Bubbleboy Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Hey Iggy....I have had another think and can see merit in throwing him in the slammer. I have done 6 years inside, dressed in blue though. Did you know inmates get paid to be in Gaol? Did you know they get 3 meals a day designed by a dietician so they are kept healthy? Did you know the Gaols that cant receive free to air TV provide Austar for these folk? Did you know that if they dont want to work in Gaol they dont have too? Did you know they can receive $80 a week in to their Gaol account to buy luxuries that a lot of us cant afford? Did you know that most Gaols have fully equipped gyms for their use and enjoyment? Did you know condoms and lubricants are provided so they can use the lube as hair gel to get spoofed up for the misses and 12 kids that come and spend the weekend with them in visits? Did you know they can be given Guitars and art supplies and if you claim to be Aboriginal, you get a shite load more. Then the Govt cant understand why there is supposedly a high Aboriginal population in Gaol? Now which part of that is punishment mate? oh... is it the fact they have had their freedom revoked? Most of them enjoy the holiday on us so they dont have to put up with the screaming misses and kids. See them on the weekend and hand them back. Return to cell and play cards and watch TV with Bubba. If you think Gaol is a punishment and and will solve the worlds crime problem.....think again! Oh and the old "R" word was thrown in for feel good, good measure. Gaols do not rehabilitate. The Govt wants you to think they do so you dont feel so bad about paying all that Tax. "Ultralights summed it up in post #170 above. Scotty
alf jessup Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Hey Iggy....I have had another think and can see merit in throwing him in the slammer. I have done 6 years inside, dressed in blue though. Did you know inmates get paid to be in Gaol? Did you know they get 3 meals a day designed by a dietician so they are kept healthy? Did you know the Gaols that cant receive free to air TV provide Austar for these folk? Did you know that if they dont want to work in Gaol they dont have too? Did you know they can receive $80 a week in to their Gaol account to buy luxuries that a lot of us cant afford? Did you know that most Gaols have fully equipped gyms for their use and enjoyment? Did you know condoms and lubricants are provided so they can use the lube as hair gel to get spoofed up for the misses and 12 kids that come and spend the weekend with them in visits? Did you know they can be given Guitars and art supplies and if you claim to be Aboriginal, you get a shite load more. Then the Govt cant understand why there is supposedly a high Aboriginal population in Gaol?Now which part of that is punishment mate? oh... is it the fact they have had their freedom revoked? Most of them enjoy the holiday on us so they dont have to put up with the screaming misses and kids. See them on the weekend and hand them back. Return to cell and play cards and watch TV with Bubba. If you think Gaol is a punishment and and will solve the worlds crime problem.....think again! Oh and the old "R" word was thrown in for feel good, good measure. Gaols do not rehabilitate. The Govt wants you to think they do so you dont feel so bad about paying all that Tax. "Ultralights summed it up in post #170 above. Scotty Bubble boy, Maybe we should get all the struggling pensioners out there to get in a plane and do some stuff like old mate, maybe then they will get a feed every day and live the life of luxury, i think they might like the idea of not struggling, hmm food for thought. Alf 1
facthunter Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Ignition.. I genuinely agree with your last sentiments, and have posted those views many times on this forum in the past. I really understand where you are coming from but everything has to be kept in proportion. He didn't set out to do harm to individuals as an aim. I mean "what a Galah". really! It will be interesting to get his view on why he did this as a human interest thing.. Giving him a really hard time won't change much and IF we accept very draconian punishment as the way to do things how are we going to redress a situation where there is a miscarriage of justice at some hypothetical point in the future? In my aviation career I have had the privilege/task of defending/representing pilots who have allegedly done "bad" things, against CASA who have the job of regulating the industry and overseeing safety matters. Many incidents at the outset appeared to be caused by a total failure of the pilot to do a fair job, when ALL the facts were on the table and examined dispassionately, a very good reason /explanation became evident, and on nearly all occasions the pilot was exonerated or was given further training because it was found lacking, or flawed. Sometimes the OPS manual was unclear ,in error, or ambiguous, or there was a failure of equipment or the crew had done extra duties and fatigued etc I try very hard to NOT rush to judgement in the light of that experience . Pilots tend to be very critical of their peers I have found. There may be a reason for that. They don't want to think they might do it too, perhaps? We all tend to think that "we" are infallible..Nev 2
