David Isaac

Terribly sad outcome for John and the young 37 year old Jason from Rockhampton. These incidents are always hard to understand and accept. I never met John, but spoke to him and conversed with him on this forum like many of us. Rest in peace our two aviation brothers.

 

 

Well that stuffs that then.

Yep we are both fired ... but at least we have the raspberries ...ROFLMAO

 

 

I wish you could blow Raspberries on this thread ... LOL

 

 

Ahhh so he wanted the short Airep thingy ... bugga I'll have to go and look it up. I might just be able to save my job. ROFLMAO.

 

 

You're fired

Thats good you better find my boss and tell him LOL

 

 

Ok i'll try, i thought it was 4

 

Aircraft ID

 

Position

 

Time

 

Altitude

 

 

........ The owner should ask what type and what experience you have.

Gidday Aldo, this has always been a vexed point. The old " ...could have, should have, would have ..." argument. It somewhat depends on whether the access to use the ALA is generally publicly available or a private access only ALA. As you know technically from a PIC responsibility point of view all ALAs are PPR (Prior Permission Required), you are technically required to seek permission to land at Warnervale (Council operated) or Luskintyre (privately operated), but alas few do. How otherwise do you determine as the PIC whether the strip is serviceable, which you are REQUIRED to do by Federal Legislation whether your are a RAAus Pilot, a PPL, an ATPL or for that matter even if you were prince Philip with a PPLIf I was the owner of an ALA, yes I would ask type and experience, but I am a pilot with an assumed knowledge and experience and I would be likely operating out of the strip, so some advice is appropriate and there would be an assumed credibility to the advice.

 

However, an owner may not be a pilot or the owner pilot's partner/employee may answer the phone and may only be able to provide limited advice. So at the end of the day the risk begins and ends with the PIC as I know you have also stated. The PIC by law must seek permission and determine for themselves whether the strip is serviceable and suitable for their skill level based on the info they get. If I owned an ALA I would have all visitors sign a liability disclaimer before allowing use.

 

At the end of the day it is the PIC's responsibility as to whether he/she continues or not, but if you have rang, asked the correct questions and received the right answers it is very difficult from afar to determine if the answers were in fact incorrect.

That is always the risk so a suitable alternative must be planned.

 

If I was an owner/operator of a PPR strip and charging landing fees I would not like to be in court defending a charge if I had told the pilot that all was good when in fact it may not have been. I'm not a lawyer but if I was the complainant I would have a very good barrister and I suspect I might win.

I wouldn't assume that, there has been plenty of precedence to the contrary. My mates case was one case in point.

 

As far as I'm aware as soon as you charge for anything you become responsible in some way.Aldo

Depending on how you communicate, your responsibility can be adequately discharged without liability.

My post was a clear plea for all ALL REC pilots to wake up in this area and take responsibility for their actions so we don't have to read about more statistics/QUOTE][/i]

We probably agree on more than we disagree, though I think your plea would have been better received if you said "All Pilots" not ALL REC pilots.

 

Aviation in all its aspects can be very unforgiving, and everyone can benefit from a reflective appreciation of a (thankfully non-fatal) incident. In this instance, singling out a particular regulatory category of aviator, (rather than simply alluding to inexperience) was the prime motivation of my response.

 

Dave

Dave,

I think we totally agree, when I refer to REC pilots I include PPL holders, after all most PPL holders are purely recreational pilots. My posts equally apply to them. My mate who pranged because of this ALA performance (lack thereof) issue many years ago was a PPL.

 

David, I've kept silent (until now) about this event, preferring to let others assess and discuss the errors of others in comparison with one's own piloting skills - all part of improving one's own skills, long term.In my opinion, we are all able to learn from our own mistakes, and from those of others. What I take particular objection to is the assertion that because a pilot is "recreational" then they must necessarily be inadequate or less committed to safety - not true in my experience....

Dsam, it was certainly not my intention and I did NOT assert that ALL recreational pilots are not committed to safety. My assertion is that there are a large number of REC pilots who were not adequately taught in particular on PIC responsibilities at ALAs and the associated risks. That was the assertion I was most certainly making. I have made that assertion based on many comments on this matter on this forum over several years and even some of the comments by experienced pilots on this particular thread. Head in the clouds summed it up well in his post #119.

