skybum

Hey UFO, I know these guys are GA, but they have been going since 1963. Melbourne Aviation Group Maybe a call to them may be productive wrt a workable rules structure.

I know the dream is bust for me. Any more news from Italy?

:laugh:touchy subject:laugh:

I can say with conviction, other than your accoms you can get round Perth city for free and then catch the free shuttles across to the south side of the river and then sit down beside the course and watch it entirely for FREE! Grandstand seating is @$100 per day and that is the only cost. Best to sit for free right by the beach.

Yep, it could be a beat-up to try and forment terror in the skies if RAA does get access to controlled airspace. All I can suggest is be the best pilot you can be. RAA mag is right. What we are seen to do now affects our freedoms in the future.

I know this may cause upset. In the interest of safety, I have copied this from another site. Is RAA this bad? I must admit that I haven't witnessed this at my home field of TYA. Everyone practices good coms and appear to be where they say they are. We live in pretty crowded airspace as far as CTA is concerned and I haven't witnessed any grumbling about Violation of Controlled Airspace issues. I put this down to a small group that exists in all flying activities. Ignore procedures and rules because either not up to speed or just plain ignorant occurs in GA which I have seen. GA and RAA mix quite well at places like Temora when I have been there for flying weekends so , as I say again I have not witnessed this. In the interest of safety for everyone. If you witness this. Either have a chat to the people in question to see if they are OK with everything OR , the worse case. Report them....If we want to get access to airspace we do not want cowboys ruining it for the vast majority of seriously safe airpersons:thumb_up: This activity will cause serious damage to the whole because of the antics of just a handful. Why give the CASA need to have to step in.

Hey Cap, don't shoot the messenger:hug: The J230 is very nice flying machine. It has good performance. Under the weight limitations it is severely handicapped in RAA. I can bet I could do at least two circuits an hour more than a c152 because it climbs so well. It IS a good aeroplane, it would be just fantastic if it was set out better than what is presented.

OK guys, I have not flown in many RAA types Just Skyfox, Eurofox and the Jabs and I would have to say the Jab IS the worst aircraft I have ever had the pleasure (dis?) of flying. Why would someone who can make a sweet flying aeroplane get it so wrong with the controls. Brake actuation that REQUIRES you to cross hand control to get your right hand onto the brake lever in the most critical part of the landing right after touchdown where the aircraft is still just flying, read this as in a crosswind I would be loath to muck around with the stick position until after the speed has bled off a bit BEFORE using the brake. Speaking of which, is there a kit made to improve braking performance? Whilst flying having to lean foward to get left hand onto the trim and completely change your feel for the trim with right hand. I found that I could get close but not perfect and was worth of just carrying a smidge of control input than try and get that spring in the right spot. Cross handing to get to the flap switch which is past the controls over on right side with the indicator over and up high and right to distract you even more as well as carb ht. Why didn't the guy spend some time with a bit of thought for ergonomic design. Taking your hand off the control column is a no-no around T/O or LDG. Has anyone ever put a switch for flap on the control column as well as electric trim? After flying one, the layout just ruins what would be a beautiful little aeroplane. Are there any worse? :confused: (moderated under rule 2.9 - Admin) (edited back without the xxxx bit. didn't know the other word for derrier was so touchy)

G'Day everyone I am backing Flyer here. 45kt stall in landing configuration must be one of the limits. As for the other limit. A story about a J230. Empty weight at 360kg Gross weight of 600kg. I am no shrinking violet. In the old scale I was a large build. In the new scale my BMI nudges 26 (or was it 36??) whatever, I'm a big guy. Even at my racing weight of 90kg and my wife in a J230 leaves me with either fuel for 1:20 with no baggage or leave the missus at home and have enough fuel and luggage to have a good trip (yeh right:laugh:) Me and Flyer even wanted to go up north but it isn't going to happen in any aircraft that doesn't have a useful load of 300kg. So all you so and so's that resemble whippets have a thought for the likes of me that CAN do the job in something like a J230 if the weight limit was closer to 760kg then 540kg. I am forced to break the law every time I fly an RAA ship with a passenger and fuel. I cannot afford my PPL, RAA is my last resort or I just give up.i_dunno

STBY, on another forum we are getting together to archive the original crash comics online. So access to issue 1, 1955 to the last one 150 in 1991 can be had at a click of the button. Regardless of the rego prefix, aviation safety and accident prevention and correct descision making is every aviator's responsibility. As history students, aviators fail dismally! We keep repeating the same errors over and over for the same result.

