aplund

My comment wasn't about the charges per say. Vector graphics for computer assisted plotting has been around in one form or another since the mid 1960s. Postscript as a standalone vector rendering format since the 1980s. Encapsulated postscript and PDF has been around since the early 1990. Transferring ~10mb files on the internet has been a thing since the mid 1990. But yet, charts for Australian airspace have been unavailable for low cost distribution on the internet until 2017! For "safety" reasons perhaps?

Yay! The 21st century has arrived!

All these kids are getting high on is lead poisoning.

Lead poisoning - Wikipedia

Doesn't sound like a "high" worth having.

I was more thinking about the exact chemistry of 100LL w.r.t regulations. This is, as far as I know, the last fuel with lead additive still in active widespread use. Presumably it's the sniff-ability of the fuel that they are after and not the effects of Lead poisoning (correct me if I'm wrong). But to create new formulations which meet the required performance numbers which don't have lead and are unsniffable will require new investments and regulations or somehow a mass migration off to unsniffable unleaded MoGas?

Arnhem Land children sniffing aviation fuel in 'public health emergency'

Urk. I cannot imagine the thought processes that lead to doing this to yourself!

The fuels and the engines they are used in are highly regulated. It will be interesting to see what long term solution the regulator will have.

We can see where technology is going with government computer systems. I would hate to see government let contracts for new systems if the experience of Qld is anything to go by. They bought a U beaut system from IBM for the hospitals. I don't know if it is working yet, but they had months of problems with it stuffing up pay for hospital staff. There have been other instances of governments buying untried programs and then having to pay up millions of our money because of their incompetence.We don't want that in air safety do we?

The problem here in Australia, is that corporate IT in every organisation is all but useless, so you can rest assured that when they do finally find or develop a new system it will also be 20 years old also. For now, they are better off with something that works somewhat reliably than having the bulk of useless IT management install something that falls over when some sneezes.

Perhaps this is what OneSky is addressing. OneSky wasn't talked about during the evening. Given that the timescale for delivering OneSky is of the order of 10 years, one has to wonder. It is possible to have your cake and eat it it too; i.e. QoS and agile systems. But the processes (and contracts) need to be very carefully considered (as was not the situation with the ABS census).

I managed to go along to a pilot information evening last night at the Brisbane Centre facility. It was an extremely eye opening time and I'd recommend going along to one of these nights if for nothing else to see and have a normal conversation to the people behind the radio when you press the button on the area/approach frequency.

But, yet again, it was one of those surreal moments that aviation keeps dishing up to me. And please, don't let what I'm about to write be a reflection on the _people_ working in the system, for as far as I can tell, pretty much everyone understands their role really well and executes it fantastically.

Let me just describe the history of what I mean by "surreal moments". The first for me was getting into the C172N model that I did the latter half of my training in. I literally felt like I had stepped into a late 1970s film set. I was suddenly a member of my father's generation! Only to be outdone by going to Gil Layt's flying school! (<-- recommended if you haven't done it.)

Next was Archerfield tower. When I went there, I felt like I'd advanced about 10 years into the 1980s (save perhaps the computer monitor that had the radar information).

Then we come to Brisbane Centre. Again, another 10 year advance. I literally walked into the computer systems we all desired when I finished high school in the late 1990s.

I'm in an amazing job where I literally get to see where technology is going and where those advantages lie. But I think I will now never buy the line that aviation is a technological wonder. This is certainly true if you are about two decades behind in your expectations. There is literally a huge potential for efficiency and capacity (and safety) gains. But for some reason, progress is glacial.

Only a few RAA results are included in the ATSB report database.

I tried to find accidents listed on the RAAus report available on the website and those in this detailed database and they can all be found. The problem is that it doesn't list registration. And the Operation Type seems to be somewhat oddly assigned. Many in the RAAus report are listed as Private.

Never-the-less, about 1/2 of the overall (22 out of 38) seem to be findable by the "Sports Aviation" operation type. That's compared with the numbers in this report:

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5743306/AR-2015-082%20FINAL.pdf

Still not found any evidence of most of these, and particularly the recent ones, being due to medical incapacitation, which was the original claim. Still could be true, but it's not totally clear from what I've found.

You're missing lots of results.

Lots of points worthy of comment in the above post but the one that is probably the most concerning to us is that you are suggesting that CASA will have evidence or have a factual basis for having a policy or regulation.If you were around during the jabiru debacle you would recall that casa don't need facts to crucify part of the industry. Casa used dubious data collected from a source who were unaware of what casa were going to use it for, so did not really scrutinise or verify it first, and then casa included irrelevant events and stated they were all relevant.