 

In any group of people, there are good and bad achievers. Let's not cast aspersions so casually. Instead, let's endeavour to learn from other people when they share incidents, and not focus on who to vilify.

I don't intent to vilify anyone and indeed did NOT. I made a very clear statement about the failings of many REC pilots in this particular area, specifically NOT vilifying any individual. Ryan is certainly NOT alone in his experience and many pilots have learned this lesson the hard way including a personal friend of mine who lived to tell the story after righting off an aircraft in a South Australian Vineyard many years ago.

 

Yes, I agree completely, that the pilot has the ultimate responsibility for a safe outcome, and that a piloting mistake probably occurred in this incident. We are all human (professional or recreational). If we are reckless in finding blame, the sharing of incidents will stop, and the better long-term outcome of learning will be lost (to the detriment of all).

There was NO recklessness in any component of my post in relation to apportioning blame. My post was a clear plea for all ALL REC pilots to wake up in this area and take responsibility for their actions so we don't have to read about more statistics.We all make mistakes and we can all learn, my post is a plea to learn and understand our responsibilities in this area. I also learn from well posted material and advice.

 

 

It about time Rec pilots took a good look in the mirror around these issues.

 

First you must have permission to land at any ALA. Secondly YOU as PIC are responsible to determine whether your aircraft and your skill level are suitable for the field AND its condition. If it has long grass ... your call. If it has ruts and dips ... your call. The owner MAY advise you of the condition of the strip, but ultimately it is your decision as PIC.

 

Just because it is an ALA does NOT mean it is suitable for all aircraft. You must know your aircraft landing and takeoff performance requirements and if 'short field' techniques are required (which is what most P chart lengths are based on), whether you are current on these techniques and then determine whether any ALA and its condition are legal for YOUR aircraft. I have heard bugga all on proper 'short field' techniques on this forum in years. It would appear most REC pilots do glide approaches and some exclusively. Not knowing and practicing 'Short field' techniques could get you in trouble one day when you are in the habit of using all of the 1000 metres at your local bitumen strip.

 

You prang ... you explain to the insurer; no one else. You right the aircraft off; you will be paying out of your own pocket. I have a friend who found that out the hard way.

 

Wake up and understand the regs. We don't get exemptions from all regs as REC pilots.

 

 

I had believed the RPL was ICAO and recognised, it is effectively the same as the restricted PPL I thought.

 

 

Sorry yes, it was not above 300AGL that became not below 500AGL ... but it was sealed raods you were not allowed to cross - gravel and dirt were ok.Similar it used to be not greater than 115kg empty and that became not above 300kg MTOW and add in the wing loading.

I remember those days well. I met Frank Bailey in those days and used to fly his designed 'Mustang' out of the old WWII strip at Berrima near Mittagong. I currently own one of his later designed Javelins.

Long before Pilot Certificates. The difference for me was that I was already a PPL holder. Great days and great fun.

 

 

Actually it was not above 300' and not cross roads.

 

 

Orchid is very rough, we bent a leg landing there...

When Zoos?

 

 

Sorry TP it was a sitter

That was gold Jetjr.

 

 

Thanks Don, we also need to have a bit of philosophy before we craft a rule to suit. ie.1. Notice of meeting and call for proposals and supporting narrative 56 days out

2. Close of proposals and supporting narrative 28 days out

 

3. Issue of formal agenda including proposals to receive reports individually, and proposals received at least 28 days out and the supporting narrative and proxy forms (21 days out)

 

4. Receive from members comments on prposals (14 days out)

 

5. Circulate comments (10 days out).

 

We also need to determine what resolutions can be put to the meeting without notice eg procedural motions and receipt of reports and thank yous or condemnation of the board

 

I will have to think up some Electoral rules but we need to work out if we want preferential where each candidate needs the support of the majority to get elected or proportional representation where each candidate gets elected in proportion to their support.

 

The difficulty with the last process was that it went away to cut rules without floating philosophy to the members first.

Keith,

Why would you 'caution' Col on this post?

 

Excellent post Col, if we understand the philosophy and the intent it makes it is easier to put constructive language around the intended amendment and therefore get member support for the special resolution.

 

 

Can someone explain to me what it is with this 'caution' tag that appears ocassionally on posts? What exactly is it supposed to mean or imply?

