FlyingVizsla

SOLD and gone to its new owner in November. Don't know how to remove it, can't find any option. It would mean removing all the comments from others too.

The magazine started with the AUF as a way to communicate with members, particularly as their elected area representatives were not doing the job. It was run by volunteers. Eventually, with the standard & content declining, they threw it to various entities to produce and it became an added cost to members. Way back then, there were complaints - eg featuring the Hummel bird on the front cover when it was not an aircraft that could be registered with the AUF. The magazine continued through RAA. The best was when it was produced by an enthusiastic flyer who knew his subject and spent a lot of his time and money pursuing interesting stories. Then he was killed in a car crash. The search for the next editorial company turned up the present people. From my notes, they were experienced in travel and tourism location publications. The father had held a PPL in his younger days. The son would take up ultralight flying when they got the contract (it all being tax deducible). That's why some articles seem to be tourism, with a little Hey! there's an airport! RAAus went to a subscription, but few took it up, per magazine it became a loss again. It was realised that they still needed to communicate the Board election statements, voting forms & envelopes and the results / AGM. They chose 3 editions to cover that. Postage and Printing have risen substantially, so it is one of the major costs to members. Voting is now on-line with a link to statements on the RAAus site. Regular emails update Tech, Ops, Board & events. The role of the magazine is diminishing to something you flip through and leave at the dentist.

There's another one on his wall, but I can't find that picture. I think taken a while ago when resolution wasn't all that great.

I'll look in, and update as the day gets closer. They are probably going to need volunteers.

Old Station Fly-in 23-25 May 2025 - including Tractor Pull, Bikes, trucks, historic & classic, woodchop, live entertainment - fly or drive. Between Rockhampton and Gladstone Qld. Who's going? https://oldstationflyin.com/

The article would have to come from the Tech Manager as the Editor isn't sufficiently knowledgeable or qualified to do it. The Rules exist, but people are always trying to find a way around them. In some cases, the Rules developed in a haphazard way, leaving a great gaping hole, where the plane no longer fits in any category.

I have suggested to RAAus that they could do an article for RAAPS, or the Knowledge Base (which I can't find now...?) The RAAPS are useful - eg what to expect with a BFR, Test flying your aircraft. I guess, between being busy and having to update something like that with Tech Manual changes, Service Bulletins, Manufacturer's etc, it has become all too hard and it is easier to handle it one case at a time.

This 1993 55-registered Lightwing is limited with weight. I worked out, with full fuel, the two on board had to weigh 52kg each to stay within MTOW.

Myles Breitkreutz (0418 198 016) is about 70km from Rocky. Myles has been with the AUF/RAAus for decades, on the Board for most of it and aircraft maintainer. He probably knows the plane & owner. Depends where in the "Greater" Rocky area it is located. He may be able to recommend someone closer to the plane.

We've been going through this with our Lightwing. It is a factory built, so available for training & hire. However the engine, although low hours, is now years expired. This means it is "on-condition" which requires annual inspections and the aircraft can't be used for training or hire, or fly over populated areas. There are costs to have L2 inspections and I believe there is a RAAus annual fee. 19 registered is amateur built, not just because the engine is "on condition" We have someone who wants to buy it and do alterations - things that normally require Engineering certifications (as it is factory designed & built). To get around this - and this isn't for everybody as it is a lot of work. Transfer the plane to the new owner using the RAAus Tech Form 028 - Damaged/Unairworthy aircraft acquisition which takes the aircraft off the Register then do the work required making sure that it is equivalent to 51% built (dismantle, recover, engine work etc) and re-register it in the 19 category. Once in 19 you can run the engine "on condition" provided you have a plan for monitoring and maintaining it. Determining the 51% is up to RAAus, and 51% is a lot of hours and work, and expense. Fortunately for us, and the plane, this is just what the buyer wants to do - a comprehensive inspection, renewal and rebuild. Document and photograph as you go to prove the extent of the work. The alternative is to have the engine overhauled to renew its life. A quick call or email to Tech at RAAus will get you a better answer. @bauple58 I am assuming it is a RAAus registered.