kaz3g Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 We have murderers and rapists out there that get to me very lenient sentences, even pissed drivers killing there mates in motor vehicles that get slaps on the wrist. I see drivers gaoled most weeks who have not killed or even injured someone but have driven under the influence or in a manner dangerous. I see others gaoled for driving while disqualified, too. In Victoria, you are more likely to get gaol for a DWD than for a shop theft. This old snoozer has done wrong by his actions as yes should get something but I don't think a custodial sentence would be fair. I doubt he will get gaol for offences under the CAA or CAR's, but he may very well get gaol for conduct endangering life or the NSW equivalent. Courts don't like it when people do things that put others at risk, especially kids. The only guarenteed way of jail these days is defrauding the government or the taxman, of kill someone of prominence. I see lots of people sentenced to imprisonment; few have defrauded government and I don't do capital crime. Fly past a boat illegally and crash without hurting anyone other than himself and his plane, na bit harsh me thinks, had of killed someone, hell yeah If all the reports are anything like the truth, he did a lot more than that and if the Court accepts them as evidence I don't think it will treat him at all leniently unless there are some quite exceptional mitigating circumstances. I personally don't like gaol sentences except for the most serious of offences because I think they just put offenders into a situation where they learn to be bigger and better crooks, gain a drug addiction if they don't already have one, and cost the taxpayer a heap. But the media tells us that the community wants harsher sentences and that's what governments listen to. chuck the old boy in the 3 feeds a day and as much sex as he likes whether he wants it or not. I know this is said in jest but it's not really humerous when you work with the consequences (victims). Rape is rape and a heinous crime wherever and however it occurs. A person who commits a crime where gaol is warranted is punished by the act of incarceration; that doesn't mean they should lose the right to safety and the protection of the law. Prison rape is the worst expression of violence and power one against the other that can possibly be imagined. The very limited research available in Australia suggests that about 1 in 4 male prisoners is raped while incarcerated --- many times these are gang rapes of the young, the weak, the effeminate and the old http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLJ/2005/17.html . Along with drug use rates far higher than occur in the general community, it is a major contributor of the spread of sexually transmitted and BBV diseases amongst the prison community and then out into the wider community. Prison rape in the USA became of such concern because of the violence exhibited by the victims against society when they were finally released that their Federal Government enacted a federal law making it a specific offence for States and thuseir agencies not to take adequate steps to prevent it occurring. It's time we had a similar law here. kaz (getting down off her soapbox) 10
farri Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 I`ve been paying rego for the Drifter and the aircraft before it, for many years and I don`t particularly like it, but I know that if I don`t remain current with my paper work, I`m in deep Kakka if I prang, particularly if someone gets hurt, so I continue to pay it and try not to prang. If in fact, the aircraft wasn`t registered and the pilot certificate had expired, I fail to see why it would become an RAA issue and it shouldn`t reflect badly on the rest of us. I don`t think it should be an RAA isue even if everything was current....As I understand it, and correct me if I`m wrong, it`s the police who deal with the matter and decide whether or not to lay charges...Any legal issues after that,are another matter. Frank.
