Jump to content

Recommended Posts

59 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

This is one of the very few threads that's managed to get legs in the last few months.

So true. Isn't that a sad illustration of what is happening to the pursuit of recreational aviating in Australia!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can take a horse to water, but you can't make it drink; if people don't want to get involved in their sport it eventually slides into the past.

Over the past week and a half I've been attending Victoria's BMX Track Attack, six race meetings, attended by about 450 families from every State and Territory.

One woman from one Club thought the concept up, to allow kids and their families to do something special during the summer holidays; now it's an annual event.

Just takes and effort to get participation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Old Koreelah said:

But for the rebellious Irish element among the convicts, Australia might easily have followed the example of Latin America: John MacArthur and the Rum Corps tried to set up a landed aristocracy, supported by ex-convict serfs.

What a crock of shite!

 

Most of those sentenced for transportation were given that sentence because they could read and or/write; or had a trade, or been employed in trades. They were mostly young people in their late teens to mid-twenties, who did their time acclimatizing to Australian conditions, then were young enough to establish themselves after their sentence was completed.

 

Sure there were some rebellious souls amongst the convicts. English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, West Indian - a polyglot population. But if you look at the ratio of rebels to total prisoner population, the rebels were well in the minority.

 

Macarthur and the Rum Corps? Sure they took advantage of the labour force that only had to be fed, clothed and housed. But at the same time, they provided the training that many of these people needed to make successes of their lives upon completion of their time. They weren't 'bound down with iron chains' on  the places they were assigned to.  Upon completion of their sentences, many ex-cons took up small holdings, or went into Trade and started successful dynasties that exist to the present time.

 

Around Camden, Cawdor and west to the Burragorang Valley families still exist who can trace their origins back to convicts assigned to the likes of Macarthur, Oxley, Howe, Hume, Hovell and other well-known early recipients of Government land grants. 

 

You have to remember that the British settlement of eastern Australia was not intended wholly and solely as a dumping ground for the dregs of British cities. It was established to provide a refit base for the British Navy in order to limit the empire building of France and Russia. This had to be done quickly, so they used the most readily available workforce - convicts.  The likes of Macarthur and the Rum Corp officers often sold their commissions when their regiments were due to leave Sydney Town. They lead the development of the infant economy into which ex-cons moved.

 

The early European history of Australia is being re-written due to the development of a proletarian emphasis based on a re-examination of the records of private individuals and a burgeoning interest in family history which is bringing to light the experiences of the Common People. So forget what you were taught of Australian history in school. Before regurgitating that mid-twentieth century twaddle, read some of the current history publications, or go to the source material - http://help.nla.gov.au/trove/digitised-newspapers/browsing-in-newspapers-and-gazettes

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, old man emu said:

What a crock of shite!...

Crickey OME, have a hit a raw nerve?

12 minutes ago, old man emu said:

...Around Camden, Cawdor and west to the Burragorang Valley families still exist who can trace their origins back to convicts assigned to the likes of Macarthur, ...

...including relatives of mine, descended from a convict lass employed by Elizabeth MacArthur.

What you say is quite true, but don't tell me the Rum Corp was comprised of reformers dedicated to the betterment of their convict employees. They pictured themselves as the new landed gentry. Even with the large-scale influx of free settlers (including lots of my forebears) it took decades of agitation by the uppity little bloke until the Robertson Land Act made it easy for them to become landowners. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but why is Australia day on 26th Jan instead of on 1st Jan when Federation day is? We are just pom Empire apologists, chest beating colonial cast offs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Glenn1 said:

Yes but why is Australia day on 26th Jan instead of on 1st Jan when Federation day is? We are just pom Empire apologists, chest beating colonial cast offs.

That’s the date the first feet arrived to colonise Australia and Phillip planted a British flag and claimed Australia for Britain, beating the other Countries previously mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but surely date of Federation is a more historical Australian date? Dutch were on Australia some 200 years earlier that Philip person, no orange flag waving?

Edited by Glenn1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Glenn1 said:

Yes but surely date of Federation is a more historical Australian date? Dutch were on Australia some 200 years earlier that Philip person, no orange flag waving?

I guess colonisation was the accepted evidence of possession then.

The Chinese built a stone structure here in 1521 but made no claim.

 

The first lot of colonists to land in the USA didn’t make it; they all died.

