Crash at Aratula..anyone heard anything yet?

[ausadvance]

Well there you go then. Now you have a great example on an incident at site that does not satisfy the CAAP regarding ALAs and not for a moment has RAA, CASA or the insurer had an issue with it.

[Robert]

What gets me on this site everyone is an expert when it comes to accidents. And full of advise.

[turboplanner]

Well there you go then. Now you have a great example on an incident at site that does not satisfy the CAAP regarding ALAs and not for a moment has RAA, CASA or the insurer had an issue with it.

Correct (although you might be talking a bit too soon). If you apply that to this accident there aren't any plaintiffs to be suing the pilot, unless he lost his income, in which case dependants could sue him.

The reason for making the example generic, is that, for example if an aircraft crashes with two people in it and the passenger becomes a quadriplegic he will usually sue, and if the pilot has breached his duty of care he will be paying.

[ausadvance]

This is why acquiring permission and insuring you are not putting anyone or anything else in harms way is one of the most important things in relation choosing where you may land. Even if it does comply with the standards of an ALA you are just as potentially screwed legally as has been demonstrated numerous times. But hey, maybe we should all just play it safe and stick to flying our keyboards?

[turboplanner]

This is why acquiring permission and insuring you are not putting anyone or anything else in harms way is one of the most important things in relation choosing where you may land. Even if it does comply with the standards of an ALA you are just as potentially screwed legally as has been demonstrated numerous times. But hey, maybe we should all just play it safe and stick to flying our keyboards?

There are plenty of breaches at ALAs but the ALA specifications are not in contention if it complies. We’re talking about using something which doesn’t comply with the CAAP.

[ausadvance]

So am I

[jackc]

If you are really worried about it all, don’t even drive your car to the airfield as you could crash! Forget owning a plane even.

Life has its elements of risk, just go out there and make the most of it:-)

 

Cheers,

 

Jack

[turboplanner]

If you are really worried about it all, don’t even drive your car to the airfield as you could crash! Forget owning a plane even.

Life has its elements of risk, just go out there and make the most of it:-)

 

Cheers,

 

Jack

It's nothing to do with whether you are worried or not; it's totally to do with innocent victims who have the right to go after you and RAA and the owner of the land and anyone else who's breached a duty of care.

[Tony]

I do not know why and how the RAA can be blamed for this. ALA is "advisory only".

Therefore, in a nutshell:

What is allowed to Gods

is not allowed to Ox.

[Student Pilot]

What gets me on this site everyone is an expert when it comes to accidents. And full of advise.

You statement goes for the whole interwebby Robert. Take the summer fires for instance, everybody knew more than the people who manage/prepare/fight. With so many expurts (Correct spelling for internet know-it-all's) you wonder why the world has the trouble it does

[Kyle Communications]

The problem is all this lawyer speak crap and americanisation of people needing to blame someone else so they can sue...too many ambulance chasers around now

[turboplanner]

I do not know why and how the RAA can be blamed for this. ALA is "advisory only".

Therefore, in a nutshell:

What is allowed to Gods

is not allowed to Ox.

RAA are the Self Administering Organisation which makes your flying possible. If there is a safety standard, and they become aware that people are thumbing their noses at it they have a duty to correct the situation. They can do this by direct intervention (expensive) or by selected Audits (less expensive).

In turn, CASA, who authorise the SAOs as a means of affordable flying also have a duty of care to take action if safety standards are not being met.

CASA can do that by conducting an audit of RAA, which some members will remember they did in 2011 for compliance with CAOs, Recreational Aviation Australia Operations and Technical Manuals. We really don't need something to trigger one of those again; take a look at the attached photo and on the left the depth of the pages; everyone represented an aircraft and I suspect quite a few owners have never flown again.

[Hunsta]

What is allowed to Gods

is not allowed to Ox.

That is so apt?

[M61A1]

RAA are the Self Administering Organisation which makes your flying possible. If there is a safety standard, and they become aware that people are thumbing their noses at it they have a duty to correct the situation. They can do this by direct intervention (expensive) or by selected Audits (less expensive).

In turn, CASA, who authorise the SAOs as a means of affordable flying also have a duty of care to take action if safety standards are not being met.

CASA can do that by conducting an audit of RAA, which some members will remember they did in 2011 for compliance with CAOs, Recreational Aviation Australia Operations and Technical Manuals. We really don't need something to trigger one of those again; take a look at the attached photo and on the left the depth of the pages; everyone represented an aircraft and I suspect quite a few owners have never flown again.

The laws of physics make flying possible. Flying is still possible without CASA or RAAus.

Before you start on the "see a PL lawyer" line again, I understand exactly what you are saying, but we're heading down a dangerous path of self policing that will not end well for those that enjoy flying or much else for that matter.