kaz3g Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 ....As I understand it, and correct me if I`m wrong, it`s the police who deal with the matter and decide whether or not to lay charges...Any legal issues after that,are another matter.Frank. CASA has its own enforcement section that will investigate possible offences under air navigation legislation and make recommendations to the Commonwealth DPP. I think the area of the lake where the incidents occurred was in NSW so that State's police will investigate any alleged offences against State laws which would include those under the Criminal Code such as conduct endangering life. kaz
alf jessup Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 We have murderers and rapists out there that get to me very lenient sentences, even pissed drivers killing there mates in motor vehicles that get slaps on the wrist.I see drivers gaoled most weeks who have not killed or even injured someone but have driven under the influence or in a manner dangerous. I see others gaoled for driving while disqualified, too. In Victoria, you are more likely to get gaol for a DWD than for a shop theft. This old snoozer has done wrong by his actions as yes should get something but I don't think a custodial sentence would be fair. I doubt he will get gaol for offences under the CAA or CAR's, but he may very well get gaol for conduct endangering life or the NSW equivalent. Courts don't like it when people do things that put others at risk, especially kids. The only guarenteed way of jail these days is defrauding the government or the taxman, of kill someone of prominence. I see lots of people sentenced to imprisonment; few have defrauded government and I don't do capital crime. Fly past a boat illegally and crash without hurting anyone other than himself and his plane, na bit harsh me thinks, had of killed someone, hell yeah If all the reports are anything like the truth, he did a lot more than that and if the Court accepts them as evidence I don't think it will treat him at all leniently unless there are some quite exceptional mitigating circumstances. I personally don't like gaol sentences except for the most serious of offences because I think they just put offenders into a situation where they learn to be bigger and better crooks, gain a drug addiction if they don't already have one, and cost the taxpayer a heap. But the media tells us that the community wants harsher sentences and that's what governments listen to. chuck the old boy in the 3 feeds a day and as much sex as he likes whether he wants it or not. I know this is said in jest but it's not really humerous when you work with the consequences (victims). Rape is rape and a heinous crime wherever and however it occurs. A person who commits a crime where gaol is warranted is punished by the act of incarceration; that doesn't mean they should lose the right to safety and the protection of the law. Prison rape is the worst expression of violence and power one against the other that can possibly be imagined. The very limited research available in Australia suggests that about 1 in 4 male prisoners is raped while incarcerated --- many times these are gang rapes of the young, the weak, the effeminate and the old http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLJ/2005/17.html . Along with drug use rates far higher than occur in the general community, it is a major contributor of the spread of sexually transmitted and BBV diseases amongst the prison community and then out into the wider community. Prison rape in the USA became of such concern because of the violence exhibited by the victims against society when they were finally released that their Federal Government enacted a federal law making it a specific offence for States and thuseir agencies not to take adequate steps to prevent it occurring. It's time we had a similar law here. kaz (getting down off her soapbox) Kaz, We all have different views and opinons on this, I respect what you say, and yes the 3 feeds was said in jest. I dont work in the judicial system as you may do, i base my opinions on what i see and read happening everyday. I had a drunk of a brother inlaw that got caught way to many times dui (atleast 10) and was always threatened by the next judge that he would go in next time and he never did and he finally woke up to himself eventually. Life would be pretty boring if we all agreed on everything that happens in this world. If i had my way and run the gaols they would be breaking rocks and getting an hr a day outside to exercise, i'd make it so miserable for them they wouldnt want to go back but thats my opinion only and i'm entitled to it. I hope i didn't offend you or anyone by what you quoted me on as that was not the intent. Alf
kaz3g Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Kaz,We all have different views and opinons on this, I respect what you say, and yes the 3 feeds was said in jest. I dont work in the judicial system as you may do, i base my opinions on what i see and read happening everyday. I had a drunk of a brother inlaw that got caught way to many times dui (atleast 10) and was always threatened by the next judge that he would go in next time and he never did and he finally woke up to himself eventually. Life would be pretty boring if we all agreed on everything that happens in this world. If i had my way and run the gaols they would be breaking rocks and getting an hr a day outside to exercise, i'd make it so miserable for them they wouldnt want to go back but thats my opinion only and i'm entitled to it. I hope i didn't offend you or anyone by what you quoted me on as that was not the intent. Alf No offence taken Alf. Your brother-in-law was exceedingly lucky and the community most unlucky he didn't meet my magistrate! If I had my way most offenders would be supporting themselves, undergoing mandatory therapies for their addictions or mental health issues AND doing community work to contribute something back and make restitution for their crimes rather than costing the community $120k pa or more to keep them locked up in the luxury that Bubbleboy suggests is commonplace. kaz 5
farri Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 If I had my way most offenders would be supporting themselves, undergoing mandatory therapies for their addictions or mental health issues AND doing community work to contribute something back and make restitution for their crimes rather than costing the community $120k pa or more to keep them locked up in the luxury that Bubbleboy suggests is commonplace.kaz ........... Frank,
kaz3g Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 ... surely you would know the regulations and the penalties. It's only a matter of matching which regulations he's broken and what those penalties are. The following are probably the most relevant under the Act: Civil Aviation Act 20AA Flying unregistered aircraft etc. (1) A person must not fly an aircraft within Australian territory if: (a) the aircraft is not registered under the regulations; and (b) the aircraft is, under this Act or those regulations, required to be registered under those regulations. Penalty: Imprisonment for 2 years. 20AB Flying aircraft without licence etc. operation of an Australian aircraft during flight time unless: (a) the person holds a civil aviation authorisation that is in force and authorises the person to perform that duty; or (b) the person is authorised by or under the regulations to perform that duty without the civil aviation authorisation concerned. Penalty: Imprisonment for 2 years. 20A Reckless operation of aircraft the manner of operation could endanger the life of another person. (2) A person must not operate an aircraft being reckless as to whether the manner of operation could endanger the person or property of another person.
