Ian Sugden

.....now this brought back to Mr Slartibartfast the storey his dear old Grandad had told him about a relative of his, a Mr Kelly, who according to Grandad was a fine upstanding pillar of society with vast legal experience and so he thought.......

".... and an aircraft on the ground asks if you dont mind if he crosses the runway, then just a double click" The guy on the ground has no idea if he was heard or not and should he or should he not cross in the limited time available. The crossing pilot must have had some uneasiness about the closeness of the situation to even make the call. I'll stand by the "just not good enough" statement. Cheers

Hank, that sure looks pretty. I was in New Zealand last year and took a flight over the 3 volcanoes (sorry I can't spell them) in the north Island - absolutely stunning! Not only the volcanoes themselves but the surrounding country side was beautiful too. Lucky fella.

The double click is not a valid form of acknowledgement under any circumstances. They can be just airwave "noise" in which case the other party has no way of knowing if they were understood or even heard. After all, the radio is used for communication and communication with radio consists of two things...speaking(keep it simple and clear) and listening. The double click has been in existence all my flying life and I don't expect it will die out at any time, but put simply its not good enough.

Mmmmm......dreams are very important in ones life, they provide the basis of aspiration and the motivation as well. Long live the peacemakers for the practical, and the John Lennons of the world for the inspirational. Hey Escadrille, you have just about nailed it with the explanation, BlackRod too with the first line drawn, Facthunter for a bit more illumination, Eightyknots for making the point as well as the pun (good one). Well done. I would think that in an informal atmosphere such as this that thoughts get kicked around in a more free manner than in a brainstorming session. So, because there is obvious difference in the thoughts on direction of RAAus, would it be worth pointing them in the direction of this little forum so they are kept up to date, or at least aware of, the opposing opinions of members? Being new to this game I don't know what has transpired before or how RAAus gets its feedback from members. Lots of feedback that people get is of the PM's driver type - tells them what they want to hear for fear of loosing his job even though its not what is going down in the real world. (I think it was Paul Keating or maybe John Howard that said he got a feel for the people through his driver.)

Aint that the truth!!

Hi Dave and welcome, lots of helpful guys & gals here I've found out. No questions too hard. Happy flying.

Good luck Damo..... and you've picked a great occupation.

To be sure. Just like John Lennon and the "we are more popular than Jesus" statement. What better way to grow than to make something affordable? With the advent of RA (and RAAUS being appointed the administering body)it has meant a significant reduction in cost. I guess what we need to think about is just how much do you think RAAUS should take on. Do you think that an ever increasing weight limit, passenger number, higher licence(sorry, certificate) qualifications etc. (all of which would take some authority from GA) should be an aim for RAAUS? Or do you think that a line should be drawn based on some parameter, on one side would be RAAUS and on the other CASA. If we keep administering RA as efficiently as possible with clear objectives in mind and contain the costs, the appeal and growth will continue at a pace. Who knows, one day CASA may say "you do it better than we do, would you like to do it all?" LOL!!!!!

Hi BlackRod, seems we both have the same idea - difference being I don't have any experience on the J120. As an extra the J120 is certified as a S-LSA and the following was received just a short while ago "Sorry but S-LSA are different from everything else. In that any mod NOT APPROVED BY THE MANUFACTURER is not permitted. Having said this the owner of the aircraft can modify it legally, but there is a catch, the aircraft will have to be reassessed for a new EXPERIMENTAL LSA Certificate of Airworthiness, which means that you the owner then become 100% responsible for the safety and airworthiness of the aircraft and it cannot be used in a flying school." I have requested a clarification of "NOT APPROVED BY THE MANUFACTURER ", wether it means permission, approval of work done by an engineer or work done by factory. Will advise further. Cheers

It would seem to me that there is a bit of concern about the safety of the tyres on the J120 out there in aeroplane land. Has anyone made these thoughts/concerns known to the relevant safety people or the factory? Steve, would your experience out at St George would be worth recounting for the benefit of all? A low hour/inexperienced pilot (I'm very inexperienced in landing with a flat tyre) could end up the wrong way trying to roll on a hexagonal brake disc with its assymetric properties. All a bit worrisome on the original quality front from these posts. I've just received an e-mail back from an authority that says "About the tyres, I have no problems reported concerning J120 wheels and or tyres." Any further comments from J120 owners out there?

Thanks Steve & Jac. I've sent off a couple of e-mails this morning to kick start the chain of events, I'll keep you posted.

Guys,thanks to you all for the most helpful hints here and sorry for my tardy response. I will have a crack at going through the channels - I want it legal, but somewhere there must be an approval method. Afterall, years ago I can remember a written off Piper Pawnee being converted to a two seater legally - cost a bomb though I'll bet. If, as you say Mick, A CAR 35 engineer can approve a change to a 747 then this would be a stroll in the park. It must just be the powers that be find it a bit tricky and thus the decree is that nobody is capable to perform this most difficult task on this unbelievably heavy 2 seater!! As I understand it now, Jabiru must give permission for the mod but it can be signed off by a qualified engineer - this negates the liability issue that Jabiru could have whilst still keeping it legal. I will continue and advise the end result, but probably not until 2011. In the meantime if anyone has more advice I'm all ears. Cheers all and thanks again. Ian