Beatups and silly things...

[Guest Graham Lea]

>RA Cowboys at YMNG

 

>Witnessed by yself this weekend by some recreational aviation pilots.

 

>Non standard circuit ops that included,

 

>Take off and landings in any direction, rgardless of the wind(good 10 kt northerly,

 

>Beatups of the airfield at low level

 

>Low level circuits......and I mean 100ft agl circuits.

 

>Low level steep turns at less than 200 ft agl. One guy took off with 10 kts down >wind climbed to about 150 ft, , power off steep turn 360 dg and landed down >wind.

 

>Low flying over towns. (Avenal).....300 ft agl.

 

>All of this was with passengers.

 

>This was only the bits I saw myself. My students were agog at the displays that >took place in my absence.

 

>When I went over to complain I was basically told to sod off and mind my own >business.

 

>Clowns.

 

I have asked the poster for his real name so I can post it onto RAAus. They may like to discuss the matters with the guys there and the poster...

 

Graham Lea

 

 

[blueshed]

Airmanship

 

WHTA IS IT??????????????

 

Saw something similar the other week, was after a Hangar Wings Presentation, and it was the guest of honour who took of in his Cub. However he didn't perform his antic's as high as the ones you have explained. The other thing was that he is EX from a major international airline!!!!!!!!!!!

 

So What is AIRMANSHIP.????????????

 

Not Ability! Possibly the thought that goes into the flight and the possible ramifications of it!!!!!!!!!

 

Will those who are not as skillfull as ones self see what is happening and copy it, because it has been demonstrated to them that this is the norm!?

 

SAFE SKIES

 

Cheers Guy

 

 

[Guest Ken deVos]

I was not there and don't condone the actions described, but wonder if the following had anything to do with it...

 

Farewell To Jeremy Simons

 

Jeremy Simons a long time AUF member sadly lost his battle with cancer on Saturday the 28th of July 2007. Our condolences go out to his family.

 

There will be a farewell to Jeremy at the Mangalore Airfield on Saturday 15th of September at 1pm.

 

All welcome.

 

 

[Guest disperse]

go on youtube and search ultralight accidents ...... plenty of luck pushing going wrong there.......

 

 

[Ben Longden]

The circumstances of a 'wake' would not warrant any clowning around as you described.

 

Its not so much a case of if things go wrong, but WHEN, that we will end up farewelling another member or members - this time for all the wrong reasons.

 

If you managed to get any info to ID the 'pilot' involved, I am sure that not only the RAA but CASA might be interested.

 

A similar low level clown act was done at Shepparton a few weeks ago in a Bell Jetranger that seriously did not impress anyone on the ground, in the circuit or anyone taxiing.

 

Its dangerous, and those doing stuff like that do not deserve a pilot licence or certificate.

 

Ben

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

This has had a fair working over on another forum today. One of the posts was from Mick Poole:

 

"If the original "Poster" Ozgrade 3 is willing to forward any specific details then he can be certain that it will be followed up.

 

Mick Poole

 

Operations Manager

 

Recreational Aviation Aust. Inc

 

"

 

Regards

 

Mike

 

 

[Admin]

A similar low level clown act was done at Shepparton a few weeks ago in a Bell Jetranger that seriously did not impress anyone on the ground, in the circuit or anyone taxiing.

Ben, I believe the guy you mention here is also starting up a GA/RAA school at Wallan. I was there at Shepp when he did it and I tell you it was complete stupidity - he went right over the clubhouse/school with only feet to spare between the top of the flagpole and his chopper skids - engine failure or clipping the pole etc and at least 12 people would have been dead.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Mike

 

I read the pprune thread and got distracted with the us and them side debate that was going on between GA and RA posters.

 

Within RA, we too could have a similar safety record as GA, all we need to do is put an expensive regulatory regime in place that is actively policed by a workforce that is orders of magnitudes bigger in terms of head count than what we currently have. We too then could achieve a better safety rate, a declining membership that makes the whole thing totally unsupportable and aircraft ages that are older than most who fly them.

 

What more could we all want than that.

 

Bottom line I like the cost structure of what we have now, and as PIC I understand that my safety statistics are 100% controllable by me!

 

Andy

 

 

[Ben Longden]

Ben, I believe the guy you mention here is also starting up a GA/RAA school at Wallan. I was there at Shepp when he did it and I tell you it was complete stupidity - he went right over the clubhouse/school with only feet to spare between the top of the flagpole and his chopper skids - engine failure or clipping the pole etc and at least 12 people would have been dead.

:;)2:

 

My blood runs cold at that thought.

 

Is there an icon for "holding ones head in ones hands and shaking it, while sighing please God, tell me this is not true "?

 

Ben

 

 

[planedriver]

Flying Cowboys

 

What the hell gets into some of these guys?

 

Even guys on a "bucks nite" still have to be responsible for their actions!!

 

"Coyboys" like this, do not deserve the privilage to fly and should be stopped before they kill themselves and other innocent people.

