kaz3g

Yep...somewhere between Cape York and Mt Gambier. Kaz

Side saddle is a killer! Kaz

I emailed Enigma and their response was that they have been ignored by CASA for years and are still,awaiting approval for their product which they hope to sell at an installed price of less than $3k. It will go off shore like so many technological developments and Governments should be ashamed of their lack of support. Kaz

The Australian Concise Oxford Dictionary is a reasonable source of definitions for legal purposes in the absence of a statutory definition..."Ordinary, common meaning" rule. "Consecutive" means "following continuously; proceeding in logical sequence..." ACOD 1987, p216. I would emphasise the second phrase and suggest that would rule out a proposed longer journey without a Nav endorsement. More important, I suggest, are the intention evinced in DJP's reproduction from CASA and the meaning they attach to "departure aerodrome" which I would read as the first aerodrome in a sequence. The real answer of course is do the study, do the test and get the bloody endorsement rather than trying to outsmart a Regulator who has pockets 25 miles long if he decides to prosecute you or, worse, deal with you administratively. Kaz

I read elsewhere that the wing on the AUSTER is stronger than that on a 150 HP 8KCAB. I did some initial aero training on one of the latter but I'm always conscious of the Auster's age...we were both built the same year! I had a very rough trip up to Bourke a few weeks ago in forecast moderate turbulence and low cloud base to around Cobar. Most of it I did at around 80 knots while laying off a fair bit because of the very strong cross-wind. It feels a bit odd when you see more of what's directly ahead through the side screen than the windscreen. I also don't like babying the O-320 engine at 2200 -2250 rpm. Feel much more comfortable when up at 2450-2500. Kaz

You need to read s3AA very carefully...the definition of "in charge" is not limited to...intent or reasonable suspicion of intent so the provision is very broad and probably only subject to ejusdem generis The reality is that very few will ever successfully defend a charge if they have the keys with them and especially if they have them in the ignition. Kaz

Beware the Sex Offender Registration and WWC Acts! Kaz

From another discussion: "Va is the close approx for Vb if it is not published in the aircraft flight manual. Most light GA aircraft dont have a published Vb. Vb = design speed for maximum gust intensity(best speed to give protection of both stall and structural failure) i.e. might be at a higher certification assumption e.g. 45fps while Vno = maximum structural cruising speed (where maximum turbs by "definition" is 30 fps vertical) Vno (green segment upper limit) the aircraft must be able to with stand a vertical gust of 30 feet per second without STALLING or STRUCTURAL FAILURE at Max weight. You would have to make sure that it did not exceed the Vno speed or the 30fps gust while at Vno to avoid stall or damage, hence the Va recomendation by some engineers for light aircraft. 30 fps gusts can be found in the vicinity of thunderstorms, while 45 fps can be found near thunderstorms, and in them can be well over those values The calculation for Va is often quoted as Va = Vs x sq rt Gmax " For the AUSTER (no manual or POH) Vs without flaps is 32 knots and the max loading is 4g Va = 32 x 2 = 64 knots which would feel terribly slow to me compared to Vno of 95 knots. Kaz

The yellow arc in my AUSTER begins at 95 knots but I cruise at 105 KN TAS which means I have to throttle back a fair bit in turbulence and leave sufficient margin for large fluctuations. There is no AFM or POH for the aircraft so I'm really just guessing that this is sufficient in rough conditions. Kaz

Thanks Poteroo...good topic and I have already expressed interest in learning. There is some material at Trubulence turn back Kaz

Enigma released details of their "low cost" ADSB 12 months ago but I don't know if it has ever been approved for VFR use. I can't afford $3.5k+ to replace my perfectly good Microair and I don't know what the story is with an encoder which could be an additional expense. When all this was originally being floated, there was much talk of ASA subsidising cost because of the massive savings it brings them by reducing upkeep on old infrastructure. Pigs might fly but a couple of g's to defray the cost would help a lot. Kaz

Just to be a voice on the other side of the fence, AND while not recommended - We did before AUF AND RAA - fly around for 100's of k's without any Nav endorsement or XC with mates in the back blocks and we survived. We camped out overnight, had a few beers under the wing, or hitched to town had a few beers and booked into the pub. Nothing was dangerous with having a few beers and flying the next day. My memory isn't all that good now but I seem to remember that there were a number of deaths and even more injuries back in those unregulated days and that was what brought it all to the stage where the regulations did more than just keep you in the paddock below 300'. Not sure how you flew 100's of km like that. You were also flying so slow you could call out and ask people on the ground for directions or simply read the street or railway signs. I did lots of stupid things when I was young but that doesn't mean they were ok or that I would want my grandkids doing them now. Kaz

Relying on your moving map on OzRunways or your Garmin 296 to navigate in remote areas is the way to get lost. Charts along with clock, compass and regular fixes supported by the electronic marvels is the ultimate way to get there for those of us who do not have TSO'd GPS, ADF or VOR. Even those are AIDS to VFR navigation and you must still get your regular position fixes between chart and ground. Kaz

Thanks OT I often google it to check on information about strips and places...it's a good reference source. Kaz

