Jerry_Atrick

It seems to be on their site... and they are not asking any money. Also it is a 2003 edition...

And you point is? The reason why it is still statisically low is the measures taken.. The compounding an exponential effect will see the cases rise pretty quickly if things were allowed to continue.. And when one runs out of medical facilities to treat, not only are the absolute amount of deaths gong to rise, but so too is the fatality rate of those infected. This is not a linear relationship (for us mathematically illiterate). Earlier this week, the Aussie fatality rate was 1.07% of those infected; in the US it was well over 3%... Yeah.. double f all is f all, but doubling the doubling the doubling.. well you get the idea.

Wait 2 years when the GTX2080Ti is superseded... the costs will remarkably come down and they will still be making a profit...

They never shut up (they aren't that far from us)...

Many seasoned pilots make mistakes.. Radio is not perfect - just another weapon in the safety arsenal. The area in the red square (Willedo should like that) is probably the busiest GA airspace in the world on a good summer's day because it is where highest conecntration of GA/rec planes are based or pass through, it is full of no-go controlled airspace, particularly the Heathrow CTA (which is as low as 2,500' for long distances), Heathrow CTR, London City, Gatwick, Luton, Stansted, Southhampton, a couple of yearrs ago, Southend and now Farnborough all have Class D CTRs. So, most airgraft, GA and Rec, fly around the squeezing many aircraft in a small area and it does get very tight. Farnborough operate 3 LARS services (West, North and East) that roughly cover the box, with assitance from RAF Benson when it is active. Although some pilots are "purists" and would not entertain even carrying a portable in their vintage or grass-roots planes, there is no way in hell I would go there withough a radio. It gets so busy (with the ridiculously long calls we have to make), that last time I flew I couldn't get a word in edgeways. But we now have listening squawk codes; so we set the transponder to that ATC unit's listensing code and they know we are (supposed to be) on frequency and will call us if they feel we need to. Works pretty well. A couple of times while on a listening squawk I have been warned of conflicting traffic that I could not see. When we leave the area (or in my case, switch to the aerodrome information frequency), we squawk 7000 (general VFR code and a reason why they never issue a code ending in 500, 600 or 700). Where the airfield we are arriving at is within an airport CTR, the airfield will have an agreed squawk code so the airport ATC know that the aircraft is entering the CTR for that airfield.

Could it be that one was not on the right frequency?

Or, as happened with me, a pilot announced he was entering the airfield ATZ (airfield traffic zone - UK) when he was actiually entering downwind and we only saw him emerging from the sun literally with moments to spare. I filed and airprox on that one. If I am overflying an airfield ATZ, (std dimensions are 2.5nm from centreline of the longest runway if more than one and 2,000' AGL) I will call them up to let them know what I am doing if I am flying less than about 1,500' above the ATZ height. But, for airfields without one, I won't generally call them up. Usually most aircraft enroute are not at or below circuit height - I never am (but it does happen)... So, in answer to your question, I would (not knowing CASA advice/regs) start onairfield frequency and shortly after leaving the circuit (with no ATZ active) would switch to area.. Any incoming that would present an immediate risk should have been on the frequency and announced themselves by that stage. Even with an ATZ active but no radio (which does occasionally happen - in which case you need prior permission), I wouldprobably witch to area frequency shortly after leaving the circuit. Having a radio is no guarantee of safety.. Nothing we have available is a guarantee of safety (not even TCAS)... But they are part of the weaponry in our arsenal to help reduce the risk and improve safety.. Our eyes aren't going to guarantee us safety, either, but we don't fly around with our eyes closed... (Yenn, I am not having a go at you as you didn't say no need for a radio - just making sure anyone who is inexperienced reading this doesn't think to themselves they should dispense with one). In GA aircraft, it is typical of club aircraft at least and many private aircraft to have two radios. You can had 1 set set as the communication set - so listening and talking to your local airfield frequency and the other set to listed to the area frequency. I know for recreational aircraft this is typically not the case (at least over here), but I would rather one than none. Evenin remote areas where thereis no ATC coverage, if your donk quits, you may be picked up transmitting your mayday by a passing airliner that could be the difference between life and death.

