Oscar Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Yes, plenty of Bach to come:) Salierisol, you have got the wrong composer. Try Grieg. And try to ignore the connection with trolls.
motzartmerv Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Yes, but greiging didnt have the same ring to it. Baching, sounded better:) 1
Teckair Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 But is average intelligence good enough to do the job? That is the best you can hope for in the public service.
motzartmerv Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Any operator who thinks that it would be a defence to propose that: 'I didn't send them aloft in a Jabiru-powered aircraft, therefore I contend that it was not dangerous' is simply being stupid. And what about the ones that DO send them in Jabs? Recreational aviation has always been an "at your own risk" activity. Never, EVER has the Govt stepped in and TOLD us there is an unreasonable risk, until now. I dont agree with your views (attempts) that would see the entire RAA on the deck of the floundering ship.
gandalph Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Yes, plenty of Bach to come:) Jeez Merv! Your ancestor would be rotating like a Rotax with a ratsh!t reduction unit at that comment. You should know better. Grieg! Must be getting old! 1 1 1
Oscar Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 And what about the ones that DO send them in Jabs? Recreational aviation has always been an "at your own risk" activity. Never, EVER has the Govt stepped in and TOLD us there is an unreasonable risk, until now.I dont agree with your views (attempts) that would see the entire RAA on the deck of the floundering ship. Merv, you have every right to hold your opinion. That doesn't make it any more valid than mine. The Board of RAA begs to differ with you.. The official RAA Board position, as stated in its initial response to CASA (available on the RAA website), states: this proposed action threatens the existence of Recreational Aviation Australia, the body charged with the responsibility to administer the safe training and operation of approximately 10,000 pilots and 3,500 aircraft Perhaps the Board does not have your expertise nor perspective, but I do believe there are some on there who are pretty experienced and astute people. They see a real existential threat. And they do NOT isolate that to only affecting Jabiru operators and owners.
Oscar Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Jeez Merv! Your ancestor would be rotating like a Rotax with a ratsh!t reduction unit at that comment. You should know better. Grieg! Must be getting old! 'Old' and 'wise' are not necessarily mutually inclusive...
gandalph Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 'Old' and 'wise' are not necessarily mutually inclusive... Don't remind me. I've known that for longer than I can remember, remember what?
motzartmerv Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Yes, I've read all the propaganda from ALL sides oscar, it doesnt mean I have to agree. If it is true, and the raa get sunk by Jabs " problems" well then there will be a few thousand slightly upset natives hey? Let's not forget what this is all about ay?
Guest Ornis Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 There was an old pilot called Oscar Who sang like a parrot in Tosca He knew all the right words Like so many old birds Was wise to what truth would cost yuh.
gandalph Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Merv, Baching. Very punny, I like it. But continuing the musical theme; the question remains: Who let the dogs out? 1
motzartmerv Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Merv,Baching. Very punny, I like it. But continuing the musical theme; the question remains: Who let the dogs out? I'm not sure, but we didn't light the fire, it was always burning;) 1
dazza 38 Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Nev, I think the more appropriate phrase may well be 'shoot the wounded'.Michael Moncke's / the RAA Board's communications since the initial CASA proposed action hand grenade was lobbed into the wagon have all been extremely worthy of careful reading and a lot of thought. They have given a very good summation of the broader picture (including placing the statistics into perspective, though that perspective seems to be lost on some people). They have NOT mentioned some of the more dire potential consequences, lest it become a self-fulfilling prophecy, and for that we should all be thankful - but absolutely NOT thoughtless about. The members of the Board who have been intimately associated with preparing responses and information send-outs to members have been putting in huge amounts of their time and energy to this problem, because they can all too easily see the consequences of the train hurtling through the tunnel towards the helpless RAA community tied to the rails. It helps precisely none of us that a few people seem intent on doing nothing but shovelling more coal into the boiler. Let us not muck around with platitudes here: ALL of 'recreational aviation' is, by legal precedent now, considered to be 'a dangerous recreational activity'. See: http://www.cbp.com.au/Publications/Flying-lessons-in-a-single-engine-light-aircraft- In brief - NSW Court of Appeal unanimously dismisses appeal in Campbell v Hay The NSW Court of Appeal has confirmed that the injuries sustained by a student flying a light aircraft under the supervision of an experienced flying instructor involved the materialisation of an obvious risk of a dangerous recreational activity. The CASA action has effectively cemented that position from the 'responsible authority' POV. Anybody who thinks a Court will differentiate between 'dangerous' being limited to Jabiru-powered aircraft and aircraft powered by other engines on the basis of a few parts of a percent of reliability statistics, is, not to mince words, a bloody fool. We are ALL tarred with the same legal brush now and the only possible difference between Jabiru-engined aircraft and others is the thickness of the tar. We are ALL 'black' in the eyes of the law. Any operator who thinks that it would be a defence to propose that: 'I didn't send them aloft in a Jabiru-powered aircraft, therefore I contend that it was not dangerous' is simply being stupid. The CASA action is the opening of the Pandora's box. Jesus, a bit melodramatic don't you think. 1
gandalph Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Jesus, a bit melodramatic don't you think. Which part Daz? Or is tinnie time and open season on anything Oscar says? Perhaps he's getting old as well and that's why he SHOUTS. 1
turboplanner Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Oscar, The case you mentioned has previously been explained. The pilot was not found to be negligent, so nothing really changes with non-Jabiru placarded aircraft, regardless of the general chatter. If you are negligent, you will pay. The Jabiru aircraft covered by the CASA limitations, require additional things to be pointed out, and may require additional action on the part of pilots, owners, FTFs etc. Certainly there's a lot of thinking and planning to be done, and I started before Christmas to try to get some definitive advice made available around Australia. How well that works out remains to be seen, but it's not the end of the world. 3 1
Oscar Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Which part Daz? Or is tinnie time and open season on anything Oscar says? Perhaps he's getting old as well and that's why he SHOUTS. No, Gandalph, it's because some people unfortunately need a hit with a brick between the eyes to attract their attention. Same reason as the fire exits in cinemas are in large, attention-grabbing letters by comparison to the seat numbers...