Dictators control their population by getting them to self police, and gradually they tighten the noose around their own neck.

The whole idea that we ought to be grateful for the crumbs we are given is silly and we should demand much more than that.

[turboplanner]

The laws of physics make flying possible. Flying is still possible without CASA or RAAus.

Before you start on the "see a PL lawyer" line again, I understand exactly what you are saying, but we're heading down a dangerous path of self policing that will not end well for those that enjoy flying or much else for that matter.

Dictators control their population by getting them to self police, and gradually they tighten the noose around their own neck.

The whole idea that we ought to be grateful for the crumbs we are given is silly and we should demand much more than that.

As you know, seeing a PL Lawyer is not compulsory, but for about the cost of an hour's flying gives you a good idea of where to set your boundaries.

People who enjoy their flying and don't breach their duty of care and cover themselves by insuring should have nothing to fear from the lublic liability system, and from around 5 years ago RAA introduced good, affordable, insurance coverage.

I'm not sure who these evil Dictators are or how they could possibly tighten any noose when the laws have been in place since 1932.

It's only governments that have stepped away from self-insuring since the 1980s.

No sporting body is limited to crumbs being given except by their own self-management Formula 1 and V8 Supercar racing run under exactly the same laws we do.

There will always be the misfits under self administration, and often it's their noise or actions that trigger audits, but only the ones who injure or kill someone are really penalised.

[M61A1]

how they could possibly tighten any noose when the laws have been in place since 1932.

It's only governments that have stepped away from self-insuring since the 1980s.

No sporting body is limited to crumbs being given except by their own self-management Formula 1 and V8 Supercar racing run under exactly the same laws we do.

We've had this discussion countless times.

While the law is the same, the criteria for what is reasonable has been steadily tightening.

You claim that speedway was a good example and you are correct there.....In my opinion and that of many others, a good sport has been left a shell of it's former self, but you believe that you've improved it.

Most sporting bodies in this country are in decline due tightening rules, but you believe differently.

The biggest problem here is that Rec flying is treated a a sport and it's not. It's no different to riding you trailbike or road bike for that matter or even the family Hyundai.

Sporting bodies compete, rec flyers are a group of individuals doing their own thing. There are no "innocent" parties to incidents like the one in question.

I know I'm not going to change your mind, and while I accept that PL cases occur, it will we a cold day in hell before I believe that we've made this country a better place by by stifling everything just in case someone wants to sue.

[turboplanner]

While the law is the same, the criteria for what is reasonable has been steadily tightening.

Not correct; nothing has changed since 1932.

 

You claim that speedway was a good example and you are correct there.....In my opinion and that of many others, a good sport has been left a shell of it's former self, but you believe that you've improved it

It's far from a shell of its former self; when I got involved around 1981 we had 100 race tracks buying insurance. The link below shows 87 major speedways, and if we add motorcycle speedways and smaller club speedways the total today would be up around 130. You could at least do some homework and tell the truth.

 

I haven't improved it, a network of members and officials manage risks very well.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dirt_track_ovals_in_Australia

 

Most sporting bodies in this country are in decline due tightening rules, but you believe differently.

Not true, two examples are the Sporting Shooters Association which has about the same numbers as RAA, and BMX Australia.

 

The biggest problem here is that Rec flying is treated a a sport and it's not. It's no different to riding you trailbike or road bike for that matter or even the family Hyundai.

Sporting bodies compete, rec flyers are a group of individuals doing their own thing. There are no "innocent" parties to incidents like the one in question.

I'm not aware of recreational flying being categorised specifically as a sport. Sport and Recreation go together so there's no need, and its no different to riding your trail bike, the law equally applies to trail bike riders. If road bikes and Hyundais are registered they are handled under compulsory third party insurance.

There is no difference between those who compete and those who just do their thing. For example, if someone is responsible for packing parachutes and is negligent they can look forward to a claim.

PL law applies if you injure or kill someone; they don't have to be classified as an "innocent party". If you are hanging around on a Saturday afternoon with some mates, with an aircraft sitting on a trailer and you haven't fitted the prop correctly and it flies off and hits one of them, it's a good bet he'll come after you for medical costs.

 

I know I'm not going to change your mind, and while I accept that PL cases occur, it will we a cold day in hell before I believe that we've made this country a better place by by stifling everything just in case someone wants to sue.

It's not a matter of changing my mind; I was front and centre in a number of cases we lost, so I learnt very early what duty of care was, and how to apply it. The good thing about what you think is that it's between you and anyone you injure or kill, the taxpayers aren't funding it any more.

