David Isaac

Daffyd, Bit harsh mate ... Have you not experienced an obstacle clearance speed takeoff in any of C180, 182, 185, 206. Your field of view is very limited and you have to be particularly vigilant. Are you suggesting that Cessna's design in this case is poor? I was always taught during my GA training to lower the nose occasionally on any climb out and look side to side for other aircraft all due to limited viz on climb out in the single engine C series. But of course you cannot lower the nose on the initial obstacle clearance climb out which incidentally is only 62 knots in a C180, 182 at MTOW.

You could have seen it only because the visibility is better than any typical GA/LSA. The climb angle and position of the Ferris wheel probably made the Ferris Wheel out of sight range at that time.

well if the loading is as you have read, doesn't take much mathematical imagination to work out possible excessive loads does it.

Good on you Bob for helping Duncan. This stuff fascinates me, doesn't mean I fully understand it, but the physic is really interesting.

Thanks Richard and Don ... LOL Unfortunately I am told that far too often. The trouble with being in any minority is you get outvoted. Maybe that is why I am such a pushy bugga LOL.

From the video it looks very much a flat spin.

Bugga off you lot, I have been flying since age 16 ... now 60, ther were only PPls then, and in the 1980s I flew Frank Bailey's (now deceased) 95-10 'Mustang', but only after extensive discussions with him on the design (he was an ex De Havilland engineer), then later flew Drifters. I am still a GA pilot, but I love rag and tube (the safe ones) or at least as safe as I can determine. There is nothing quite like a flight in a Drifter to stir up the senses and the rekindle some foot skills.

Climb angle visibility is also an issue on all of the GA aircraft I fly. You have to be visually vigilant on the climb out phase. Splays must be clear of obstructions.

Simple maths pmc. Pull 4g with that extra 50kg and you add 200kg to the wing loading.

The design loading would have to be capable of carrying the additional 50kg regardless. In other words the whole design loading would have to include the floats.

I told you ... The little guy in blue with the white gun holster fancied him ....

I think you mean pontoons and that clearly applies to water landing aircraft. It doesn't give you the liberty to just add 50 kgs. The airframe also has to designed to carry the extra 50 kgs in its structural loading. You just cannot increase the MTOW without consideration to G loadings. Look at the debacle caused by the illegally increased weight of the European LSAs.

Now that's an aircraft I would like to see. Come on Daffyd you are retired now (probably got less time LOL)

Well done buddy

Well done Derek, now tell us all what the hell you started. LOL

You bet your pretty face Dazz, so would have I. The pilot skill here is and always was irrelevant, the aircraft was within the splay and collided with an object deliberately placed within the splay. The ATSB report clearly shows the Ferris Wheel was within the splay and shows pollarded trees below the Ferris Wheel. Additionally there was no advice on the airfield web page warning of the obstruction of the Ferris Wheel. The only warning on the web page was the playing field lights being within the splay and that warning has always been there for Old Bar.

What, ..... Take The thin edge of the wedge ... and that will change the outcome. Not bloody likely. The focus is on the wrong thing. Wake up everybody, a whole bunch of people were involved in placing a Ferris Wheel in the splays of an aerodrome. Splays are put in place for safety margins to provide a safe area for aircraft when things go wrong, when mistakes are made or where weather may cause drift. The people that made that decision are responsible for this accident. The pilot skill here only explains why the aircraft was where it was, but the aircraft was entitled to be where it was except some bloody idiot put a Ferris wheel right within the splay. So now what are they going to do ... Instead of making sure the splays are clear during the next event they are going to stop flying. FFS . HELLO HELLO IS ANYONE OUT THERE. Am I the only one who can see the profound stupidity here?

Recreational aviation being out of control had NOTHING to do with this accident. It was a Committee of GA pilots and Taree Council who allowed the Ferris wheel to be placed in the splays FFS. MOVE THE BLOODY THING AND THE ACCIDENT WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED. yes I was yelling.

Tubz, Old Bar airfield is heritage listed, it can't be sold. But they could potentially stop it being used.

