derekliston

1 hour ago, Thruster88 said:

I believe the engine failed over a forest. So hit the trees at 60-70 knots and die or use the feature that they paid for and all walk away. Not a difficult decision.  

There have been quite a few and guess what?……….They are not Jabirus!

49 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Most autopilots will disconnect at some physical input Level. I've never alluded to the plane being flown manually.  A meal was being served at the time wasn't it? Crew NEVER have meals at the same time and it's supposed to be a different meal.  As far as switches go which ONE over rides? The switches accessible to the Piot would be actuating switches so the pilot can position the seat where He?/ She wants it like being able to get out of it when needed. Nev

It will be interesting to see the eventual answer. One would suppose that if the dive was precipitated by a cabin crew member accidentally actuating the switch, then he/she would have been standing on the flight deck and presumably thrown against the roof, as were the passengers and cabin crew in the passenger cabin!

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

Apparently the Flight attendant accidently hit a switch that moves the  seat fore and aft and it pushed the CM1's seat so far forward it pushed the stick forward and stick forward means Houses get bigger.. Nev

Do you actually believe that Nev? I find it a bit hard to credit! I would have thought that in cruise it would have been on autopilot, incredibly unusual to be hand flying, yes the seat moving forward could cause the pilot to push on the yoke, but hard enough to disconnect the autopilot??? 

100% and a large part of the reason I am giving up flying!

1 hour ago, NT5224 said:

So this time, to avoid a full day  journey into Darwin to see my medical man I took a punt on the new Class 5 declaration.

 

Attempt 1: Went through the online process,  paid my money then…… nothing. No certificate.

 

Attempt 2: Went through the online process,  pressed submit and got a message saying an appointment was being booked for me with an Aviation Medical  Examiner! (as required for a Class 1 or Class 2).  Unbelievable. I have just received an email from  CASA confirming that I will need to go to a DAME for my Class 5. How is it possible that those two systems can be conflated? 
 

So I called CASA and spent an hour speaking to two lovely people who helped me the best they could. They could see my first application and payment -but couldn’t explain why a certificate hadn’t been issued.

 

They could  see my second errant application and killed it from the system as it was preventing me from getting back in. They told me to log back out and start over.

 

Attempt 3:  Went through the online process and paid a second time.

 

‘Error Occurred while processing your request. Contact CASA’.

 

Have other people been through the Class 5 medical route? What have your experiences been?

 

Cheers 

 

Alan 
 

 

 

 

 

It’s CASA mate, did you really expect anything else? AeroMedical is a large part of why I am giving up flying?

On 3/2/2024 at 8:35 PM, BrendAn said:

Well I did my second solo today and I just couldn't get my head in the game. I think it was a combination of not keeping hydrated. It was hot in the aircraft today.the other was fatigue.  I should have made the decision to stay on the ground but I learnt the hard way. Took  4 attempts to get on the ground.  A big bounce on one attempt. As soon as the instructor got out I just seemed to forget stuff.  The CFI talked me down on the last go , although I had already regained my composure and set up properly for the landing.  But knowing he was there made a huge difference to my mental state.  Anyway just putting it out there. I ignored human factors and it bit me.  I think it's just as important to post the bad experiences as the good ones.

 

For what it is worth, I’ve been flying off and on since 1968 and still make landings that are less than textbook! It happens to all of us, but you are correct, if I have a disturbed sleep night for example, I don’t fly. Since I only fly for fun it really doesn’t matter and is infinitely better than risking bending the arroplane.

2 hours ago, turboplanner said:

If you go back 3 posts you'll see I was responding to Jabiru whose question was "What what what?

 

Blue Skies from Boonah on Sunday said the operating runway was 04

I checked the distance from the end of 04 to the Golf Club gate at 1500 metres.

 

If you go back one post, Blueadventures quotes Bush Flyers Downunder saying a Touch and Go occurred just before the incident and there is some Flight Aware data, not confirmed.

 

 

 

Which is why I suspect engine failure impossible turn scenario although I would dearly love to be proven wrong!

41 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

If 04 is the active runway you take off on 04.

Not sure who is being obtuse, you or me? The comment said they took off on 04 and crashed 1500 metres in a straight line from 04! Not my comment! Turboplanners comment!