 

 

Here we go again Keith. More misinformation. Lets not let the truth get in the way of a good story.

 

You have NEVER been able to put any resolution to any meeting with out the required notice to members either when we were an association or now as a company and Kasper should have known this and has NO valid complaint about being shutdown attempting to put one at the AGM. But let's not let this fact get in the way of your invalid allegation.

 

By all means raise valid complaints, but it seems there is a plethora of invalid complaints and innuendos from a few on this forum.

 

Kasper's rubbing it in by complaining he was prevented from putting a resolution at the AGM when he knows you cannot put resolutions without due notice and particularly when he was told he would not be allowed to put it by the president is nothing more than mischievous.

 

He raised a valid technical point with the constitution and left the board in an impossible position to give the required notice and is now rubbing it in. Any sympathy I had for the issue is now gone.

 

Just get on and put a resolution to fix the technical notice problem with the constitution .. right .... no one seems to really want to solve the problem. No resolution has come forward from Kasper and he is accusing wrong doing at the AGM when in fact what happened was the correct procedure. And now he going to take his marbles and go fly with HGFA, with no apparent intention to be productive to fix the problem other than complain on this forum.

 

Then to add more BS to the overly inflated issue, let's have Keith cast more aspursions and allegations about a lawyer being present at the AGM and link it to the ENTIRELY DIFFERENT set of circumstances of the now infamous Queanbeyan meeting.

 

If you want support for genuine issues from most of us, may I suggest you start behaving a little more professionally and factually. If you want to make allegations about meeting notice and process, do your home work and read the constitution and do a basic ASIC model rules Google search before you make absolute fools of all of us.

 

 

I am here. You would have trouble flying in. Cloud is high enough for a great show though. Paul Bennet did a great routine. Nanchangs up at the moment.

 

 

I guess I'm saying that would it not be better to devote more time to judging the approach better, rather than a last second fix by slipping it in?That's not to say "don't ever teach it as a last resort" but I sometimes get this feeling that people see it as some sort of cure-all. "Yeah got too high on this glide approach, but easy fixed, just slip it in like I normally do when I'm too high on a glide approach!" That's an absurd distraction from addressing the root problem.

I understand what you are saying Dutchy, but I frequently deliberately arrive high just so I can practice side slipping (with and without flaps) and I love it. It is a good maneuver to practice and if you have a flapless machine, it is a normal approach technique. But then again I have flown a few vintage birds and rag & tubes in my time.

Hope to make it, at this stage 4 aircraft are flying in from Gawler.

If you are interested in catching up my mobile is 0412 221 469. I'll be there on Sunday.

 

 

Shirley not?Kaz

Ha ha ha Kaz ... she is out LOL.

Hope you are doing well m'dear and that Auster as well.

 

 

I copied this from the other thread "Change is in the air to a question from Tubz ...

 

I can understand 21 days notice of a Meeting; which allows people to make arrangements to travel etc.However if you're suggesting that members will need 21 days to make their mind up I would suggest a cattle prod or two.

Clauses 27 and 21 are not co-dependent, Clause 27 clearly shows the pathway.

 

You said not to mention Corporations law, but can you point to something which would overturn Claus 27 in this Constitution.

Hi Tubz,

I found this on the ASIC website about model rules. It seems that 21 days notice is required at least for Special resolutions.

 

http://www.asic.gov.au/for-business/changes-to-your-company/company-resolutions/

 

"Company resolutions

 

A resolution is the formal means by which decisions are made by a meeting of company members. There are two types of resolutions: ordinary and special. The Corporations Act 2001 (the Corporations Act) requires many decisions that affect a company to be made by resolution, some of which must be by special resolution. In addition, the constitution of a company may also require that other decisions be made by either an ordinary resolution or a special resolution.

 

 

 

General requirements for passing resolutions

 

 

 

The general requirements under the Corporations Act for the passing of any resolution are:

 

• The resolution—
   
   
  is passed at a meeting, which is properly convened and satisfies the quorum requirements, and
   
   
  
• is entered in the books kept by the company for that purpose within one month after the meeting is held.
   
   
  

 

 

[*]The minutes must be signed by the chair of the meeting at which the resolution was passed or by the chair of the next meeting.

