onetrack

I've never seen so much BS and straight-out lies, in the reasons given for the truck driver running off the road with a load of ANFO.

1. If the fire started in the engine bay, he would have had plenty of time to go past the bridge, and then swerve off onto the shoulder.

Engine bay fires are common, they are caused by electrical short circuits and burst hoses spraying oil onto very hot exhaust manifolds and turbochargers.

I have never seen a crash caused by an engine bay fire. You can still steer in a fairly straight line for a km or more, even with flames licking the windscreen, using peripheral vision.

2. If there had been a tyre on fire prior to the crash, there would be a black line of molten rubber up the highway - which can't be seen in the photos.

3. If a tyre was on fire, he still would have had plenty of time to avoid the bridge, and steer off onto the shoulder, past the bridge.

4. Drivers ploughing their vehicles into bridge railings, is caused, 99.9% of the time, as a result of simply going to sleep at the wheel.

5. The crash happened at 2150 hrs. That's right on "normal" bedtime for most people (and for the body clock), and the time of greatest danger of falling asleep at the wheel - particularly after a 14 hour work day.

I've driven somewhere around 3,000,000 kms and put in a lot of long hours at the wheel - long before driving hours were regulated. I've seen a very large proportion of crashes caused by simply falling asleep at the wheel.

The danger periods for falling asleep at the wheel, are "normal" bedtime, and just on sunrise. Not everyone is aware of this.

"Sleepy" foods containing ingredients that lead to high levels of tryptophan in the body, are also another reason for falling asleep at the wheel.

Foods such as chicken (chicken thighs in particular) and cheese, are notorious for producing high levels of tryptophan.

I've nearly run off the road myself a number of times, due to fatigue, and due to food consumed. I've had family members do the same - including the SIL who went to sleep at sunrise, after an 0300 hrs start.

It's frightening when it happens, and it happens a lot. You only have a couple of seconds to avoid disaster, most times. Yet in a lot of cases, a different reason for the crash, is the conclusion.

A good lawyer would roast this driver over the reasons given for hitting the bridge railing, and expose his fabrications.

He's taking advantage of the total destruction of the truck and trailers, and the elimination of evidence, as a godsend to cover his story.

The term "fractured dynamic" is not one that I've heard (and I've been in business, and the business world for over 50 years). But what the writer is referring to, (with a rather poor expression of English) is a dysfunctional board.

The dynamics of a corporate board refer to the energy and momentum of a group of directors whose aims are all aligned, as regards the corporate direction and goals.

When the dynamics "fracture", it simply means that the group is no longer operating with a common aim - i.e., further progression of the corporate body - and individuals are pursuing personal agendas, or hidden agendas, that are working against the smooth functioning and common aim of the board.

Essentially, when this happens, it means the group leadership is weak, or the aim of the board is poorly identified, poorly spelt out, and not followed with vigour.

Below is an interesting and informative little article from Harvard Business Review, about effective corporate and board leadership and guidance.

In particular, the five "disrupter" elements need to be studied and absorbed by those who wish to improve their leadership and guidance ability, in relation to corporate boards and corporate aims.

A More Effective Board of Directors

Was sidetracked for a bit with a property purchase and also a costume for Supanova

Danny - So what costume do you have planned, for when you start flying the Bushcat? Biggles? 

Used to have a bulldozer operator in my employ, who sometimes wore a (rather well-used) top hat and tuxedo, when operating the machine.

Gave some class to our operation, but it certainly made for some rubber-necking, when passers-by saw this, in a relatively-remote farmers paddock, in the Wheatbelt. 

That appears to be a British Sperry Gyro Horizon, likely to be from a military aircraft from late in WW2. Earlier Sperry Gyro Horizons had a line in the shape of a rounded, elongated box, around the aircraft outline.

Check out the Sperry advertising for Sept 1940 and May 1943 for slightly earlier versions of your Gyro.

Sperry Gyroscope Co

Motoring laws and regulations can only be enforced on property which is accepted as being, "open to the public".

If you make it clear to would-be attendees/visitors to any type of "event" that you are hosting, that they are on private property, and the general public is not invited, then all bets are off, trying to enforce road regulations and traffic laws.

However, if you advertise an event and make it clear the public is welcome, then the area you have selected is regarded as being "open to the public", and the coppers can enforce road regulations and traffic laws, accordingly.

Many 4WD owners have found their insurance policy does not cover them on roads that are not gazetted or recognised as a "public thoroughfare". It pays to read the vehicle insurance PDS.

Motor vehicle fatalities on private property are not counted in the road toll. Neither are vehicle crashes on private property recorded under traffic statistics.

