Jump to content
  • Welcome to Recreational Flying!
    A compelling community experience for all aviators
    Intuitive, Social, Engaging...Registration is FREE.
    Register Log in

docjell

Members
  • Content Count

    104
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

75 Excellent

About docjell

  • Rank
    Well-known member

More Information

  • Location
    Majors Creek Q 4812
  1. Funny that Phil! Three of us built a Longeze in the UK in the eighties- I cannot now remember quite why though! She's still around apparently- G-MUSO. What a nasty, uncomfortable beast she was! Sold her to an RAF pilot who obviously found all her handling problems and physical discomfort perhaps preferable to his work 'ride'. She has now moved on, and the latest owner contacted me to inquire after photos of the build. They were lost during my divorce- not really that bothered!
  2. Great to catch up again Phil- how's flying in Pomgolia! I'd hope that most pilots are"switched on" so understand and appropriately cope with differing types and weights- this is not difficult- it's about basic airmanship isn't it? Responses like 'Birdseye's ' response " nonsense " is arrogant and doesn't contribute much to helpful discussion. Stay well and rug up!
  3. Some "woops" Phil but a great photo and so glad no one was hurt physically (but how'd you live that down in the aero club bar lol) There but for the grace etc - life and flying both have very steep learning curves! ( remeber our chats a while back about the late Ross Millard)
  4. Come on guys-loosen up - you know exactly what I mean! But that is the delight of these forums! The 172 and Sportstar DO "land themselves" - compared with for example the Eagle 150 or the Rutan Longeze - what nasty planes are they! Uncomfortable, bad visibility, no sense of humour at all, a constant battle all the way down finals to balance speed and descent rate, and depressing when your co-pilot/senior pilot with many thousands of hours under the belt stuffs up the landings as often as you and swears almost as much! I'd rather go back to sky-diving that fly those beasts again - would make about as much sense!
  5. The prevailing wind at my strip is virtually always at 90 degrees to the strip direction. Perhaps we just have a different skill mix
  6. Not in my experience Birdseye- I found going from a C172 to the Sportstar incredibly easy and intuitive. The Sporty, like the 172, virtually lands herself with minimal interference . It does look and behave like a 'conventional' aircraft in every sense.
  7. Ahah! I'll just write it down - or in the words of the constipated mathetician - just work it out with a pencil
  8. Docs are always castigated for using docspeak ! To me - "primary paint" is what my grandaughter does at daycare in the mornings- WTF?
  9. Er - yes - not quite sure what the cancelled airshow and Hervey Bay have to do with the original post stickshaker but thats what democracy is all about! The right to pen irrelivancies and post nonsense!
  10. Bundaberg without any doubt - I lived there for two years and the climate for flying was absolutely perfect. It was within easy reach of Brisbane (if big cities are your thing) by road or plane, and via the Bundy Aero club a number of really good flying venues were on the menu! Picking up mates from Brisbane's main airport in a C172 was easy and a blast! Being asked to "line up behind the departing A380 having due regard to wake turbulence" was so much fun ! Bundy enjoys superb weather patterns, is a cheap place to live (by our extraordinarily inflated Aussie standards) and the airport was very pro-pilots and pro-avaiation in general. It was run (well) by the Bundy council and local casual aviators used the facilities without landing fees. The city was very pro-flying - Bert Hinkler and Jabiru Aircraft both boast Bundy as their homes. But- there is always a but eh!- Bundaberg is not the hub of the universe by any means! The city is parochial, narrow minded, not on the beach, has high unemployment, not much social infrastructure , and had a couple of utterly disastrous flooding episodes in the last 24 months which I can only imagine will have dealt a mortal blow to property sales in the area. But - I have flown in the UK and Far North Queensland, and would 'regroup' to Bundy in a heartbeat- but ONLY for the awesome flying!
  11. Sorry for the dilatory reply,Bats. This situation is in no way, shape or form analogous to road registration because rego is a tax specifically applied to road users to pay for upkeep of gazetted roads, and has nothing at all to do with vehicle condition. Since (bizarrely IMO) our state government doesn't require regular vehicle maintenance (cf the annual 'MOT' vehicle check mandated in the UK- similar if you like to an aircraft '100 hrly/ annual inspection) they thus require a condition report as the only ( rather inadequate) means of ascertaining vehicle safety. My 'public ranting' was frustration at the blinkered and submissive attitude of so many of our fellow pilots who I suspect have been brow- beaten by years of bureaucracy to the extent that they actually believe that administrators have our fundamental interests at heart. They do not- we have become obsessed with process not product. It was also telling that you felt that my 'rant' would 'damage my cause'. I don't have a 'cause'- I am seeking a sensible, reasonable and responsible resolution to a completely soluble problem - perhaps if more people would intelligently and politely 'rant' we could politely and sensibly have a voice in the evolvement of future rule making that effects us all I have had a reasonable and productive discussion with RAAus technical division, and a good result seems achievable . Cheers Docjell
  12. Thanks Nobody- but the form specifically requires a VH registration as far as I can see- is this negotiable (surely not - it's CASA )
  13. Absolutely Nev- I concur 200%- but this is not about "stuff that's been sitting around for ages" - it's about machinery that has all the necessary mandated maintenance issues complied with ,carried out by a person or persons legally deems competent so to do, and yet not 'legally' flyable because the rego is out of date. This is fundamentally different from a road vehicle - the rego fee if basically a tax to pay for the upkeep of gazetted roads and bears no relationship whatever to,the vehicles fitness for purpose in terms of maintenance. Indeed it is interesting that in QLD there is no requirement to maintain a vehicle in safe condition in practical terms - it only requires a "roadworthy" when it is up for sale. I have yet to fully understand what the RAAus annual fees for registration for the aircraft and pilot are actually for- other than providing money for the RAAus. I am not sure I am getting bang for my buck! My PPL remains current in perpetuity dependant on a biennial flight review and a medical, not registration fees.
  14. That interesting Kasper. Is there therefore an option to apply to CASA for such authorisation for an RAAus aircraft - for example to fly an unregistered aircraft to a place that has facilities for required maintenenance/ avionics checks et ?
×
×
  • Create New...