Absolute dishonesty to establish a rationale for bringing our hobby down.

I went to ATSB National Aviation Occurrence Database: Detailed Data Search. I entered this search.

• Date range: From 04 Mar 2004 to 03 Mar 2017
   
   
  
• Location: All
   
   
  
• Occurrence Category: All
   
   
  
• Occurrence Type: All
   
   
  
• Aircraft and Airspace: Aircraft Type: Aeroplane. Operator Type: Sports Aviation - All
   
   
  
• Injury Level: Fatal
   
   
  

There were 28 results with 5 ATSB investigations. Each has a short summary in the data returned if there is an investigation or not. Most just say collided with terrain without giving a reason. Is it that the ATSB don't report reasons like incapacitation even if that information is known? Does "Sports Aviation" pick up all RA-Aus flights or am I missing lots of results here?

I showed this statement to my wife, currently a specialist doctor and formerly an aviation medicine doctor and a GP.She stated "I wouldn't even dignify that with a response". So I'm going to write one anyway.

 

The reason she has said this, is because it shows no understanding of the practice costs to DAMEs. They do not do it for the money. DAMEs would be far, far better off seeing a two or three "normal" everyday patients in that time. Then they wouldn't need the extra equipment to do the aviation medicals, wouldn't need to screw around with constant resubmission requirements and changes directed by CASA, wouldn't need to pay the practice nurse who has to do all the ancillary testing for aviation medicals, and so on.

 

My wife knows an anaesthetist who is a DAME. You honestly and truly believe an anaesthetist does DAME work for the money? Lol!

 

Her response to this statement was: "Why is there a community expectation that a doctor should work for free?"

The question should always be is the cost worth the benefit. And by cost, I don't mean monetary costs alone. For a class 2 medical, why is it better to have someone removed from your personal doctor, that most people have to made special arrangements and time to see?

The list of tests and examinations performed doesn't seem to need medical training outside of the ordinary. For class 1 medicals, there certainly might be an argument for some kind of specialist knowledge, though I haven't looked into it. But for class 2, I don't see the need. Particularly given that AV Med, also someone removed from the medical history of the person, seems to order extra tests and have the final decision anyway.

If it is an issue of trust, then you are going after the wrong profession. As I stated above, the whole thing is based on reputation and competence. Sure the media have stories of rogue operators, but what exactly is it about CASA's system that ensures there won't be rogue DAMEs?

The thing is, I'm arguing that there be less demand for DAMEs, which is likely to cause some people grief if they have set themselves up in such as way as to rely on having this custom. This is a situation I fully understand.

Back on the CASA discussion paper though, the quantitative statements made without reference to quantitative evidence is of enormous concern. Anyone who find the scientific method appealing will see this as an obvious oversight. Easily fixed though. Give us the citations to substantiate the "several recent medically related fatalities in the latter group" claim. Then the role of the lack of a Class 2 medical can be examined more closely. Without this, it's just an argument based on 'truthiness'.

Unfortunately there is a new electronic system.[ATTACH]49570[/ATTACH]

Have you ever? seen a doctor, had an x-ray, osteopath

 

questions about your family members too

 

"answer them to the best of your ability including everything , even if you broke your leg when you were 7 years old"

That's pretty much crazy. Particularly when you consider that this is _not_ your regular family doctor (if you have one of those) doing this. Good luck with this system detecting pathological liars.

 

I had a chest X-ray checking for TB 15 years ago which was negative (there was an international student at uni who tested positive). I'm meant to report this? What purpose does it serve? What about dental x-rays? I've had a bucket load of them.

 

SPECI YBHM 280133Z AUTO 27075G122KT 0900 // BKN008 OVC010 34/34 Q////

RMK RF00.4/019.4

Alternate required?

Doesn't sound like paradise on Hamilton Island today.

I passed the Class 2 AVMED and during the examination the DAME told me that the average or typical systolic blood pressure for a 50 year walking in off the street is 150. He might have been exaggerating a bit, but there is an overall trending increase with age. People also frequently have an increase of10 points or more just due to entering a DAME's practice. So it's a good idea to record your blood pressure at home for a month or two before going in and show the record to the DAME. Also, if it's high, see a GP well beforehand so you can get it medicated before the DAME examination, otherwise you'll only be starting treatment at that point and it will greatly delay the process.