8 minutes ago, dlegg said:

It was noted that 04 was active runway, what makes you think they had just taken off?

Because that is what it said??? Or at least that is how I read it! If ATSB and RAAus don’t investigate, how will we ever know the cause?

54 minutes ago, dlegg said:

You're right. You shouldn't speculate. They hadn't just taken off.

That is not what it says further up! Just taken off on 04 and the crash site was 1500 metres straight ahead??

I really think we shouldn’t speculate but I will. Experienced pilots or not, it is beginning to sound like the engine failure, impossible turn scenario. I have known of several pilots of great experience who have died doing what they told others not to attempt! Tragic whatever the circumstance and whatever the error, aviation doesn’t forgive easily!

I think this award has now been proven to be a joke!

Back when I learned to fly in the UK spin recovery was a part of the PPL test although. I believe it no longer is a requirement? That was circa 1970. Personally I believe that every pilot should experience a spin and recovery even if only demonstrated by an instructor in a suitable airframe, Decathlon for example! 

3 hours ago, Lightwing Bill said:

The accident is a very sad event.   Sad for the two individuals and also sad for the families and friends.

 

Once again, the coroner will take over the evidence and the police will be instructed to determine who died, where and when they died, and the cause of death.   The coroner is not required to, nor does it have the resources to determine the cause of the accident.   

 

The ATSB says it will "help", but that may be no more than looking out the window at the weather or seeing if there is a media opportunity for the ATSB.   The coroner is not required to release its report to RA-Aus or the general, public. 

 

As a result, the cause of this accident like all RA-Aus registered aircraft accidents, is unlikely to ever be determined.  That puts us all at risk.  There could be a latent defect in the aircraft, checklists or maintenance procedures and we will never know until the "holes line up".

 

CASA has failed to comply with its own policy of achieving an acceptable level of safety and making our skies as safe as reasonably practicable.   The CASA CEO and Chairman of the Board have been alerted to the situation (as if they didn't know) and appear to have done nothing to rectify the situation.

 

The passenger's estate is unlikely to get any benefit from the RA-Aus Member's Liability Insurance Policy (MLIP) due to the lack of an official investigation into the cause of the accident.  The RA-Aus Board has refused to even put the process for making a claim on the RA-Aus website.   

 

The process for the passenger's estate to make a claim involves issuing a letter of demand to the pilot or pilot's estate.   That letter of demand has to include evidence that the pilot was negligent.   Evidence would be from an ATSB report if it existed.  The pilot then makes a claim against the MLIP to cover the letter of demand, up to the passenger limit of $250,000.  There is no evidence that that amount has never been paid by the insurer.  If that is the situation, it would appear that;

 

No ATSB report = no evidence = no payout from the MLIP.   I

 

It's a great policy for the insurer.

 

How many other unfortunate families of people who die or who are injured in RA-Aus registered aircraft accidents have found themselves unable to get some compensation from the MLIP?   Why doesn't RA-Aus reach out to these people and try to help them get some support from the MLIP?  The RA-Aus Board has refused to tell members what claims have been made in the past.

Does it bother you that the $600,000 pa RA-Aus insurance policy is not performing the way we are led to believe it does?

 

Does it bother you that we are flying in aircraft whose safety is compromised because RA-Aus aircraft accidents are not being investigated?

 

You will be with the "mob" if you don't care.   CASA also doesn't care as it appears to be only interested in the "big end of town".   The ATSB says it doesn't do sport and recreation aircraft accidents reports due to lack of resources, however it appears that the real reason is that sport and recreation aircraft accidents don't generate enough publicity for the Bureau.

 

It's over for the two blokes who died, but it is a long haul for the relatives and friends.   It is a pity that the organizations that we pay are not doing what can be reasonably be expected of them to prevent tragic accidents like this one.

 

What will you do to make the changes that are needed to make it safer for all and more supportive for those who are affected?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I understood this to be a VH registered aircraft???

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

And do you reckon "ACT of God" should be a serious concept when you are paying for "loss and Damage" cover?  Nev

Reminds me of Billy Connolly’s movie. The Man who sued God!

That makes me wonder whether, if the airfield operators are deemed responsible for the cable breaking, they will completely remove the cables and leave the responsibility to owners to use ground screws or whatever for their tie downs?