turboplanner Posted January 5, 2012 Author Posted January 5, 2012 OK, hands up those ( and there must be a few of you based on the comments yesterday) who only thought they had to comply with what was written in RAA regulations, and didn't realise they had to comply with the Civil Aviation Act and all it's regulations, and have never learnt them?
turboplanner Posted January 5, 2012 Author Posted January 5, 2012 Come on Your Honours, there's 15 of you on right now, not to mention 69 lurking guests. 1
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 TP reading them is one thing....having a good understanding of that spaghetti mess....thats entirely another question. my personal opinion is that initially a student has lots to learn and expecting "read and understand" of all CAO's and CAR's with a view to distilling down to those that are relevant to what we do, is a bridge too far (at that point in time). that said, the doc's that I believe are essential reading are the orders relevant to your ultralight aircraft exemptions (which can be found or linked to from the RAA website), and the VFR flight guide (which will point you to the most relevant O's and R's for what it is that you are intending to do). I also believe that your CFI will introduce these to you as and when relevant during training Andy
David Isaac Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 The following are probably the most relevant under the Act:Civil Aviation Act 20AA Flying unregistered aircraft etc. 20AB Flying aircraft without licence etc. 20A Reckless operation of aircraft Hi Kaz, Out of curiosity, since these are 'Federal' Acts and Regulations, what Court has jurisdiction? Is it the Magistrates Court, the Supreme Court or the Federal Court? and; Are the prescribed penalties mandatory or a maximum that can be set by the presiding Court?
David Isaac Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 OK, hands up those ( and there must be a few of you based on the comments yesterday) who only thought they had to comply with what was written in RAA regulations, and didn't realise they had to comply with the Civil Aviation Act and all it's regulations, and have never learnt them? Actually we only have to comply with the Civil Aviation Regulations (CARs) that we are NOT exempted from by way of the appropriate CAOs (Civil Aviation Orders). The CAOs under which we operate our ultralight aircraft have exemptions from the requirements of certain CARs. It is not even that simple because 'our' CAOs put additional obligations on us such as a requirement to be an appropriately certificated RA Aus member and a requirement to comply with the RA Aus Operations Manual. In some cases the RA Aus Operations manual places more restrictions on us than the CARs do. One such example of that is under the CARs in a GA aircraft you can fly below 500' provided you have the landholders permission; under our Ops manual there is an additional REQUIREMENT to also have a 'Low Level' Endorsement on your Pilot Certificate. No such endorsement exists in GA, there is however, a recognised training regime in GA, but there is no requirement to have it to fly below 500'.
