68volksy

For TAF's and the like i'm thoroughly enjoying this website: http://www.bom.gov.au/aviation/knowledge-centre/index.shtml#Weather+Advice+for+Your+Safety/ The CASA guys promoted it heavily at their Avsafety Seminar.

Hi Greg, I'm pretty sure there's someone learning with Teraya at Goulburn Aviation who was talking of getting into a Jab 160/170. I'll pass on your idea if I can remember who it was! I only caught the end of a conversation as the guy was leaving. There was another guy who currently owns a Gazelle up here who was thinking of trading it for a 170 also - I'll ask him next time I see him. There's a shiny new 170 up here too but I think the owner of that has it tied in with his business.

My understanding was the LAME license had nothing to do with RA-Aus? When they sign off an RA-Aus aircraft i thought they are using their RA-Aus L2 maintainers licence and not their LAME licence. I also thought RA-Aus was setup to get away from the CASA way of doing things and the inherent costs involved. Dodgy work is dodgy work no matter who "licences" the individual though. It should be a pretty simple Trade Practices case at the very least I would have thought?

Hi Sam, Have you found yourself a plane as yet? If not I can recommend Teraya's Gazelle at Goulburn Aviation - www.goulburnaviation.com.au (separate to the group mentioned above) if you're willing to sacrifice a bit of speed over the Jabiru. She's got a guy doing a conversion to his brand new J170 with a very nice glass cockpit who may be open to the idea of cross-hiring it through Teraya (if enough of us keep bugging him maybe?). There's a couple of other ex-students there who also have Jab's although I think they're 55 registered. Her rates have always been very reasonable I believe (it helps that she has all us happy volunteers always hanging around).

Just been through this process to buy an aircraft and cross-hire to a flying school. First broker (one of the big advertisers) stuffed up initial application and came back to us with the only option being to finance directly through them (the brokers directors) at a slightly ridiculous rate of interest. Second broker was much better but we chose not to use the financier (bank of queensland) due to the increased insurance costs and requirement for a valuation. Increased the initial cost by over $5,000 (extra $1,000 per annum for insurance due to higher public liability requirements) Ended up with a simple unsecured business loan. We were told the financiers simply will not finance a personal aircraft purchase unless it's a "personal loan".

Hi PF, If you need a lift into town if you choose Goulburn or anything let me know. Someone's usually poking around out there and I could get them to keep an eye out for you. If you're lucky they may even have the Billy on. Cheers, Tim

I thought I saw the Boomerang designs in the Whitney liquidation sale - wonder if anyone bought them? My reading is the Boomerang was designed primarily for flying training and was advertised as a very robust aircraft. In my opinion the Tecnams are much more suited to the owner/flyer. I think most GA training organisations know and trust the Lycoming/Continental engines and tend to steer clear of Rotax's. The Boomerang is also rated for spinning I think - not sure if the standard Tecnam is rated for spinning?

I'm just stirring the pot. What's the point of an online forum if you can't do that? Even if Avdata switched to taking photos instead of using radio they still could not charge a single RA-Aus aircraft a landing fee. I don't work for Avdata - well apart from filling in the paperwork to get aircraft out of landing fees for aerodromes we've never even heard of inline with what frank says above. Honestly cficare - it would take 30 seconds to figure out my name if you're interested. I'm not proposing name tags for all pilots and aircraft but rather an open system where people are accountable for their actions and anyone can make them accountable. I believe that such a system exists on this site without the need for us all to provide everyone with our names and addresses thanks to the moderators and the sign-up process. If RA-Aus were as diligent as the moderators of this site and held firm to the primary principles of RA-Aus as the moderators do to the principles of this site then we wouldn't be having this conversation in my view.

There's a lot of referencing of privacy legislation going on in this discussion. In my understanding (and i'm open to be proven incorrect) the Privacy legislation only applies to organisations with a turnover of greater than $3million. There are some specific items such as Tax File Numbers also. Does RA-Aus turnover more than $3million per annum? I think it more likely that RA-Aus has developed and implements its own Privacy Policy. Does anyone know more of the actual legal position that RA-Aus is in with regards to this? As an Incorporated Association under s67 of the ACT incorpoartions Legislation the the association must make its register of members available to at least its members i'm pretty sure. Maybe if the Avdata people joined the association they could have access to details to charge landing fees?

I'm still here. Good old tax season's begun early this year for some reason. Not hard to figure out my name if you know where to look. Might be a good exercise for those that are curious. I expect to receive a postcard from those who have the time.

I see it as being polite and responsible for my actions.