Its not worth getting an ACR because it has to be within 14 days of the sale, and if you are "just looking" it can be an added expense. But a L2 should have a good idea of the things to look for. Some will do it as a favour, but you should consider compensating them for their time, travel etc. Our ACR is becoming a long drawn out saga; needed a 100hrly, some work, before observing flight. A "bit of a look over" wouldn't carry the same obligations as ACR, and could be more candid than a tick-box list. Just be careful you don't enlist the owner's best mate to do the inspection. Where Old Mate vows & avers that it is the best plane ever, only to find it is a heap of junk after you bought it. That's why RAAus bought in the ACR. Good Luck. Childers is a bit far from Rocky otherwise we could take a Bo Peep.

It needs someone who knows what they are looking at ... not many around. Maybe try one of the LAMEs at Rocky. If it is RAAus, it needs an L2 for the ACR. There are L2s at Rocky, The Caves, Wowan (Myles B) etc.

There are pilot wings in silver & gold on this site - see "Our Shop" and search for Wings (go to page 3). Ready to engrave or stick a logo on. Ian might be able to do a deal for bulk purchase. Profits go back to running this site.

A sad outcome for all concerned. A few things we will never know, regrets, "what-ifs", "could we have done more? and guilt. Neat boxes called "Pilot Error" and "flight into IMC" "not licenced for IFR" when there were other variables that may have contributed in some small way to a catastrophic outcome. The ATSB said incapacitation was unlikely as his wife was an experienced pilot and capable of taking over. They say the autopilot disconnected (the flight was stable till shortly before the accident) and became a roller coaster ride. Regardless, a family has lost their parents, grandparents, the aviation family have lost a couple of experienced pilots and friends. Learn what we can; don't rely on the Auto Pilot and avoid IMC.

The ATSB report noted that he flew this route many times, usually fortnightly, although he sometimes went coastal. He mentioned he was entering cloud and had done that before, relying on Autopilot, but this disconnected. Whether that was by accident (a 2 second audio alert would sound) or by exceeding parameters eg speed. It may have been inattention after disconnection and / or disorientation in IMC. I surmise that he was probably distracted by the beeping and was too engrossed in looking for the cause or how to re-engage the Auto pilot and was too slow transitioning from reliance on automation to flying on instruments. After clearing the mountain, he swung around and hit it. A sad outcome for a couple of experienced aviators.

The ATSB final report is out. The ABC news summarises it - loss of control on flight into IMC. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-10-02/mackay-light-plane-fatality-caused-by-pilot-error/104424164 https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2024/report/ao-2023-052

Was mentioned on this site ...

There is only one option - to vote for - and to vote for three. Three vacancies, three candidates. I think I tried to only vote for two, but it said "incomplete" - can't remember precisely what words etc. So; voted for three.

ABC - witness reported a loud bang, seeing a parachute and ball of flames. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-13/redesdale-bendigo-plane-crash-vic-police/104348794

I was right - "Under the constitution, a ballot is still required." I hope someone doe a re-write on the Constitution to save members' money. I got my electronic voting email today.

Note that access to the Candidate Statements is only available by clicking the link above [Member Portal]. If you just log in to RAAus and go to Governance, 2024 Board Nomination .. you won't find anything. I am just wondering if someone has had a close look at their Constitution and realised the wording isn't very good and an election has to be held regardless of the number of nominations being equal to the number of vacancies. It seems a waste of time and resources. 5th September (tomorrow) as start date - a bit rushed?

Strange turn of events - three vacancies, three applications - usually they are "elected unopposed" but there's an election? Two are current Board Members. 2024 Board Election Notice Recreational Aviation Australia Limited has received three valid nominations for the 2024 Board Election, where three Director positions are available. The three candidates are Luke Bayly, Jennifer Laird, and Simon Ozanne. Candidate statements can be found on the Member Portal. The election will take place from Thursday 5 September until Thursday 3 October 2024 using Vero Voting’s electronic voting platform. All financial members will be sent unique login details by email from Vero Voting prior to the election so they can participate. Please check your junk mail if you do not receive an email.

The Quorn races are on this Sat - 17th August 2024. That's why the marquees are due to arrive and people were working out there, and the beer will flow in a temporary bar. No doubt we will hear more on this one. A beat up? Or a genuine engine failure, mishandling.