@spacesailor: 250 milligrams! Minaturisation continues!!!! The fact you hae A,B,C and D makes me very worried (think hermes)...

@WayneL - Soeak for yourself.. I had no idea... Tell us all... How exactly did you know?

OK @turboplanner - Let's not get too sensationalistic about it.. the above is why I will never spend money with the Herald Sun (though Robbo on footy is OK). A more seasoned review is here: NFPs face penalty of up to $16.5m or 20 years in prison for directors under new “industrial manslaughter” laws | Lexology. OK, they are talking about not for profits (NFPs), but it is about any workplace death that results from an employer's negligence, which, as the article states, is where standards far well short of those required. I worked for a state H&SE and I have to say, what I saw in my relatively short time was eye opening. The mum and dad businesses that had a minor infraction paid the price; but trying to get a corporate and the directors responsible to be held accountable was impossible. Personally, as described by lexology, I welcome the law - p[particularly the personal liability (although I will say, it should have to be found that it was a direct resuilt of the director's actions or inactions with regard to their responsiilities that they will be held accountable - if it can be shown, for example that they ordered the requisite protection and were misrepresented by their subordinates that it was implemented when it wasn't, then they should not be held liable).

Well, the trend these days in minaturisation!

And only when she is having a cuppa tea.. with two sugars...

I echo @octave's response above, but as this was addressed to me, I thought I would add one more thing... The assertion is that everything is way over the top and the "mathematically illiterate" are gullible and there is something that experts - people with decades of experience in medicine consulting with people with decades of experience with outbreaks, don't know that is known by others. Yet, no credible evidence has been proffered. Without validating the data sources, I googled Japan covid cases (japan covid cases - Google Search) and Australia Covid Cases (australian covid cases - Google Search) One of the assertions is that it only really badly affects areas with high population densities. Well, take a look at the Japanese numbers.. By any valid comparison, a population density of at least 10 times Australia*, yet their peak number of cases in their second wave is not even twice the number of that in Australia - and given most have occurred in Northern outer parts of Melbourne, I would guess that the relative population densities are quite a bit less than a factor of 10 (as an aside, ACT has a pretty hefty population density of over 1,000/sq mile). They don't precisely correlate in a linear way and I am not going to see if there is any other correlation. The thing is, the vast majority of the numbers in Australia (I have not checked Japan) originate from specific areas; probably from specific events** (BLM, work places and horny security guards come to mind); I guess it's too cold to flock to the beaches). I am all for reasonable and proportional restrictions to the risk; my concern is that the phrase "reasonable and proportional" especially combined with, "for the mathematically illiterate" is a vehicle to unilaterally water down the restrictions without true regard for the risk. At present, we know the fatality rate, but what we don't have ready figures for are the rates of chronic impairment distributed over different levels of severity so we can measure life changing chronic impairment. Also, key is the transmission rate ® and reducing it (I think that is as plain as the nose on my masked face). We know it's behaviour is exponential (as with many contafgeous diseaeses). We know it has a long incubation period so working out you have it before taking precautions once you notice you have symptoms to avoid transmission is futile. Unlike HIV, which is realtively hard to spread without being in close contact and transmission of body fluids - and even then, unless there is direct transmission into the bloodstream, even a set of inhibitor (anti-viral) drugs would be a very expensive exercise as a signfiicant proportion of the population would contract it.. While I accept if I am promiscuous and have unprotected sex with every man, woman and chimp that consents I may end up having to take and anti-viral for the rest of my life, I can elect to wear a condom and drastically reduce the chances. Now, wearing a condom is sort of like wearing a mask at the end of the day.. it does reduce enjoymnent, but it serves to reduce transmission. Yet no-one sees wearing a condom as a violation of their human rights... Of course they have a choice, but I am sure, if it were enforceable, law makers would have loved to, in the days prior to the anti-virals, have a law preventing unprotected sex except when intending to procreate.. but enforcing it is not practical - and HIV doesn't have the transmission rate of COVID. On the other hand, enforceing restrictions is more pragmatic and it does have a wild transmission rate. My point.. the lockdown is to get ahead of an exponential increasining of transmissions - look at the curves of the two graphs - even mathematically illiterate can see the patterns. IMHO, they show how it can quickly get out of control; Once under control, social distancing, masks, etc, is required to keep it there. It sort of makes sense. Yes, I take the point it provides other pain and suffering.. the question is of scale.. I am lucky, I live in a big (although renovators delight) house in a village on a decent plot of land outside of London. I feel very sorry for those families in a small flat in a tower block (as I do for those in housing commissions in Melbourne). We should be providing them support and relief - that is sympathetic to their cultures e.g. special dietary requierements, maybe some timetable of exercise out of the house, financial support, medicines, pastoral care, etc. I absolutely agree... But, the maths speak for themselves so far, to this illiterate person. * You could also find areas in Japan on a par of population density or even less than areas in Australia. But like for like, relative to the country (e.g. captial cities, etc), it does appear to be that. Of course, Tokyo is only 6 times more populated that ACT, so I compared it to Sydney which was actually way more than 10 times... I compared Sydney to Okinawa, which gave more than twice the population density, however, that is like comparing Sydney to Geelong, maybe. It appears going hard has results regardless of population density (but, if you live in an area of 3 people per square mile, then going hard is not coming within 100' of your neighbour). ** I don't know what caused the outbreaks in Melb - just potential causes... so happy to be corrected.. .Well, happy to be corrected with any of the above. [edit] Looking at US Stats (google COVID-19 Cases USA), where it can be argued they have let it to a certain extent rip, their fatality rate is 3.5% - almost 3.5 times ours..They have a similar health system (although poublic health is not as good as ours), but that doesn't account for the massiv difference in fatality rates. Note, the global reported fatality rate is 3.9% and that includes many countries without developed public health facilities. That should provide some food for thought. Also, lool at their curve - more or less plateaued during their controversial period of lockdowns and restrictions; but as they have eased, well... the data is there...