In all honesty, environmental pressures(...evolution!) will make the diference in the end. To say exactly how the human race will meet it's end is as bad a theory as human induced global warming. I was reading a website last night called ICECAP. Leamen Bros were big movers and shakers on pushing for investment in anti-carbon out to a century in the future.(You should read their pedigree) Yet, they couldn't predict their downfall less than a year later. Makes you feel so confident in "expert opinion" Science Fantasy! should be left to the bargain tray at the local bookshop. OK, we are all lead to believe that China is on a one child kick. The families are prefering only boy children and are aborting females in the hope of getting only a son....thats the story we are being fed. One thing that struck me and wife in particular during the openess of the olympics in Beijing. A camera crew was in a primary school. My wife picked it up first. The class was nearly three quarters girls???? One class doesn't make a whole country but very strange that that particular class had more girls than boys. SO a theory could be that China wants the world to believe they are trying to rein in their population by literally breeding themselves out of existence by breeding only boys all the while breeding up a huge population to flood the world like the theory of the yellow horde of old! Sounds far fetched. doesn't it? AGW is based upon similar tenuos "facts" Think about it!

Gee, I miss Flight Services:sad:

Gliding? Great fun! As I described gliding to my 20000hr jet chtr mate who had never even considered it as real flying. Gliding is like golf for pilots. :thumb_up:

Yep, vk3auu. Good link:thumb_up: Here is another one http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Calen7/MornerEng.html The whole page is a good read.

I just beg to differ. because of the ability of the internet. ANY "fact" can be refuted by both sides in short time. Students think they are clever cut and pasting facts into their projects and do not realise how quickly they will come undone. On this whole Anthropogenic Global Warming thing. Because of no shred of even including THE most dominant greenhouse gas in any calculations just shows how foolish these "scientists" are. CO2 represents 0.0032% of global atmosphere. Of which human activity adds just 3% of that OR 0.000096% of total global concentrations (careful with your zeroes, people!) There are even fools who firmly believe that the closing ozone hole forms a vortex which eventualy caused that rotating storm in the Atlantic that hit Brazil.???? Look at where ozone forms the protective layer and what partial pressure it produces??? and someone firmly believes atoms cause a vortex??? big enough to cause a rotating storm??? PUULLEASE! Anyway, in the spirit of an opposing argument. Global sea rise? OK that would mean that the inertial mass is moving further away from the centre of the planet. To the lay person. What happens when an ice skater starts to spin and then pulls their arms in toward their sides, and then push their arms above their head. The rotation increases to conserve inertia. Move arms out and the opposite is true. So, with global sea rise the planet is expanding 70% of the earth's surface. NASA has NOT detected ANY slowing of the Earth's rotation due to sea rise. Please explain! Physics doesn't change to suit an argument.

Crikey! Enough differences in the photoes to be a different flight in each photo. Maybe, someone's private collection has made it into the press. There was a time where this was very common. Since Sept11, security has got just that little bit silly. A shame really. This is just a beatup that is going to result in some poor bugger getting in a lot of hot water for happy snaps.

Ahh good to see. Most everyone here can see it will not affect their brand of flying.:thumb_up: This argument can continue along academic grounds for reader information if we so wish. I understand UAT pretty well. Tell us some more on VDL4, Jetboy.