Unfortunately we are seen as 'rich boys' because we fly aircraft. The average person has no idea that an average 4WD costs more to own and operate than a small aircraft. After all wasn't recreational aviation supposed to make aviation in Australia affordable. Unfortunately I doubt we will ever be seen as a 'valued presence', when we are no less valuable than any other sector. Closing the airfield to this event is a huge mistake and I will wager a decision made more on political grounds than one of safety especially since the cause of the accident was readily identified and can be easily relocated. My fear is the airfield committee succumbing to this event will be the thin edge of the wedge. The airfield is heritage listed and an important part of this event at Old Bar. The committee should have got some balls and acknowledged the mistake, fix it and move on. The placement of the Ferris Wheel within the airfield splays was was one of the most profoundly stupid acts imaginable. If the Ferris a Wheel had not been placed where it was in the splays, this thread would not exist and neither would the ATSB report and all the politicking that resulted.

Well if you shut it down you remove all risk and don't have to shoulder any responsibility. So if you want to fly in to the festival tough, they will lose a very small amount of attendance and have again marginalized a select group of the community. There is no reason why it could not be kept operating if the splays are in place. If you want to remove all risk then close the bloody streets as well FFS. Rant rant rant rant ...... can you tell i am not impressed, they are so conservative now they might as well be CASA, but even CASA would let the field operate if the splays were in place.

I should correct my own statement, Notams are not issued at ALAs, but when a pilot seeks permission to land at an ALA which pilots have a duty of care to do, they could be advised by the operator of the obstruction and the displaced threshold. It could even have been put as a temporary warning on the Old bar airfield web site and then the displaced markers would have been obvious.

50 page report, one of the most comprehensive i have seen. the ultimate insult is in the 'Safety Summary' of the report: What's been done as a result RA-Aus have taken steps to ensure that the flight training facility that undertook the pilot’s training and its staff are aware of the requirements imposed upon them by the RA-Aus Operations Manual, and that RA-Aus staff at the facility have the required skills and knowledge to carry out flight training operations. The pilot underwent a flight review that established the need for additional training. The festival and airstrip committees reported that in future the airstrip will be closed and aviation operations suspended when the festival is taking place. (my underline and bold) So ... lets not fix the issue with idiots putting Ferris wheels in splays ... lets just shut down the airstrip .... Typical response, I am sorry, but this type of reaction really distresses me. Lets just stop all flying and we wont have any accidents. Will they close the road off into Old Bar if a car runs off the road and runs into a shop?????

I did a fair bit of research into the physics of the accident (putting all the red herring politics aside) and after making an initial inaccurate comment at the time which was kindly corrected by another contributor, I came to the conclusion that the accident was pretty simple to explain. Paul (the PIC) made a mistake in a go around, he left it late to make the decision, a decision that plenty of pilots make in error all over the place on ordinary airstrips. The problem was compounded because Old Bar is a short strip, so with limited runway available and limited power he still managed to clear the fence and climb away from the runway, even though he was drifting slightly to the left. Splays are put in place on ALAs for the very reasons of errors and mistakes that Paul made that day. If the splay had been clear, Paul would have climbed away successfully and at the worst would have raised a few eyebrows for a low go around over the public. You think that is too simple ... I think it is that simple .... All the rest of the posturing is collateral damage and it exposed weaknesses at the core of RAAus, at Morgan Aeroworks, at Taree Council and at the organisation of the event. None of those weaknesses caused the accident. There were two main factors contributing to the physical accident: 1. A late go around decision (hence arguable pilot competency / training) 2. A rather large obstruction in the splay (poor organisational decisions). In my view the main liability lies with the decision to put the Ferris wheel in the splay and not issue a Notam with a displaced threshold. But if they did all that and displaced the threshold, the only aircraft that could have used the strip that day would be probably STOL and egg beaters. But hey it was spectacular, Paul and his passenger survived and by nothing short of miracle, no one was hurt on the Ferris wheel. The two physical casualties were a written off Ferris Wheel and Morgan Sierra, which incidentally is (was) flying again. The administration casualties will be many.

yeah .. I think the little guy in the blue hat fancies peter ... LOL