Archerfield seems to be susceptible to storms like that! Sorry if this is thread drift but bear with me! A lot of years ago I broke a Skyfox. I thought I had put the pin through the spar after unfolding the wings, but in fact on the left wing I had missed the hole. I pushed down on the tail to swing the aeroplane around and the wing then swung back and not only nearly broke my arm, but broke one of the aileron hangers. I had to drive to Caloundra to get the repair kit and then spent the best part of a week repairing it. It was then put back on the flightline where the owner kept it, because according to Skyfox, although it was fabric it could be safely tied down outdoors! Absolute bullshit! A week or so later Archerfield was hit by a storm and the aeroplane not only had so many holes in it that you would think it had been machine-gunned but was tipped upside down, despite being tied down, it was virtually destroyed! Really don’t know what happened to it after that?

I remember when I worked there, watching an afternoon storm come through and the AN2 that was chained down ouside Ian Aviation’s hangar was actually flying on its chains!

32 minutes ago, facthunter said:

I know a bloke who was on one of  those ships that struggled back with a temporary patch on it. Apparently it was a pretty unnerving event. If there's enough magnesium in it to ignite it would corrode pretty badly in salt water.   Nev

I agree Nev, just remembering what read at the time, that the superstructure was magnesium/aluminium alloy. I was interested because I had a cousin on the Sheffield but thankfully he had transferred out not long before! Sorry no more thread drift from me!!!

4 hours ago, Markdun said:

Aluminium better for sure, but it burns too.  Ask the British navy about that.

3 hours ago, facthunter said:

Set alight by  exocet  missiles. That's a high ignition temp. Usually aluminium just melts when cars burn. Gears sitting in a shield of molten aluminium on the road. Be good as a shed  Ornament.. "From the Hottest Car I ever had".  Nev

3 hours ago, facthunter said:

Set alight by  exocet  missiles. That's a high ignition temp. Usually aluminium just melts when cars burn. Gears sitting in a shield of molten aluminium on the road. Be good as a shed  Ornament.. "From the Hottest Car I ever had".  Nev

Fairly sure that the Sheffield was an aluminium/magnesium alloy, so not surprised that it burnt and the Exocet didn’t even explode. It was the still burning rocket motor that set fire to the ship!

Sorry if this seems like thread drift, it is related I promise! An awful lot of years ago whilst myself and a couple of mates were apprentices in Ferranti’s research lab, we were, as apprentices are wont to, mucking about one Saturday morning with a bit of fibreglass scrap from the case of one of the electronic boxes. Don’t remember how it came about, but we set light to it and it went up, as someone said elsewhere, like a candle! On the Monday the designer was completing a form for the Navy about the fire risk and he said nil risk! We told him he was wrong and demonstrated with another piece of scrap. Well that resulted in a complete redesign to comprise an aluminium case. I have been wary of resin based structures ever since and more so now, since I have seen what happens with these plastic fantastics! I have minimal plastic on my CH701 and I like it that way. My cowling, apart from a Jabiru supplied nosebowl, is aluminium.

5 hours ago, dlegg said:

Warwick to Palgrave direct is about 18nm, so only 10 mins or so flight time after taking off after refueling. So clearly catastrophic RIP

Assuming that he did in fact refuel at Warwick. I tried to refuel my CH701 at Warwick on Friday and discovered the stepladder has been nicked, or is otherwise missing! So I had to take my own ladder yesterday! Jabiru being high wing also, is it possible to refuel without a ladder?

6 hours ago, RFguy said:

yeah , like I said in my expose'  - ".. unless a hose to and from the oil cooler failed, that would end up on the muffler. "

Those are barbed fittings and must be clamped correctly. Oil filter could have failed, also, there have been a few oil filters split / come off.....

 

The barbed fittings do have to be clamped, I agree, but having said that, when replacing oil hoses I have not yet succeeded in removing one from a barb without cutting it!

So sad, such an unforgiving hobby. Also glad it wasn’t one of our Warwick crew!

Not a lot left after it burnt! Did the pilot/s survive? Only from the burnt shape it looks like it could be one of the flying school diamonds? Anyone know more yet? I fly from Warwick but didn’t today because I didn’t like the wind.