I certainly know where I would like to be! I keep telling myself "Good things come to those that wait" I am getting sick of waiting:hittinghead:

ADS-B has been bashed to hell and back on most forum that I can think of. A couple of years ago there was very vocal opposition from senior people within RAA. I am just wondering what this group of very level headed recreation aviationists think of the idea of having to carry a new box. From what I have learnt so far, the end game will have ADS-B carriage in aircraft required to carry a radio. This would mean CTAF® We are awaiting REG103 to be enacted, this will allow RAA licenced pilots to access controlled airspace. To do this will require radio and transponder plus other stuff, I am sure. For garden variety buzzing around on weekends and sunny days from private aerodromes I see no need to partake of the new technology. Provided the pilot remains clear of RPT and IFR ops then never the twain shall meet. It is when a plastic fantastic wants to get higher and faster and further then things start getting into the world formerly part of GA. With all the requirments of the GA world needing to be fitted. I have found ADS-B transponders in Europe for about EU2200 TSO, just add a TSO145a/146a GPS to the mix and its certified. MicroAir are considered a goer as soon as the subsidy is given the go ahead with lower airspace roll-out. However, regardless of subsidy. The equipment is available at around the AU$4500 to $5000. What is everyone's view on this?

This is starting to get away from the thread at hand. How about we start a thread on ADS-B wrt RAA and see where it leads.

Yep, agree on transponder to STBY unless entering or departing the GAAP. WRT Capstone. That is a bit of a bunfight over not so much standards of equipment but comparable standards from ADS-B to radar. Not sure if it was a union or FAA or combined but ADS-B was pulled as a separation device in ATC. It was still available but ATC could not provide a separation service using ADS-B alone. Strange stuff! Over here our upper airspace ADS-B ATC provides the exact same separation standard with ADS-B as radar. Haven't heard any more about Alaska and ADS-B. Was in contact with the local ATCOs but they must now refer me back to the FAA over the subject. So, if that is still going on I could well imagine the locals would be a little reticent to take up the loan offers until the FAA sorts itself out. As for over here. The jury is still out on the subsidy for GA VFR, also includes RAA. Everything I have seen points to a basic ADS-B 1090ES transponder including a TSO145/146a GPS. The GPS may be included within the transponder for VFR. IFR get a few more goodies so AirServices can also look at shutting down certain navaids. In this case though. NO electronic serveillance would have avoided the accident. Transponder, FLARM or ADS-B. Unless there is a re-write of the rules that mandate ADS-B ON AND a real time feed inside the control tower cab with allowances and licences for the tower staff to use the feed as a separation device if so needed. Especially if a built in alarm was to sound alerting tower staff to a close proximty within the circuit area with enough seconds to contact aircraft and give instructions to avoid each other. EN has a radar feed from ML CENTRE but they aren't allowed to use it as a separation device. Only to aid them in locating you visually. If there are any ATC on the thread I hope they can set me straight wrt radar use in the tower. EDIT- just to add, it has saved me heaps of times to get the call from the tower to ensure my parrot was squawking. Me started flying before transponders were common. Still have to remember Lights-ON Camera-Transponder to Mode C, Action-Cleared for Takeoff, Power and T & Ps all green.

ADS-B is just another transponder...At a cost of $25,000???...I do not think so. Mis-information like this is unwarranted, Tony! You are no different to the media in this regard. This accident has happened in a highly regulated PROCEDURAL airspace. Electronic surveillance doesn't work well in the busy circuit area of a GAAP.

The man from Gaia. Gotta luv him. He and others proclaim the CLAW theory of a sulphide cycle that drives cloud libedo. And the ANTI-Claw theory just for GW. A foot in both doors. Good lad:thumb_up: He also likes the idea of nuclear power. That must cause consternation amongst the deep dark greens:hug:

Methinks the owners of the lease at CB are just trying to pee you off so you will go somewhere else. If I remember right they made the news about charging a heap for parking and moving all the GA onto the grass. Havent flown in so only going by reports. Doesn't sound right, does it?

Ultralights, the "recovery" took place 256ft down in the ice. The aircraft all performed survivable forced landings on the surface. Fifty years later, they are over a mile away AND 256ft under the surface in ice:thumb_up: NASA says 7cm a year. Glaciologists say Greenland forms ice at 7ft per year...just a little different. Even the creationists tried to jump on board. they tried to prove because of the meterage these aeroplanes were down in the ice over fifty years proved the Earth was only 2000years old.:confused: If the planet has been warming since the industrial age because of CO2 levels and Greenland is one of those places were melt is starting to overtake acreation then these aeroplanes should have been getting pretty close to surface..just wasn't the case.