Hi @SplitS, Can you please educate us mathematically illiterate, using credible sources, where the official maths is wrong? After all, stating "for the mathematically illiterate" is all well and good, but without real cedible evidence, it is a hollow claim. I know and understand that the death rate is c 1% of reported cases (and it appears that increasing the testing correlates to an increased identification in number of infections, but given the concern of the number of increased deaths attributed to pnuemonia, there is a concern there is also an underreporting of deaths as well). I also know that the death rate is lower amongst the younger population, but it seems to be catching out a number of people with hitherto unknown conditions susceptible to becoming a fatality under COVID-19 who were living normal, active lives. We also know the spread is exponential and has the propensity to overwhelm the health services because of the extra-long incubation period before symptoms are exhibited and that a relatively high population will require hosptialisation to the point where hospitals will have to turn people away. Intuitiviely, in such a scenario where people are being turned away from necessary hosptial treatment, (and as witnessed in NYC), the death rate will increase as a result. I haven't done the research and to be honest, I can't be bothered because I trust our health officials.. so far they have not been materially wrong unless everything we are being told and the stats that are being kept is complete BS. In this situation, it is hard to be statisctically precise to the individual case, but all the maths and stats I have seen do not paint a rosy picture to just let it rip - even protecting the known people with pre-existing conditions and the elderly.... The medical profession may be erring on the side of caution, but in this case, so far, the evidence has borne out support of this approach rather than throwing caution to the wind. But let's go the other way... Let's isolate a decent sized part of the population representative of the greater population at large, including proprotional sized health facilities, age ranges, known pre-conditions and we can assume unknown pre-conditions; and, of course, thrown in a proprtional number of people estimated to have the virus today ... let the virus rip and see what happens. Will you volunteer to be in that test? I certainly wouldn't - nor would I allow any of my family - and I would strongly dissuade anyone else.

That bloke in the video is having a rant out of jealousy because he is not a Melbournian.