 

1901 would have been Commonwealth Day or Federation Day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, turboplanner said:

You can take a horse to water, but you can't make it drink; if people don't want to get involved in their sport it eventually slides into the past.

Over the past week and a half I've been attending Victoria's BMX Track Attack, six race meetings, attended by about 450 families from every State and Territory.

One woman from one Club thought the concept up, to allow kids and their families to do something special during the summer holidays; now it's an annual event.

Just takes and effort to get participation.

 

Many sporting clubs are in decline because of the over regulation and costs involved in trying to minimise the liklihood of being sued, not to mention the current mentality that kids shouldn't be encouraged to be competitive.

Recreational flying is not a sporting club though, as I said previously, all they need to do is administer a licence and rego to do your own thing, CASA made the rules about the type of training and aircraft allowed. All we really need is an aviation version of the local Transport Department. We don't need organised competition events, although they might be fun, but, I doubt that they could effectivley  organise such an event at a reasonable cost in this country. The reality is what we do, in no way resembles your average sporting club, and because of that it shouldn't be run like one or likened to one.

BMX used to be way bigger than it is now, might ask yourself why that is? Hint: Lawyers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I’m sitting here among 450 competitive riders and a crowd of about 1500; nothing kills a sport quicker than negativity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Well I’m sitting here among 450 competitive riders and a crowd of about 1500; nothing kills a sport quicker than negativity.

How many were doing 10 and 20 years ago? How many will do it again next year?

450 sounds like a pretty small group for a national group.

 

Please remember, I'm not attempting to belittle them for having the drive to participate in their sport, Just those who who make it harder than it should be.

 

Edited by M61A1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, M61A1 said:

How many were doing 10 and 20 years ago? How many will do it again next year?

450 sounds like a pretty small group for a national group.

 

Please remember, I'm not attempting to belittle them for having the drive to participate in their sport, Just those who who make it harder than it should be.

 

In 2003 there were 670 registered BMX participants in 2017 there are 1251 http://www.bmxv.com.au/Portals/46/Users/068/24/324/BMX Victoria 2017 AGM Annual Report.pdf?ver=2017-05-28-234858-893

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Old Koreelah said:

 but don't tell me the Rum Corp was comprised of reformers dedicated to the betterment of their convict employees. 

I don't deny that, but the The New South Wales Corps' (Rum Corps') domination of the colony's economy through its monopoly on the supply of spirituous liquors ("rum" was a generic term for alcoholic beverages) only extended from January 1793 to December 1808 when Macquarie arrived and the Rum Corps transferred to England in May 1810.  Most of the officers who had been granted land by Major Grose, who had been left in temporary command of the colony after Capt. Arthur Phillip returned to England in December 1792, gave up their commissions to remain in the Colony. 

 

Grose immediately abandoned Phillip's plans for governing the colony. A staunch military man, he established military rule and set out to secure the authority of the Corps. He abolished the civilian courts and transferred the magistrates to the authority of Captain Joseph Foveaux. After the poor crops of 1793 he cut the rations of the convicts but not those of the Corps, overturning Phillip's policy of equal rations for all. In a connived attempt to improve agricultural production and make the colony more self-sufficient, Grose turned away from collective farming and made generous land grants to officers of the Corps. They were also provided with government-fed and clothed convicts as farm labour.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would hazard a guess that the major reason why recreational flying is declining, is purely and simply because of the cost involved - and the fact that extensive ground travel is required from city living locations (outside heavily controlled airspace), to enjoy the pursuit.

In addition, ultralight flying for recreation is limited to the pilot, or a pilot and one passenger - so that precludes it as a family outing.

One can acquire a small boat, 2 or 3 trail bikes, or even several mountain bikes, and enjoy recreation as a family at much lower cost than owning and flying an ultralight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, onetrack said:

I would hazard a guess that the major reason why recreational flying is declining, is purely and simply because of the cost involved - and the fact that extensive ground travel is required from city living locations (outside heavily controlled airspace), to enjoy the pursuit.

In addition, ultralight flying for recreation is limited to the pilot, or a pilot and one passenger - so that precludes it as a family outing.

One can acquire a small boat, 2 or 3 trail bikes, or even several mountain bikes, and enjoy recreation as a family at much lower cost than owning and flying an ultralight.

 

Is it declining? I haven't looked at participation figures but certainly the flying school I hire from seems to be booming. Yesterday a 15-Year-old girl did her first solo and there seem to be quite a few younger students starting out. 