Chird65 Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 ..........they had to comply with the Civil Aviation Act and all it's regulations, and have never learnt them? Turbo. I think learn them is too much. We must be aware of them and understand enough to comply. I drive every day but do not know all the road rules. Try to find a concise and up to date version in Victoria of the road rules it is possible but not easy. All Rules usually need a plain English version for the general public. Even the CARs have the CAOs to make them easier to comply with. Having just done a PPL course the VFG was the preferred publication to reference. To apply this to the thread if the Pilot had read any of these publications then being as low as the pictures suggest would be seen as against the rules. Chris
winsor68 Posted January 6, 2012 Posted January 6, 2012 Perhaps not know them of by heart... Standard response to regulator questioning if you aren't 100% sure..."I can't say with 100% accuracy but give me 2 minutes and I will consult the manual and get back to you"
Guest pookemon Posted January 6, 2012 Posted January 6, 2012 Hey Iggy....I have had another think and can see merit in throwing him in the slammer. I have done 6 years inside, dressed in blue though. Did you know inmates get paid to be in Gaol? Did you know they get 3 meals a day designed by a dietician so they are kept healthy? Did you know the Gaols that cant receive free to air TV provide Austar for these folk? Did you know that if they dont want to work in Gaol they dont have too? Did you know they can receive $80 a week in to their Gaol account to buy luxuries that a lot of us cant afford? Did you know that most Gaols have fully equipped gyms for their use and enjoyment? Did you know condoms and lubricants are provided so they can use the lube as hair gel to get spoofed up for the misses and 12 kids that come and spend the weekend with them in visits? Did you know they can be given Guitars and art supplies and if you claim to be Aboriginal, you get a shite load more. Then the Govt cant understand why there is supposedly a high Aboriginal population in Gaol?Now which part of that is punishment mate? oh... is it the fact they have had their freedom revoked? Most of them enjoy the holiday on us so they dont have to put up with the screaming misses and kids. See them on the weekend and hand them back. Return to cell and play cards and watch TV with Bubba. If you think Gaol is a punishment and and will solve the worlds crime problem.....think again! Oh and the old "R" word was thrown in for feel good, good measure. Gaols do not rehabilitate. The Govt wants you to think they do so you dont feel so bad about paying all that Tax. "Ultralights summed it up in post #170 above. Scotty Finally, someone that can spell Gaol... Sheesh... I figured Gaol was not all it should be but OMG that's bad. There seems to be a few that don't think that Gaol time would be appropriate and that just because people get off on their Nth drink driving charge this clown should get off for this. What he did not only breaks CASA rules, but he was also involved in "Conduct endangering life". The skier and the occupants of the boat were not willing participants in his antics. His complete stupidity put them at risk. He does deserve Gaol time for a number of reasons - and he should get it. The reality is that he may not get it, or if he does it will be the standard "wholly suspended" sentence which amounts to nothing. A couple of people have stated that his license should be suspended and he should be fined. He didn't have a license! And unless the fine is huge it amounts to a slap on the wrist. People should be punished for their stupidity. Just because the current system doesn't punish them, doesn't make it OK for one moron to do something stupid like this.
Bryon Posted January 6, 2012 Posted January 6, 2012 OK, hands up those ( and there must be a few of you based on the comments yesterday) who only thought they had to comply with what was written in RAA regulations, and didn't realise they had to comply with the Civil Aviation Act and all it's regulations, and have never learnt them? Turbo, even the politicians who make the laws are not expected to be able to read and understand them. Maybe an "Explanatory Memorandum" outlining the basis of the CAA and regs can be developed that would be an introductory or first reference point for all pilots
turboplanner Posted January 6, 2012 Author Posted January 6, 2012 TP reading them is one thing....having a good understanding of that spaghetti mess....thats entirely another question.my personal opinion is that initially a student has lots to learn and expecting "read and understand" of all CAO's and CAR's with a view to distilling down to those that are relevant to what we do, is a bridge too far (at that point in time). that said, the doc's that I believe are essential reading are the orders relevant to your ultralight aircraft exemptions (which can be found or linked to from the RAA website), and the VFR flight guide (which will point you to the most relevant O's and R's for what it is that you are intending to do). I also believe that your CFI will introduce these to you as and when relevant during training Andy From the minute you open the throttle on your first solo you should have completed BAK, Perfromance and Operations, Nav theory, and Legislation, and know and understand it. Why? because someone may be inbound with an undercarriage problem and cloose the runway/airfield forcing you into uncharted waters, and possibly a landing at another field. I'm sure you'd be getting plenty of help on the radio, but that's the reason for making sure you have this knowledge at this time. I studied night after night for months and did it, and it did actually save my life shortly after solo, but my point is it has to be done, not just put in the too hard basket. In GA its drummed into you that you're training to be Pilot In Command, not just to get a probationary licence for a trail bike. Having said that, I agree with you that CASA have done a terrible job in making regulations accessible with their amendment system which never cleans out the trash, but makes the paperwork grow like a creeper. I'd be very wary of the VFR flight Guide. For a start there are two of them, one printed and surprisingly having contents that are not as central to flying as they should be and not produced by CASA. I found a major mistake in the legal visual flight rules section, and wrote to them, but never heard anything back. So if you want some hand reading you need to go online for the official guide which has a drawing of a 1930's aircraft on it. In reference to your belief that their CFI would introduce these to you as and when relevant during training, that's why I asked my question, because from many posts here I don't believe that is happening in some areas. 1
farri Posted January 6, 2012 Posted January 6, 2012 I`ve been paying rego for the Drifter and the aircraft before it, for many years and I don`t particularly like it, but I know that if I don`t remain current with my paper work, I`m in deep Kakka if I prang, particularly if someone gets hurt, so I continue to pay it and try not to prang.If in fact, the aircraft wasn`t registered and the pilot certificate had expired, I fail to see why it would become an RAA issue and it shouldn`t reflect badly on the rest of us. I don`t think it should be an RAA isue even if everything was current....As I understand it, and correct me if I`m wrong, it`s the police who deal with the matter and decide whether or not to lay charges...Any legal issues after that,are another matter. Frank. I was reading new and old post, came across the one I wrote yesterday and realised I could have given the impression that it was my aircraft and pilot certificate, I was refering to, when I wrote, " If in fact, the aircraft wasn`t registered". The reference to my AC was in the first paragraph! From there on I was refering to the AC that went into the lake. Frank, Ps, I feel better now.
