Ron5335

Well, we need the operator of a struggling flying school in Andrew Broads electorate (He's a National too) to go to him and tell him what the CASA restrictions have done to him, then it gets raised in question time in Parliament (As a Dorothy Dix question) directed to Darren Chester, who in turn assures everyone that the good Senator is handling it. Then the Minister jumps up a couple of days later and advises the house, That he has fixed it !!!!!!! Then Barnaby shows up on the nightly news, telling everyone how good The Nationals are. !!!!!

Could be some value in this !!! Darren Chester is a National Party Member. Nationals just got a new leader in Barnaby. The Nationals will want to get some quick runs on the board to show that they have hit the ground running and can fix things. O'Sullivan is a National too !! nudge nudge wink wink

Did you note during the video. The CASA dude proudly put forward the figure of 2 to 3 times greater rate of failure ( To back up their actions) but then Sen. Heffernan replied so we are talking about 2 or 3 planes per 10,000 (Instead of 1) It kind of puts everything into perspective.

Rather than relying on the members to show an interest to the senators, (I did to both) it would be a good time for RAA to poke it's head up and state, how many members it has, the value of the fleet, the number of flying schools, and the general turnover $'s for Aust. and the crippling effect the restrictions have introduced.

Oscar: Watershed moment it is, I also see it as, Do or Die for Recreational Aviation as it exists today. In the real world of aviation, the pilots are hobbled by their reliance on their employer, and it's not in the interests of airlines and commercial operators to go out of their way to upset the safety administrator. On the other hand, the Recreational & Sport flyers are not too backward in coming forward and are made up of consortium of everyone from butchers to lawyers and retirees with too much time on their hands. So now that push has turned to shove, What's next ? A) Cut the rabble loose, and make it 100% self regulating, and protect itself from future litigation by lifting the bans, and sit back and say "I Told you so". and continue their rein over the industry. or B) Bring out a bigger stick, and beat it into submission by firstly closing down the major local supplier of economical engines/aircraft, as the $Au dollar is going South and that will automatically limit imports from over seas. But option B is slower and brings in a lot of flack.

Done. Look at around the 8:00 in the clip. In response to the Senator O'Sullivan's question on what was causing the engine failures, (After assuming that CASA had carried out extensive investigations into each and every incident.) Included in the answer was "Roller Cam Valves". Roller Cams were introduced as part of the solution, not the cause. What's the penalty for misleading a Senate hearing ?????

Firstly they admitted they imposed the restrictions without identifying the fault. Then a big game changer cam with that they pulled down a modified engine with 900hrs on it to find no problems with it, (When the industry standard is only 200hrs, yet they did nothing, or planned to do nothing with the findings into the restrictions they imposed. No wonder the Senator seemed less than impressed

A great example of why we need a senate !!!!

And just to make it interesting. Warren Truss (aka Young Mr Grace) has decided to leave politics at the next election. Being the current head of Aviation matters in this Govt. He will have his feet up on the handlebars, with a Go away, stop bothering me attitude till then. After the election, we will have to see who we get,. Then he/she will have to take a year or two to settle in before making any decisions. as Malcolm Turnbull keeps telling us "It's an great an exiting time to be an Australian" and everything will be better if we just be innovative.

Or is it a case of Give a man an inch, and he will make himself a ruler !!!!

The Status-Quo is quite interesting. If in Post #2 Oscar is somewhere near the money by saying casa will be left holding the bag if they lift the restrictions. Then that is nullified by the fact (As in the latest Jabiru update) that casa might also end up holding the end of the stick with pooh on it should they leave the limitations in place and force someone into a "Statistically Less Safe Aircraft" that crashes. But then the rest of the aviation world is saying that they are happy with Jabiru's and no action is required (And they appear to have the better records) So, if it ends up a case of the whole thing was a beat up, then heads will have to go to neutralise the above Catch 22 and life as we know will go on.

Here is the worrying thing. Take a look at the number of abstainers or non voters on issues where the politicians are allowed a conscience vote on issues. (NSW Only) http://www.nswvotes.org.au/conscience/ Appears that they do not have a mind of there own, or they don't trust themselves , and rely on other people to tell them how they think/vote.