[M61A1]

The only reason Sporting Shooters is as big as it is, is because of Howard's gun laws, and like RAA, you have to be a member to exercise your right to have a firearm.

Most local football and athletics are struggling because of PL costs, and not just the financial side, the rules, which we get so that the insurance will cover the event are so restrictive, that fewer people are interested in a watered down version of their sport. Every second week there's an article about a club with numbers down and unsure of survival.

You keep telling yourself that speedway and other motorsports are thriving, I know many people in that world, and their story is completely different.

 

I have no problem with people being responsible for damage they cause, but as I've said in the past, quite a few of the cases you have linked to are what the average Joe would consider to have utterly ridiculous outcomes. Not because the law has changed, but because the "reasonable" goalposts have moved a mile.

 

The cost to the public has been more than the taxpayers know. They've given up freedoms for perceived safety.

[M61A1]

Here's some information that reflects the harsh reality....

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-09/australias-lost-speedway-tracks-and-the-families-who-made-them/11928022

 

We need to make sure the same sort of thing doesn't happen to rec flying.

People already think it's a rich mans hobby, but I can tell you that I spend less money flying than other family members spend racing cars, and I do it more often.

I like flying and will do it for as long as I can afford to, and if someone wants to make it more expensive ( as regs tend to do), then I think we need to stand up to that.

[turboplanner]

Here's some information that reflects the harsh reality....

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-09/australias-lost-speedway-tracks-and-the-families-who-made-them/11928022

What a load of garbage; the main interviewee was from Motor Sport Australia (previously CAMS), which does not administer Speedway, Karting, Drag Racing, Rally and a few other motor sports along with V8 Supercars, Sandown is a ciruit racing track, not a speedway, Tailem Bend is a circuit racing track not a speedway, the local speedway being Murray Bridge which has been operating for 30 plus years, Tolmer Speedway Bordertown was suggested to be closed in November last last year, and that's possible, but it's currently listed with a different contact name for 2020.

Broken Hill is listed for the 2020 season for sidecars and demo derby.

The Speedway for Brisbane hasn't been Redcliffe for the last 40 years, if ever a speedway existed there, the track is Archerfield.

The bottom line is I gave you the current numbers and they are up, not down, so you need to read something other than an out of touch Motor Sport Australia story.

 

We need to make sure the same sort of thing doesn't happen to rec flying.

As I mentioned, what you were saying about speedway isn't supported by the facts, and if you look at RAA you will not see any downturn either.

As I mentioned, you don't have to drag all of us into these sob stories, PL is between you and anyone you hurt.

[M61A1]

Leave your head in the sand...you’re happy there.

[turboplanner]

Leave your head in the sand...you’re happy there.

You don't have any idea where my head is; as I said, what you think is between you and the people you injure, it doesn't affect anyone else.

[Scotty 1]

The only reason Sporting Shooters is as big as it is, is because of Howard's gun laws, and like RAA, you have to be a member to exercise your right to have a firearm.

You don't need to be a member of SSAA to own or shoot a firearm.

[kgwilson]

The fear of litigation in Australia (originally imported from the USA) has spawned a huge public risk insurance industry. We are now constantly told that 10 million is not enough so the standard is now 20 million and likely to go to 50 million in the future. Event insurance costs are through the roof now. Try & run an airshow and the so called safely requirements and costs associated with insurance usually mean the event gets pulled.

 

Another thing that NZ got right was when the Accident Compensation Commission was set up back in the 70s. It covers compulsory insurance cover for personal injury to everyone in NZ whether a citizen, resident or visitor. The right to sue was removed. It is paid for by a levy on employers & car regos. Sports groups get it for free. The scheme has its detractors but it has kept everything sensible. Car rego in NZ costs about $109.00 a year (recently increased from $80.00) including the ACC levy. Here the CTP is often 2 to 3 times the rego fee due to the costs associated with massive claims. If we had a similar system here, all that PL BS would disappear.

[turboplanner]

You don't need to be a member of SSAA to own or shoot a firearm.

Correct; there are millions of Australians with firearm licences; they are not required to be members of clubs or associations, so self- administer.

They can become a member of the Sporting Shooters Associaton of Australia, Inc. and take advantage of any of the services offered. For example there is a rifle range at Noble Park in metropolitan Melbourne, and hundreds more dotted around Australia, there are shotgun facilities etc. People can have a shoot at a convenient location without going out into the bush or on to farm properties. If you do use their facilities you can observe one of the most efficient and comprehensive dity of care operations I've seen. And this is not scaring people away. Currently SSAA is quoting 180,000 - 15 times that of RAA, and making a mockery of the rubbish that a few people were hawking about how RAA wasn't a "cricket club" any more and should be registered as a company. SSAA is a good model to see the difference.