Jump to content

KRviator

Members
  • Posts

    1,159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Everything posted by KRviator

  1. You'd be surprised at the weight of a persons cremains. I'd estimate my mates at around 5kg, and plugging that into a web-based calculator suggests in excess of 400 balloons would be needed. Though I do like the idea!
  2. Nope. ? I built the -9, I built the pod, test flew it empty, test flew it loaded, and tested releasing simulated cremains. Same as the GoPro attachment on the fin. I installed it prior to the first flight so it was there as part of the flight test program. If CAsA want to make a song and dance about it later on for the next buyer, they don't have a leg to stand on.
  3. I scattered the ashes of a pilot mate from my RV-9 last year. I built a small pod that bolted to the wing tie down and used a pair of linear actuators to open the bottom door. With minimum fuel his wife was actually able to come with me and be the one to press the button over the mountains northwest of Brisbane.
  4. A (very) quick look through Ausgrid's network standards shows the average LV residential cable is 95mm2, so a diameter of around 11mm. The breaking strain for 11mm wire rope is in the vicinity of 16,000lbs, or around 7.2 tonnes. Snagging one isn't going to worry the cable much at all, maybe dislodge it from an insulator or two, but that's it.
  5. Send the invoice to RAAus, RAAus passes it onto the member. If not paid within X months, aircraft is de-registered. Cost to employ a data-entry clerk in the office 3 days a week: ~$40,000 per year, including super and payroll tax. Hell, I work part-time now, I'll do it for $30,000 a year working from home! Across the 13,000 RAAus members, that's $2.50 a year to keep your private details private.
  6. One thing the OIAC noted was that for them to investigate my complaint, my privacy had to have been breached - it wasn't sufficient that it could be. In my case, I was lucky as when I was talking to the investigator from the OIAC, at the time I had no evidence it had been, but when I got home from work interstate the following day, there was an invoice for a landing I did at Warnervale over a year ago when I had an ADAHRS sensor failure and didn't feel comfortable returning to Somersby. So I promptly called them back and said "I have that proof now!" and they agreed it was serious enough to pass on to their investigation team.
  7. The synopsis of my complaint was that they collected my details years ago under "Privacy Policy 2.1", to manage my aircraft registration and RPC, however, then entered into a commercial arrangement with a third party (the AAA) and changed their privacy policy to include a term I did not accept when I signed up, thereby allowing any number of fourth-parties (the airport operators) access to my private details. There's several other pertinent points that the OAIC was most interested in, but that's the basics for me... Notice it doesn't say The General Public.... CAsA, yes. The ASAO, yes. Joe Q Busybody? Get stuffed.
  8. My complaint to the OIAC was also upheld, and will be passed on to an investigator for them to look into, when they can spare the time - sounds like they are well and truly swamped with complaints at present. I won't go into the details too much as I don't want to give RAAus any ammunition with which to mount a defence, but it could be an interesting fight nonetheless.
  9. I did the MPC last year - and while I did learn a bit, the whole process simply struck me as a way to penalise the pilot/builder/maintainer if it went pear-shaped. It's a paper trail, nothing more, nothing less. But CAsA says we have to do it, and the SAAA is the unfortunate meat in the sandwich. I built my -9A, at present, I fly it under RAAus and sign off the maintenance as a L1. But soon as I put letters on the side, hopefully over the Xmas break, I need an MPC, Experimental CoA, MR, W&B authorisation and (another) flight review, to fly the exact same plane that the fortnight before, needed none of that. Time to hang up the headset and buy a fourby, methinks. ?
  10. Time to sell the Brumby and get a boat. Much as I love having the RV-9, I'm over the bullshyte security, outrageous fees, medicals, RAAus politics and other superfluous fluff I need just to go aviating - and am probably going to sell the -9 early in the new year. It just isn't fun anymore.
  11. Also check out Mark Rober - he's the guy that built the parcel bomb to catch out package theives - but he goes into the science in an easy-to-understand way which is downright enjoyable. Between the two of them, and FailArmy, they occupy about 90% of my YouTube time. ?
  12. Just goes to show someone else can love a narcissist besides themselves...
  13. Pretty sure all new transponders need to be Mode-S, so about $3000 for the box maybe $500 for an encoder, and $1000 or so to fit, depending on how complex your installation will be.
  14. That's correct. All new IFR installations require a C145/C146 GNSS to drive your ADS-B. Garmin has released a couple new boxes, plus an indicator like a G5 configured as an HSI and you should be able to fit one for less than $20K. Still a BIG chunk of change though...