Well if it has a positive outcome, it gets a tick for an achievement. The more ticks, the better you look, so why tackle big issues for only one tick, when you can solve lots of little things and get more ticks.

I don't think Clive will be back...... Palmer Aviation went under too, and the bank took the plane back.

If, as the article refers to, Dick Smith stands for Parliament. How effective would he be as an independent trying to implement change, if the Government had a clear majority ? Then again, he firstly has to get elected in the seat, and How many voters in that seat see aviation as a primary issue? (Kind of a one trick pony) http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/01/21/00/55/dick-smith-considering-running-against-bronwyn-bishop-report

http://www.9news.com.au/world/2015/12/24/16/38/helicopter-crashed-on-fiji-island-seven-aussies-and-kiwis-on-board-escaped-without-injury Any ideas on what would have caused this sudden reaction ?????

From the ATSB Report: (Who knows how much this document would have cost) The majority (21 per cent) of in-flight medical and incapacitation events in Australian civil pilots for the study period were due to acute gastrointestinal illness (usually food poisoning), Will this mean that #casa can now move to ban pilots from eating 4 hours prior to and during flights, then claim it will improve air safety by 21% by eliminating the Green Apple Splatters. If in response to Alcohol, we can up with 8 hours from the bottle to the throttle. & Clear Prop & Clear mind is suppose to lead to safer flying. Who want's to try with this one? Eg: If you just put something in your tummy You need to wait 4 hours To see that it doesn't come out runny Don't vote... it only encourages them !!!!!!

Like at lot of other contributors to this site , I never got to meet Maj, and only knew him via his posts that now seem haunting when you scroll through some of the topics. My condolences goes out to all the family and friends that he made throughout his life and the grief that they must be going through at the present time. Naturally, in trying to determine what happened there are many scenarios being put forward in an effort that pilots can make some sense out of it, if nothing more than to regain or hold onto their confidence. I wasn't there, I haven't been told anything, but the astonishing thing for me is the cone marker in the foreground of the photo, that I assume is the runway, and the wreckage just meters away. So close, yet so far.

I tried the link and it took me to the page, but it also said that I had completed the survey already. I wonder what I answered ????????

MARAP on #19"s (Oh No .....The Bed Wets are starting again) As you would recall, my #19 aitcraft was the first to get caught up in the dilemma. Two days after releasing the MARAP I applied to renew the rego, only to be told I had to go through the MARAP (To apply or seek permission to modify what I already had completed and with the completed photographs in the hands of the RAA before any application to do them) Added to this was the big Red Herring of "You were not the builder, so you can't modify it" where as the legislation says If you purchase a #19 rego aircraft you are deemed to be the owner builder. Another year on, and closer to meeting my creator would anyone like to give me the odds on what will come first. 1. Me, meeting my creator ? 2. Getting a definitive answer on Who can modify a #19 other than the builder ?

Yes, ICAC were doing the wrong thing. As the High Court stated in rough terms, They initiated action without letting the the normal legal process run it's course. Their role is to investigate matters where justice was been seen to be done, but there is suspicion that someone, or a group are tampering with the system or doing back room deals to pervert the course of justice.

I would say your on the money......... and while on the subject of money ..... Who will pay the $50k to get it to the High Court for a determination. Then as in the Cuneen Case ..... What action has been taken against ICAC for doing the wrong thing in the first place ?

Aviation wouldn't be where it is today (Nor Hollywood) , if it wasn't for Mr Honey and his tenacity to expose the faults of the dreaded Reindeer aircraft. Only old members will understand these posts (Really old)

As a bit of a awareness to everybody where ever you are. The sleepy little airstrip at The Oaks got a visit from the CASA Drug and Alcohol tester this week. A painless experience, but a bit of a surprise for all concerned. Historically, we should be due in another 20 years !!!!

If so, I hope they refine it, otherwise patients being treated might find themselves "Hopping" out of bed at night, and onto the road in front of on coming cars.