 

Non-compliance with these requirements could invalidate the outcome of the resolution.

 

 

 

Voting on resolutions

 

 

 

Where a company has share capital, a member has one vote for each share held subject to any rights or restrictions attached to any class of shares.

 

 

 

For a company without share capital, every member is entitled to one vote. The chair has a casting vote, and if a member, also a member’s vote.

 

 

 

Proxy documents for members of listed companies

 

 

 

A notice of meeting for a meeting of members of a listed public company:

 

 

• must specify a place and a fax number; and
   
   
  
• may specify an electronic address for the purposes of receipt of proxy appointments.
   
   
  

 

 

Listed companies are required to record the total number of proxy votes exercised validly and how those votes were exercised in the minutes of meeting of members, in respect of each resolution in the notice of meeting.

 

 

 

These requirements apply despite anything in the company’s constitution.

 

 

 

Ordinary resolutions

 

 

 

Ordinary resolutions are not specifically defined in the Corporations Act and require only a simple majority to pass (i.e. more than 50% of the members present at the meeting, either in person, or by proxies, if allowed by the constitution).

 

 

 

Some of the matters on which an ordinary resolution is sufficient are:

 

• election/re-election of directors
   
   
  
• appointment of an auditor
   
   
  
• acceptance of reports at the annual general meeting
   
   
  
• strategic, commercial decisions
   
   
  
• increase or reduction in the number of directors
   
   
  
• passing a board limit resolution (for public companies)
   
   
  

 

 

Special resolutions

 

 

 

Calling a meeting of members of a company or registered scheme

 

 

 

The notice of meeting sent to members advising them of the meeting must set out an intention to propose the special resolution and state the special resolution. This is in addition to the other information required to be provided in a notice of a meeting including the place, date and time of the meeting, the general nature of the meeting’s business and information about proxy votes where applicable.

 

 

 

Generally, notice of a meeting to members of a company must be given 21 days before the meeting is to be held. A listed company must give a least 28 days notice. Shorter notice can be given where members with at least 95% of the votes that may be cast at the meeting agree beforehand. However, the provision for shorter notice does not apply to a resolution to remove or appoint a director or to remove an auditor.

 

 

 

Notice of a meeting to members of a registered scheme must be given at least 21 days before the meeting is to be held. Registered schemes can’t give shorter notice.

 

 

 

Passing a special resolution when holding a meeting

 

 

 

At least 75% of the votes cast by members entitled to vote on a special resolution must be in favour of the resolution for it to be passed. However, it will not always be necessary for the members to physically meet in order to consider the resolution.

 

 

 

Passing a special resolution without holding a meeting

 

 

 

A proprietary company with more than 1 member can pass a resolution by circulating a document and having all the members entitled to vote sign a statement on the document that they are in favour of the resolution. Where two or more people hold shares together, each member of a joint membership must sign. The resolution is passed when the last member signs (i.e 100% of members entitled to vote agree). A ‘circulating resolution’ cannot be applied to a resolution to remove an auditor. The 75% requirement for votes in favour of the special resolution only applies when a company holds a physical meeting.

 

 

 

A proprietary company with only one director who is also the only member of the company can pass a resolution just by signing a document setting out the resolution.

 

 

 

Advising us about special resolutions

 

 

 

In most cases, the passing of a special resolution must be lodged with us on Form 205 Notification of resolution or Form 2205 Notification of resolutions regarding shares. ....."

 

 

I can understand 21 days notice of a Meeting; which allows people to make arrangements to travel etc.However if you're suggesting that members will need 21 days to make their mind up I would suggest a cattle prod or two.

Clauses 27 and 21 are not co-dependent, Clause 27 clearly shows the pathway.

 

You said not to mention Corporations law, but can you point to something which would overturn Claus 27 in this Constitution.

Hi Tubz,

Shhh, Shirley is not watching ...

 

I found this on the ASIC website about model rules. It seems that 21 days is required at least for Special resolutions.

 

http://www.asic.gov.au/for-business/changes-to-your-company/company-resolutions/

 

"Company resolutions

 

A resolution is the formal means by which decisions are made by a meeting of company members. There are two types of resolutions: ordinary and special. The Corporations Act 2001 (the Corporations Act) requires many decisions that affect a company to be made by resolution, some of which must be by special resolution. In addition, the constitution of a company may also require that other decisions be made by either an ordinary resolution or a special resolution.

