frank marriott

Yes, not referring to the pilot report but to people suggesting it was a wilful false claim to cover some other "incident" - But anyway just an observation.

Certainly suggesting/accusing the pilot of making a false report is a big step - think civil liability.

Exactly - the restriction NOW is based on certificate V Licence (subject to compliance with CAO 95.55) The changed instrument conditions in the new tech manual were introduced by the current RAA administration (despite opposition from some of the then board) But if people keep voting for them then you get what you deserve.

If you are happy with that Col, I have no answer - one could argue if a CFI can't identify the person, then how can they issue a certificate to an "unknown" individual. But it is already done, so we will see what eventuates - because I have an ARN & medical I will renew mine through the CASA system, not available to all RAA pilots. I suspect the decision was made without thinking it thorough.

As with RAA in deciding no longer look after pilot certificate holders. - even though, to quote their words, it only made a small PROFIT!!!!!

Real figures for a J230 if you are interested; 123kts TAS any weight (up to RAA/LSA limit of 600kgs) any altitude up to around 7000ft (I rarely operate it above that height) @ 24 ltrs / hr. at 2900rpm.

No wish to argue, just my opinion. Yes I have completed the RAA HF course and was quite frankly embarrassed by some of the comments being made by some IMO shouldn't be in charge of a lawn mower. After over 35 years of PVT & COM ops (including IFR) I find it difficult to put up with academic crap from non pilot academics. I accept you have more experience then me but I do not accept the push for this type of stuff. Should I make a mistake in the remaining years I have left to fly, then I would be happy for people to say he made a HF mistake because he didn't agree with push, I know I would have a "mistake" but some people need a box to put it into. People make a living out of this stuff but IMO those who need it most really most will not change anyway. IMO there is 3 important things 1. Get the weather and know what it means. 2. Know your own limitations & currency. 3. Know the aircraft/instrument limitations (I have listened to some frightening opinions on this alone) I accept some people thrive on this sort of stuff, it is just not me.

"WE (RAAus) did some form of it (which I think should be revisited and introduce an interactive on-line refresher/ follow up" Could not agree with that one Nev. Don't encourage them to introduce more BS. One cannot legislate commensense.

Not in my experience, been operating in class C @ Townsville for 10 years. In fact a flying school is operating one almost daily presently - circuits etc.

Keith Wally has been given a 3 month holiday from here - so don't wait for a reply.

When you have Katie employed as a "safety manager" (+assistant) you have to generate paperwork/stats etc to justify the wages

Suggest you get out more, plenty of other opinions about

I have a CIR but would not consider flying a RAA size aircraft (quite apart from instrument/pitot heat etc considerations) in IMC. It can get very uncomfortable and very dark very quickly in real IMC as opposed to playing with instrument procedures on a computer/cheap simulator or a bit of under the hood training.

Before you get too carried away about the definition of a "road" which in itself is a bit involved, remember to check "where" the offence can be committed. eg. Drink driving can be committed on a road OR elsewhere - read "elsewhere then on a road". There is no shortcut to reading the Act with reference to a particular offence and where it can be committed.

There is no arguement about the numerous airports being security controlled thus requiring the ASIC card (stupid waste of money with no real benefit IMO) - but required by law. But the point is now being made harder to obtain by a lot of pilots because of the RAA decision to cease handling them.

C & D are security controlled (at least everyone I have used) - unless you are only referring to transit rights which is a pretty limited use of a CTA endorsement.

Interesting comment.

An interesting situation now arises for RAA (only) pilots in regional areas given: 1. The face to face requirements 2. CASA - only issues for CASA licence holders with a current medical. 3. RAA no longer interested in RAA pilots RAA so out of touch it is becoming past a joke. Should they be successful in gaining CTA access for pilot certificate holders, I wonder how they are expected to gain an ASIC to be able to use it. Another prime example of what your regional rep. could take to the board table and have addressed, but of course we don't have them anymore - but that's what the members voted for. Doesn't affect me personally but only by virtue of holding a CASA licence also.

BUT is anyone putting up their hand?

I have found the noise is generated from the iPad itself (plug in an external battery with same results). Particularly after the iPad battery is low, and produces greater interference on 126.7 than other frequencies. Mine is an old iPad and a mate with the latest iPad does not have the same problem. Make of that what you like.

Why. On what grounds if you flight planned it.

Geoff, you are correct now 23 - why is another question - not explained but what I have come to accept from the new administration of RAA, even less input from involved people than with CASA, but I have come to expect this approach. Was a member's organisation but that is only history.

For aircraft with undercarriage similar to a Jabiru this is light and practical. Obviously if a second person is around it is better as you just lift the wing and the other person puts it under the undercarriage leg. On your own then it would require digging.

Kasper you are probably right - I was going from memory and probably that came from CAO 20.18 as I was only flying GA at the time. My comment was more about without these minimum instruments one cannot comply with the VFR rules. I am not talking about flying around a paddock but mixing with other aircraft up to 10,000 feet. Training with various instruments "failed" is normal (or at least I hope so) but that is a different situation IMO to taking off with a known unserviceableity in primary instruments.

Instruments required for flight under the V.F.R. ASI, ALT, compass & watch.