 

Presumably the so-called instructor learned to fly at the Aviation School of Self Destruction. Fortunately I have not met, or witnessed anyone so blazee about safety, that deserves to wear a cap with "Richard Cranium" emblazened on it, but no doubt, there are a few unfortunately, who qualify for this dubious honor??.And for everones safety they should be named and made aware, to discourage them.

 

Alan

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

Interesting it seems that Pprune has deleted the whole thread. Wonder why.

 

M

 

 

[Guest Graham Lea]

Last I saw, the thread had degenerated into a slanging match. I asked the original poster via pm to let me know his real name etc so I could pass it onto RAA but haven't heard back. His last post was not a happy one due to the number of responses (one in particular) saying that it was ok to do those things...

 

There are some weird people in cyberspace using aliasus... Maybe he asked that it be deleted Maybe it was just someone having a go at RAA people who doesn't even fly.. who knows?? Haven't seen any posts from anyone flying there at that time in RAA aircraft :-) Personally, I reckon someone in the area should go to the field and ask for verification.

 

 

[Guest brentc]

Ken, you are right, it was related to the memorial service.

 

From a reliable source - the new International GA school is very 'anti ultralight' and will do anything to see that RA pilots are hounded back into their corner at any opportunity. Any deviation from the normal flight plan are vigoriously reported and acted. The above post is apparently grossly mis-reported and the authors ID indicates he is a GA instrucor.

 

 

[Tony]

"........One guy took off with 10 kts down >wind climbed to about 150 ft, , power off steep turn 360 dg and landed down >wind "

 

I'd like to see that, engine failure ?:)

 

 

[Guest Fred Bear]

I know of a certain place near Sydney that lets folk jump out of their planes (if you get my drift). Anyway, I don't think they have ever heard of airmanship. Taking off in 15kt tail winds, pulling 60 degree banks at 150 AGL, coming in to land with 15kt tail winds...the list goes on. We stopped going there to watch the people jump out of the planes for our safety. A very very scary operation which basically has a you attitude to CASA and anyone else. Things really need to get looked into at some point be it this operation or others. Most people obey the rules, most schools do and it's the ones that don't that give is the bad name in the business.

 

Interesting it seems that Pprune has deleted the whole thread.

Hmmmm, one reason I am not on there. Too much biatchin', too much anti-anything-to-do-with-ultralights. There are many other forums around, most not RAA/Ultralight/Recreational friendly. That's why I don't bother. Here is the home of Recreational Aviation (plug for you Ian so don't moderate my post) :) It's not a slanging match against other forums mate I am just stating what I have observed...

 

 

[Guest brentc]

I was just thinking about the post that started this. What GA persons need to realise, is one of the only remaining differences between GA and UL, which is that with permission of the land owner (including airfield operator), technically everything in the post with the exception of flying over a town at 300ft (which is purely speculation at best) is legal. Downwind landings, yeah sure, bad airmanship, however still not illegal.

 

In the GA world, you are only permitted below 500ft to take off or land unlike UL. It is unfortunate that this one last 'freedom' may be lost with the new regs coming in.

 

I remember back to my powered parachute training where I probably only reached 500ft on a couple of occasions. Most training was conducted down low, including 2ft off the deck dodging fences and tussocks and all legal!

 

For those that read Pprune, you'd be quite surprised if you knew who was posting on most occasions. Even the seemingly most knowledgeable people on there may have less than 50 hours and are barely out of their PPL or CPL. Advice from PPrune is flakey at best, so be careful.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Brent

 

I havent read all the CAO's that relate to Ultralight flying , however note the following:-

 

CAO 95.32 (Microlight or Weight Shift operations) specifically limits operations below 500ft to specific occasions. The part of the order that is relevant is as follows:-

 

6 Provisions relating to flight height limitations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.2 For the purposes of subparagraph 5.1 (b), the conditions, 1 of which must becomplied with for an aeroplane to be flown at less than 500 feet above ground level, are:

 

 

 

 

 



(a) the aeroplane must be flying in the course of actually taking-off or landing; or

 

 

 

 

 



(b) the aeroplane must be flying:

 

 

 

 

 



(i) over land that is owned by, or under the control of, the pilot or of another person (including the Crown) who, or an agent or employee of whom, has given permission for the flight over the land at such a height; and

 

 

 

 

 



(ii) at a distance of at least 100 metres horizontally from any person (other than any person associated with the operation of the aeroplane) and from any public road; or

 

 

 

 

 



© the pilot of the aeroplane must be engaged in flying training and the aeroplane must be flying over a part of a flying training area over which CASA has, under subregulation 141 (1) of the Regulations, authorised low flying.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Andy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest browng]

In the GA world, you are only permitted below 500ft to take off or land unlike UL. It is unfortunate that this one last 'freedom' may be lost with the new regs coming in.