I don't see the information being available as a concern at all. As i said if you give me just a name i'll soon be able to get at least your address, mortgage details, credit history and if you've ever been part of a company your date of birth and place of birth. And that's all without breaking any privacy legislation and using publicly available documents. If you want to be a member of your local Aero Club you effectively place all your details out into the public domain. Why not let the public know the owner of that noisy aircraft flying at 100 feet above the bed of the sleeping shift worker. It's not like the police will be around to book them or RA-Aus will give any complaints even a moments thought...

What about the issue of landing fees? My understanding is RA-Aus registered aircraft can land at any airport fee-free due to the locked-box secrecy regarding their ownership. I don't see this as rightly fair. We could always install boom-gates on runways but somehow I don't think this would work. You cannot compare car registration to aircraft registration. Be like comparing dog registration to car registration. It's not a matter of privacy - if you want to register a VH aircraft then you're made fully aware of what details will be available and what will not. Also if you ever decide to become a director of any sized company you'll have all your details (including date and place of birth) publicly available. If you've ever bought a block of land or registered a mortgage then you'd be amazed at what's available to the public. The list goes on. It's also interesting to note that a register of all members of a club must be kept and made available to the public upon request. The privacy legislation is only designed to affect the big boys.

Crikey, Someone should probably sort through all this and see if there are any trends. It seemed like a simple idea at the time... I'm quite pleased by the diversity of it all I must say. From my experience over the years it seemed to be trending towards primarily those that are self-employed and IT-type workers. That said there seem to be a few IT folk, Engineers and Musicians (Wasn't expecting that one). Keep 'em coming though - i'll try and summarise things when I get a chance. The general public's perception (or the people I know anyway) seem to associate pilots primarily with Doctors and the more wealthy "I manage a range of real estate and mining interests" type.

Just sitting here munching on my lunch and started wondering what it is/was us recreational flyers do/did for a living and who employs/employed us. I'm curious as to just how diverse this community might be. Also curious to see if any of the general stereotypes actually fit. I'm primarily an Accountant by trade and work for my own business. Anyone else wish to share?

Nothing's happened as yet. John Ferrara is meant to be entering into a 2 year lease for the airport commencing 1 July 2011 with an option to buy after the 2 years. That's the deal as it sat with Council in February and still is. I'm informed by a Councillor that as of today the lease has not yet been signed. There are many terms on the lease/sale agreement including the finalisation of the motel that commenced construction in 1991, the construction of a new terminal building and many others. I believe the detail in many of these terms is still being discussed also. From the Council resolution if Mr Ferrara fails to deliver on any of the points the whole thing falls over. Council is also taking an option over some of his property out there i believe. There have been no changes to any of the facilities. The old terminal building is slowly being demolished but that's been in the cards since 2001 when the DA for demolition was approved.

Petition signed. My father's a town planning consultant based in Goulburn/Sydney and would be happy to provide some professional advice in this area if needed. PM me if you'd like some details.

Hi Sue, We used to have Drag Racing and car testing at Goulburn until the users got together and pointed out how damaging it was. Unfortunately for us the Council then went one step further and are selling the airport entirely. If we could have the time again we would probably have tried to find a way to make these other things work as the Council was happy so long as the airport wasn't costing them money. Now the future of the airport land will be laid entirely in the hands of a private property developer with no guarantee as to access or charges. I'm not looking to support the drag guys but just sharing an experience. Cheers, Tim

I personally have made a conscious decision that all minimum hours stated are irrelevant. My feeling is the more flying situations i'm exposed to with a competent instructor sitting beside me the better. The first offer to go solo I politely said i'd rather not as I was exhausted after a tough day at work. My instructor actually made the offer to me in such a way that I could answer honestly without any pressure or expectations. The first solo and first training area solo were also discussed quite openly as I was getting close. The instructor made it clear that she would make a judgement as to my technical proficiency and it was up to me to make the judgement about my mental and physical proficiency. I think the technical side of things can take anything from 1 lesson to 100 lessons or more to "click" and there are so many variables in the mix it's not funny. Being mentally and physically prepared without resorting to an over-active ego, peer pressure or bravado also takes time to develop.