  15. I am sure the maintenance figures, are not cheap - I'm not disputing that at all. The problem is "they", councils etc, are passing on those distinct airport mowing-and-maintenance charges to the users but not anywhere else. They are not passing on the mowing and lighting charges for the use of my local park to me when I take my kids down to kick the footy or ride their bikes on the waterfront cycleways. They are not passing on the boat ramp maintenance charges to my neighbour when he launches his tinny at the brand-spanking $1.5-million-dollar facility at Koolewong, or ties up to the local pier, nor are they passing on the maintenance charges to park my car at the car park at the beach. Why not? Because in each of the previous examples, they are community assets, and their maintenance has been incorporated into Councils annual operating budget - as should be airport maintenance, at least for Private fliers - no matter how expensive it is, for anything else is discriminatory. I can understand if a Council wanted to charge business operators as I believe they charge cafe's a lease fee if they want tables on the footpath for example, and if you are making money out of a community asset, the community should be reasonably reimbursed for it, but to use a community asset for my own private use (note - not exclusive use, if you leased a hall for a party, etc), then I fail to see a reasonable expectation that I should pay extra to use it when I am already a ratepayer in the shire. AAhhhh you say, but what if I am not a ratepayer in the shire? Then your ratepayers are welcome to fly down here and use my local airport, or the boat ramps - let's face it, Cessnock and Hornsby shire councils don't have a lot of waterways... Sure, it can be argued, "You use the facility, you should pay for it", but I have yet to hear anyone who actually uses that argument, provide a substantive case for why it only applies to the local airport not every other piece of council-owned infrastructure, like carparks, beaches, sporting fields. About the only example of "user-pays" for my local council I can think of is the pool - and at less than $25 for a family of 4 for all-day access, and free parking, even that doesn't compare to a lot of airports that charge well over $10/tonne landing fees. Even for a small four-seater like a Mooney you're still up for $15-20+ just to land, with parking often extra. Cessnock, $17 for a Mooney to land + 12.80 to park per day, Toowoomba $16.75 to land (per landing too, another airport that results in $180/hour for circuit training in my RV-9) plus $16.60 just to park - it isn't just Warnervale where they are gouging pilots, though that is my oft-used example as it is my local airport.
  16. Had AvData developed a business model that issues timely and accurate invoices and had councils developed a fair and equitable charging system - instead of one that charges $495 in landing fees for an hour of circuits - though they have "generously" introduced an RAAus rate that reduces that to "only" $150 an hour now - it probably wouldn't exist either... Then again, you can't simply point and say "Those pesky RAAus pilots are avoiding landing fees..." when you look at the various threads on PPrune et al. and see the commentary from GA pilots that utilise false callsigns in an effort to avoid AvData owned charging systems as well. The publication of aircraft owners details is a separate issue, wrong as I feel it may be, the root issue is the majority of Councils do not see their airport as "just another council asset" that they are responsible to maintain in accordance with their ratepayer budget. "All them noisy airplane owners is rich" seems to be the common mentality and they then think we should be charged to operate from a 1.5km strip of bitumen when they wouldn't dare introduce a toll-gate on the road into town, or a $10 fee to launch your tinny at the local boat ramp (of which my local council has 46 across the shire and receives no income from). Now, Private strips are another story - and I agree yes the owners are entitled to charge for use, but it should be fair, something that isn't always the case. Though for example, I pay $300/month for hangarage and unlimited use at Somersby and I am quite happy with that.
  17. MGL make their N16 that utilises the SL30 communications protocol so you can drive it with an EFIS if you need to. Again, not TSO'd, and I can't recall if you need TSO to do NVFR. From memory, you do not, but I can't point to the legislation that says either way atm...I've got it in my mind that you don't need any navigation receivers for Night VFR though and the VFRG seems to support that. I picked up a KLN-90B from Ebay a couple years ago for $600, it won't do for IFR these days as it is only a C129 unit, but it will give you RNAV and push your position-fix times out to 2 hours if you need that. Really, you'd be wanting a GNSS unit over a VHF Nav as VOR's are going the way of the dodo, but it depends on your panel space.
  18. I noted this in my reply to the OIAC last week, along the lines of "To get access to the Motor Registry requires legal action or a court order, the RTA can't "simply change their privacy policy" to allow a shopping center to issue invoices. Begs the question why the Civil Aircraft Register is public domain at all. Boats aren't. Cars aren't. Motorcycles aren't. Planes? Well, they're owned by toffee-nosed rich people, so what if their details are in the public domain?!?
  19. Looks like I can't edit the above to add the privacy policy as well, but here it is from RAAus website: https://shop.raa.asn.au/privacy-policy/ 1626 AEDT on the 23rd October 2019. Click HERE for a JPG if the embedded version doesn't work.
