Misuse of ultralight term or naming all aircraft as Cessna

[Zibi]

I know this topic comes all the time whenever there's some news article and to be honest I don't understand why you people get so worked up about this ultralight term misuse or even naming most small aircraft as Cessnas.

 

When I talk to non-flying friends about ultralights (say a Jabiru or Savannah) I also describe them as something like a Cessna just a bit smaller.

 

It just makes the conversation that much easier, as for most people there is no difference between one small plane and another and if you want to explain what the differences are most of the time you'll still end up with the other person ending up with something along the lines of "So it's like a Cessna, right?"

 

I guess most journalists will use the same logic, but I do I agree that news articles should use the correct name (at least once in the article and especially under a picture) or start using term Cessna-like rather then straigh up Cessna for everything.

 

On the other hand it always makes me smile when people talk about a plane like sat Dash8 as a small plane (not ultralight just small compared to other airliners), for me it's huge :)

 

 

[poteroo]

I know this topic comes all the time whenever there's some news article and to be honest I don't understand why you people get so worked up about this ultralight term misuse or even naming most small aircraft as Cessnas.When I talk to non-flying friends about ultralights (say a Jabiru or Savannah) I also describe them as something like a Cessna just a bit smaller.

 

It just makes the conversation that much easier, as for most people there is no difference between one small plane and another and if you want to explain what the differences are most of the time you'll still end up with the other person ending up with something along the lines of "So it's like a Cessna, right?"

 

I guess most journalists will use the same logic, but I do I agree that news articles should use the correct name (at least once in the article and especially under a picture) or start using term Cessna-like rather then straigh up Cessna for everything.

 

On the other hand it always makes me smile when people talk about a plane like sat Dash8 as a small plane (not ultralight just small compared to other airliners), for me it's huge :)

Agree. I actually don't see a problem in calling our aircraft an ultralight - similar to a 2 seat Cessna. It positions us in the relative order of size in the aircraft family. Describing anything is simplified by giving it's 'size' relative to a known item.

 

happy days,

 

 

[terryc]

who are you people ?

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Thing is the journos are very quick to call right after something has occurred , they could be just as quick to call and ask what type is it.......but they don't.

 

Example.....last week within an hour of the unfortunate Sav crash occurring in central Qld, I recieved two (or was it three ?) media calls asking " what can you tell us about the crash this morning"....they had got my number from the board member listing in the RAA magazine.

 

Fact is : one....I'm not the board member for that area...two : I hadn't even heard of the crash yet due to it not being on media yet !!....until they called. I had nothing to offer them.

 

RAA protocol for board members in that case is to refer them to the board president Michael Monke as main point of contact for the organization, especially where media is concerned, which I did, and the journos had no problem with that, and thanked me for my limited assistance.

 

Journos are forever chasing news cut-0ff deadlines and may be down to the hour or even minute to submit a report for the next news....any report........

 

It is rare unfortunatly that we get a call back from the same journos a few days or a week later when we are in a position to give them some real accurate info.......old yesterday's news by then, so they're not interested anyway. Fact is plane crashes sell papers...end of story...............Maj....

 

 

[dazza 38]

Maybe it just me, but as far as I am concerned, journalists get paid to deliver news worthy stories as accurate as they can. They seem to be lazy when it comes to aviation. It is funny somtimes but really, they should have some grey matter in their heads. Remember when they called a C17 Globe master a Blow master, amateur hour at its finest.

 

 

[maddog63]

Maybe it just me, but as far as I am concerned, journalists get paid to deliver news worthy stories as accurate as they can. They seem to be lazy when it comes to aviation. It is funny somtimes but really, they should have some grey matter in their heads. Remember when they called a C17 Globe master a Blow master, amateur hour at its finest.