If someone causes a fatality on private property with a motor vehicle, they cannot be charged under road regulations and traffic laws - but they can be charged with manslaughter.

Civil liability Law comes into play against the property owner, if someone is injured or killed on private property. If the person injured or killed is a trespasser, then there is little likelihood of any successful charges or claim against the property owner.

The Beverley fatality I mentioned was not the Cessna crash, it was definitely an ultralight, and it was around the early-to-mid-1980's.

However, that was the era before RA-Aus. BASI was still operational then, and I understand they investigated the ultralight crash.

CASA was not founded until July 1995, and ATSB was not founded until July 1999. It appears that many earlier BASI-investigated crashes were not transferred across to CASA or ATSB online records.

I would have to go back through the newspapers of the era to try and find the media reports of the fatality. Unfortunately, newspaper records of the 1980's are not available online.

I would hazard a guess that the major reason why recreational flying is declining, is purely and simply because of the cost involved - and the fact that extensive ground travel is required from city living locations (outside heavily controlled airspace), to enjoy the pursuit.

In addition, ultralight flying for recreation is limited to the pilot, or a pilot and one passenger - so that precludes it as a family outing.

One can acquire a small boat, 2 or 3 trail bikes, or even several mountain bikes, and enjoy recreation as a family at much lower cost than owning and flying an ultralight.

I seem to recall one local Ultralight fatal crash (in the 1980's - at Beverley, W.A.), which ended the life of a very experienced BASI investigator, was deemed to be simply the result of failing to ensure a fuel tank tap was turned on.

The engine cut out at a critical height, right after takeoff, and the result was an ultralight that promptly dropped like a stone, due to stall.

Why do we never seem to hear of the courts banning someone from holding a license for life

There are quite a few drivers in W.A. who have been handed a life ban from driving. I can't speak for other States.

Unfortunately, numbers of these banned drivers then continue to drive, without a licence - and they have then gone on to kill/maim others with their badly-driven vehicle.

I don't know what you can do to prevent people from driving (or flying) when they have been banned for life - apart from lock them up for good. But there's no provision in the law to do that.

W.A. hoon banned from driving for life

Serial W.A. DUI driver banned from driving for life

One problem I had with "Shopmate" (despite having had numerous successful shipments previously), was when I purchased 2 new small (9Kw) hyd motors from a bloke in Florida and had them sent via Shopmate.

The Shopmate operation is based in Portland, Oregon, and once the hyd motors arrived there for transfer to the Shopmate forwarding system, I got a note from them, stating that the "items were leaking oil, and could not be shipped".

I got them to send me photos, and I couldn't see any oil leaking out. I texted the bloke in FL and he assured me he sent hyd motors all around the world without any problems - and my motors had been packed the same as everyone elses.

Shopmate were insistent that the parcels were leaking oil and could not be shipped. They gave me two options - agree to have the motors dumped - or arrange to send them by road anywhere in the U.S.

I wasn't about to have 2 perfectly good, brand new hyd motors worth $1200 dumped, just because some Shopmate operator was being super-picky.

Fortunately, I have a good Internet mate (Paul) in OR, not far from Portland and the Shopmate operation - so I got Shopmate to send the motors to Paul for "cleaning" and repackaging.

Paul advised me he couldn't see any oil leaking anywhere - so the Shopmate crew were just being anal about the whole deal.

Paul repackaged the motors, sent them back to Shopmate - and Shopmate promptly forwarded them to me, with no problems.

However, the whole exercise left a bad taste in my mouth over Shopmates rules, and the exercise of those rules to stupid levels.

Their refusal to ship initially cost me another $50 in charges, plus some extra to cover Pauls efforts. I am very careful now, about what I ship through Shopmate. 

The problem with dollies is caused by drawbars that are too short - which is caused by arbitrary length limits, set without regard to truck and trailer design.

Manufacturers shorten drawbars to get within strict length limits, so you then have increased sway and wander potential. In W.A., in the 1970's, we went away from short drawbars for dollies, now they're making a comeback.

I never had a problem with the big Drake dolly, because of the length of the drawbar, which is also a weight-bearing member. I have seen some stupid things done with truck design to get within length limits.

I agree that the largest percentage of truck drivers are courteous and professional in operation. But there's also a fair percentage of truck drivers whose truck-driving skills are seriously deficient.

These are the blokes you see tailgating on freeways, hogging the RH lane, and generally using the "might is right" driving rule. A lot of the bigger 4WD owners are of a similar mentality.

