DWF

"CASA and industry representatives have been involved in the development and formulation of the proposals contained in this NPRM" and included model aircraft (MAAA), rotorcraft (ASRA), balloons (ABF), gliders (GFA), parachuting (APF and ASA) and even the Air Sport Australia Confederation (ASAC) [of which RAAus is NOT a member] BUT NOT RAAus! Why not! RAAus is a RAAO that is probably bigger than the rest of those organisations put together - and should have had input into the development of the proposal. It will certainly significantly affect our organisation.

From the latest CASA Briefing: Comment now on proposed self-administering rules It’s time to comment on detailed proposals for a new approach to the regulation of self-administering aviation organisations. CASA has proposed clarifying, simplifying and modernising the arrangements for self-administering aviation organisations. Current arrangements are complex and are based almost entirely on exemptions rather than positive rules. The proposed changes would allow existing self-administering aviation organisations to continue to operate as long as they meet the relevant new standards. There would be a stronger legal framework for self-administration, providing a modern, efficient and effective alternative to conventional regulation. A notice of proposed rule making on the issue says self-administration is not self-regulation as CASA retains oversight of the organisations. Under the proposed new framework an approved self-administering aviation organisation would have a direct regulatory relationship with CASA under a specified set of largely outcome-based regulations. The proposed rules are designed for the sport and recreational aviation community. This includes light recreational and microlight aircraft, gliders, hang gliders, parachuting, paragliders, recreational ballooning, warbirds, gyroplanes, model aircraft, rockets and kites as well as amateur- built and experimental aircraft. Part 149 envisages the potential for bringing a growing range of self-administering aviation organisations into this regulatory framework. Find out more about the self-administering proposals and comment before 21 October 2016.

How?

What is the problem with consulting the users of our manuals and constitution - we, the members! CASA and the FAA, etc. have a NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rule Making) process whereby a rule or document is proposed and public comment is invited, feedback on comments is provided and often the document is amended as a result of user comment/feedback before the final rule is made/document is published/adopted. This would defuse a lot of discontent and provide those subject to the new/amended rules with an opportunity to air their views. It may also allow "unintended consequences" to be pointed out before it is too late. Also it provides the authors with an opportunity to better explain or word the document to improve user understanding. One person or a small group writing a document will know what they mean but not have written clearly enough to convey the intent to the outside reader. I would like to see the requirement for a NPRM type process be included in our constitution or at least a Board policy document. DWF

CASA is about to issue a Discussion Paper on this issue. I would suggest that we all follow/comply with the current procedure whenever appropriate to see if it really is a problem. Make a note of each occasion and in particular any problem or comments encountered. We will then have some 'ammunition' to back up any argument we may bring to the Discussion. DWF

I would suggest that the flare should be commenced well before the wheels reach the ground. A useful technique that I have found helps some people is to round out early (high) and fly along the runway at landing speed with a little power on letting the aircraft slowly settle towards the runway till the wheels just touch then try to keep the aircraft about 30cm above the ground while flying along the rest of the runway/airstrip - and going around as you near the end of the runway. This low pass method helps some pilots get the 'picture' (peripheral and ahead) of what it should look like as the aircraft touches down. It also helps with low speed control near the ground and practices your go-arounds. In my experience many pilots who have trouble landing are too fast at round-out and/or do not hold off long enough (and try to 'push' the aircraft onto the ground).

You did.

Ian The TROPHIES list looks a little strange/inconsistent to me: Trophies 1 First Message - Post a message somewhere on the site to receive this 2 Somebody Likes You - Somebody out there liked one of your messages. Keep posting like that for more 5 Keeps Coming Back - 30 messages posted. You must like it here 10 Can't Stop! - You've posted 100 messages. I hope this took you more than a day! 10 I Like It a Lot - Your messages have been liked 25 times. 15 Seriously Likeable! - Content you have posted has attracted 100 likes. 20 Addicted - 1000 messages? Impressive! 20 Can't Get Enough of Your Stuff - Your content has been liked 250 times. 30 I LOVE IT! - Content you have posted has attracted 500 likes. 50 100 Posts - When a user has made 100 post 100 WOW, 1,000 Posts - When a user achieves 1,000 post 250 5,000 Posts CONGRATULATIONS - When a user has posted 5,000 times "Can't Stop" = 10 Trophies for 100 messages but "100 Posts" = 50 Trophies for 100 posts - is there a difference? "Addicted" = 20 Trophies for 1000 messages but "WOW, 1,000 Posts" = 100 Trophies for 1,000 posts "100 Posts" = 50 Trophies for 100 Posts whereas "Addicted" only = 20 Trophies for 1,000 messages.

