coljones

The fatal accidents in '13 was the lowest while the fatal accident rate was average. This seems to imply that departures (or hours) in '13 were lower than previous years.

Sorry Nobody. Today I went flying an LSA55. The slower it went the quicker it fell out of the air on final, bugger!!!

wonderful language, this english. when you say "faster" do you mean "it lands at a greater velocity" or "lands sooner"?

The supplier could not bring them up to spec and the contract was cancelled on mutual terms - I am not sure if the Oz government took a bath but clearly in early 2007 they were uninspired with the capability of the supplier to deliver something that the Navy could reliably use. It appears that all the planes were returned to the vendor.

I prefer the Police check to the "good guy with a gun" or "caught with your pants down" alternatives. Might not be comprehensive but does scrape a lot of scum off the walls.

Of course but I do Oxymorons much better.

If nothing it might impress on parents that the quads and trikes are deadly and that they should lock away the keys and exercise a higher degree of supervision about their use. We have adults around the city (and country) who buy their kids mini motor bikes and let them loose on roads, footpaths and in parks

There are grubs out there who prey upon old people, young people, the meek, the halt and feeble minded and aircraft owners. They might be kitchen only staff this week but they will use all their psychopathic and sociopathic skills to move up the food chain without detection. It's tough but all people working with people at risk really do need to have a police check - might not uncover anything but might discourage the bad people (and the heroes and those looking for an OAM)

Broad flies a plane and is about 40. I don't know if Roy flies a plane. He is about 25. Those politicians who sail in submarines might be attacking quietly and with stealth but might, also, be skiving off.

I was thinking of Andrew Broad, actually the current Member for Mallee in western Victoria. He flies a Brumby. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/mp-andrew-broad-is-the-flyin-pollie/news-story/800dc41fd0d584e8428677a353d3a691

The young bloke who got elected to Malcolm Frasers old seat, Wannon, has been very quiet.

I went to school in the 50s and 60s and they were the most over regulated, petty, vicious systems in the world. Want to get ahead - play rugby league FFS what a bunch of wankers.

is it going back to Orange?

how is the c140 going?

there is workers comp for workplace injuries.

I think Skidmore has some engineering creds - you don't go test flying without them. United States Navy Test Pilot School Flight Test, Successfully completed 1985 – 1985 RAAF Academy BSc, Grad Dip Mil Av 1977 – 1980 Dr Jonathan Aleck is a lawyer and is Lee Ungermann's boss

Taking responsibility for your own aircraft might mean handing the maintenance of it over to someone qualified to do it properly. There are some who cannot walk and chew gum at the same time who should be barred from being within 500 metres of a plane. Care and feeding is not a trivial matter and unless an owner or pilot is 100% sure of what they are doing then they should hand the maintenance over. RAA is not child's play and shouldn't be treated as such.

Sorry Don but I beg to differ. Quite a lot of organisations have gone under because of the B.Com, B.Bus, LLB, MBA, AICD people at their pointy end. I think you will find that there are a lot of professionally qualified people from other professions doing sterling work on a wide range of commercial and not for profit organisations around the world. You might not be personally disparaging me but I think that the boards, large and small, work I have done over the last 40 odd years was of significant benefit to the organisations I have served. Some of my best friends are lawyers. One, in particular, one a board I currently serve on, is absolutely first rate mainly because he thinks outside the square and aims to understand the business and come up with novel solutions. No, he is not an aviation lawyer. I must give a lot of credit to your achievements, twice, as Treasurer, and to Jim Tatlock. If either of you opened your mouths on treasury matter it was to speak sense. Having a B.Com doesn't always guarantee that outcome. Not having a B.Com doesn't indicate that the treasurer is a gibbering idiot. Just because a board member represents the aspirations of his/her electorate to the board doesn't mean that they are bound to support the proposal, all things considered. The board members might advocate but must, at the end of the day, vote in support of the organisation, All of its members, and the rights of other stakeholders (including staff and those we have commercial and legal relations with). Having advocates on the board is not a bad thing. Keep well

you can have a meeting, which can be broadcast, and then after an ensuing debate, you can have a postal ballot. Directed proxies only work with an informed electorate - unless of course, like those "grown up" companies, you can con the mums and dads into giving open proxies to the chair where they can be used to support the power block. Think Whitlam and the NRMA. By issuing a ballot paper it forces the rank and file to make a decision - yes, no, do nothing - how much more democratic can you get.

My reading of the draft suggests that there are NO postal ballots, just the flawed proxy at GM meeting problems we are saddled with. Can you dig out the drafting guidelines used to nut out V1, before the lawyers got to it. Leaving aside Spencer who else is on the sub committee, and their qualifications?

Not off at a tangent. The first stat quoted by RAA was 198/10k. How far did RAA spread that?

Do some flying across a range of planes first. Do you have an RAA pilot Cert? You should also check out Dave's Flying School and the Sydney Recreational Flying Club at The Oaks. Both have a lot of maintenance and operational experience on a range of RAA engines and airframes.

I can't see a decimal point in the 198/10,000 stat. That would make it 19,800/1,000,000. 3 different figures 198/10,000 => 19,800/1,000,000 1.98/10,000 => 198/1,000,000 Or 1.98/1,000,000 Were the dodgy RAA calcs the basis of the CASA action?

"still lurks around on the fringes"? Is this code for a man in a raincoat?

It's all a bit like global warming - CASA is saying that they know nothing but their mind is still made up.