Ungrounded

Don't like it much - sorry. Perhaps if there were some gun sight cross-hairs in the middle?

Are there some Cessna's without starter motors? Or just a case of accidental start while moving prop during pre-flight inspection - live mag?

Yeah, but just one big temper-tantrum dummy spit from good 'ol Sol just might make things go awfully quiet upstairs.

AirAsia X flight from Sydney to Malaysia ends up in Melbourne after navigational error

Perhaps use a weighted metric of say number-of-likes/number-of-messages*100 ? Perhaps too simplistic and would result in people being court martialed for lack of likes and sliding back down the ranking scale. But take the idea and play with the math. You should be able to find a metric formula that ranks Forum users by both quantity (number of posts) and quality of those posts (likes).

They are changing them all. $5 note is just the first cab off the rank. $10 next etc all on down the line. About one year between introductions I think. They are harder to counterfeit apparently but at the same time "things" have been done to make it much easier for a machine to accurately identify/count them (note acceptors in vending machines etc-al). This was the main push for changing them. Or so I hear tell. And 'yes' I wouldn't give you $5 for one of the garish collideoscopic mashups either.

Interesting. How was the meeting advised to SAAA members? I've seen/heard nothing.

I'm also a member of both organisations. A very recent *new* member to both. As such I have no lengthy historical involvement with either. So what follows are some impressions from a somewhat bemused johnny-come-lately to all of this. These are just my *own* views from someone "outside", looking in. Views possibly flawed, likely inaccurate, but I'll share them anyway. 1. RAAus had it's roots in building/flying Ultralights (originally the Australian Ultralight Federation - AUF). But this is no more. The current focus is all about flight training and then flying very sexy, very expensive 600Kg factory LSA's. The recent rapid growth of RAAus seems likely attributable to a large influx of more senior gentlemen/ladies taking refuge from GA medicals. These people bring with them a GA view of the world. 2. RAAus looks on track to becoming a very professional organisation. But sadly somewhere along the road they seem to have stopped listening to what a large section of its members actually want. While still continuing to act in the best interests of "Recreational Aviation". Does anyone else see a problem here? 3. RAAus didn't seem much interested in builder assisting someone constructing an aircraft. 4. SAAA also had it's roots in building/flying Ultralights (originally the Ultralight Association of Australia - ULAA). But this is no more. The SAAA reputedly has a very professional focus on aircraft construction. But the aircraft today mostly seem to be very high end kits. The resulting aircraft are of course GA registered and often even more expensive, more capable and as a consequence heavier than the 600Kg LSA's. 5. The SAAA has in recent times has been so dysfunctional that even a simple e-mail to head office requesting information regarding the Builder Assist program went completely unanswered. So with this overly simplistic view of the current state of play. It makes sense to this newbie to at least discuss amalgamation. The SAAA could look after building, construction and maintenance and the RAAus can look after flight training and aircraft registrations. Excepting this isn't really an amalgamation but rather a re-amalgamation. Given that the RAAus was originally a break-away group from the SAAA ("...so just where are the Judean Popular People's Front?". CASA playing the part of the Roman's of course :-). Now here's something else that may (or may not) be of interest. I'm also a member of another Aircraft related organisation, the EAA. For the princely sum of $40 a year I think it was, they quite happily answer my technical questions. Recently the EAA even sent me an e-mail invitation to take part in an online survey. I can't believe that such a survey would have been created just for little 'ol me. So I'm assuming that quite a number of people reading this may have seen the same invitation. And the thrust of that survey? It was:- "Why are you a member of the EAA?" and... "Would you be interested in joining or establishing an EAA Chapter in Australia?". So maybe there are other opportunities for mergers/amalgamations? Or perhaps just even greater impetus to consider local options? Kind Regards All, Steve.

Same NSW. https://www.service.nsw.gov.au/transaction/check-registration-and-history-vehicle

Geez, why not? I kind of like the look of where they are going with their E-Fan!

Apart from all the obvious issues of build quality done by someone else. I'd be worried about registration issues. Looks suspiciously like it might need to be registered "Experimental" and that you may need to prove that you constructed 51% or more of the aircraft yourself.

What sort of aircraft is it? A Google of SportAir locates a company in the USA that sells multiple aircraft types (including the Sting). But this airframe doesn't look to be one of theirs. Looks to be wood and fibreglass construction.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-28/skydiving-cessna-crash-landed-in-adelaide-when-fuel-ran-out-atsb/7121110 https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2015/aair/ao-2015-115.aspx Fuel exhaustion apparently. Two fuel dip-sticks in the aircraft with different calibration marks.

