Should the carriage of a radio become compulsary in all aircraft?

[turboplanner]

The MK1 eyeballs can't see behind you. I had an out of town student pilot call turning downwind a couple of seconds behind me once. That was the only call he made in several circuits because he was obviously struggling badly with his City based Cherokee trying to come to grips with our circuit, crosswind, and turning points, judging from the go round and variable pattern he was flying.

 

But it was enough warning to allow me to twist the Jab to make sure he was no threat.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

The closest I have come to hitting anybody in my area in the last ten years has been with camoflaged military helicopters, either Chinooks or Blackhawks. They are very hard to spot initally, don't seem to fly the normal type routes, so they can pop up anywhere. You then give them a call on the appropriate frequency, and no answer most of the time. I assume they are on some military freq or whatever. No sustitute for keeping your eyes outside, period. Radios are a false sense of security if nobodys listening, and your talking to yourself. My 15 year old daughter spotted a Chinook crossing in front of us the other day, that I hadn't. She had her eyes outside like I've taught her to. She'll make a good pilot one day if I can get her before the boys do.

 

:rotary:

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Same sort of problems in the Hunter Valley with the Military FA18s and Hercs. sometimes i think carrying a slingshot would be more benficial with them.

 

 

[Guest Brett Campany]

Good thing this guy had a radio eh?

 

Plane crash near Northam | PerthNow

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

wow if you have 'back flaps' make sure you have a safety cage as well as a radio tuned to tripple j of course.

 

sounds like a scary ride. good point for carrying a radio. a vhf one of course

 

 

[Guest Brett Campany]

wow if you have 'back flaps' make sure you have a safety cage as well as a radio tuned to tripple j of course.sounds like a scary ride. good point for carrying a radio. a vhf one of course

hahaha yes the "back flaps" comment had me giggling a little to. Pity these journo's can't do a bit of research every now and then.

 

 

[Guest Biggles Jr]

YES...

 

why not... if you can afford to own a plane you can afford a radio... i encountered a tiger moth on late final and it was only that i noticed him when i was checking before i backtracked... all planes should have one and all planes should have to use it :big_grin:

 

 

[Guest watto]

Having a radio is of course no substitute for good observation, I was passing near Biggenden the other day on route to Brisbane when another aircraft caught the corner of my eye and he was 9 o'clock to me but I was directly ahead of him at the same level, it appears he was more than likely 1000 ft lower than expected to be and most likely had begun descent to land or was simply cruising at that altitude, never the less he did not make contact with me even though I would have been directly in front of him, I contacted him, and then he responded and he passed behind me with no drama but really he should have spotted me and called but did not do so and luckily I am a bit hiperactive as far as keeping an eye out for other traffic even out in the bush like that.

 

A radio is a good communication but cannot do much good if people do not use them and that often happens when people a forced into something it becomes an accessory that is just there because it has to be for compliance and as with my previous job carrying a radio every day you need to be tuned in to listenning to it and to immediately recognise a transmission that is intended for you because when there is an excess of comms people tune out and it is a real skill to have the brain wired to pick up subconciously what is important and what is other chatter.

 

My current job I also carry a radio but there is so much constant BS about absolute rubbish that you simply have to tune out from that information and then click on when it is important info intended for you otherwise your ears would be bleeding by the end of the day.

 

To much radio traffic will cause accidents and will not be used appropriately by the people being forced anyway.

 

That is my 2 bobs worth!

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

OK for all of those who are happy with being told what to do and are happy with mandatory requirements here is some good news for you. Check out the 19th April entry on here,The Flying Tigers Recreational Aviation Club .It looks like we've got started the process.

 

I personally thing it stinks that RAAus board has sold us out. they keep saying that they will fight to preserve our freedoms and then they roll over on this, what next??? I also thingk it stinks that there is now an other $500.00 or $600.00 MANDATORY cost to flying

 

I should point out that I fly with an ELT but this is my choice. The important words in this sentence are "my choice".

 

With this impetus and the apparent backing of the RAA board, maybe the pro mandatory lobby can now get to work on mandating IFR, triple redundancy glass cockpit two crew, air bags, emergency slides, EGPWS, TCAS, RVSM, weather radar, cockpit voice recorders, flight data recorders and fixed ELTs. These would all add to safety, so surely should also be mandated.

 

We need to organize a petition to the RAAus board to ground all RAA aircraft untill relavant regs requiring all of the above are in place.

 

Have a nice day.

 

 

[turboplanner]

After spending five minutes scrolling though a Club site, I saw some reference to a proposed change on ELT's for flights over 50Nm.

 

Did I miss the reference to Radios, and where does the RAA come into it - what I saw referred to CASA?

 

Explain more?

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

I understand that the RAA board simply agreed to CASA's proposal.

 

Thanks to our board NOT LOOKING AFTER OUR FREEDOMS we will soon have the brand new MANDITORY requirement to carry ELT's.

 

My point is, what next???

 

AND they didnt ask us before they reversed their published and promoted position of SAFEGUARDING OUR FREEDOMS.

 

I am a bit kranky about this backflip.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

The way CASA is showing interest in us recently (they destroyed GA so we're next cab off the rank to justify thier existance) we'll soon have maintenance releases and medicals. The current RAA honchos don't understand KISS ("keep it simple stupid") which is why Middo and others are headed back in.

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

The way CASA is showing interest in us recently (they destroyed GA so we're next cab off the rank to justify thier existance) we'll soon have maintenance releases and medicals. The current RAA honchos don't understand KISS ("keep it simple stupid") which is why Middo and others are headed back in.