But the problem of idiot car drivers with little understanding of the need for additional stopping distance for trucks is something that remains with us.

Constant education is the key, and I believe regular driver testing might assist in weeding out the bad drivers.

A very big problem is the "developing bad habit" problem. Failure to stop completely at stop signs, failure to look properly at intersections and T-junctions. Failure to give adequate indication of turns or lane changes.

All of these habits start off slowly and then develop into a pattern of continued "slackness" in carrying out the actions properly and fully.

One has to develop a substantial degree of self-discipline to both recognise when bad driving habits are developing, and to correct those bad habits from degenerating further until one causes an accident.

Spacesailor - In every State and in every jurisdiction in Australia - and around the world - the onus is 100% on the driver reversing, to "exercise due care". Too many drivers seem to think they they have some kind of right-of-way when reversing.

The louvres are facing the wrong way. If they were reversed, the airflow over the cowling would draw hot air out and upwards, utilising the venturi effect, aided by the convection effect,

When I see a crash involving a truck that failed to stop in time, I see a truck driver who drives his truck like a car, leaving no margin for error, inadequate braking distance, and a lack of "defensive driver", driving tactics - which allows for other drivers making serious errors of judgement, being inattentive, being distracted, or being under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

I might add, I have driven trucks for over 50 years, have owned a Drake  4 rows of 8, 100 tonne spread low-loader, with 2 rows of 8 dolly, and hauled earthmovers weighing 100 tonnes and loads up to 7 metres wide.

The biggest danger when you're hauling oversize, is motorists who can't even pass a wide load without rolling over (and yes, had one who rolled their car and caravan straight into the RH front wheel of the Mack, while trying to overtake at 80kmh!).

The problem with a large percentage of truck drivers is the inability to back off the loud pedal until it's too late. They are focussed on "pedal-to-the-metal" because they have to be at "Point B" at a certain (tight schedule) time, after leaving "Point A".

Not a lot different to the "get-home-itis" problem, that is behind the poor decision-making, involved in numerous light aircraft crashes.

Customs and AQUIS are interested in every single thing that comes into Australia, and every incoming parcel is X-rayed, and often pulled apart, and every vehicle imported, is half-stripped to check all cavities.

I've known blokes who had to pay good money to put cars back together after Customs and AQUIS half-wrecked them, checking for asbestos, drugs, weeds and seeds.

Riley - 70kg is probably the most awkward size to ship. It's termed LCL (Less-Than-Container-Load), and shippers have minimum charges for every shipment, meaning small shipments cost big $$'s in relative terms.

Then, if you ship this 70kgs shipment in a seatainer (even inside a vehicle), there's a multitude of port charges, handling charges, security charges, bonded warehouse costs,, etc, etc, - ad infinitum. These charges really add up.

Shipping in a car boot involves a substantial amount of liaison with the car importer - a need to organise for your shipment to go to where the car is located, and additional (double) handling costs - both ends.

One big thing to keep in mind, is handling size. If you can break the shipment down into 3 or 4 parcels, it can be handled by hand. Around 25kgs is the point where the shippers demand a forklift for handling - at every handling point.

I wouldn't reject air freight out of hand. The important thing to remember is that air freight gets away from the "port rorts". However, air freighters will have a minimum charge per shipment of around $250.

You will find, if you go directly to an air freight company here, for a quote, without an account with them, you will be reamed a completely new cloaca.

But if you can find a company in the U.S. who runs an account with air freighters, you will then get a far more reasonable charge.

The mail/parcels system may possibly be the best method, if the parcels meet the postal maximum dimensions and weights.

The secret is to find a crating operation in Atlanta (or an American internet friend in the area!), who will crate or pack the items intelligently (and securely) to meet shipment rules and regulations.

Be aware that asbestos is a huge bogey in Customs/AQUIS eyes. Any shipment that even raises a slight suspicion of asbestos will see your shipment stripped, torn apart, and banned from entry, if even a sniff of asbestos is found.

Gaskets, clutches, brakes, and insulation are all typical areas where Customs/AQUIS will home in like a heat-seeking missile.

Talk to a local freight forwarder who does machinery shipments, they will give you useful advice.

$1000 in value is the break point for needing a permit prior to importation. Under $1000 - no permit needed - over $1000, a permit is needed, prior to importation.

Universal Customs Brokers

If I was building an aircraft (but I'm not), I would be paying attention to shielding of high temperature areas, location and protection of potential fire sources, such as oil and fuel hoses, and ensuring that every feature of the cabin interior design was as fire-resistant as possible.