Totally agree and it's not only aviation. Some of my sons friends were recently involved in a head on collision on the Bruce Highway, which was not their fault. There were injuries of course, most minor, but one of their friends neeeded surgery on his feet. The people in the other car were ok. The press sensationalised the story about young people having a head on while travelling to a 21st party, but left out the detail of what had exactly happened and that the quick thinking of my sons friend who was driving, saved the lives of all involed. Usetting and frustrating.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Thing is the journos are very quick to call right after something has occurred , they could be just as quick to call and ask what type is it.......but they don't.Example.....last week within an hour of the unfortunate Sav crash occurring in central Qld, I recieved two (or was it three ?) media calls asking " what can you tell us about the crash this morning"....they had got my number from the board member listing in the RAA magazine.

Fact is : one....I'm not the board member for that area...two : I hadn't even heard of the crash yet due to it not being on media yet !!....until they called. I had nothing to offer them.

 

RAA protocol for board members in that case is to refer them to the board president Michael Monke as main point of contact for the organization, especially where media is concerned, which I did, and the journos had no problem with that, and thanked me for my limited assistance.

 

Journos are forever chasing news cut-0ff deadlines and may be down to the hour or even minute to submit a report for the next news....any report........

 

It is rare unfortunatly that we get a call back from the same journos a few days or a week later when we are in a position to give them some real accurate info.......old yesterday's news by then, so they're not interested anyway. Fact is plane crashes sell papers...end of story...............Maj....

I agree the President should be the one to comment, and he should be given some legal training to ensure the comments don't provide any fodder for later claims, no names are given until relatives notified etc., but certainly the location, correct name of the aircraft, broad condition of the pilot/passenger, and basic details of any investigation underway.

 

And most importantly, all that should be provided as far ahead of the journalist's deadline as possible. I always ask what the deadline is before getting involved in any comment, and that will determine whether I have to speak off the cuff, or can advise the journalist I'll call back after checking the facts. They always appreciate that because they are trying to write a story about a very obscure section of the community (for example what would you write about a Trials Bike accident? Would you get the lass correct? Would you get the make and model of bike correct?,would you know the key riders and their level of experience?)

 

If the deadline is, say 4 pm that day, I will cut short my time in order to get information back by about 2:30 because this gives time for the journalist to weave together the story from witnesses, people who have what you are doing, want the airport closed etc. and I'll attach a high definition photo with correct description. This way you have a good chance of getting the correct story in, with enough time for the Editor to look at the story and allow it to be rewritten. A lot of bad stories are 180 words written by the journalist cut back to 70 by the Editor with links holding it together. If the deadline is 4 pm and you send your story in at 3:55, there's no time for the journalist to write it, and no one wants to read last week's news in the next edition.

 

The reason you don't get a call back from the journalist is that the public doesn't have a burning interest to know that someone was feeling off colour and pulled a lever which turned a pulley which made the A3450 from YSBK, which was on a flight to YWER, drop a wing and clip a Messmate, and next week there will be a drug bust somewhere which the journalist is required to attend.

 

 

[Chird65]

... and next week there will be a drug bust somewhere which the journalist is required to attend.

is that the answer to "what were they smoking when they wrote that"

 

 

[XP503]

I'm proud to use the term 'Ultralight' if that is what I am flying on the day.

 

Couldn't care less what assumption people want to jump to, I'll let my flying do the talking.

 

I wish it was still the AUF........

 

A name change is one way to convince the uneducated that we aren't lunatics in death machines but I can think of a better one....

 

Fly better.....

 

As far as I am concerned a Jab or a Sav is an ultralight, and nothing at all like a Cessna.....

 

 

[shags_j]

My problem with calling everything an ultralight is that whenever there is a crash (172, lsa, basically anything short of a DH8) then it is referred to in the press as an Ultralight.

 

That term in the public eye then becomes synonymous with being unsafe. Not only does that sometimes cause concern for potential passengers you might have, but I am sick of getting the statement from people "ultralights, that's pretty dangerous isn't it. They crash all the time".

 

 

[facthunter]

Most of the ones that crash, do it only once. Nev