Happyflyer

It sounds like the co-pilot was getting treatment for some mental issues. The problem was that he kept this from his employer and authorities. Our health system is largely computerized and we all have medicare and private health insurance numbers. Perhaps if you hold a class 1 medical certificate this could be flagged on the health system with mandatory reporting requirements for certain health issues.

If a air marshall can carry a gun, he can also be responsible enough to carry some sort of electronic over ride key.

“It should be noted the audit found that flight safety had not been compromised,” he said.

So what is the problem?

"The report found the Royal Flying Doctor Service’s safety problems were so severe that it would have already had its wings clipped under standards commonly applied by mining companies with their contracted airlines."

The mining companies are run by fat bloated OH&S departments desperate to justify their existence. Their requirements far exceed legal requirements. Just as an example the PC12 and King Air RFDS aircraft are designed to operate with one crew. If you want a contract to fly into a mining strip they stipulate two pilots for the same aircraft. Mining companies used to be able to afford this excess, some may have to rethink this now.

There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots... but there are no old, bold pilots.

The pilots were specifically broadcasting "emergency, emergency" rather than "mayday", does this mean anything?

Most Cessnas will carry a 15% gross weight overload for ferry flying, so don't sweat the weight v strength issue. ,

I do agree that by teaching you will learn far more. I have taught in the past in a couple of different areas and I certainly believe that there is no better way to learn any subject than to teach it. In my case however, I intend to retire from my second career at the end of April and I am certainly not looking for a third career nor am I intending to commit to a timetable. At least not in the short term, so the theory and small amount of practical experience that I may gain needs to be weighed up against the time and cost required to do it.

Always try to make the plane do what you want it to, do not just accept what you end up with. You should always be flying at the altitude you have set yourself at the airspeed you have planned. When climbing, work on keeping you airspeed close to your target, when descending target your airspeed and rate of decent, when levelling off work hard at maintaining the new level and develop the ability to remain on heading and in balance. Keep your radio calls to a minimum, use your eyes and ears and situational awareness to fly safely. The occasional flight with an instructor you trust and get on with is a small cost and will also help a lot. And I do believe that the less time you have between flights the better you will become.

I have also been giving some consideration to doing my instructor rating. Not because I wish to gain hours as to do that I would be far better off going flying but because I think I could learn a lot about myself and flying by doing the rating.I currently have no desire to teach but I would like to become the best pilot that I can and I think that the instructor rating could help me do that.

This was an update on the first one.Ozbear would have done better to fill the tanks or have enough for an alternate.

With reference to the simulated instrument flight, there are no minimum hours stipulated under Part 61 for an RPL. All you will need to do is demonstrate proficiency, how you gain the skills is not legislated. It's worth reading the MOS to determine what you are required to demonstrate proficiency.With reference to the English language proficiency, CASA delegates (ATO's, Flight Examiners or what ever qualification the person assessing you holds) can only certify to Level 6. You need to be assessed by a qualified linguist for a level 4 standard (ie level 4 is more difficult to assess - a bit like the downwind 05/36 example).

61.495 Requirements for grant of recreational pilot licence endorsements

(1) This regulation applies to a person other than a person who is eligible to be granted a recreational pilot licence endorsement under regulation 61.500.

(2) An applicant for a recreational pilot licence endorsement must:

(a) have passed the aeronautical knowledge examination for the endorsement; and

(b) have completed flight training for the endorsement; and

© if the endorsement is a recreational navigation endorsement—have completed, in addition to the flight time mentioned in paragraph 61.475(2)(d):

(i) at least 5 hours of solo cross‑country flight time; and

(ii) at least 2 hours of dual instrument time, 1 hour of which is conducted during dual instrument flight time; and

(d) if the endorsement is a flight radio endorsement—have a current aviation English language proficiency assessment.

If that's true, then all I can say is it's goddamn wrong. I am all for breath testing on public roads; you have an obligation to drive safely not only for yourself and anyone who's in your car, but for every other road user too.If however you want to drink a carton of beer and tool around your property on your ride-on mower, then you should be able to. You're not covered by MAIB, you're not required to register the vehicle, you're not putting anyone else at risk and if you're stupid enough to roll it and break your silly neck, that's your own business. The cops don't come and breathalise you when you get pissed and juggle carving knives or ride your skateboard down the stairs, so I fail to see how operating machinery within the boundaries of your own property is any different.

Check the fees at Warnervale. Looks like $25 to land and take off, $30 to park overnight, $100 to refuel (plus the cost of fuel). This may not be current but if they are still charging this then clearly they don't really want aircraft there.

From the council https://consultation.wyong.nsw.gov.au/d-and-r/notice-of-variation-to-revenue-policy-warnervale-a/supporting_documents/WARNERVAL_AIRPORT_PROPOSED_201314_FEES_AND_CHARGES.pdf

hey tornado & andy@twitter are you commies happy that the data retention laws passed? i thought so! now the government will read every email you ever send, record all of your phone calls, save all of your browsing history, keep everything you post on twitter and facebook (interesting stuff i bet), and even know the location and model of camera with any photos you take, congrats.

