Jim McDowall

On the subject of why a Part 149 organisation or its agents/ officers should not get involved in accident investigation the submission of Commodore A.R. (Drew) McKinnie, RANR to the Aviation Safety Regulation Review Panel https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/migrated/aviation/asrr/submissions/files/115_a_mckinnie_29_jan_2014_redacted.pdf , particularly pages 5 and 6, instructive

I meant Xcom - looked wrong when I typed it in but the brain was not plugged in! Can you fix the radio? (not the brain - determined to be u/s long ago)

On the subject of junk radios does anyone know who can fix X-Air radios?

Are there any RAAus schools that do taildragger training in South Australia?

Thanks for the info and pics. Will track down a local Aeropup and have a look but at first glance the Aeropup seats do not match the drawings in the Supa Pup builders manual.

Can anyone supply a picture of the factory supplied Supa Pup mk4 seat?

More canon fodder for Dr Smart Aleck

The problem is bureacrats write the regulations requiring manuals to be approved by CASA with little instruction as to what has to be in the manuals. The likes of RAAus, GFA etc set out to impress CASA with how diligent they are and write extensive manuals which sometimes are in conflict with the law or often internally conflicted. They submit them to CASA who after numerous internal conferences and communications with the proponents eventually get an approval of a document that contain errors in law or otherwise. This approach generates a lot of internal activity for CASA employees that justifies their existence. Those of you with nothing better to do should read Sue Woods (of Jabiru fame) evidence to a senate committee earlier this year which illustrates the outside view of CASA's approach to the outside world at https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=committees/commsen/9146706b-6e31-4a9f-9fad-1b3fca2f099c/&sid=0006

All this confusion of aircraft classes adds weight to my argument that all RAAus aircraft in private operations should be "experimental" category. This would absolve CASA of any liability(and pobably RAAus) under CASR 203.??? as all VH "experimental" aircraft are already. No need for any BS compliance with arbitary standards that create un-necessary silos and increased administrative load.

A swarm attack by drones would inevitably paralyse our air force. This paradigm is war gamed.

Just pulled the cork and don't plan to put it back in.

Maybe not. Australian wine stockpile is at a nine year low. Evidences that some of us have been helping the industry through tough times.

I checked my 1995 copy of 95.10 and the wing loading requirement of 30kg/m2 was the go then which is why I didn't build a Hummelbird back then.

When is Dr Smartaleck due for retirement?

And there is a group in the population who are wandering around with a brain anurism that they are unaware of. They can go "pop" at any point in time with immediate incapacitation and probably death. I've seen it happen.

RAAus paid a lot of money only to have the GFA sponge on its work and decide to "copy and paste" RAAus's P.149 work product - also agreed to pay a consultant who I believe did work for RAAus's Part 149 exposition (application?) $10K to assist with the process. (see GFA minutes August 2020). At that stage RAAus's exposition was not in the public domain.

Is this the accident? https://www.theage.com.au/national/dick-smith-set-to-fight-aviation-rules-changes-20040918-gdynks.html

Just like parking stations no longer need attendants we no longer have garbos. Technology replaces coal face jobs with code cutters.

AsA is only trying to increase its revenue base ....... follow the money!

Try this https://www.segelflug.de/osclass/index.php?page=search&sCategory=110

Have a look at the classifieds at www.seglflug.de. As Europe has abandoned 25kHz spacing there are many good radios coming out of gliders. I have installed 2 Becker 4201 at a cost of $3-400 each. They fit in a 21/4 hole.

From Flight Safety, August 2017: Unlike the US and some other countries, there is no legislated upper age limit in Australia or New Zealand for airline pilots, providing they continue to meet the relevant medical standards and other requirements. But because they must comply with the age restrictions of the countries to which they are flying, older airline pilots are effectively restricted to domestic or Trans-Tasman operations.

In Australia you cant compulsorily retire someone on the basis of age. I know of a guy who was flying 737 freighters until recently at the age of 73 and it was only COVID that stopped him (or his employers) flying.

You need that privilege to pick up hitchhikers. The good part about the NZ initiative is that if you already have the required licence you do not need to do a special medical to fly.

Sorry forgot about CASA's version https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-page/changes-medical-certification