Birdseye

"the DR-7 is built like a formula one race car" And at twice the price?

That bend over test is in preparation for the next CASA price hike most likely.

All we need now is a scale V12 Merlin.....Those jet guys have it so easy.

I think that it has been established that there is still a question mark. Not only that, but the Aeronautical Information Publication is a subordinate document, not the prime legislation.

He also goes on in his post : "However, can someone tell me what the requirement is for restricted?" Another "mea culpa"?

OK, CAO 95.55, para 7.3 makes no reference to the original question asked and refers solely to controlled i.e. alphabet airspace. AIP ENR 5.3 (if that is the correct reference) talks about the issuing of notams for restricted and other areas. The CASA Project document is not legislation. Nothing to do with recreational flying in my case, I have decades of professional aviation experience and I can't find it.

Yes that would make sense, but what I'm asking is where is the actual legislation that supports this treatment statement. Without that, the statement is nothing better than "a bloke in the pub told me".

This question has whetted my curiosity. The statement "is treated as Class C" is not definitive. It also raises the question why an aircraft or its pilot quals are relevant, especially in the case of a non-aviation Restricted Area. I'd be keen to see any legislation reference that confirms the "treated as" position. No doubt exists about the areas or the requirement for permission to enter, as that is spelt out in ERSA.

Not saying whether it is correct or not as I haven't gone to the source documents, but para 1.4 on this link has information relevant to your question. Tutorial: Australian airspace regulations

That was also a comment I made to the CASA survey, which was that human ingenuity will inevitably overcome many engineered solutions. The original post highlights the problem we have currently with the media, i.e. people without the necessary technical knowledge or experience in the subject matter making generalized comments.

Yes, very hard to find. You probably have found the pilot and maintenance docs I came across on this site (links work), but no internal dimensions in either. LEGEND 600 - LIGHT SPORT AIRCRAFT (LSA)

Cool, we must be getting close to firewall forward.

I've just completed my CASA drone survey. The summary I gave was they they should use a measured risk assessment and management approach, without looking at what others have done (and made a mess of).

Ombudsman every time. Make sure you have done the right thing as far as notification and reasonable follow up action. Then don't mess around any further, just make sure you tell the ombudsman exactly what outcome you require. Applies to phones, mobiles, internet etc. regardless of the provider.

Media Rule #1: Never let facts spoil a good story. Media Rule #2: See Rule #1

Impertinent, I am as well informed as you. I was expressing an opinion.

I have always thought they were an example of technology purely for technology's sake.

I recall the ground crew alert horn fitted to the the JT8D B737s worked very well to get the attention of the package holiday totty as they wandered back to the terminal.

You lucky, lucky, bastard! My chance at Coltishall was stymied by the aircraft going u/s at the last moment.

Love it when the worm gets a good bite.

Presumably same applies to the dodgy building materials that come in from China as 'asbestos free'.

Perhaps even some Empire flying boats?

It's all down to personal perception. Sometimes we see what we see, other times we may see what we want to see.

Seems to me that people focus on the rotary 'Phantom' style of drone. The fixed wing variety can roam much further afield: