Jerry_Atrick

There's quite a bit of discussion about it here: Personal injury - FLYER Forums (@:mods - feel free to delete if you feel that forum competes with this one - I don't think it does). The shareoplane I was involved with included third party liability to about £10m from memory (for each 3rd party - there was a max and restrictions, buit would have covered this). Aviation insurance companies here will generally pay out, even if there is some minor breach of the policy - the market is tight and as soon as word gets out that an insurer is unreasonable in handling claims, it is sunk. What interested me was that, although for normal claims of tort, this would probably fail (someone claimed unfair contract terms act can't remove liability for personal injury - may be true - but if so, is a relatively recent change as when I studied law here, UCTA only protected liability for death), some posts claim that an accident is strict liability (i.e. it only has to have happened (unless various conditions apply) and one is liable). [snipped my interpretation, which after looking up strict liability, was not quite right - though I don't recall it in Tort (yet I still passed it)] It would appear from the above, that in Aus, it would fall under the law of general tort or similar, in which case, it would come down to whether or not the pilot was negligent in their flying or emergency handling under the circumstances.

There's quite a bit of discussion about it here: Personal injury - FLYER Forums (@:mods - feel free to delete if you feel that forum competes with this one - I don't think it does). The shareoplane I was involved with included third party liability to about £10m from memory (for each 3rd party - there was a max and restrictions, buit would have covered this). Aviation insurance companies here will generally pay out, even if there is some minor breach of the policy - the market is tight and as soon as word gets out that an insurer is unreasonable in handling claims, it is sunk. What interested me was that, although for normal claims of tort, this would probably fail (someone claimed unfair contract terms act can't remove liability for personal injury - may be true - but if so, is a relatively recent change as when I studied law here, UCTA only protected liability for death), some posts claim that an accident is strict liability (i.e. it only has to have happened (unless various conditions apply) and one is liable). [snipped my interpretation, which after looking up strict liability, was not quite right - though I don't recall it in Tort (yet I still passed it)] It would appear from the above, that in Aus, it would fall under the law of general tort or similar, in which case, it would come down to whether or not the pilot was negligent in their flying or emergency handling under the circumstances.

Ideleted...mod

Back to the more inventive banter... Isn't the Australian parlance for snitch, "dob"? Why on earth would an Aussie use American parlance on an Aussie forum? Anyhoot, as I recall during the first 30 years of my life, Aussies never dobbed... ever... You weren't Australian if you did..

@alf jessup - it's a very poignant point.. Though, I personally am not in favour of using such public atrocities to further my agenda, but it (and the Bourke Street event) highlight what we have been saying all along - far easier, cheaper and more effective to use road vehicles to carry out these atrocities than aircraft. And, it highlights anyone can get a road vehicle (does one even need to provide a license to buy a cheap banger?). Of course, those same dumb arxe pollies may say, "Hey - notice how they haven't used aircraft - it's because of the ASIC and long may it remain in existence".

A couple of weeks ago, I had the fortune to make a quick visit to Melb, albeit in less than fortunate circumstances. Though about packing both the Aus and EASA PPL docs and then thought "stuff it... not worth the hassle". Result - no flying school got my revenue (what should have been a check flight and then a rental for about 5 hours I would have guessed - YMMB - YTOC - YBLT - YMMB was the thought). Ended up taking my bruv out for lunch instead - fraction of the price and my £ came home with me

I also had a long hiatus from flying - not quite that long - 15 years (with the odd, sporadic flight in between). Great feeling to get back into the saddle. Well done, ol' chap!

Sincerest condolences to all affected. Until moving down here, I often flew through there when heading oop north from Fairoaks; I have also flown form Wycombe Air Park for a short while and my son's forst lesson (aged 8 with three pillows under him and two behind him) were conducted from there For some reason, when there's a connection, they seem closer to home. RIP.

A mate of mine who got his PPL and Aus is heading with the family to Aus in 2018... Instead of renting a plane and taking them places, he is going to take an hour bimble with an instructor and hire a car to do his travelling because of the ASIC/AVID requirement. I met with my examiner to sign off some docs so I could convert from JAA to EASA. He was in Aus a few months ago and in the end gave up on the bureaucracy (and that is coming from the UK and EASA land) and did an hours bimble rather than scenic flying. If these are the terrorists they want to deny access to GA in Aus, then they are doing a sterling job.

An interesting fly-in: Curry By Air 2018 - FLYER Forums (Ian - I am sure these forums aren't competitors to yours - if they are, pls feel free to remove the post). One that is usually organised every four years: Raduno 2016: 22 June - 26/27 June - FLYER Forums We also have some pretty strict requirements when organizing events, but these are just friendly get togethers. and dispense with the idea of a formal event. Some remaining photos of the 2014 flyin: RADUNO 2014 - Page 2 - FLYER Forums Even something a little bigger would not fall foul of the rules if it was kept in the spirit of people simply gathering at an airfield.

If it is to be a fully fledged event, makes sense; otherwise, I would suggest if you want it an informal fly in, then it would attract unwanted risk mitigation.

Isn't the ASIC thing to protect inside the fence, not the general public? *ducks for cover*

@turboplanner is right in that one owes a duty of care to those around them for reasonably foreseeable risk - though there are some caveats to that too (proximity in terms of are you their keeper is one of those). So for example, your look around and clear-prop call should be good enough to alleviate you of liability of someone walking into the prop as you/after you start the engine, unless you mechanically did the actions without taking notice of the easily seen bystander admiring your prop in plain view in front of you... The key is it has to be a) a reasonably foreseeable risk and b) a reasonable duty of care - and the terms reasonable are interpreted by the court given the circumstances of the case. The fact that a foreseeable risk has yet to materialise and there is no history of it having materialised in the past is of no concern to the law - I guess the word foreseeable rather than historical is the pertinent word (historical is used by insurance companies to beef up premiums).. Also, the sad fact is that there is a tiny minority of people in any facet of life are usually irresponsible or negligent and unfortunately society has developed to take the easy way out by restricting everyone because of the actions of a few, rather than working out a way to identify and prove the bad actions of a few and dealing with them. @Nobody is right - just have an informal gathering at an airfield - I hadn't read all of the above posted CAP, but I don't think it will be caught by it. Otherwise anytime your local aero club did a fly away, technically it would be a fly in to wherever they were going and it would have to come under the same rules. (p.s. I am not a lawyer!)

OK - maybe I have a simple mind, bit most airfields have done their risk assessment and put in lace what is required to cater for the public visiting as well. A fly-in of this nature is merely a bunch of pilots agreeing to meet at an airfield for a social occasion, have a BBQ or meal, maybe a camping sleepover at an airfield that normally allows it anyway, and therefore apart from what @bull has done to reinforce those rules and requirements, what else should be required? After all, the only difference is that a hangar may be opened up (and aircraft relocated??) to cater for dinner and some members of the public may attend... No need to overcomplicate - or put in this forum - only members of the forum or pilots who actually fly in (or pre-notify arriving by some other means) will be allowed.

Of course, they would be known as Aerodrome Public Safety Barriers

Over 'ere, organising a fly in is quite simple. People get on a forum similar to this one; propose a destination (either UK or somewhere continental Europe), there's a bit of a squabble on dates and once sorted, someone makes a call to the destination to ensure enough food is ordered at the on-site restaurant and we all descend using SOPs .. Only at organised events rather than these casually organised fly-ins are there w-anchors and hooligans...

@GyPy&Susi - if you go here and search for IPEC, it has some info AWA ARGOSY.. BTW - like your dog - looks almost exactly the same a mine!

Nothing to say, but bloody lucky!

@bull - looks like you've got the gong for organising Not-Kosh 2018!

I used to subscribe to Australian Flying as it had a good balance of informative articles abut fly9ing, safety and destinations. I used to particulary like Shelly Ross' writing style and although a little dramatic, I gleaned many tips from Jim Davies (or was it Davis) safety and flight technique/ratings/training articles. As it happens, my b/day and Christmas (or festive gift giving day to be PC) coincide and I am thinking about getting the missus to take out a subscription to an Aussie magazine... It may not technically be aviation related, for example, Aussie Geographic or an Australian focussed travel magazine.. However, I would like it to be aviation based. One of the advantages of Aussie Aviation was SWMBO, who hates anything aviation (I know how to pick 'em) at least read Shelly Ross' articles.. I was using them to try and get her to see sense and take a light aircraft flight with me (or this eye-candy-for-girls instructor at the local school). Anyway, I digress.. I know this is a recreational forum, but any recommendation of a magazine, prefereably that blends recreational and GA, that meets the above criteria would be greatly appreciated. TIA

I thought this was amusing...

We have very bloated bureaucracies.. They have to justify their livings... I did a gig (note, consulted to, not worked for) one of the [edit] Aussie [/edit]state health and safety authorities... The old timers there were pretty well reasoned actually - understood the objectives of the organisation and had practical ideas about how to implement them while minimising the impact on their "clients". The corporate younger one were concerned with three objectives: How to extract more money from their "clients" How to justify their empires through ever increasing rules and regulations How to punish those for even the most minor transgression - very black and white approach. I kid you not, but a judge threw out a case against an employer who's son was killed by a minor oversight in the application of H&S rules - the reasoning being the father has suffered a punishment for it way beyond anything the court could impose (and a spokesperson for the authority went on air, unbelievably to state how disappointed he was of the decision) Oh, and there were the middle and back office support functions that were next to useless... None of their measures seemed to relate to hard evidence and numbers of the risks they were protecting/mitigating. Relating this to aviation.. Well, I can't comment on CASA (in fact, I havebeen watching their out and back series and it is actually something to applaud, even though one could argue it doesn't delve enough into the subject matter). But I can say, EASA (and JAA beforehand) added a lot of rules and regs and obligations, yet it has made not a drop of difference to the accident, injury and fatality rates.. I will now put down my last glass from my last bottle of Petaluma Shiraz (if they still make it, pls let me know - can no longer get it here)

Agreed.. I am responsible for implementing compliance with some pretty hefty regulations at the moment, and small drafting anomalies will not change liability. I haven't read the whole doc, but Appendix F states: "Fly-in, Competition or Cross country event – A gathering of aircraft at an event or competition where the general public have been specifically invited to the event. E.g. World gliding competition. Note. This does not include a Fly-in where the general public have not been invited to, such as a local aero club Fly-in." Most of what's required for a fly in (or comp) seems something that commonsense would require, anyway (OK - I make that assertion from the title of what is required - not the detail within the provisions of the doc). They are: Site Survey - well, it's an airfield and has parking... Also, should be somewhere the public can gather safely.. Dunnies will have flies hoverring and women's will run out of loo paper faster than a F18 flies with afterburners on. Marking of Display Axis - A white rectangular box around the BBQ marks the display axis. Parking of a/c - Please ensure you pack you aircraft off the runway and taxiways. Also, don't park at the pub, even if you take the wings off (reference some QLD event a couple of years ago). Min height settings - Hmmm tough one.. Circuit heights - but use QFE to confuse CASA. Wx minima - erm.. refer to VFR minima; add a bit if the airport is an alitport. Briefing - Er - refer to the AIP, ERSA and some other commercial guide. If there are a lot of pilots about - lookout. Sample Schedule - Airfield open at x; closes at y; BBQ starts at 12:30 Joy/Adventure/TIF Ops -This is a fly in! If you're lucky enough to be offered a ride (in the airplane, not the other type - although that could be lucky, too, depending on whom the ride is with), then it is at your risk becaue even CASA have deemed is us to be dangerous fruitcakes heelbent on destroying the earth. Post Display Departure Planning: Please use the same planning technique you were taught - it usually works. Post Display Report (Form 694) - What display? The above should do it... Feel free to use it; even royalty free..

Well, may have to get the book.. All time fave aircraft (I have a thing for twin taoil boom aircraft - when they scrapped the IPEC Argosies that were based at Essendon (from memory), I was devastated)... Probably going to join this group once a few short term things coming up do actually occur.. Vampire Preservation Group - Home Page And this is very tempting... May have to part with the XC90.... De Havilland T22 Naval Vampire | eBay