May I ask a question? Where is the exemption for RAAus types from the VFR rules that allows flight below 500'agl? I have searched the RAAus site and found nothing that indicates such an exemption, except maybe for gyros which have a maximum altitude limit. I have a low level endorsement on my PPL which allows me to fly below 500' agl with the landowners permission, I am not aware of any RAAus equivalent. I am not a 'GA' zealot, I have both ratings, and I could well be wrong, but flight below 500' agl is dangerous, obstacles like towers and antennas do not require lighting or notam until they reach 300agl, and if you put one on a hill it could make for a ruined day. I am of course happy to be corrected, but I have my doubts.

 

 

[Bigglesworth]

Apart from low over a town, I'd do that if I was in the right/wrong mood <dodges bricks>

 

I especially would tell any 'complainers' to so off ;)

 

Seriously, who out there hasn't done a bit of low flying and abnormal circuits just for experience, and as for the 'turnback', if you can do that, you will learn the exact critical height for EFATO, which might save a life.

 

Besides, if they only endangered themselves, Freedom is what we want.

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

May I ask a question? Where is the exemption for RAAus types from the VFR rules that allows flight below 500'agl? I have searched the RAAus site and found nothing that indicates such an exemption, except maybe for gyros which have a maximum altitude limit. I have a low level endorsement on my PPL which allows me to fly below 500' agl with the landowners permission, I am not aware of any RAAus equivalent. I am not a 'GA' zealot, I have both ratings, and I could well be wrong, but flight below 500' agl is dangerous, obstacles like towers and antennas do not require lighting or notam until they reach 300agl, and if you put one on a hill it could make for a ruined day. I am of course happy to be corrected, but I have my doubts.

As Andy says, the CAO refers.

 

There is no exemption. We are responsible for behaving in a responsible fashion just like everyone else.

 

If you've ever seen a stall/spin death you would have some caution in supporting the kind of behaviour that was reported even if it was over-reported.

 

This is not a GA vs RA issue, this is basic airmanship. The GA students from Mangalore have their faults as well.

 

Take care, obey the rules and live a long and happy life.

 

M

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

Apart from low over a town, I'd do that if I was in the right/wrong mood <dodges bricks>I especially would tell any 'complainers' to so off ;)

Seriously, who out there hasn't done a bit of low flying and abnormal circuits just for experience, and as for the 'turnback', if you can do that, you will learn the exact critical height for EFATO, which might save a life.

 

Besides, if they only endangered themselves, Freedom is what we want.

I've said this before so I might as well say this again: Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose. Lose your life and the whole thing's irrelevant.

 

Second whilst you are pushing up daisies the rest of us have our basic freedoms curtailed. Great.

 

We all like low level training. Glide approaches from low levels...Do it in a structured way, make the calls, watch out for other traffic, take an instructor with you.

 

When you feel that rush of blood to your head you should carefully land immediately and not fly an a/c for 24 hours.

 

Death is permanent. Fun is a lifelong joy.

 

Problem is that in our flying most of us never get too close to the limits so the first thing we know about having breached the limits is when we're discussing it at the Pearly Gates. That's why we have instructors and rules.

 

Mike

 

 

[Guest Fred Bear]

Yep well said Mike. How many times has this and similar discussions come up on these forums? Many. And it's a very simple rule. The PIC is responsible for the safe operation of his/her aircraft, passengers and anything on the ground so why be stupid about it? It's too short already this life here. No need to shorten it further by doing silly things. I came across an accident I attended year before last. A Jabiru pilot hit the powerlines right above his house and was instantly killed. You know what? He knew they were there. He was flying very low to show people on the ground what the a/c could do. Go figure.

 

 

[Bigglesworth]

Showing off is something else, that is definately dangerous. But taking things to extremes, well, I have come close to killing myself a few times in various activities (i.e. diving) and no-one thinks it any big deal there. So what do people have against flying? As for making more restrictions for others; I just hope Casa realises that this would happen in any case, and so doesn't worry

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

Showing off is something else, that is definately dangerous. But taking things to extremes, well, I have come close to killing myself a few times in various activities (i.e. diving) and no-one thinks it any big deal there. So what do people have against flying? As for making more restrictions for others; I just hope Casa realises that this would happen in any case, and so doesn't worryLast words on my black box:

 

"Hold my beer, I want to try something"

I just remember the families and the funerals of all my dead mates, not just in the air.

 

Try this for your sig:

 

Last words on my black box:

 

"Oh, Fark, I wish I'd listened"

 

 

 

M

 

 

 

[Bigglesworth]

 

I like that, (BTW I don't drink, the sig is a joke)

 

You are correct, of course. I didn't say what should be done, just what is likely to happen. the point I wanted to make was, the original compainer was making a big scene over things which, while not good, were not all that bad. Hardly anyone sticks to the rules as far as I have seen. One of my first lessons included cloud cutting, and most other instructors did similar things (wing overs in a Gazelle).

 

So, what point did he want to make? He isn't going to change the people who do it, he might make rules worse for others, but the rules still won't stop people. As I wanted to point out.

 

By the way, as dangerous as all that seems, it is still safer than driving a car.