Jump to content

BurnieM

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    359

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by BurnieM

  1. BurnieM
    The issue is that departures from The Oaks 36 or 18 do not fly over Camdens circuit area but upwind departures from Camden 24 fly almost directly over The Oaks.
  2. BurnieM
    x
  3. BurnieM
    But AVDATA do have a contract with the Airfield owners. Most airfield owners have a website where they state their charges. Really this argument should be with the airfield owners if you are being charged for usage that did not occur.
  4. BurnieM
    I thought they only charged for landings ? They have been used in incidents before but I understand ATSB do not specify the source due to lack of proof of chain of custody.
  5. BurnieM
    They charged me $12 for a single touch and go a few weeks ago. I understand that the charging is done from radio recordings. They pretty much had to wave it but I would have thought it should have been obvious you did not actually land.
  6. BurnieM
    https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/plane-crashes-at-avalon-airshow-20250328-p5lney.html
  7. BurnieM
    Stef does Avalon (Youtube)
  8. BurnieM
    Ok stretching it a bit. At YSHL I have heard 20 NM long finals from RPT aircraft. Just trying to paint a picture of the relationship between Camden and The Oaks for those unfamiliar with this area.
  9. BurnieM
    You are still stuck with the Camden 24/06 runway orientation. This is the longest and only sealed runway at Camden.
  10. BurnieM
    Camden ground height 230 ft AMSL The Oaks ground height 879 ft AMSL In order to climb above The Oaks circuit height (lets say 1500 ft AGL at The Oaks) 879 + 1500 = 2379 ft AMSL Height to climb from Camden to above The Oaks circuit - 2379 - 230 = 2149 ft to climb 6.8 NM from Camden reference point to The Oaks. Lets subtract 1 NM for The Oaks circuit - 6.8 - 1 = 5.8 NM Departing upwind 24 at 100 Kt you have 3.5 minutes to climb 2149 ft (or 4.4 minutes at 80kt)
  11. BurnieM
    Departing upwind Camden 24 goes almost exactly over the The Oaks as does long final for 06 Removing The Oaks (THK) reporting point probably does not change a lot.
  12. BurnieM
    When suggesting options you have to be careful that one of the options IS NOT 'shut down The Oaks'. It seems to me that the relationship between Hobart anad Hobart Cambridge is similar with a common CTAF. How does this work ? Can anybody comment ?
  13. BurnieM
    Probably The Oaks traffic needs to use the same CTAF as Camden. But then does The Oaks traffic make uncontrolled calls or is there a pseudo semi-controlled calls from/to Camden and what format does this take and what control does Camden have over The Oaks movements ? As it is I understand that Camden puts limits on the number of aircraft allowed to be in the circuit at Camden.
  14. BurnieM
    Not saying there is not a real Camden/The Oaks comms issue. Just saying that this mid-air collision is not the best example to drive action. Or maybe it is. A loud and well known incident could maybe drive extra education and training. It is just logically comms was only one factor and the reason for lack of comms was not lack of knowledge in this incident.
  15. BurnieM
    Both of the Cessna pilots knew about the Camden and The Oaks comms requirements and yet did not perform them (Oaks comms). At least one of the Cessna pilots had flown in this area many times. From a distance this looks like a fatigue/workload overload rather than a straight comms issue.
  16. BurnieM
    Has the report been issued for this collision yet ? Comms was definitely an issue but both the examiner and pilot being tested were aware of The Oaks. The examiner was a Shell Harbour local. I believe the Cessna was at 1300 (Camden circuit height) and then climbed into the Jabiru at 1900 (The Oaks circuit height).
  17. BurnieM
    Decided to delete as this is more of a rabbit hole than ASIC ...
  18. BurnieM
    These lawyers appear to be admiting that their client, his girlfriend, failed in her legal obligation to report her finance to CASA. We all have it but rarely are people prosecuted for it. I will not comment on the ethical issues with believing he was so dangerous he might kill himself and yet taking limited action to stop him. Yes, RAAus has big liability here but .....
  19. BurnieM
    Zero information in the boards 'statement'. Why bother making it (apart from ongoing pressure from members).
  20. BurnieM
    What year did Rotax fix this problem ? ie if we have engine made after x then we can relax
  21. BurnieM
    I always replace the whole coax length even if the work takes significant time. 20 years of corrossion but leaving the last 10% does not make a lot of sense to me.
  22. BurnieM
    https://www.coronerscourt.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/COR%202022%20005430%20Form%2037-Finding%20into%20Death%20Following%20Inquest_Signed.pdf
  23. BurnieM
    Note the first person to stop him was a passenger who was not aware of what an ASIC was but could definitely identify a shotgun. Any id card is only a very small part of a security system with the major failures here being; - lack of regular fence patrols and - lack of security patrols on the apron While we keep pretending that all you need is an expensive id card and occassional council rangers this will continue to happen.
  24. BurnieM
    How do you know there is nothing to be learned unless you do a preliminary onsite investigation of all aviation incidents ? Not taking about a team of people for multiple months, just 1 guy onsite for 24 hours. Yes this also costs. If you are the CEO of a government safety organisation that is underfunded why are you not being very loud ?
  25. BurnieM
    When you bought your Harley Davidson did you ask your neighbours if it was ok first ? When you decided to park 5 x B doubles on your rural block did you ask your neighbours if it was ok first ? When you took a job that required you to start your car/bike/truck at 4am did you ask your neighbours if it was ok first ? You did not ask because it is allowed to do these things. I believe in not pissing off your neighbours but we all have a right to enjoyment of our own property and in rural areas this enjoyment can (legally) be wide ranging. Its a fine line guys.
×
×
  • Create New...