime incidents including recreation boat accidents.  Which raises the question, why doesn't Angus support a similar accident investigation service for recreation aviation now that he is in charge of the ATSB?

 

The RA-Aus Board, Pip Spence CEO of CASA and ACM (ret) Mark Biskin chairman of the CASA Board were all asked if they would consider setting up a registration service and define a set of standards for private accident investigators.  RA-Aus Board said no, Mark passed the buck to Pip, Pip drifted off on a tangent.   

 

It's a CASA Board attitude problem.   The Board should never have agreed to Part 149 (sport and recreation organizations) without a specific requirement for accident investigation. 

 

RA-Aus and CASA pointing the finger at ATSB isn't productive.  Angus's ATSB "train set" is, with good reason, completely independent of Pip's CASA "train set" so we need to find another solution if Angus won't share his "train set".

 

 

The issue of accident investigation is important to those who fly in recreation and sport aircraft as well as to those we share the airspace with.   

 

Does Pip think the fare paying public, particularly those important ones up the front of commercial aircraft, will be pleased to know that CASA is contemplating allowing RA-Aus aircraft, with dodgy airworthiness and operated under a set of rules that are not monitored by formal feedback from accident reports, to operate in controlled airspace?  

 

One person can't change the status quo.   It will require the input of every recreation aviator to get RA-Aus and CASA to do something.   Our elected RA-Aus Board members should be doing this for us.  Unfortunately, the RA-Aus Board doesn't seem to understand the problem or be willing to engage with the membership to help find a solution to the problem.

 

Why don't you ask Michael Monck, RA-Aus Board chairman, if he thinks we need an accident investigation service, what he is doing to get one, and when he predicts that such a service will be available.   His email address is [email protected].   

 

The answer recently given to this question was that the Board appreciates the need for an accident service, and RA-Aus is talking to CASA and the minister about more funding for the ATSB.    On timing, RA-Aus had been "talking" to the Minister for over 4 years without a result.   Up until about 4 years ago it appears that RA-Aus was conducting accident investigations. 

 

I pay for my own public liability insurance and don't rely on the MLIP.   I also check that any aircraft I hire or have instruction in has comprehensive insurance before I get in it.    Unlike motor vehicles, aircraft are not required to have any insurance cover.   Unfortunately, due to the lack of accident investigation, I can't be sure of the airworthiness of my aircraft or the reliability of the procedures that i operate under.

 

That's it from me.   Thanks for reading this far.   Have a nice day.

 

I was under the impression that RAAus had to do investigation under Part 149? 
If RAAus don’t do investigations on crashes, yet we must abide by their regulations, and be subject to investigation for breaches?

Call me confused?  

2 hours ago, mkennard said:

My Jab has electric flaps.

Yes and I don’t like the way I need to use them. Reach across with left hand and use switch by holding with finger, at the same time watching that little indicator cable on  the extreme right side of cabin.

Simply should be a rotary multi position switch on instrument panel to select desired flap setting. Select, forget and continue flying plane. Set switch as desired, when needed. 
iF my aircraft was 19 rego, I would fix it in a heartbeat. 

Does this incident bring to light the deficiencies of RAA Insurance?  Seems to me this needs to be investigated otherwise members could be compromised on what is deemed a legitimate claim? 

On 23/12/2023 at 12:53 PM, kgwilson said:

A quick search shows the LS1 weighs about 425lbs and an IO360 about 280 to 330lbs so it would appear to have a reasonable weight penalty plus the redrive and rear counterweight for balance.

Benalla Gliding Club had an LS1 powered Pawnee as a tug. It was on a special 1500 hour permit and it went like a scolded cat dragging an ASK21 glider into the sky 🙂 

I just wonder how many pilots fly without a current required medical?  Any statistics?  There will never be any method to check self declared medical status either?  So the whole thing is a crock…… 

Why worry about about things you cant control or fix.  Don't EVER expect the Govt to help either. Make plans to cover your own needs in a shortage, be it food and fuel for generators, be off grid, water supply etc. Keep cars full of fuel etc…..the list goes on.

I have long been prepared, and by the time I run out of resources, most of the population will be at each others throats…..