Keith. The constitution for RAAus Ltd has the following rules: "20.3 Before or at the Annual General Meeting, the Directors must, in accordance with law, make available information to the Members on the Company’s activities and finances during the period since the last Annual General Meeting. 20.4 The Chairman of the Annual General Meeting must give Members as a whole a reasonable opportunity at the meeting to ask questions or make comments about the management of the Company." It appears to me that if the rules are followed you will have your opportunity to "ask questions or make comments" at the AGM.

Maybe I am using too much IMAGE ination here but ... as many of us wear more than one hat so to speak how about allowing users to upload one or more image(s) (aero club and/or flying school logos, etc.) to a gallery (vetted by the moderators) then allowing users to choose up to a given number of images (say 5) that could then either be displayed alternately on a timer (like screensavers) or with a different one (of the selection) displayed each log on or post. Just a bit of a though bubble really. A bit of a coding challenge I would guess?

How about you just change their avatar to ROUND.

It is the little magnifying glass symbol at top left.

Not quite Nev. It's at or below 3000ft AMSL or 1000ft above terrain (which ever is the higher). Applicable levels: At or below (whichever is the higher of): (a) 3000 ft AMSL; or (b) 1000 ft AGL Flight Visibility: 5000 m Cloud: Clear of cloud and in sight of ground or water Conditions: Radio must be carried and used on the appropriate frequency Source: AIP ENR 1.2

Admin said: Round avatars - this has been a bit controversial with a handful however with the lack of comments from many I can only assume that most users are not fussed about having them or not. Maybe you should use the "Post a Poll" function and ask the questions specifically if you want to gauge reader opinion. My reading of the responses is that there are quite a few who would prefer to remain 'square'. I was going to suggest this a while ago but didn't get a Round Tuit.

Do you think any (larger) country is going to change over now? For a start, I don't think it would save any money - the cost of the chaos alone would be enormous. I think it would be a tricky thing to phase in so it would have to be an overnight change. You could possibly make a small fortune as a sign writer changing all the signs! The mind boggles......

The saying may be a little trite but I don't think it is silly. It is a warning - to not forget to ensure the gear is down. I would wager there are many pilots out there who have forgotten to do their pre-landing checks occasionally. There are probably some who don't do any! As you say it usually happens in a non standard situation where the pilot is distracted by one or more of the may things that can cause distraction. And yes, good discipline is the key.

That's a "plane"?

They are standardised. It is just that there are 2 different standards. Which do you chose and why?

There is an old saying in aviation: "There only 2 types of pilots; those who have landed gear up and those who are going to." (Not saying that is necessarily the case here.) RAAus pilots may possibly not be liable to this fate as we are not allowed to fly aircraft where the gear can be retracted (yet).

The purpose of making radio calls is to aid situational awareness and facilitate ALERTED see-and-avoid traffic separation. When operating on circuits I usually only make a Turning Downwind call each circuit - unless it is prudent/desirable to make additional calls for separation with other traffic. (An aircraft is usually more visible to other traffic when turning so I make the call entering the downwind turn.) This practice may be a hangover from when I used to operate at a secondary CTR airport where the only call ATC usually required was the turning downwind call. I will confess to using the "Clear of the Runway" call. This call is made to aid the situational awareness of other traffic in the area, particularly inbound traffic, by informing them that I am no longer a separation problem for them. (At our airstrip it is difficult to see an aircraft on the ground once it has left the runway due to buildings, trees and several taxiways.) I definitely agree that some pilots make far too many (unnecessary) calls. A pet hate of mine is pilots who talk too fast - trying to get it all out as quickly as possible. I can usually decipher the calls but my students often have real trouble with them. These calls usually require a "say again" and so do not really save any time and cause an extra distraction for those hearing the transmission. DWF

My preference would be #2 for the heading line (possibly because it appears to be a bit larger and clearer) and #1 for the body text.

I learned to fly in PNG so brings back some fond memories. He probably needed to keep the speed up to get to the top of the hill. Not the place to be if you are not on top of directional control (especially on the landing roll). DWF

I prefer a sans serif font. You may have noticed that I often change the font on my posts to Tahoma (or good old Arial). Droid Sans is OK by me - and IMHO more suitable/readable than the current font (Book Antiqua?). DWF

How about "Groan!" I could have used that one more than once.