 

 

 

General requirements for passing resolutions

 

 

 

The general requirements under the Corporations Act for the passing of any resolution are:

 

• The resolution—
   
   
  is passed at a meeting, which is properly convened and satisfies the quorum requirements, and
   
   
  
• is entered in the books kept by the company for that purpose within one month after the meeting is held.
   
   
  

 

 

[*]The minutes must be signed by the chair of the meeting at which the resolution was passed or by the chair of the next meeting.

 

Non-compliance with these requirements could invalidate the outcome of the resolution.

 

 

 

Voting on resolutions

 

 

 

Where a company has share capital, a member has one vote for each share held subject to any rights or restrictions attached to any class of shares.

 

 

 

For a company without share capital, every member is entitled to one vote. The chair has a casting vote, and if a member, also a member’s vote.

 

 

 

Proxy documents for members of listed companies

 

 

 

A notice of meeting for a meeting of members of a listed public company:

 

 

• must specify a place and a fax number; and
   
   
  
• may specify an electronic address for the purposes of receipt of proxy appointments.
   
   
  

 

 

Listed companies are required to record the total number of proxy votes exercised validly and how those votes were exercised in the minutes of meeting of members, in respect of each resolution in the notice of meeting.

 

 

 

These requirements apply despite anything in the company’s constitution.

 

 

 

Ordinary resolutions

 

 

 

Ordinary resolutions are not specifically defined in the Corporations Act and require only a simple majority to pass (i.e. more than 50% of the members present at the meeting, either in person, or by proxies, if allowed by the constitution).

 

 

 

Some of the matters on which an ordinary resolution is sufficient are:

 

• election/re-election of directors
   
   
  
• appointment of an auditor
   
   
  
• acceptance of reports at the annual general meeting
   
   
  
• strategic, commercial decisions
   
   
  
• increase or reduction in the number of directors
   
   
  
• passing a board limit resolution (for public companies)
   
   
  

 

 

Special resolutions

 

 

 

Calling a meeting of members of a company or registered scheme

 

 

 

The notice of meeting sent to members advising them of the meeting must set out an intention to propose the special resolution and state the special resolution. This is in addition to the other information required to be provided in a notice of a meeting including the place, date and time of the meeting, the general nature of the meeting’s business and information about proxy votes where applicable.

 

 

 

Generally, notice of a meeting to members of a company must be given 21 days before the meeting is to be held. A listed company must give a least 28 days notice. Shorter notice can be given where members with at least 95% of the votes that may be cast at the meeting agree beforehand. However, the provision for shorter notice does not apply to a resolution to remove or appoint a director or to remove an auditor.

 

 

 

Notice of a meeting to members of a registered scheme must be given at least 21 days before the meeting is to be held. Registered schemes can’t give shorter notice.

 

 

 

Passing a special resolution when holding a meeting

 

 

 

At least 75% of the votes cast by members entitled to vote on a special resolution must be in favour of the resolution for it to be passed. However, it will not always be necessary for the members to physically meet in order to consider the resolution.

 

 

 

Passing a special resolution without holding a meeting

 

 

 

A proprietary company with more than 1 member can pass a resolution by circulating a document and having all the members entitled to vote sign a statement on the document that they are in favour of the resolution. Where two or more people hold shares together, each member of a joint membership must sign. The resolution is passed when the last member signs (i.e 100% of members entitled to vote agree). A ‘circulating resolution’ cannot be applied to a resolution to remove an auditor. The 75% requirement for votes in favour of the special resolution only applies when a company holds a physical meeting.

 

 

 

A proprietary company with only one director who is also the only member of the company can pass a resolution just by signing a document setting out the resolution.

 

 

 

Advising us about special resolutions

 

 

 

In most cases, the passing of a special resolution must be lodged with us on Form 205 Notification of resolution or Form 2205 Notification of resolutions regarding shares. ....."

 

 

Possibly! My bird is in for her annual in Lincoln at the moment. If it's ready by the weekend I'm planning on heading over and picking it up at the same time. Not looking liklely but possible!

PM me if you do Nick and we could catch up.