Jump to content

frank marriott

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,020

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

 Content Type 

Everything posted by frank marriott

  1. frank marriott
    Been over it too many times already. Talk to Monk, King & Banfield and read the tech manual. Only change (although the above mentioned say there is no change) is instrumentation ref 4.2.4-6 current manual and 10.4 new manual. See if you can get some conformity from them, I have given up. I have it in written form that nothing has changed. Certainly no change other then instruments (RAD 47 has always been there) Authority based on CAO 95.55.
  2. frank marriott
    No such requirement!
  3. frank marriott
    Bl Out of interest what do 'you' call an area frequency?
  4. frank marriott
    RJW My only comment would be a proper windsock,read correctly, gives you direction and strength, after you get your certificate be prepared for variations at private strips. Many light plastic windsocks give you direction ONLY.
  5. frank marriott
    By all means disagree but it might be of interest for you to read up on how a magnet induces voltage into a coil - has nothing to do with temperatures although they do effect how an engine starts - simple AC theory - but whatever you're happy with. (Hint, has nothing to do with battery voltage only the speed of the magnet)
  6. frank marriott
    Think rate of turn, i.e. speed of the magnet passing the coil, induced voltage, not RPM.
  7. frank marriott
    have a Class 1 or 2 medical certificate to fly above 10,000 ft, or have another pilot with you who has a Class 1 or 2 medical certificate who is occupying a flight control seat in the aircraft and is authorised to pilot the aircraft.
  8. frank marriott
    The upper limit for RAA is 10,000ft. The 9500' is the effective upper limit (east) 8500 (west) when considering hemispherical levels for VRF flight. Section 7 CAO 95.55
  9. frank marriott
    Must be some different logbooks around that I haven't seen - if it is not PIC, dual, or ICUS (no longer accepted other then multi crew training) then what is being suggested? Are people adding another column for unidentifiable flying?
  10. frank marriott
    Have a read on ENR 5.5 , 2.2 for "conflicting traffic".
  11. frank marriott
    I am quite over this Keith. Still a lot of supporters on this forum, so I suspect Australia wide as well, although I just haven't met one personally. So I'll just sit back and watch (other then comment on some blatantly wrong statements) - the obvious will occur in time is my belief - just hope it occurs before all the money has gone and too many unchangeable regulations are introduced. To be realistic, I have probably only got another 10years active flying left, so unless something happens shortly I will be able to sit back and talk about what could have / should have happened and laugh at what the current flyers have left. I have even received a complaint from a member (who stood against me when I was elected) stating he was not happy that I let down the members who voted for me by resigning after a short time (obvious self promotion). The message was CCed to the CEO and President (I really couldn't care if he also CCed the Queen of England) I had to inform him that the change in representation (which he voted for) meant that we were sacked not resigned and perhaps he was not aware of what he actually voted for - but that's all history now.
  12. frank marriott
    As predicted would happen before the sickening change was voted in!
  13. frank marriott
    I have no problem with GA flying board members as such, I have been flying GA for over 35 years myself, but there is NO justification for turning RAA into a mini CASA and GA style maintenance for RAA aircraft. Try raising the minimum day VFR PVT requirements for GA (& all RAA flying has this limit anyway) and you might be surprised with the result (including what is STATED in CAO 100.5). There is only a small number of individuals causing the current outputs but with the GREAT NEW BOARD setup they have effectively gained autocratic control. The supporters of this mess still support the change and only with time will they realise what is happening - hopefully before it is too late. I have given up! I suspect (without evidence) that there has been some 'back door' deals in order to secure CTA approval for certificate holders. This is misguided as (certified) RAA registered aircraft have been using CTA for years- before my involvement by virtue on CAO 95.55. The matter to be addressed is purely related to the extra training for a certificate holder to obtain a CTA endorsement.
  14. frank marriott
    Not a chance Kasper - there is a clear GA mindset with Monk & Banfield and nothing can be changed - trust me I tried my best and only received insults (whilst a board member). Very sad but they still have their supporters, yet anyway.
  15. frank marriott
    No Bill, The information I received was that your L1 will expire if you don't do the on new line exam. This is after I completed a (a). face to face L1 course (cost $100) run by RAA (b) first on line exam ©. Manufacturers engine maintenance course (d) Been maintaining my LSA for 8 yrs. This was all pointed out to Banfield and the board but a waste of effort. So I just did the L1 exam AGAIN which will cover me until the next brain fart. I have given up with this admins approach to people. Just shut up and pay your money. Until enough people get annoyed enough to do something about them I just pay my money and go flying and treat them like another CASA (with the same amount of respect)
  16. frank marriott
    Should you predication occur SDIQ , then I would hate to even thing about rego and membership fees for the ever increasing H.Q. "Senior Management Team" & of course don't mention the "paid directors" in the new constitution. If you believe the political style crap that it is not being considered, then why was it included - For those who think they are too important and need paying for their time, just go and see how much they will be missed. Should the outcome of the current approach result in a substantial reduction in membership and registrations then the outcome MAY be positive, the empire builders and mega spenders would no longer be there, and control of RAA could quite likely be returned to the "members" - an original idea but it is possible.
  17. frank marriott
    Sorry Frankus, I didn't realise who you were in conversation with. I haven't seen post by that particular member for a long time (my election). Forget I even mentioned anything.
  18. frank marriott
    If you are interested in "facts" and not BS, you would not involve Ungermann or Poole. But if you want a politician type answers go there. I don't know who advised you to go there but obviously someone with a slanted view on the world.
  19. frank marriott
    I think you summed it up in your first sentence HIC, I don't think anyone has a problem with someone making a slip or learning (we are all guilty of that from time to time). The deliberate changing of calls because one does not agree is an entirely different matter - strive for a professional approach and it will happen. A professional approach to flying does not relate to your licence or certificate. If you feel strongly enough, try to get the recommended standard changed - good luck with that.
  20. frank marriott
    Sue Have a read of the TORUMS legislation. Act, road rules regs, drivers lic regs, fatigue management regs and the list goes on. Anyway makes no difference to the output from the current RAA approach, so not worth researching.
  21. frank marriott
    When the States(well 5 of them anyway) signed an agreement for national road rules and replaced the Traffic Act with the TORUMS Act & Regulations in about 1999 they should be the same even though a State Act. W.A. & N.T. didn't sign and A.C.T. I don't know but they are 'different' in a lot of ways not just traffic regs.
  22. frank marriott
    I guess it is how one treats regs and advisory docs. I have my own opinion in relation to CAAP 166 but I comply with its content as it exists (under review at present). Similar I elect to no longer read the "feel good" rubbish currently being sent out by RAA (or the self promoting mag) - I comply with the ops and tech manual, although I have extreme opposition to some aspects of them. Comments here by the likes of "airsick " (I would imagine most people know his true identy and probably using another invented name by now) are just sad. The bottom line, whether it be RAA or CASA some things need changing, and there is a process by which one can attempt to change them, but until that happens there is an obligation to comply no matter what ones opinion is of the particular rule or guideline. I don't believe there is room to decide for yourself which parts you may accept and others to disregard.
  23. frank marriott
    Don't worry the DH uninformed comments will start here as well shortly.
  24. frank marriott
    Nev Currently, (apart from landing & parking fees) no fees in class C unless you file IFR.
  25. frank marriott
    Think about not only what you are saying but WHY and I suggest it will fall into place. Some just broadcast what they have been told to say without any reasonable appreciation of "situational awareness". (Can be annoying). Although the phrases might be foreign to start with, thinking about the purpose may help it all fall into place.
×
×
  • Create New...