I thought Hell was somewhere between Hay and Booligal. kaz Hay and Hell and Booligal by Paterson ‘You come and see me, boys,’ he said; ‘You'll find a welcome and a bed ‘And whisky any time you call; ‘Although our township hasn't got ‘The name of quite a lively spot — ‘You see, I live in Booligal. ‘And people have an awful down ‘Upon the district and the town — ‘Which worse than hell itself they call; ‘In fact, the saying far and wide ‘Along the Riverina side ‘Is “Hay and Hell and Booligal”. ‘No doubt it suits 'em very well ‘To say it's worse than Hay or Hell, ‘But don't you heed their talk at all; ‘Of course, there's heat — no one denies — ‘And sand and dust and stacks of flies, ‘And rabbits, too, at Booligal. ‘But such a pleasant, quiet place, ‘You never see a stranger's face — ‘They hardly ever care to call; ‘The drovers mostly pass it by; ‘They reckon that they'd rather die ‘Than spend a night in Booligal. ‘The big mosquitoes frighten some — ‘You'll lie awake to hear 'em hum — ‘And snakes about the township crawl; ‘But shearers, when they get their cheque, ‘They never come along and wreck ‘The blessed town of Booligal. ‘But down in Hay the shearers come ‘And fill themselves with fighting-rum, ‘And chase blue devils up the wall, ‘And fight the snaggers every day, ‘Until there is the deuce to pay — ‘There's none of that in Booligal. ‘Of course, there isn't much to see — ‘The billiard-table used to be ‘The great attraction for us all, ‘Until some careless, drunken curs ‘Got sleeping on it in their spurs, ‘And ruined it, in Booligal. ‘Just now there is a howling drought ‘That pretty near has starved us out — ‘It never seems to rain at all; ‘But, if there should come any rain, ‘You couldn't cross the black-soil plain — ‘You'd have to stop in Booligal.’ ***** ‘We'd have to stop!’ With bated breath We prayed that both in life and death Our fate in other lines might fall: ‘Oh, send us to our just reward ‘In Hay or Hell, but, gracious Lord, ‘Deliver us from Booligal!’

They will be "regulated" airports sometime soon...kaz

It was absolutely nothing to do with her politics and if you take the time to have a look at my posting history you might discover I'm not a party politic poster. I simply think that the consumption of alcohol airside by aircrew is unacceptable to the majority of the ill-informed public whose opinions hold far more sway with legislators than we small band of recreational flyers. And I'm not a wowser...just finished a stubby before dinner. Perhaps it's more honest for you to say you do agree with her politics because I'm not commenting on them. Kaz

Thanks djp...I have been familiar with convection and orographic turbulence from gliding activities but was intrigued by the extent of surface friction turbulence and the extent to which wind direction and gust strength varied with altitude in flat country as I headed north. I found a bit of a discussion here https://digital.nmla.metoffice.gov.uk/download/file/sdb%3AdigitalFile%7C46dbdd1d-c4c1-41e7-a3ba-4648596fc5e4/ Kaz

The last several weeks have seen weather, especially in Victoria, where severe turbulence events have occurred. Turbulence is something I would like to know more about so I can properly understand the dangers it presents. It wasn't something I learned in my PPL beyond a warning to "stay out of the yellow if it's rough upstairs". We have an Aerocommander here week nights doing the bank run and I sometimes think about the pilot on winter nights when storms are about. I saw the results for one of this type at Clonbinane near Mt Disappointment some years ago. I'm sure it was nothing to do with the Aerocommander and everything to do with the conditions it encountered. ------------------- Two dead in light plane crash By Jamie Duncan July 31, 2007 10:22pm Article from: AAP TWO people have died in a light plane crash north of Melbourne. The wreckage of a twin-engined Aero Commander was found by a search helicopter crew in trees near the tiny town of Clonbinane, near Wandong, about 60km north of Melbourne, about 9.45pm (AEST) today, Victoria Police spokesman Wayne Wilson said. There were no other people on board the flight. The identities of the victims are not yet known. Police believe the fatal flight took off from Essendon Airport bound for Shepparton, 180km northeast of Melbourne. A search for the aircraft was sparked in the Wandong-Mt Disappointment area after residents reported hearing a light plane in trouble, followed by an explosion, about 8.20pm. The plane came down near Drag Hill and Raynors roads, south of Clonbinane and northwest of Mt Disappointment. Earlier tonight, the weather bureau issued a severe weather warning for western and central districts of Victoria, including the crash site, for severe winds averaging 75km/h with gusts to 110km/h, especially in elevated areas. The area is near the top of the Great Dividing Range. Monument Hill, a short distance west of the crash site, rises to 480m above sea level. Police have sealed off the area and are awaiting the arrival of crash investigators. http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22169185-2,00.html ------------------- Media releases: 09 November 2009 - 2009/13: Pilots reminded to be aware when operating in areas of known or forecast turbulence (Media releases: 09 November 2009 - 2009/13: Pilots reminded to be aware when operating in areas of known or forecast turbulence) Media Release 2009/13: Pilots reminded to be aware when operating in areas of known or forecast turbulence 09 November 2009 The investigation of an in-flight breakup that occurred near Clombinane, Victoria on 31 July 2007 has found that it most likely resulted from an encounter with localised and intense turbulence, from an elevator control input, or from a combination of both. The accident resulted in the death of the pilot and passenger on board the Rockwell International Aero Commander 500-S aircraft on a business flight from Essendon Airport to Shepparton. As a result of its investigation, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau reissued the publication Mountain Wave Turbulence (available for download at www.atsb.gov.au (Mountain wave turbulence)), distributed the investigation report to all Australian operators of the Aero Commander aircraft, and issued a safety advisory notice to aircraft operators and pilots. That notice encouraged aircraft operators to review their procedures to ensure an appropriate awareness amongst operating personnel of the implications for aircraft performance of the combination of aircraft weights and speed, and of the ambient conditions; in particular, when flying in, or near areas of forecast severe turbulence. The investigation found that some pilots operating the aircraft type were generally unaware of the applicability of the aircraft's manoeuvring speed during flight through turbulence, despite the inclusion of relevant advisory information in the operator's documentation. There was also a concern that pilots generally may not have been exercising as much caution in forecast severe turbulence conditions as they would for thunderstorms, even though the intensity of the turbulence could be similar. At the time of the in-flight breakup, special weather reports for severe turbulence and severe mountain waves were current for the area. Wind speeds on the ground were reported to be 50 kts and calculations using the recorded radar data and forecast wind showed that the aircraft had been in cruise flight at 7,000 ft above mean sea level at speeds probably greater than its published manoeuvring speed, prior to it disappearing from radar. The wreckage and its distribution pattern were consistent with an in-flight breakup during cruise flight. There was no evidence of any pre-existing defect, corrosion or fatigue found in the aircraft structure. An examination of the wreckage and fracture surfaces showed that the aircraft structure failed under symmetrical negative overstress. A full report is available from the ATSB website Aviation Occurrence AO-2007-029 ------------------ Makes you think! Kaz