  20. Except RAAus currently has two privacy policies displayed on their website. The PDF Privacy Policy "Version 2.0" that contains the AAA clause, and THIS ONE, which I believe is "Version 2.1", or the one they changed by adding the clause. So it is not clearly expressed or up to date. Now lets see how long it is before RAAus remove that policy in another cover-up attempt (note, that policy is current and displayed on their website as at 1611 23/10/2019, so over a year since the other policy was changed,) Note the line right at the bottom? "We may update our Privacy Policy from time to time. Amendments will be published on our web page www.raa.asn.au/shop" So if you were visiting that site to check on updates to the Privacy Policy, you would not be aware they have changed it, as their website is out of date, and/or their webmaster has not got an 'effin clue what he's doing. But you did not consent for the secondary purpose, as the "AAA Clause" was inserted after you joined RAAus, and there has been no notification to the membership or you directly about the change in the Privacy Policy before they did so, in August 2018, and started disclosing your details. No, you were not aware it could reasonably occur, as in the March 2017 edition of Sport Pilot, RAAus made a declaration in writing that they would not disclose your details to a third party. As such, you would expect RAAus to abide by that declaration, not perform a 180* backflip and enter into a commercial arrangement with a third party less than 18 months later. Furthermore you "are concerned" that once your personal information has been disclosed to various third parties, it is no longer controlled by the RAAus Privacy Policy, and may be on-sold, used for direct marketing or more illicit activities such as identity theft, as you have no control, nor have you agreed to supply, your personal details to those third parties, nor are you able to find out who those third parties are, nor what their privacy policies contain, as the AAA refuses to disclose what members of their organisation will be able to access your personal details, as it "is private"! There is also no control over who may access the RAAus database in terms of accuracy of registration provided. Ie, Jabiru ixty-five, nineteen sounds exactly like Jabiru ifty-five, nineteen over any number of radios, except the owner of Jabiru -5519 now has their personal details provided to an airport owner they have never visited. How so? RAAus is not an airport operator, airport owner, and does not currently, nor have they ever, collected landing fees, or acted as an agent for collection of landing fees on behalf of an airport operator The Primary Purpose of collection of your personal details is to administer your RPC and Aircraft registration on behalf of CASA as the delegated ASAO for light aircraft. There is no remit there to collect or participate in, the collection of landing fees, either on behalf of, or directed by, CASA, or as part of our Ops Manual. Presumably your consent for collection of personal information was before the AAA Clause was inserted, and as RAAus is the only entity which administers ultralight aircraft, there is no alternative to opt out. You agreed to the collection of Personal Information for the administration of your RPC and aircraft registration, the mailing of the monthly magazine and email correspondence relating to safety notices, etc, these may be considered to require your personal information and you consented to disclose it to receive such services.
  21. I've not flown a -6, but my fixed-pitch -9A does not like slowing down landing downhill there. I did it once, and it was immediately added to the list of things not to do again. Landing uphill, I can be down and stopped in well under 200m with moderate braking. One thing that concerns me is the repeated buckling behind the cockpit of the RV-series. It has been mentioned in several accident reports previously, as well as this one, and makes me wonder if something should be 'done' to resolve it. The problem being, if the longerons buckle ahead of the shoulder restraint, it effectively slackens your shoulder harness and you are then unrestrained and pivot around your lap belt only.
  22. Final report is out. Landed (very) long and didn't go around.
  23. Found this today from the Australian Airport Association: MY bolding - See the scope creep already? So it is no longer about 'just' landing fees. It never was... I'm in discussions with the OAIC at the moment about the privacy breaches, so will see what they ultimately have to say about the matter, but from what I can see, arbitrarily changing the Privacy Policy for a new secondary purpose which is unrelated to RAAus' operations isn't legit...Hopefully they agree... I asked the AAA who their members were that would be accessing my data. The response? "We can't tell you, it's private!". ? RAAus has also put out this FAQ about going's on too... aaa-agreement-faqs.pdf
  24. The vest itself is a combination of MOLLE equipment over a tactical vest. Some of the US RV'ers use those fly-fishing vests as an alternative too. Ultimately what I use may not fit anyone else, or they might have different priorities in what they want to carry, but the beauty of the MOLLE system is you can customise it to suit your own needs & wants. An example is this bare vest is on Ebay for $40, and you can add whatever pouches you want and will fit in your cockpit. You'll notice I haven't focused too much on food, though there is a small snare in one of the pouches. You can go 3 weeks without tucker, and I hope I would be home by then! Survival to me, isn't about camping in luxury, it is about making sure you are still alive when the paramedics find you, so I have put more medical, first aid and location aids in there than rations. For remote areas, I would carry water in the back of the plane, but not on my person. You can still go 3 days without water and again, I hope AMSA would have at least found me by then, even if the ground party is still some days away. To that end, I typically use OzRunways with tracking enabled, I have ADS-B in the RV, and for XC flights, I file a plan, rather than just a flight note or worse, nothing at all - even if ASA does get confused because not many RAAus aircraft request flight following...The recent Mooney prang inland from Coffs shows the benefit to ADS-B in the search effort, even if it wasn't a happy ending...
  25. Insofar as political politics, I don't think people are ignorant or uncaring. I think most of us have simply had a gutful of our elected officials behaving in a worse manner than my 7 year old. Screaming and mocking each other across the chamber, concerned only with getting themselves reelected and their parliamentary pensions than the overarching good of the country. How many hospitals, freeways or schools would that $1080 tax refund buy? But that wont get the asshats voted back in... I'll get off my soapbox now......
×
×
  • Create New...