Hi Bass, From an accountants perspective there are a wonderful variety of tax considerations laid out in front of you to consider here. The first consideration needs to be looked at from the company's perspective (the same test would apply whether it was a company, partnership, joint venture, trust etc.) which is best done by considering the company as a separate entity. In this instance the company could be considered to be in the business of hiring out an aircraft that it owns. Whether it hires the aircraft to Shareholders or not is not really a consideration. In this case all money paid for hourly hire would be considered income. You can offset this income with maintenance and fuel expenses etc and also with the depreciation of the aircraft itself. The depreciation deduction is generally the most substantial and allows around 20-25% of the aircrafts opening value to be included as a tax deduction each year. I am yet to see a cross-hire arrangement that makes a profit - kind of like rental properties... The tax returns each year are very simple and easy to prepare and should cost not much more than getting an individuals return prepared by an accountant. There's no requirement for Business Activity Statements unless you register for GST which i've mentioned below. If the company performs its operations at arms length from the shareholders and perhaps cross-hires through a flying school or offers services to the public then it creates a range of considerations for the shareholders/directors. If one of the shareholders was to borrow money to purchase their share then the interest on that money would be a personal tax deduction. This could be a very good consideration for those on the higher tax brackets. There's also the ability to pay Directors fees/salaries from the Company. If all the shareholders have GST-registered businesses that they hire the aircraft through then it would be worthwhile registering for GST. The GST-registered businesses claim back any GST the hire company charges and the hire company can claim back the GST on any of its expenses. When you add up the GST on the fuel and maintenance expenses it's usually worthwhile. I would steer clear of associations and Limited by Guarantee companies due to the restrictions associated with these in regards to the distributions of profits. A Pty Ltd company is the cleanest mechanism in my view to achieve the aims you identify. Keep the shareholders agreement clean and cover all the main outcomes clearly (with general clauses for the rarer outcomes). That's a very brief summary anyway. Can't let out all the trade secrets in one go... Cheers, Tim

John, Goulburn is already a great airfield! It really is. If you stay out of the politics and try not to look at any of the privately-owned land on the way in anyway... I still maintain that the incident which is the subject of this thread has no place whatsoever in discussions on the safety of the airfield or the aviation community out there. Your statement that strong, wise, informed leadership in aeronautical behaviour is absent is also a little baffling. I'd strongly suggest that you attend one of the BBQ's - I think you'll find the support for each other and attitude to safety amongst the recreational pilots out there is of a very high level indeed. I also think you'll find the knowledge, wisdom and strength of some of the regulars (not myself I will admit) a most refreshing change to your perception of the pilots at Goulburn Airport. If you are aiming to undertake a cultural change in flight safety then logic would dictate you look to authorities such as CASA for guidance rather than a fully paid member of the "Old Guard" who's looking to buy Goulburn airport? Cheers, Tim.

Hi John, My intention was too remove Goulburn as the focus of this incident and instead focus it on the wider aviation community. Unfortunately, as pilots, I do not feel we can exclude ourselves individually from this community. I think we can individually exclude ourselves from some of my statements however - my old high-horse gets a little tired some days... I would argue that the untrained person in an unregistered and unairworthy aircraft is not, nor ever will be, a member of our aviation community. Unfortunately the wider community and the media do not make this distinction. Whilst the links and friends that the man had at the airport seem to run deeper than his one-time terminal visit might suggest I do not think he could be called a "local" Goulburn airport user. As such I do not believe his actions can go to support any argument that there is an entrenched attitude issue at Goulburn. There are certainly many characters who believe that their way is the right way and they are capable of making better judgement without resorting to law books. There are also many who believe that by placing unwavering faith in legislators they will never do anything unsafe. These two tribes both exist at Goulburn (and elsewhere from my observations) and will always be in disagreement on some level or another. Unfortunately the history of Goulburn airport has been very much one of a nation divided - the three Kings in Glass Castles. The Kings are getting on a bit now though and i'm hoping there will not be any successors. Most recipes generally involve a period of mixing. This in my opinion is what is missing most at Goulburn - a forum for communication to take place. There're quite a few airport users who get together for a monthly BBQ down at Goulburn Aviation - you may have seen the invites posted on this forum. Please feel free to wander down if you're around on the first Saturday of the month as the invitation is always open. It's a good place for sharing any issues that arise. There's no shortage of opinion but we try and stay true to the reason we're all there - a love of flying. Cheers, Tim.

John, I feel you make it sound as though Goulburn is the only aerodrome with any of these occurences? I don't believe this is the case - i'm sure every member of this board could easily relate just as many issues at whatever aerodrome they use. We also all seem to feel more than happy pointing at other people and calling ourselves "safe" because we can see the errors they make and the things they do wrong. This goes to highlight my previous comment in that the primary outcome in these instances is feeding our own egos. It's a darn sight harder to see our own faults and harder still to do anything about them. I know how many times i've pushed a little too hard in the car after having talked myself into the "there's no-one else on the road" mentality... From my perspective for change to occur it will take pilots not only able to see other peoples errors and communicate but also pilots willing to accept their own errors and change. It's not about to happen any time soon...

There's not many people who can hear a word of caution and actually listen. The whole ego thing plays too big a part in the aviation community in my view.

Bit more info: Comp involves flour bomb drop and spot landing in a C152. Cost $100. Very simple competition in other words. The guys organizing it left some flyers with Teraya at Goulburn Aviation. You can call her on 0418 165 813 for the details.