 

One issue these days is that there are many competing hobbies compared to the past.

 

I do find a lot of rec pilots to be overly pessimistic.   I first started flying in 1988 but due to having a family I gave it away. In 2007 I did a TIF and decided to get back into it. On the day I did my TIF there was a club BBQ and I recall getting into a conversation with a group of older guys.  These guys pretty much told me that sports aviation had been ruined and there was no point and various other whinges. Luckily I ignored them and continued and still fly regularly. I think it is a shame that most of the talk is negative and discouraging.   Often when I flying I will run someone looking around the flying school. I always share my enthusiasm for flying, of course, I do tell them that there is annoying red tape and expense etc. but that in spite of that it is still a fantastic thing to do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no spring chicken, but I'm not that old either. When I started getting my pilot cert, I was looking forward to the activities and camaraderie found at any fly in I went to. Since I have had my pilot cert and since bought an aircraft such activities have died out. This why many of us claim that it is dead or dying. If all it takes you to call yourself a pilot is that act of taking off, having a quick look around then landing again, then good for you, you are more easily satisfied than a lot of us.

Any time I have enquired about such activities, the usual response it that the liability burden is excessive. Turbo tells us that the liability laws remain unchanged since the thirties, which may be true, but while law may be unchanged, clearly, the boundaries and definitions have. This is evident thoughout  all industry, not just rec flying.

If the BMX body ran like RAA, they would require anyone who rode a bicycle to be a paid up member and abide by their rules, no matter where or when they rode a bike.

I could race my own car in my back paddock against a mate or two, but see what happens if you do that with an aircraft.

 

Excuse my pessimism Octave, but many of the very reasons I wanted to fly have been killed of since I began the process of of learning to aviate, and I'm not over happy about it.

They may not mean much to some, they were my dreams and hopes that have been killed of by overzealous bureaucrats, that claim to have just "weeded out" what they feel are "undesirables".

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, M61A1 said:

I'm no spring chicken, but I'm not that old either. When I started getting my pilot cert, I was looking forward to the activities and camaraderie found at any fly in I went to. Since I have had my pilot cert and since bought an aircraft such activities have died out. This why many of us claim that it is dead or dying.

Welcome to the real world; there has ALWAYS been a mix of people who come, fly and go, and even after a year or so, only the instructor knows their names.

The rest either socialise in a group, and there are literally hundreds of social reports on this site, and plenty of threads interrupted by people arranging to meet at a fly in etc., or

in larger clubs socialise well beyond that with evening functions, competitions, flyaways etc.

 

So that's not true on an Australialia-wide basis. If it's the case at your airfield there's nothing to stop you setting up the cameraderie.

 

I know there is some disbelief at the hours reported for 2017, but even if you cut that in half RA is neither dying nor dead.

 

I'm not saying there aren't problems but even with the current RAA Ltd structure, they could be fixed.

 

Flying isn't compulsory; if you don't like its structure, and the structure is not going to change, give it up and find another hobby. 

 

13 minutes ago, M61A1 said:

If the BMX body ran like RAA, they would require anyone who rode a bicycle to be a paid up member and abide by their rules, no matter where or when they rode a bike.

The BMX body does have risks, albeit injuries more so than deaths, it does supply food, and it does contain car parks, so it DOES run like RAA in terms of risk management.

The difference between the two is no one campaigns to break the rules on BMX.

On any meeting night, the car park is orderly, the spectators are not allowed on the track, the canteen volunteers must have a food handling certificate, the competitors must sign in, which is now done electronically by riding past a transponder, and before any racing can start there must be three or four Ambulance staff spread around the track, there must be three or four volunteer marshals and these people work to protocols when there is an accident and other riders on the track. In three years I have never heard a discussion on how hard it is to be safe.

13 minutes ago, M61A1 said:

I could race my own car in my back paddock against a mate or two, but see what happens if you do that with an aircraft.

Injure or kill someone racing in a paddock and you can expect roadworthiness inspection, third party insurance check and possibly registration check, and definitely a blood alcohol check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Flying isn't compulsory; if you don't like its structure, and the structure is not going to change, give it up and find another hobby.

Neither is living. Perhaps we should stop pretending we live in a free country.

Your "My way or the Highway" attitude has no place in this country.

11 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Injure or kill someone racing in a paddock and you can expect roadworthiness inspection, third party insurance check and possibly registration check, and definitely a blood alcohol check.