Firstly CASA have attacked RAA and Jabiru owners and flight schools as I see it not just Jabiru.. I posted for the benefit of Jabiru owners and Flight schools.

. lawyers were not engaged by Jabiru.

 

. CASA have done what ? What a load of dreamed up garbage. This is a disgraceful stupid statement that only a person who didn't care about the real facts would make. (Most likely the enemy)

 

. What he flies is a GA plane, he does not appear to fly RAA planes, I fly GA and RAA. I am insulted by GA pilots who think RAA is inferior or not real aircraft. I'm not bagging GA pilots only the knockers.

 

. I have chased a lot of information, there is no legal action in progress, there is inquiries and more information being sought. RAA has put in a FOI as per newsletter.

 

. John has jumped to conclusions and invented scenarios and this is helping no one, this is totally misleading.

 

. I am very reluctant to give any more information or help on this site due to people interfering with stupid and crazy assumptions that ruins it for people this involves and concerns.

 

. Should any legal action take place it would need to be determined if it would be beneficial or damaging to the future of RAA and it's members, I think legal action of any kind would be off the table until CASA decide their future actions relating to the issues.

 

. My post was not for the entertainment of the exaggerators or harmless speculators. I would not dream of writing the crap he did and if you think harmless speculation is what he said you are seriously wrong.

 

.legal people have said ....

 

What can we do for those affected?

 

We encourage any flying training organisations or aviation organisation faced with adverse economic and business outlooks, due to this legislative instrument, to share their story with us.

 

The Shine Lawyers Aviation Department is investigating the potential legal remedies which may be sought from various parties arising from the way these safety risks have been dealt with, and is looking at a range of options for operators who have suffered losses.

I see you fly a piper Comanche and it seems you want to jump to conclusions and make misleading statements, are you interested at all in RAA or Jabiru owners or Flight Training Facilities ? Stick to your Comanche.

GentsI potentially have to do this trip shortly in a J120....The effective range taking potential wind into effect means I need to pick up Avgas between Balladonia and Murray field between 200nm and 250nm west. Is there a source of Avgas in that range? I'll have 2 x Jerrys on board but would prefer to land with them full as I consider them an absolute fixed reserve.....

 

People have said stay away from Ceduna, I have a full suite of carnet cards, is there any other reason to avoid?

 

Can I also get confirmation that Balladonia has avgas on pump..

 

A J120 doesn't take much avgas at a time....are any of the roadhouses anything other than pump where you can buy only what you need?

 

For those that have done this trip heaps (east to west) what headwinds in reality should I plan for as a reasonable assumption? I've heard that I need to plan for 35kt headwinds but that seems excessive to me in that I probably would wait it out rather than push on....but if 35kts is reality for great chunks of time it might be a slow trip!! Any guidance would be appreciated......much less of an issue in a J230.....

 

Andy

You call those the right tyres?

These are the right tyres!

I was under the impression from CASA briefings before part 61 came in, that PPL and CPL licences could only be issued with airspace endorsements and that current holders of a PPL without CTA endorsements had three years to get an endorsement or revert to an RPL. It would seem Part 61 has confused CASA every bit as much as the rest of us.

There are risks associated with flying ..........These risks are that you may infringe some regulations and be assulted and incarcerated by the government.

Once incarcerated, you may be further assulted by all sorts of things including "guards" with actual bodily harm, with no legal protections.

 

I reckon CASA is the biggest risk in flying.

Last night landing just before midnight. Batteries charged during the day sustain flight overnight. There are two pilots but only one on board at a time. It will need to stay aloft for several days when flying over the Pacific. Don't be too negative boys, just think how quickly technology has advanced in things like mobile phones and computers. I expect electric aircraft will be a real viable alternative in five or ten years.

So the penalty is wholly suspended. This clown does his act in full view of the public, on video and gets no penalty? Not much deterrent there. I am always amazed that the judiciary thinks a suspended sentence is a major penalty.

Truth is we are all just surmising. Those that are Han Solo or Indiana Jones fans see a hero making a good fist of it. Those that see the end result of a destroyed aircraft and substantial injury think maybe he got it a bit wrong. Could be he made the best of a very bad situation or he cocked it up and is lucky to be alive. If it was me, I would be disappointed to have landed so heavily as to wipe out the undercarriage and break the back of the aircraft, but glad to be alive!

That's good news Meth, the taxpayers (and their children) in this country are spent out. About time these 'Green' projects learned they have to stand on their own feet. Once they can make it economically viable to do with private money all the best for them.

Guess this one ... hint not Australian ;-)[ATTACH=full]34426[/ATTACH]

Hypothetical RA-Aus question regarding any (RA1) restricted airspace that is KNOWN to be currently Inactive.If a transponder equipped 24 rego aircraft with a Pilot Certificate holder in command wishes to transit this airspace:

 

A) Can they do so under current regulations?

 

B) if so, MUST they contact ATC prior to entry knowing it to be inactive?

 

For the record, I always plan around all Restricted airspace, though I'm just not 100% clear on RA-Aus regs in such circumstances.