Nobody

Listen to the "commentary" on this one:

view from the cockpit:

not my video but I was standing about 10m away from where this was shot.

The other thing I'd like to see (in my dreams) is a better way of knowing when Restricted airspace is active or not active. Notams are not the easiest things to read when you don't do it every day. A simple website would be vastly better. Input the R numbers and get instant feedback on their status and likely activation or deactivation.

It gives this as output. Not always good news but easy to find if you know where to look....

Edit: looks like I was beaten to it....

If needed they can get it back out again. YWOL is about 1800m from memory and the charts in this document seems to indicate that at a low weight it should be ok even with zero wind.

I understand that newish engines(for the reverse thrust) and tyres are being put on for the landing and will be swapped over to the original once it is in position.

Edit forgot the link:

http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commercial/airports/acaps/747_4.pdf

I am not that sure that it is really a rumour. Here are a few links to news articles about it going back a few months. I expect that there will be a big media contingent there to watch and record. The landing has been practiced in the simulator and preparations are all go.

http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2015/01/30/4171125.htm

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/01/30/13/35/record-setting-qantas-jumbo-donated-to-illawarra-aviation-museum

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/worlds-longest-flight-recordholder-qantas-city-of-canberra-747400-retires-20150129-1314lo.html

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2015/02/18/goodbye-first-qantas-747-but-hello-plane-spotters-buzzfeed/

http://www.australianflying.com.au/news/qantas-donates-b747-400-to-hars

http://www.australianflying.com.au/news/the-last-minute-hitch-30-january-2015

and from back in December when it was a rumour:

http://australianaviation.com.au/2014/12/vh-oja-back-in-sydney/

I have heard there is a 747 soon to become an exhibit at Wollongong.Anyone heard Anything?

Weather permitting it will be flown in on the morning of 8th of March.

I used C&H twice bring in kits from Vans and they were good

The instrument will impose operating limitations on Jabiru powered aircraft that are issued with a CASR Part 21 authorisation by way of conditions under CASR 11.068.

The instrument will also impose the same operating limitations on Jabiru powered aircraft that operate under the exemptions in CAO 95.55, by way of a direction under CASR 11.245.

I wonder if this applies to an experimental amateur built(VH registered) and RAAus registered aircraft or just the certified VH registered ones?...

Class D VFR still require a clearance and IFR are provided positive traffic information, both aircraft are under control of ATC who resolves their being a conflict. Class E, the controller has no idea of the VFR and it intention, traffic is provided when it can be. However as you get closer to an aerodrome aircraft become more in conflict, that's the nature of arrivial and departure paths. Flying at 8500feet doesn't stop a conflict for a Jer who is descending into the aerodrome, that could be up to 20-30 miles out, which is why in Australia controlled aerodromes (those set by CASA due to the number of movements and pax) are protected by Class C or D airspace. That protection is required for both the aerodrome (7-12nm radius) and the flight paths into and out of the aerodrome.The US system seems to use Class E airspace where in Australia we would use Class G. But not in place of using D or C around controlled aerodromes.

The image below shows the airspace situation as shown on the US sectional chart around Savannah Airport(KSAV), an airport with approximately 6.5 times more movements annually that Williamtown. The Class C airspace is shown by the maroon lines. Significantly there is an upper limit to the airspace at 4100 feet. Above that height the area is Class E which in the USA does not require a radio or a transponder* for VFR flight. The consequence of all of this is that the airport does not prevent movement of aircraft like Williamtown does.

*slight correction. In Class E you do not need a transponder in the USA but above Class C as in this case you do.

Class E airspace is the worst, and I for one would not want to see any more it.

I don't want this to turn into an argument between generations about which is better.

I just want people to understand that there will come a time for everyone when it is necessary to consider giving up flying. It will come at different ages for each of us depending on our health and past aviation skill but at some point it will come. As we age the risks of flying increase. We will all need to make a decision one day that the risk of flying is greater than the enjoyment that we get from it. It won't be an easy decision but like turning back before going into IMC is one that should be made correctly.

I used the car data because as far as I know there is no equivalent study for aviation. Unfortunately there is limited recent, national data in the public domain for cars but there are a few state by state studies. Here is a graph extracted from this link which shows the situation from South Australia from 1994 to 1998.

There have been reductions in the crash rate for younger drivers due to introduction of things like the 3 year P plate rule in NSW and the limits on passengers late at night and so the more recent data has a lower peak on the left. What this shows is that there is a relatively flat plateau through the middle years of life with higher risk at the beginning and the end.

I reckon you need to start thinking hard at about age 75. I don't have aviation statistics but on the road the data is clear. Per kM travelled males aged 75+ have higher crash rates and serious injury rates than the 15 to 19 age group.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9663297

:yikes:Yikes! I hope that they find a way to improve these lithium ion batteries to the point where a lighter battery such as this will be a safe proposition in light aircraft.

The distinction needs to be made between lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4)

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_iron_phosphate_battery

and lithium-ion polymer battery

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_polymer_battery

One type is probably ok in an aircraft. The other not so much...

for example take an RAA factory aircraft, maintained by L2 (not a LAME) and a RPC can't fly it in CTA, yet the pilot with RPL can. The maintenance of the aircraft hasn't changed.

Isn't quite level though, when people can build the same kit under VH and do their own maintenance

the point I make is that RAAus has some advantages and disadvantages over GA. Asking for the same privileges as GA may come with the same requirements...

I more meant without the extra restrictions.The fact an aircraft can be registered VH and the pilot RPL and it's okay, the same aircraft registered 19- and the pilot RPC is a no go, i'm not saying all aircraft should be allowed, but a level playing field would be nice.

Does any policy cover the first ten hours?