I'm with you Maj,

 

Lets hope they can save us. (I'd stand for the board and make a serious contribution but I suspect that I don't have the mass appeal to get the votes.) Recreational flying is getting more and more like GA every day.

 

God save us from any more mandatory this that or anything else. Maintenance releases will require signature from qualified personnel, the whole thing makes me shudder.

 

 

[BLA82]

Qwerty,

 

Now that you have let it all out re read the poll question. Should the carriage of a RADIO be mandatory. We are not advocating the carriage of ELT.

 

 

[Guest watto]

Qwerty, I underrstand your frustration and I have seen what is happenning here before, I worked for a private prison and there were distinct differences in the way we did things, our treatment of "clients" our proceedures etc and the then QLD corrections did not approve, now 18 years later after several renewal of contracts and providers the tightenning of contract conditions etc you can barely tell a Govt and private sector run prison apart!!!

 

So Casa will over time if allowed rope in RAA to an almost identical style of rules and regs and practices as possible to attempt to unify the two movements and even though RAA is separate CASA will eventually have more say than we realise, so it is important to have the right people on the board now to steer us away from that process, but mean while the process is taking place as we speak and has been since RAA's inception.

 

They first got all the rec flyers to register and come under a governing body (RAA) so they had the net cast and over time will reel them into the fold.

 

 

[Guest watto]

The only real differnce with it now is that the private sector has to be far more accountable and has more regulations than the gov sector, for example KPI's were set at certain levels and had to be met or financial penalties applied, only problem being is when you met them the next time the contract was negotiated the bar was raise until eventually the goals were not achievable! and then the gov agency began to say but you are not performing as you are not meeting KPI's, yet those same KPI's did not apply to the gov run centres and they remained free from that level of accountability and scrutiny.

 

 

[merc]

Turbo try clicking on the link,( The flying tigers web site), then click on RAAus petition.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Call me dumb, but I couldn't find it, even with their search - found this site, RAA site, but not the story.

 

Has anyone asked RAA to confirm the facts?

 

 

[Guest watto]

What and ruin some perfectly good speculation!! are you mad man? hahaha

 

good idea Turbo, probably the first thing someone should have done before we go off on a wild goose chase.

 

 

[merc]

Turbo try this link ( www.theflyingtigers.org.au ) then click on raaus petition.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Thanks Merc.

 

I was soundly beaten up for suggesting that RAA members should debate issues, and told by poster(s) that's why we elect Board members, so perhaps those people might like to comment on this one - if it ever happened.

 

 

[Tracktop]

Well like many before me, I have watched and listened to this subject for some time so now it is time for my thoughts.

 

First of all I am very new to aviation, I have only had an interest of any kind for 12 months

 

( and in reality only 6 months) so I come with no history knowledge and no past baggage.

 

While I can see where the NO proponents are coming from, and I agree that keeping it as simple and as unregulated as possible is the correct direction within reason.

 

While I am still to attain my PC I am a member of this site and as such entitled to vote how I feel at the time I vote in the pole as is every member.

 

Yes I voted yes, have you change my mind no

 

From a selfish point of view - when I purchased my plane (new) it seemed obvious to me that for safety sake, it should be equipped with the optional radio and not including it was not what I considered an option. For MY radio to be most effective it would be better if every aircraft had a radio on board. Even better if was switched on and on the right frequency. Yep selfish but my safety is important to me and I believe anything I can do to improve that is a bonus.

 

There have been some pretty weak arguments for the NO vote like put a radio in every car example, even wrong frequency doesn't wash. It will never be perfect but the improvement - especially at such small expense would be benificial. All the other non arguments like why not mandating "IFR, triple redundancy glass cockpit two crew, air bags, emergency slides, EGPWS, TCAS, RVSM, weather radar, cockpit voice recorders, flight data recorders and fixed ELTs" only effects the occupants of that ac NOT ME. I want to be heard when I say something. - selfish me :big_grin:

 

I notice almost if not all the NO proponents agree they have and use a radio.

 

Why if it does not provide a significant benefit to you ?

 

My thoughts are that a radio is like the motor car blinker, yes I was around and driving when they didn't exist. Now every car must have them, they are not always used correctly (like wrong frequency) and sometimes not even used at all (as with radio now) but without them driving on our roads would would be a much more hazardous and difficult task than it already is. You still need to drive ( operate ) defensively in case they are used incorrectly as you would if radios were mandated.

 

Having said that I don't believe it will ever be mandated as it would need to fall in line internationally.

 

Then again maybe the RAA / HGFA should lead the way by mandating it in their rules and show how responsible we really are, it might even give us some leverage to bargain / negotiate for some other freedom / exemption that is really more important to us. Especially seeing as if radios seem to be the norm rather than the exception, and this discussion is really about freedom and rights (exemptions) rather than what is best.

 

Ray

 

 

[BLA82]

Then again maybe the RAA / HGFA should lead the way by mandating it in their rules and show how responsible we really are, it might even give us some leverage to bargain / negotiate for some other freedom / exemption that is really more important to us. .Ray

Very good point Ray,:thumb_up:

 

 

[Yenn]

Ray. The only way we can show how responsible we are is to do it of our own accord. having it mandated for us is not the answer. You are correct in that most of us have radio fitted, but most of us also keep a good lookout, and as I found at Bundy the radio will not let you know where all the aircraft are when it is busy. All it does is alert you to the fact that there are others about.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

well if we are going to mandate ourselves i'll go for the two tin cans and string version. if you want to use a radio buy one and get endorsed for it. but don't insist on it for those who don't want one,, can't afford one or just don't need one.

 

remember not everyone flys what you fly and were you fly it from.

 

think newbie think.