Guest Ornis Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 There was an old pilot Mozart Merv Whose notes sure hit a raw nerve Facing the music is Jabiru After CASA scored a to-do With an instrument bowed in a curve.
Guest Ornis Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Ouch, Oscar. If I find a huge pile of sh!t on the doorstep I get a shovel, not go looking for a gift-horse... PS. I do value your erudite explanations. I try to be reasonable, but have found dealing with Jabiru and its engines extraordinarily frustrating and expensive. It will make no difference to aviation in NZ if Jabiru folds its wings, but I appreciate it will in Australia. Pity about the Bents - sometimes the dragon wins.
Oscar Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Oscar,The case you mentioned has previously been explained. The pilot was not found to be negligent, so nothing really changes with non-Jabiru placarded aircraft, regardless of the general chatter. If you are negligent, you will pay. The Jabiru aircraft covered by the CASA limitations, require additional things to be pointed out, and may require additional action on the part of pilots, owners, FTFs etc. Certainly there's a lot of thinking and planning to be done, and I started before Christmas to try to get some definitive advice made available around Australia. How well that works out remains to be seen, but it's not the end of the world. Turbs, the important element of that case I am trying to mention is not the finding of guilt / innocence, but the fact that we have now all been put into a 'class' by a legal precedent. CASA's action regarding Jabiru has effectively reinforced that 'classification' in the case of Jabiru-powered aircraft; how long do you imagine it will be before similar action is taken in the case of other aircraft that can be demonstrated statistically to be 'unsafe' beyond an arbitrary point that is selected by CASA as being outside the acceptable? This is 'slippery slope syndrome' territory. If, for instance, CASA decides to extend this type of action on the basis of occupant safety statistics from death/injury, there are plenty of other 'low hanging fruit' out there that will suffer, and satisfying THAT will be a far larger task than rectifying some deficiencies in engine components, it will require major, major airframe re-design. From the statistics found in that American study of LSA accident rates (often quoted here, but for those who haven't seen it: http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDwQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.flyingmag.com%2Fpilot-reports%2Flsa%2Fsport%2Flsa-safety-picture-emerging&ei=nf2mVK6hB8Lj8AWWxICgBg&usg=AFQjCNFz4vcQB_yvsNGY8ymr4KkcVP-1fw&sig2=pbEVMeDiDpj1lELHJAdAYA&bvm=bv.82001339,d.dGc ) , the list of such low-hanging fruit is extensive - and ironically but importantly, Jabiru is the least of the low-hanging fruit. The essential point that the RAA responses made, is that the action CASA has taken is not justified on the basis of the big picture. It is a case that the cure is worse than the disease. It is also most definitely the thin end of a wedge.
Oscar Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Ouch, Oscar. If I find a huge pile of sh!t on the doorstep I get a shovel, not go looking for a gift-horse...PS. I do value your erudite explanations. I try to be reasonable, but have found dealing with Jabiru and its engines extraordinarily frustrating and expensive. It will make no difference to aviation in NZ if Jabiru folds its wings, but I appreciate it will in Australia. Pity about the Bents - sometimes the dragon wins. Ornis - that may well be one of the best summations of the situation with which we are faced that has yet been produced! What we need by way of response is exactly, to grab a shovel and get the manure off the doorstep, rather than accepting - or worse, supporting - that it should have been placed there. What CASA has dropped is a large pile of excrement indeed.
turboplanner Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Oscar, the statistics WHICH I HAVE SEEN and reported on (I use capitals because of the constant propaganda being spouted on this thread) WITHOUT the statistics which ATSB and CASA have which may be non-RAA derived and WITHOUT the non-reported incidents warranted urgent duty of care action. CASA is doing its job. Railing against CASA without providing a safe alternative is just bringing more attention to the denial which the statistics show. 1 2 1
Guest Ornis Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 In some ways Jabiru's success has authored its downfall. Jabiru is no rag-and-bone contraption driven by a motor-mower engine - that people look at amazed and suspicious. A Jabiru looks like an aeroplane. It is marketed and sold as an aeroplane. In NZ, the engine alone costs more than a small car. People have high expectations. What CASA has done is announce to the world: 'Hey, in our opinion, Jabiru is not what it looks like.' (A little Cessna.) From this side of the ditch I don't see any sign of a slippery slope. The target appears to be Jabiru. My guess is Rod Stiff was obstructive and uncompromising. It will be interesting to see if NZ CAA shakes a stick. Somehow I doubt it. As far as I know no Jabirus are used for training and the others are mostly lame ducks...
motzartmerv Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 There was an old pilot Mozart MervWhose notes sure hit a raw nerve Facing the music is Jabiru After CASA scored a to-do With an instrument bowed in a curve. Hey!!! I'm not that old.. I'm not even 40 yet..... Doesn't mean I'm a spring chicken either... It's not the years, it's the mileage..:)
Guest Ornis Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 There was a bold pilot - not motzartmerv Who flew a Jabiru with great verve The motor stopped short And he was caught With his pants down - the old perve.
motzartmerv Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Im not bold either!!!...If I was, I wouldnt be worried about the thread topic:) 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now