skippydiesel

I would like to have your comment & advice on: Glasurit 68, with wet on wet 284-90, as a suitable aircraft paint over aluminium, that has been sealed/treated with DeSoto 515X349 primer . AND Any other recommendations (with reasons) to do the job

I believe in flexibility - I use whichever method seems to give me the best result on the day (wind speed/direction). Usually crab on final, side slip over the fence, for a single wheel touch down - works for me. Way to high on final, slip for higher rate of decent, no airspeed increase. So my advice - practice both systems.

Why not go for a "fabric" door along the lines of a "taught liner"

Adding to all the hazards listed by Nev: Single phase power lines are impossible to see from the air, do not always follow tracks, sometimes the poles are not equally spaced, occasionally branch to shearing shed , etc and can hidden by a tree/line lot. So look for the posts while well out. The post shadow, is sometimes easier to see than the post. Follow the line of posts and look for any "branching".

I am always suspicious, of the efficacy, where the recommended quantities, do not take into account the variables for your system eg fuel additives that are by the tank (how large/small is your tank???)

I'm with Nev on this - I had never experienced manual flaps, in GA, until I moved over to RAA - Now much preferer manual, for all the reasons that Nev gave.

Well in at least one case it is - Facial Tumours in Tasmanian Tigers - in nature, where there is one in, there may be others.

Again I agree with your opening statement however this must be mitigated with the ability of the Gov to actually manage/get things done. So we trade a bit of self determination for a bit of Gove efficacy. The "pendulum swings" and Gov assumes to much power & needs to be brought back into line ( a debate for another time: I think that time is well & truly overdue, with the Australian Government(s) transparency diminishing/increasing use of secrecy and all sorts of rorting going on)

I have read your arguments on this m - there is logic in what you promote but the facts you use are selective, so at the end your conclusion is, in my opinion, wanting.

Well there you go - not such an outrageous idea after all. Thanks Russ.

I agree in principal, with "live & let live" but with one overriding provision - your belief set/system/philosophy should not have an negative impact on me or the wider population. If it does then you deserve to have your activities restricted and possibly criminalised. One of our greatest difficulties, as a democratic society, is "managing" the media so that it remains factual while at the same time being free to report the "truths" it perceives as important. It a difficult balancing act that often swings too far in each direction.

Not sure if there is any great revelation here - duty of care, by employer/service (hire vehicle, aircraft) to provider to provide a safe vehicle/work environment is well established/understood by most.

There is much in your comments, that I agree with however there are work situations/environments where I strongly support mandatory vaccination - The very concept of a safe working environment (an employer legal obligation) demands this in many if not most instances. Basically all work environments where either your work colleagues or customers/public may be put at risk by you or where you are at risk from your interactions with colleagues/the public should require your vaccination.

My understanding of the NSW hospital system at the moment: Staff shortages, rather then beds, is the most likely short term problem. Gladys seems to focus on beds, however the medical profession are concerned about staffing the beds/wards. I have a close relative working in the Campbelltown, NSW, hospital - she says the situation is becoming very difficult with people presenting with conditions,other than CV19 but also infected with CV19, so needing to be isolated - something not mentioned by the Gladys team.

Vaccination only reduces your chance of serious disease/death. It's not claimed to be 100% effective AND although the vulnerable will have a greater chance of survival, CV19 vaccination does not remove their initial vulnerability/co-morbidity. If we were to reach 100% vaccination, all deaths would be people who had been vaccinated. Just means that they were on the edge anyhow and even a mild CV 19 might " tip them over".