OK - assume it's their brains travelling at the speed of light :-)

Even they're not too hard to lift off the internet.. Having said that, you will rarely seen any from me... mainly because I have been in hiatus lately, but also, for some reason, I am not comfortable taking photos while flying... The ones I have posted have usually been taken by my son.

..... ensure that ....

the CEO of an organisation held in such high regard by its community, it is unaccountable... However, they often.......

Gutsy man letting us all know you have a 5¼" floppy

Tomorrow in ol' Blighty, wearing face masks in shops becomes compulsory (they announced it two weeks ago; maybe COVID-SARS was predicted to be dormant until tomorrow?) However, for some reason, we can go to pubs and restaurants/cafes without wearing masks? Is alcohol an inhibitor they are not telling us about? Today, I get my first haircut since some time in January... Unfortunately, what hair I have doesn't grow long, it sprouts out the sides, so I look lik a half-bald, wrinkly and rotten broccoli floret... Will be wearing a mask (have to hold it to my face). Funniest thing I have seen, and it is quite common, are people wearing masks with their noses poking out of the top of it into the air... Sort of defeats the purpose...

I had a large response to the police thing... but better judgement kicked in. In summary, my experience of the Victorian Police (last in about 1999 - and only traffic related) was that they are defintiely adverarial (us v them) to start with, but once you establish yourself as respectful to them and don't try and BS them, they show discretion. Hey, I even managed to avoid a fine from the notorious Traffic Operations Group back in the early 90s for doing 80 in a 60 zone coming out of a country town between the last house and the 80 sign. I find the police in the UK (again, only for traffic offences) don't exhibit the adversarial trait - based mainly on the fact that when doing over 90 on motorways and being caught red-handed, they haven't even bothered coming after me (and no fine or summons in the post). In fact, once, when I slowed down, the motorcycle policeman waved me on to speed up (and of course, I would not disobey the police). In the case of COVID-19, like an umpire of an AFL game, the rules allow a lot of lattitude when making a decision. Unlike an AFL game, they have to balance personal liberties against the wider community safety, and it is a difficult call to make. Some will err on the side of caution; some will err on the side of personal liberties and some will get it right. Unfortunatley, some will be posterior holes (as there are in all forms of life). Thankfully, the latter are in the minority - but the natire of being adverarial to start off with may be in response to community attitudes. Here is an ABC report on an outback policeman. Interesting watching: Back to topic.. I can't even get back to Melbourne to traverse a border

I know I have lately been a little critical of QANTAS, but I recall when my father took ill and I needed to get to Melbourne in the height of peak season (15 years ago), QANTAS upped their game and got me there on time - at a price not too far off the cheapest you could get. Of course, it was a 747 (or two) that did the work. For cattle class, much better than the A380.. And yes, the CEO wasn't the same as now, but, I think if the chips were down, QANTAS would probably do it again. Despite Boeing's 737 problems, for long haul (and i have done London - Singapore in business), I would take the 747 ansd 777 over any Airbus I have been in.. Of course, that is from a pax perspective, so down to the airline configuration... From the front seat, I defer to the experts. Also, on the A380, never got the pushing into the back seat feeling that one got in the 747 or 777. RIP the Flying Kangaroo 747... Great service over the years.

I did say perception - not reality... As Bruce mentioned, home builder have more time... However, I have noticed many ads that are at pains to stipulate factory build and the price doesn't seem to be cheaper... Mind you, I am surem the LAA drivers who build their own aircraft are normally a discerning bunch... [Edit] It is worrying about the quality of factory built anyway.. The TB20 was laid up in the workshop so long for its paint because of the manufacture issues found by the shop... It really was not one where quality control was front and centre... Maybe it was made after a French lunch on a Friday afternoon?

Sorry - was the way I worded my response (first time i saw the thread and after reading the OP, I read all the responses and was taken off track). The point is, over here, there is a perception of higher probability of lower quality in homebuilds than factory builds. I have no idea if it results in a lower value (though my guess is, it would as lower quality usually equals lover perceived value), but over here, factory build is used as a strong selling point..