frank marriott

A prime example is at one particular regional airport when being delivered by taxi in the morning the driver commenced driving past the terminal when I said in here my plane is out the front. His reply was everyone normally goes down here about 500m and goes through a plain wire two strand fence. The effect on security ZERO. At another location the refueler wanted to see an ASIC card before refueling after landing and parking in front of the bowser. Quite clearly the only people interested in the stupid ripe off card are those people gaining income from their use - nothing to do with security. There “may” be arguments made about their use at international terminals but in reality a red card being displayed is never checked so in effect serves no real purpose there either.

A widely spread myth, but a myth just the same.

Getting close to the issue I suspect, given my experience with the attitude of the current chairman when I was on the board. A major reason I would not even consider standing under the new set up. (And I am aware of certain current issues)

Not an unexpected result given that the “take over” was based in division. Only achieved by the unprecedented soliciting of 800 proxy votes by a core few (legal yes, ethical and in the best interest of the organisation - well that is up to the individual member to decide for themselves). Good leadership requires inclusive decisions, effective debate and informed reasoning to achieve a desired outcome which will then be supported at all levels within the organisation. Dictorial stlye decision making can only achieve contempt. Open and inclusive communications is essential. Interestingly the director’s remuneration comes up again. The big statement by M.Monk of “it will not happen on my watch” ‘might’ be tested - the obvious question, as was raised at the time giving rise the the statement, why was the process included in the new constitution if was not intended to be used. (Again emphasising “open, effective, inclusive and factually correct communication)

Ops manual 4.02 ICAO group method is the preferred means for expressing a four digit call sign. Group form is the pronunciation of a series of numbers as the whole number, or pairs of numbers they represent rather than pronouncing each separate digit. The use of group form may, however, be negated by four-digit identifiers or the placement of zeros in the identifier. Examples: Lightwing 0437 Tecnam 1346 Trike 1215 Aerochute 1001 = “Lightwing, zero four thirty-seven.” = “Tecnam, thirteen forty-six.” = “Trike, twelve-fifteen.” = “Aerochute ten zero one.”

Although the definition of a road is relevant to many traffic offences it is not relevant to many which apply “elsewhere then on a road”. e.g. UIL & Dangerous Operation. Shopping centre carparks & service station driveways etc are all covered in the definitions.

Been flying for a couple of years now. Jamie’s J430.

https://www.whitsundayairport.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017-Pilot-Guide-1.pdf

Facts will be of interest as with any accident. Bullshit and personal bias is of no interest and actually reflects on the poster. We have been through this crap before and just continual comments of this uninformed bias only adds to my ignor list - which I don’t like to use but continual rubbish from ANYONE trying to push their personal bias without any facts certainly makes me use the function. With the new site the list was deactivated but as SOME appear again with crap without fact I can see a few will need adding again. I refuse to read uninformed crap, the ABC covers that enough for me.

There are specific instructions re high/low power & amount of damage specially laid out (at least for Jabiru aircraft) in the overhaul manual. Any high power or damage in excess of about 3 inches (from memory) off the tip means a bulk strip although costs are not as frightening as for Lyc & Cont. I have no knowledge about Rotax.

Query re ignored list. As a personal choice there are some individuals I have no desire to hear from. I have checked my ignor list and they are still there but I am getting their posts since the new site set up. Is there a simple way to reactivate my list?

The “Mt. Erebus disaster” is a very involved matter. Commercial pressures & passenger expectations & company advertising plus the alleged changing of waypoints AND whiteout conditions - plus plus. The comments by Justice Mahon being the strongest I have seen from a Royal Commission of Inquiry with reference to alleged coverups. “I am forced reluctantly to say that I had to listen to an orchestrated litany of lies.” (Paragraph 377) It is the expression of such opinions that, ultimately, cost Justice Mahon his career.” The bottom line is once you go below LSAL you are flying VFR procedures unless on an approved Aerodrome approach. The point to be taken for RAA (& any VFR Pilots for that matter) without referring to the individual details of the Erebus disaster, is you must comply completely with the VFR rules no matter what toys you may have fitted to your instrument panel (approved or otherwise).

Should have realised, I was thinking in terms of the POH/flightmanual etc.

What does JF stand for?

Short answer, you will not learn to fly off the internet, talk to your instructor is the best advice you will get on line particularly in the student stage.

I do wonder if current (at least RAA) students are taught “compass turns”. With the acceleration errors & overshoot and undershoot north and south or just using the rate 1 turn to give the 3°/sec. even with turbulence it works. Talking to many pilots and reading some comments it would appear to me this basic information is either not being covered or completely forgotten?

I think it is a personal preference thing. e.g, I have a 4” EFIS which I use in cruise and the information it provides is great and cheaper then fitting “steam driven” instruments to obtain the same information. I also have conventional ASI, altimeter, and T&B & compass, I find that I always use the “conventional” instrumentation for all take and landing situations. In reduced visual conditions I confirm that the EFIS information agrees with the other instruments. It may be a familiarity thing over but over 30 odd years I prefer the analogue gauges when the information is critical. I accept it may well be a familiarity thing but I feel comfortable flying if the EFIS is US but not the other way round. People who trained with digital information only would most likely disagree. Yes flying VFR (as in RAA reqirements) attitude and power is the answer but other information is nice to have.

If you are going into CTA, submit a flight plan, not difficult, and you are expected and in my experience works perfectly. I accept if you are VFR it is not required but with a submitted plan it often saves time and the reply from CLR delivery “stand-by remain outside CTA” whilst the controller tries to fit you in with other traffic and you are already assigned a SSR code with a plan otherwise they have manually enter your details and issue a discrete code. In short just makes life easier for yourself and the controller.

“Whilst RAAus accepts this decision may anger some members”. (Implied - but I don’t care, RAAus is no longer interested in the wishes of mere members, we will decide what will happen so there)

Doesn’t sound like a draft to me. Link and Monk giving replies, one is telling porkies by the looks.

1400??????? Wonder how they were selected!! We had a survey.....trust me. Your details are private BUT ......... just trust me, typical politician style answer. I just hope EVERYONE thinks seriously about where we are heading with approach. Certainly not unexpected by some.

Having just been shown a copy (as I no longer receive it myself) of M.Monk’s editorial in the current magazine which caused a bit of mirth, at least locally, normal irrelevant stuff until the last couple of paragraphs - it would be ironic if 4 board members throw him out after the mini non representative board was his (and a couple of others) claim to fame in order to gain autocratic control of RAA. There might be some light at the end of the tunnel after all, if they go through with it. Shades of the Rudd & Turnbull saga just up the road.

Just wait for the new admentents to the ops manual in process now, being forced through by the dictatorship of the current mini board (i.e 3 plus 1). It would be alleged as a favour to “mates” at a particular flying school! Sad reflection on what we have left of RAA, but expected. I haven’t seen ANYTHING from administration to members about this. If members accept this then I am left speechless.

I had a lengthy telephone conversation with a director (in confidence) today, I recommend any interested member do the same. Certainly not a happy and agreeable board. Ask about any agreement with AVDATA!