Hi Mark, Was it you or someone else here that mentioned TX watchdog timers? Is this the only reason why the Icom airband radios/handhelds are no longer compliant? Because that lack such a timer? Or is there some other compliance issue? And if I am getting my head around all this. Then does this mean that the IC-A15 handheld has received special CASA/ACMA dispensation for continued sale because there are no other ground options available. Even though they are still strictly non-compliant (for some reason). Further, that if you already have an IC-A15 installed in a fixed ultralight installation then it is alright to continue using it. But that any new fixed installations of an IC-A15's would be verboten? Steve.

Yep I've got a plan. Staying out of the clouds!!! Here's another good video on the topic.

Question guys: There isn't any legal problem or impediment with using a hand-held radio in an ultralight or homebuilt is there? I know CASA has a list of "approved" radio equipment that I've seen somewhere for VH registered aircraft. Is this applicable to RAA rego as well? Or are you OK to use a hand-held? Someone (Spacesailer I think it was) made the comment a while back that there were no "approved" handhelds and I'm wondering what was meant by this.

Might be best to stick with established standards rather than re-inventing the wheel. Which may cause undue confusion. Not sure how these would help in a circuit though. Maybe there are others? Steve (being silly).

Sorry, I should have been clearer. There was something about a couple of the previous posts (not just yours) that seemed to imply that it was in fact "illegal" to be in possession of an air band VHF tranceiver, unless you had successfully passed an appropriate "Radio Endorsement". Even if said transceiver was only being used for receive purposes. At the time this didn't seem quite right and it was really this point I was seeking clarification on. So suffering a bout of insomnia tonight I've been reading up on the various bits of Radcom legislation. The results of which have surprised me. Turns out (my reading/understanding) that it is in fact illegal to be in possession of an air band handheld transceiver unless you already have the Radio Endorsement. I don't think it has always been this way. In fact I rather suspect that this has only been the case since changes made to the Radcom Act back in 2007, but have not verified this. Reading between the lines my interpretation is that ACMA only cares about people illegally operating transmitters. But that the law has been structured such that they don't have to prove you were the one transmitting. Just having a piece of radio gear capable of doing so in your possession is enough to convict you of an offence. Another revelation is that it is a legal requirement for a business selling said communications gear to verify that the purchaser is suitably licensed prior to sale and then hold a copy of whatever documentary proof was used for a period of two years after the sale! Steve.

Question: Why shouldn't a low time pilot without a radio endorsement carry and listen to, a hand held air-band transciever? Granted they could not use air-space that required them to transmit but outside of that?

Motorbikes and bicycles both steer the same. They are both two-wheeled. They both require counter-steering. When you ride a bicycle (or motorbike) and steer without holding the handle bars you weight-shift the handle bars in the correct direction(s) as required. Counter steering is still happening. The second "Kieth Code" video about counter-steering posted above by Pearo shows a clear demonstration of this happening.

Hi Yenn, Actually it's quite true. Although it might best be said that a bicycle or motorbike turns because it is banked-over and that to bank the bicycle we *briefly* initiate a turn in the opposite direction to establish the desired bank angle in the desired direction. Since this is an aviation forum then this then will seem appropriate. One person who did believe this would appear to have been none other than Wilbur Wright of "Wright Brothers" fame. Wilbur had this to say on the subject:-

Often a battery powered radio has a cleaner sounding signal. As they escape from unwanted noise entering the radio via the main electrical system. They can still suffer from RF interference but often electrcal noise rides the power supply lines. Very much in agreement that a portable radio needs a good external antenna to perform well. You may also need to be careful with the headphones and microphone (headset) being used. In that they should be electronically "matched" (suitable) for the radio in question. Using a genuine manufacturers accessory for the radio is the safe way to arrive at the desired matched condition. Use something 3rd party and you may need to be careful/experiment with matching the microphone type/impedence and the headphone impedences. Low TX audio and/or RX volume is the common result of a mismatch.

Version 2 has been "Removed by user". What was the difference?

With regards to the "backwards bike". It probably doesn't help any that most people (including me) learnt to ride one without ever realizing that to make a left turn you actually turn the handle bars to the right, even if only briefly (and vice-versa for the other direction). Bicycles turn because they are inclined or banked over. To cause a bicycle to bank left for a left turn you have to steer to the right. The process is called "Counter Steering". Not suggesting that if you did understand "Counter Steering" you would be able to ride that infernal backwards bike. But the knowledge may speed the process of re-learning how to ride. Interesting video/experiment!