Jump to content

facthunter

First Class Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    32,848

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1,168

 Content Type 

Everything posted by facthunter

  1. facthunter
    Not comparable. GA is ICAO Compliant and CASA gets revenue from Aviation fuel sales. Relatively easy to manage whereas RAAus etc rely on a lot of dispensations to operate. That's NOT popular with the AUTHORITY and is the main reason about Problems with CTA access. Whether this SHOW continues or not rests with the CASA. They won't come right out and say it up front, so not having much clout and much public sympathy being realistic you are between a rock and a Hard place. For Now I'd say Back the RAAus. It's all you have except GA. I'd hate to be working for them. You can't win. They made a mistake in trying to be the "NEW GA", but maybe they felt that was the only way to go to survive in the longer term..Nev
  2. facthunter
    CASA just want rid of it. RAAus cannot well represent your Interests as I has to keep onside with the CASA. Nev
  3. facthunter
    No you don't OWN the Company. Thankfully. Subscriptions do keep it in business. Same as buying a subscription to National Geographic Nev
  4. facthunter
    Of course they would get and take lawyer advice. Thats where this thing has gotten to. You have to prepare for the worst or you are a dill when you are in a managing role.. Your last line doesn't reflect the world we are ACTUALLY IN. Nev
  5. facthunter
    That's deep and meaningful. Nev
  6. facthunter
    The information from the report enabled determination of the freezing level and I also have experience of severe Icing in That area something I doubt anyone interviewed would have had. Nev
  7. facthunter
    Stake Holder Engagement. What genius dreamt up that Department Title? Nev
  8. facthunter
    It's NOT a Wirraway. Nev
  9. facthunter
    Are you disputing anything I have said. . My "information" is from the report. Nev
  10. facthunter
    BY the system coping, but the Margin for error gets smaller, and the pressure gets higher. Nev
  11. facthunter
    The Coroner gets involved when a fatality happens His/her job is to determine the Cause of death. The Weather conditions were the cause of death. WHO decided to FLY that day.? The Pilot. No amount of training in any of the RAAus array of aircraft would have been of any benefit that day. He was considered an exceptionally adept pilot and stayed in the air longer than most who haven't flown IFR. Its Likely the ICE was the final straw.. Nev
  12. facthunter
    Not a realistic assumption They no doubt would be acting under Legal Advice. Nev
  13. facthunter
    Bit judgemental . They can't say much when being threatened with Prosecution. Nev
  14. facthunter
    So, WHAT is going on? Does the right hand Know what the left one is doing? Nev
  15. facthunter
    What does some Promo Picture Prove? You have been deaf to the problem forever.. Nev
  16. facthunter
    I have NO idea why you would come to that conclusion. In any case you continue to insist that No problem exists. IT DOES exist and could end most of the warbirds and the U'/Ls from flying as they wish to and HAVE done. . CASA have the say over the end game because they ARE the "AUTHORITY" .Nev
  17. facthunter
    At the end of the day It's about liability and whether CASA wants RAAus (oranything similar)to exist into the future No sensible person would join some Body. that exposes them to an unspecified potential liability that has no limit. Nev
  18. facthunter
    I'm not on trial here and not everyone reads into a document WHAT someone else might.. I've explained the Arms length concept applying.. No definite conclusion to some accident can be sourced/allowed from a Participating party. It has NO value. Documents and records should be available and provided and any technical matter that might have affected the outcome such as performance icing conditions of the Aircraft and any pilot. WHY would I presume to state what the Coroner was unaware of? Nor will I speculate on it. . Give it a break anyhow. Opinions counter to yours have a right to be expressed. Nev
  19. facthunter
    I thought that had just ended. There has been ongoing problems with some 19 ****' PLANES. and how they are treated with new owners The 51% rule is back there too for 19 planes Nev
  20. facthunter
    I have read it. Nev
  21. facthunter
    What Torque are we speaking of? Any mechanic worthy of the name knows the limits of an open end spanner. Nev
  22. facthunter
    They NEVER could do investigations and the Coroner should have been aware of that. It's an at ARMS length concept. Nev
  23. facthunter
    WE don't know what it is 19 xxxx was built under the 51% rule. IF you repair it enough you might qualify as the builder and still be able to do all the work on it under that rule. CHECK first. Nev
  24. facthunter
    But ... WHO would care. Just say it's a SAFETY issue and you're done. Nev
  25. facthunter
    IF you have a bit of a SEA the last thing you want is to smack into a wave. Too high a pitch attitude to survive out of ground effect and maybe some windsheer as well. The plane couldn't have been overloaded.. Maybe tail-heavy? You'd have to reference the elevators position. Nev
×
×
  • Create New...