Get short of food? I  Can always knock over a passing Wallaby, for fresh meat 🙂 

Sorry, looks like I have stumbled into an EV forum?

cheers from,

The Coal Roller 🙂 

13 hours ago, kgwilson said:

I like the fact that you can opt for Steam gauges. The 230 price has skyrocketed lately largely due to the cost of all that glass & flash instrumentation plus the commitment to Gen 3 spares is a good reassuring statement. Continuous improvement is the best option engine wise, rather that a complete new generation especially as petrol powered ICE engines are in the twilight years of their existence.

3 years ago I was looking for a new aircraft,  one of my many aviation moments and never did buy new.  Instead, I went second hand with a view to upgrade later.

Went personally to the Brumby Factory at Cowra and looked, sat in their demo Brumby,  looked the goods everywhere…..but was told NO steam, NO way and that was the end of that. Out the door I went.  My original training aircraft had steam gauges, due to COVID I had to change schools, choices all had Dynon screens…..nope, not interested.  I wont own a car with screen displays, I managed to get a Mahindra ute with no digital screen, will be my last new vehicle.

All I need in an aircraft is to know how high, I am , how fast I am going , how much fuel I have and what direction I am flying in. A radio is a good thing, too 🙂 

Engine gauges?  If they go awry at 5000ft on a flight, you will probably soon be a Glider Pilot, just fly your freaking plane……in silence while you look a place to land 🙂 

Lots of technology is not always better…..look what rhe Wright Bros got away with 🙂 

On 7/11/2023 at 5:37 AM, leslloyd said:

So Gen 4 still can't match Rotax in overall terms i gather,i sold a 230 because of the constant verbal crap associated with ownership,

pity as it was a joy to fly otherwise.

 

I don't care what gets said about them, I will keep mine until I go to my grave.

Mine hauls my sorry arse around the sky, well enough for me 🙂 

Triggered reminder for me…..when building airstrip, make sure sides are clearly marked…..

I was sure I picked that up from the AOPA broadcast Thursday night……

Australian Aviation will always have a problem with 800+ CASA employees of which few have a Pilots licence of some sort, administering about 9000 aircraft.

Then you have the FAA in the U.S. with 49 employees administering some 30,000 aircraft.

You can see CASA is way over MTOW 🙂 

Just fit what other owners have and what works.  Fly happy 😃 In this case, screw the MARAP system, your aircraft wont care 🙂 

Turbs, dont sweat it…..its not your problem. You wont have to pay even 🙂 

Trust me, I consult with good people and I learn from others. Yes I break the law somewhere every week, but I compromise no one else in the process, nor myself.  But there are some LAMEs I would not let touch a $300 rusty Corolla, even if I wanted to drive to the next town.  I have learnt in this life I have to fix nearly everything I own, myself.  Just the other day bought a new 4t 4 post hoist and installed it, because for the last 55 years so, I have rolling around on the ground under cars, fixing them…..yeah I know, I am a slow learner. 

4 hours ago, facthunter said:

The "condition' report is best performed by someone very familiar with the type and not associated with the last owner or previous maintenance of that plane .How the books are written up is important and the W&B docs and when it was last weighed. There's a lot of things it does NOT address.  Nev

This was the first of many disasters I found on my newly acquired aircraft, dontcha love the firewall penetration of the fuel line that was marked 7 years old and done as part of the 5 year rubber replacement requirements as detailed by Rotax. .  Which I immediately grounded……further inspection by me (totally unqualified) found more problems revealing a flying death trap:-(. RAA were not interested, said they could not care if my wings were held on with Blue Tak.  Whats a Condition Report worth? SFA. Care factor by RAA, ZERO. So now I do not fcuking care anymore, I do my own work now….have all the FAA Tech Books and study them carefully, like my whole life…..taught  MYSELF.  Illegal and I dont care, Illegal is a sick bird.  Now just waiting for some Aviation Gronk to send this info, to snitch on me to RAA…….

Read the PDS referring to the insurance scheme and it will be like many, full of escape clauses and all but worthless 😞 

The MARAP is simply a document to read and allocate an invoice to.  In respect of the one in this post, its just an excuse to charge money for something not required.  Which in itself cannot really be substantiated.

Since I have beed involved in Aviation which is all of 5 minutes, I have seen gaping holes in some things, over regulation in other garnished with a whole heap of b/s. Don't ever mention Condition Reports to me either…..that will wind me right up 🙂 

30 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

An assessment is an assessment the assessor has to go through the whole process.

5 minutes for a rubber stamp job, next please for another MARAP the same as the previous one, KA-Ching……