In addition, I'd be paying attention to ensuring cabin exit ability after a crash is easy, and there can be no confusion with regard to door or canopy latches.

There are two major scenarios that obviously worry most pilots in the back of their mind - smoke, then flames, in the cockpit - and being trapped in an aircraft that is on fire.

As a large majority of aircraft end up inverted after a crash, one has to remember that confusion is the primary problem when inverted, everything is upside down, and you lose precious seconds trying to re-establish your orientation.

I understand the commercial aircraft designers go to great lengths to ensure any fire activity on aircraft is slowed down at every possible point, thus enabling people to gain additional time to calculate their options and ways out.

Remember, there are ample signs warning drivers that a radar camera is ahead.

The only warning signs for cameras in W.A., are for fixed highway cameras, and red light cameras. The mobile operators are becoming more and more devious every day.

W.A. has a Road Trauma Trust Account which is funded by speeding fines alone. The authorities do spend a substantial amount of the RTTA monies on road upgrades and improving safety levels with road and signage design improvements - but they also spend a lot of the RTTA monies on buying and installing more speed cameras, too. 

RTTA money is well spent, says Head of Trust

IMO, the major causes of road crashes are inattention (distraction), and a simple lack of basic driving skills.

By far, the largest percentage of road deaths in W.A., are single vehicle rollovers on straight stretches of good road, and single vehicle collisions with roadside trees.

If you can't keep a vehicle upright on a straight stretch of good road, or avoid roadside trees, you are seriously lacking in basic driving skills.

The problem stems back to the fact that a very large percentage of drivers have a very lax attitude towards keeping their attention on keeping full control of their vehicle.

I'd like a dollar for every driver I've seen balancing a mobile phone on top of the steering wheel, while they wobble all over the road - I'd have enough to put a deposit on an aeroplane. 

I wonder why none of the car manufacturers are adopting this, they all seem to have cold air intakes on EFI engines. Maybe their engineers are not very smart.

Aren't the RNAS boys regarded as "girlies", by the real fly-boys of the RAF?? 

Old K - I think the comments in the BBC article, provide a dose of reality, to the journalists optimistic outlook!

I have little doubt that electric, driverless, Uber-style, on-demand transport, will certainly become common sometime in the future - but certainly not in 10 years - and certainly, not outside the major cities.

As to air-taxi's becoming widespread - not within 25 yrs, by my estimation - until a vast amount of engineering, regulatory and safety issues are overcome, to produce virtually fail-safe transport.

A drone probably has about the same effect as a seagull and they allowed a garbage tip to exist near Mascot for ages. I went through a flock of them and got about 4 on approach on one occasion.. Neither are desirable and Pelicans and Frigate birds are of a  far greater risk.  Nev

On Cocos-Keelings West Island (CCK), the airport security bloke does a run up and down the runway in the airport ute, just prior to takeoff of commercial flights, to scare off all the local bantams, which exist in abundance in the scrub each side of the runway area.

The bantams aren't high flyers, so I suppose they represent a far lower risk of EFATO, than Seagulls, Pelicans and Frigate birds - but they do fly surprising well over a couple of hundred metres.

You've never seen anyone pray so hard, as an agnostic who's convinced he's going to die within seconds.

I think the good minister represents that risky group of believers, who are "so heavenly-minded, they're no earthly good".

He needs to focus a whole lot more on the practical aspects of keeping on living on this Earth, whilst flying - which practical aspects involve keeping track of fuel burn and fuel reserves.

Then again, the religious fundamentalists have always had an indifferent attitude towards staying alive.

When you land that, and it deflates; does that qualify as, "landing flat on your arse?"

Extensive amounts of rules and regulations regarding safety, are generally put in place to prevent idiots from killing themselves and others.

As the crash rate shows, many people still take "calculated" risks - whereby their "calculations" are inherently faulty.

One classic "calculated" risk that come to mind, is the attempted turnback after EFATO.

Many other disastrous events can be put down to inexperience, unfamiliarity, and overconfidence.

I'd have to opine, nearly all the pilots involved in disastrous events, caused by the three above reasons, rarely thought their combination of actions would end up in total disaster.

This is why comprehensive training, and total familiarity with your machine, are crucial factors in avoiding disasters.

Training has to cover overconfidence, and instructors have to be alert, to the overconfident, brash personalities.

The mind boggles at the thought of just how many millions of dollars went into that crazy research programme.

Didn't Mythbusters prove a falling bullet was no danger?

Firing at a drone from the ground does pose a real risk of an injury or fatality from a ricochet, because it would very likely be done at an angle below 45°.

Firing a gun into the air can kill someone