turboplanner Posted January 6, 2012 Author Posted January 6, 2012 Actually we only have to comply with the Civil Aviation Regulations (CARs) that we are NOT exempted from by way of the appropriate CAOs (Civil Aviation Orders). The CAOs under which we operate our ultralight aircraft have exemptions from the requirements of certain CARs.It is not even that simple because 'our' CAOs put additional obligations on us such as a requirement to be an appropriately certificated RA Aus member and a requirement to comply with the RA Aus Operations Manual. In some cases the RA Aus Operations manual places more restrictions on us than the CARs do. One such example of that is under the CARs in a GA aircraft you can fly below 500' provided you have the landholders permission; under our Ops manual there is an additional REQUIREMENT to also have a 'Low Level' Endorsement on your Pilot Certificate. No such endorsement exists in GA, there is however, a recognised training regime in GA, but there is no requirement to have it to fly below 500'. I've covered some of this from Andy's post. This should all be on the RAA Website, allowing all of us, new students, and pilots wanting to maintain recency after a break to quickly see a master index, nesting diagrammes of how the training proceeds, and the regulations apply, and then all the regulations, or links accessible by one click. All the regulations are already there, John Brandon's work is already there, we just need a way to find out something quickly, and that's what we've been paying for. If we get that, then there's no reason for people to be floundering around in the sky not knowing what they don't know. This particular case is a bit unusual in that, as Steve Tizzard has pointed out, the person and aircraft have no relationship by licence or registration to RAA, and perhaps that situation might also be covered on the site, given the two year prison sentence for not complying. 1
turboplanner Posted January 6, 2012 Author Posted January 6, 2012 Perhaps not know them of by heart... Standard response to regulator questioning if you aren't 100% sure..."I can't say with 100% accuracy but give me 2 minutes and I will consult the manual and get back to you" Win I'm taking it that you'll be hitting the books right soon. No not be heart, but by intent. Remember, you can't consult the manual in the air. I was about to go for a licence test and had two weekends of flying practice available, so booked sessions with my instructor to test me before the external test. The first weekend I had a bad dose of flu, so I decided just to do some easy work like stalls. The instructor pulled the throttle on me for a forced landing. I weakly explained I had the flu and was planning to do forced landings next weekend. He said "The aircraft doesn't know that and we've already lost 200 feet, so what are you going to do?"
turboplanner Posted January 6, 2012 Author Posted January 6, 2012 Turbo. I think learn them is too much. We must be aware of them and understand enough to comply. I drive every day but do not know all the road rules. Try to find a concise and up to date version in Victoria of the road rules it is possible but not easy. All Rules usually need a plain English version for the general public. Even the CARs have the CAOs to make them easier to comply with. Having just done a PPL course the VFG was the preferred publication to reference. To apply this to the thread if the Pilot had read any of these publications then being as low as the pictures suggest would be seen as against the rules. Chris Understanding the intent so you comply is a pretty good way to look at it. Go into most newsagents and you'll find the driver's licence booklet which learners buy. It pretty much covers everything, including the new meaning of single unbroken lines in Victoria. In this case, aside from the exact rule, I would have expected everyone to have had their instructor point it out in the air as an example of good airmanship - moving away from another aircraft so a situation doesn't develop etc., keeping clear of other aircraft, people on taxyways etc.
Recommended Posts