I would expect the BAC, but I shouldn't be surprised with someone poking their nose into the business of others. In any case you have tried to dodge the point that you  would be able to do it as long as you didn't annoy the neighbours too much, and problems only arise if you get too silly. In a recreational aircraft, you're a criminal the moment you do it. Hypocrites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbo said: "Injure or kill someone racing in a paddock and you can expect roadworthiness inspection, third party insurance check and possibly registration check, and definitely a blood alcohol check."

 

Not 100% correct.

 

CRIMES ACT 1900 - SECT 29

Culpable driving of motor vehicle

Sub-sections:

 (6)    For this section, a person shall be taken to drive a motor vehicle culpably if the person drives the vehicle—

        (a)     negligently; or

        (b)     while under the influence of alcohol, or a drug, to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle.

 (7)     For this section, a person shall be taken to drive a motor vehicle negligently if the person fails unjustifiably and to a gross degree to observe the standard of care that a reasonable person would have observed in all the circumstances of the case.

 

Injuring or killing someone whilst driving a vehicle on private property is an offence under the Crimes Act  (In NSW - other States & Territories are likely to have the same law).

Therefore compulsory Third Party insurance and vehicle registration do not come in to it. Since vehicle registration does not apply, roadworthiness standards don't apply. However, knowing about a fault in any part of the control system, and continuing to drive the vehicle would be taken to be an element in proving "drive negligently".

 

Intoxication by any substance would also be an element in proving the offence. However, Police do not have the power to require testing when an incident occurs on private land (paddock bashing) unless the incident happened in the course of employment. Since Police cannot carry out the usual testing that they can when the incident happens in a public place, they have to revert to the proofs of Drive Under the Influence, which generally involves the formation of an opinion that a person was under the influence following the detection of the usual signs of intoxication. That opinion can be backed up by evidence from witnesses who saw the person consume intoxicants, or who themselves formed the opinion that the person was intoxicated before the incident.

 

Note that Sub-section (7) says that the driver must be so Mozart and Liszt that they are incapable of having proper control. Is that the same BAC for everyone?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the clarification OME. Victorian law may be slightly different re alcohol. We had a problem with a particular race track out in the hills which would not join any association, would not comply with any regulations, the commentator's repertoir included a constant flow of four letter words, the drivers would bring slabs to the pits and consume beer between each heat, and they had a class of car where points were scored if they could bash and disable the next one. We had no sanction over them but a complaint had been made by a member of the public to CAMS, and CAMS rightly threw it to us.  We had no liability, but I decided to make a visit at the next meeting. Then followed one of the most fascinating days of my life which we don't have time for here, but the commentator was swearing continuously, and we were a family sport, the drivers were drinking throughout the day, and one of the bash cars was stalled by another one. These cars carried a passenger and had the roof removed above the seats. and the two occupants unbuckled jumped up and stood on the floor, with the roof panel at waist height viciously gesticulating at the car which hit them. Another oncoming car hit them hard, and it was obvious that this behaviour could easily result in somone getting killed. I was near the start finish line and the car that hit them stopped in front of me. The two that were hit leapt out and raced for my two, who just as quickly jumped out with fists up ready for a fight, I grabbed them both by the collar and held them, but the Chief Steward wasn't quick enough to catch his two, so, still holding my two I used a foot to trip one and pushed the other over using one of my drivers as a battering ram. How none of them thought to belt me I'll never know. Fighting was one of the woman's complaints, but since they were getting out of their harnesses with the potential to kill each other I had to do something, so I phone the local Police Sergeant, told him of his local woman's complaint, told him what I'd seen, and  suggested he read the riot act in the pits at the start of the next race meeting. He said he didn't have the power to do that, I told him to bluff and he said he would take care of it. The job was given to a constable, who phoned me back after the meeting to say he'd one into the pits and had a quiet talk to the drivers. He told them he didn't have the power to take their beer off them, but he'd checked the Act and it didn't say breathalysing was limited to the road; that he had an urgent job to go to but he would be back later in the day. Their beer went home with them

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, M61A1 said:

Your "My way or the Highway" attitude has no place in this country.

 

Just to make it very clear; the regulations you have to live with are NOT mine, with the exception of suggesting an offence for wheel spinning by hoons, and a section of semi trailer braking regulations.

 

I have to live with what we are dealt the same as anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×