We called the big ones " Cockeyed Bobs"... And they really were big! I pulled an RFDS plane up as it was starting it's take off roll because a huge one was approaching from the side. My neighbour had been shot in the head (another story). And a neighbour had his C150 destroyed in its hangar when one went through and the aircraft wasn't tied down. The Cessna bounced up and down between the ground and the roof trusses and bashed itself to death. Kaz

I worked in the Upper Gascoyne where it stays hot most of the year. Our thermals twisted windmills of their foundations and carted them away never to be seen again. We used to go to Marble Bar for our summer holidays! Kaz

Fly early morning and you should be ok. It will be hot and there will be strong thermal activity later in the day. The forecast is for heat in the Centre affecting most of the eastern seaboard. I'm just back from a trip as far north as SW Qld and it was actually quite cold, but windy. Generally best May to August. Kaz

CASA has a NPRM out signalling a change in airport designation from the current REG, CERT and Other, to Regulated and Un-regulated. I think it's probably a fair bet that former CERT aerodromes will become Regulated (irrespective of whether that have RPT services) and that all Regulated will require ASICs. Kaz

Bex said: "Note that you just made an accusation of someone breaking the law. If you do not have evidence to support your claim, then it is you who is breaking the law." Read it again, Bex. Neither Nev nor I made any accusation of laws being broken, and we both expressed an opinion about a flying-related matter, not a political one. Just to bring you up to-date, there is no such animal in Australia as slander, now. It's all defamation. It seems some people lose objectivity where red-headed female politicians are involved. Kaz

Exactly Nev. My comment wasn't meant to be Party political but rather to reflect on the wisdom or otherwise of having a photo of herself AND especially her pilot widely published in those particular circumstances. Firstly, in my view, it didn't promote a positive image of recreational flyers. I don't know if those were the first or their third Bundy and Coke but much of the uninformed public out there has read enough bad press about pilots in little aeroplanes to have formed a fairly sceptical opinion of them and their pilots. I stand by my comment that booze airside next to the aeroplane is not a good look. Secondly, again in my view, the mere act of closing that open aircraft door would be sufficient to enliven CAR 256(2). If the pilot did consume additional cans then CAR 256 (2) could become a further unfortunate factor in the publicity event. Yes, I'm aware that despite the strict liability nature of the offence its points of proof are significantly weakened by the inclusion of a subjective test (impairment), although I add that courts have now accumulated a lot of knowledge about the effects of alcohol on coordination and decision making. Yes, the likelihood of a prosecution may have been remote, although it does seem the pilot may have already attracted the Regulator's attention for other matters. Finally, I like a drink after flying, myself. I especially enjoy a bund, with or withou Coke. But I won't go airside with an open drink because perceptions matter. In politics, perceptions are everything! Kaz CIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988 - REG 256 Intoxicated persons not to act as pilots etc or be carried on aircraft ........ (2) A person acting as a member of the operating crew of an aircraft, or carried in the aircraft to act as a member of the operating crew, shall not, while so acting or carried, be in a state in which, by reason of his or her having consumed, used, or absorbed any alcoholic liquor, drug, pharmaceutical or medicinal preparation or other substance, his or her capacity so to act is impaired. Penalty: 50 penalty units. ........