Nobody

NO. Isnt the discussion above about factory built. If you want more than 600kg in a kit build why wouldn't you build it with the help of SAAA and fly it with an RPL? The issue here is that some factory build aircraft are supposedly designed for more than 600kg and the change would allow them and other older GA aircraft to be registered and flown in RAAus.

I think that this is also a great point. When you read a story about a pilots near miss in a magazine there is a temptation to think "I would never do that, I am not that reckless". The reality is that many pilots who end up in these situations are not grossly reckless either, they just made 1 or 2 bad decisions.

Perhaps have a read here: http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/politics-and-off-topic-posts.139207/ and then go sign up here: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl

The difficulty is that as soon as the weight limit is increased someone uses it to put a bigger engine in and gets more speed. They then think that the weight limit should be increased again... It has happened at 450kg 544kg and now 600kg. If the limit is increased to 700kg and then 750kg will people then be asking for 800kg?

I think that the discussion above is a good one. MTOW and CTA will have little impact of safety. Improved training and a change in attitude a much greater influence on teh outcome. Training of the general pilot population* should be about recognizing the onset to a stall/spin and correcting before it develops rather than the focus on the recovery after. With practice you can actually fly an aircraft very close to stalling in quite gusty conditions with relative safety. The controls of the aircraft give feedback that allow for accurate control of the aircraft. You can quite happily fly a 172 around for long periods of time with the stall horn sounding. I know because my instructor made me do it. One point that is occasionally missed in the discussion of base to final turns and stalls is the different optional position. The lower an aircraft is to the ground the greater the ground takes up of the pilots view, coupled with the face that a turn made close to the ground may make the wing appear to move rearward with reference to a point on the ground. These combine to make a pilot want to pull back on the stick and apply too much rudder. To counteract this and as a way of building confident control of the Aircraft the US PPL syllabus has "ground reference maneuvers". The turns around a point exercise is described here on page 6-8. It isnt part of the Australian PPL syllabus nor as far as I know the RA-Aus one either. *Training of instructors, test pilots and aerobatic pilots should of course have a greater focus on recovery techniques rather than avoidance as they are most likely to experience a situation where the aircraft departs controlled flight.

IF you have a lot of time have a read of the discussion about the Concorde at the link below. Lots of good information form the people who actually designed, maintained and flew it. It starts off a bit academic talking about APU's but gets very interesting when they talk about the computer systems and the engine design. http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/423988-concorde-question.html

The full details of the construction on he website and in the full length video are pretty impressive. http://ddeville.com/derek/Qu8k.html

This has to be the most optimistic comment on building an aeroplane i have read. Awesome...

It is a onex. It's a single seat sonex with very cool folding wings. http://www.sonexaircraft.com/onex/

and a few more from Ausfly 2015:

A couple more:

A couple more

you wanted pics:

This discussion gives an interesting perspective on what we expect from the manufacturers of parts for our aircraft. In this instance a long time ago they sold a prop. It appears to have worked successfully for many years on a number of aircraft. There appears to be no propeller logbook to confirm exact time in service but it has been used for over 1000 hours, in obviously aggressive corrosion conditions by looking at the bolts. Are they really expected to replace the hub without charge after all this time? I am all for manufacturers replacing things that are defective but is this the case here? Do you take a tooth brush back to the shop after 6 months and ask for a new one?

Yep I went. I had a great time. I even saw this good looking rv-6 that had flown all the way from WA. I will post some pics tonight when I get home.

You dont need to be a member of SAAA to build and fly an experimental. SAAA do provide support and assistance.

Exactly the point I was making earlier. Unless you are within 1-2 hours drive you wont get "the general public" turning up in droves. So dont make the event about them. Make it about the pilots, the builders and the aviation buffs. Cater to their needs and interests so they turn up year after year and the event will be a great success. Not many events are able to do the phoenix and rise from the ashes. This years event had a good turn out from people who came from all over. Hopefully next year there will be a bit more catering to deal with the increase in numbers!!!!

So why cant you grasp that wen compared to Temora it is closer to Sydney and almost exactly half way from Melbourne to Brisbane? In a big country like Oz you are not going to get a location that is more feasible for a flying weekend away from the 3 largest capitals.

Do you know where Narromine is? It is closer to Sydney than Temora.

Exactly, and as a comprise Narromine works well. Being inland of the ranges generally the weather is good this time of year. On the coast there is greater variability, you get nice days and then some bad weather. If the event had been held on the coast last weekend it would have been cancelled.

Ok, Here is the list of Airports from ERSA sorted by distance from the Sydney CBD. Are there any locations that are significantly closer that would be suitable?

Many of the things you are asking for are exactly what happened this year. The flying display days were the Friday and the Saturday. This allowed, for instance people from Brisbane/Melbourne to leave home early Saturday morning and arrive in time for the airshow. The Airshow finished at 3:45 with aircraft able to take off about 4:00. That gave approximately 2:00 hours for a flight back to the oaks, bankstown or cessnock which most aircraft could have achieved. The Saturday night had the formal dinner and those that stuck around for it enjoyed it with the whole of the Sunday to Fly drive home.

Go back to my post 81 earlier in this thread and reread it. I don't think that the general public who is looking to be "entertained" will drive 3 hours each way from Sydney to go to the airshow. So even Bathurst isnt even close enough for them. Bathurst also has some significant negatives, including RPT so that makes operating the airshow difficult as well as needing greater security and ASICs. It also lacks the amenities for camping so these would have to be brought in at a cost. It also lacks 2 directions of sealed runways leading to the risk that the airshow could be cancelled if the wind is the wrong direction. It also dosent have much of a taxyway system so that departing aircraft need to backtrack slowing departures. There is a lot less parking area for aircraft and any airshow that uses the main runway as the display line means that the spectators are facing directly west into the sun. If the event is moved to Bathurst it will be gone in 2 years. It really depends a lot on what you think that Ausfly is about. Is it an event for the general public or an event for the aficionados? You liken it to an overseas band visiting but I think of it more along the lines of the Deneliquin Ute muster or the Tamworth Country Music festival. These are events that people are willing to travel significant distances to attend. They are already part of the "scene" but are looking to meet up with like minded people who are also interested in what they are. Ausfly needs to work towards that goal. Sharing it between venues in practice dosent work out too well. Look at what happened to the motor show when Sydney and Melbourne tried to agree to have it on an alternating basis. If disappeared for a few years. Airshows that are already held close to the main centers like Wings over Illawarra, Avalon and the Evans Head Fly in are the types of events to market to new participants in the sport. It is vitally important that SAAA and RAAus are well represented at these events to showcase the smaller end of Aviation.

I don't know the local conditions that well but looking at the google earth image could the road to the east of 03/21 be upgraded to be a taxiway for small aircraft?