In my case, I had a condition in 2012 which I brought up with the DAME when I first had the medical done. He listed it on the form (as he should have), but didn't have the full information so I had to go to my GP to get a few pages printed out. AVMED granted me the Class 2 medical but only for 12 months. I have to get a medical done every year even though I have my GP and specialists giving me written evidence with pathology that I am remiss of my condition and that it is unlikely to return. This now annual class 2 medical exaimation was decided by someone at CASA who is 3 steps removed from the process. When I rang AVMED, they could not give me any advice as to when the audit requirement will be lifted.

The issue I have with this is that I cannot see any tangible benefit from getting me to do a complete class 2 medical with all of the tests unrelated to the condition which has not affected me for years. If it really did return, it would be because I declare something to the DAME. Which, when you think about it, is really pretty silly as it gives one an incentive _not_ to declare a full medical history.

Back to the original topic.Looks like back in 2009 CASA closed the 750kg project citing not safety concerns , but possible concerns from other sectors of aviation? WTF like who? ? They said more consultation needed.

Thanks Aplund. I am assuming this study was of pilots who have a class2 medical or higher. Interesting airliners was the most represented in icap incidents with the highest medical standards! No percentage given!10 fatal accidents with most being from heart attack. All single pilot aircraft . They say the risk of a fatal accident increases with the pilot having a heart attack!!

Would be interesting to line up RAA numbers with these.

Found it:

Pilot Incapacitation: Analysis of Medical Conditions Affecting Pilots Involved in Accidents and Incidents

Does anybody know how many pilot incapacitation accident have occurred in RAA over the last say 10 years?Would be a good measure to see if the current drivers lic equivalent is working. ie nobody on the ground has been killed by RAA pilot incapacitated

But given that, it would be an interesting to see the raw statistics.

When doing the Bob-Tait online exams, I got a question about the leading cause of pilot incapacitation. I think I got it wrong on my attempt, but I remember the correct answer was acute gastroenteritis. There was also a reference to where that information was from, but I didn't write it down. I'm not sure I can go back and find it. But it is interesting to note that this condition is one that no level of medical screening will assist in preventing.

Long term, you should look for tax deductibility for your flights and equity in a property to use to buy a plane along the lines of my comments I made to you on another forum on this topic or find the extra income required from somewhere else.

A rule of thumb for GA is if you are flying 70 hours or more per year, you should be buying, not renting. We do 60-70 hours most years.

As a person working full time at a career as a professional, would you have the time or the skills to tackle the hours of owner-maintenance required for a RA-AUS aircraft? Many/most? of the owners of ultra-light aircraft are retired or semi-retired tradies with a solid background of workshop experience from their working lives, which equips them very well for keeping their aircraft maintained and flying.

I'm not sure if it's just me, but my brain hurt for the week leading up and a couple of weeks after the test.

I clearly need to talk to people, I understand that.

I guess I wasn't looking at exclusive owner-maintenance nor exclusive ownership. I'm just trying to figure out the picture in my head involving my decisions and where I fit into the bigger picture. Answering these questions will take some time. I'm really trying to keep an open mind for the long term. Though in the short term, I think my options are pretty clear (or maybe the better word is limited).

Consider me tickled pink.

I do like the idea of a combined starter/generator. It's what electric motors were meant for.

I find resistance out there to computer controlled engine operation, usually couched as a safety issue. I think, in the modern era, any safety issue related to computer reliability can be managed just like the reliability of any other component.

Let us know when you have more details on the Web.

I think Aplunds grammar and spelling auto-correct function kicked in. I believe he actually meant to write "What a jewel!" in reference to our engine. It just came out wrong...BTW, very nice of you to say so Aplund. All nice comments are appreciated.

 

I'd love to have some general pointers about what you are thinking in the design of this engine. I've often thought about why there aren't more people selling turbos in this power/weight range. It seems there are a couple of major objections: there won't be enough pilots capable of using them (i.e. need a special rating), starting will require a start kart, will need a new/significantly modified air-frame, fuels/oils will be unavailable or expensive, maintenance will be too complex.

I think you've covered the last two to some degree above. Are you able to discuss or point me to any information on any of these other issues for your design?

This is really awesome!

I don't really understand the air induction. You say it has a low profile, so in flight, is the dynamic pressure of air at the intake utilized?

What are the possibilities for alternative fuels i.e. Diesel?

PS When will we ever break free of the US engineering system of archaic units? I mean, does anyone care how much power 120 horses generate? Where as 1 Watt = 1 Joules/s = 1 kg m^2 / s^3 and hence no mysterious conversion factors in equations. Also could have saved NASA $125m in a mars probe.

We used to operate 40 year old C130s with high hours in the RAAF and a prop never came off.