skippydiesel

Naaa! Still looking for the chests to pin the wings on😈 Sorry if I offend - not big on "look at me" ostentatious displays - next it will uniforms, rank epaulets, etc - What's wrong with a nice certificate, you can frame & hang on your wall at home? It may be a tad hard for some to reolise, most of us are just amature/recreational pilots not "Top Guns"

I rest my case😈

Nice!😈

Maaate: You don't know just how tough some kids upbringing was and yet somehow most survived even flourish. I have no desire to reinvent/impose the past but feel that the "pendulum" of how children should be raised, has swung from one unpleasant even nasty extreme, well past reason, to some hysterical, contonwool, entitled, chemical, digital, mayhem. Children no longer roam the bush, play in the street, walk to school, - they just play with their digital tools!😈

Wings are for military aviators , to be worn with their service uniform.😈

"People that were highly functional and have low interpersonal abilities were just regarded as different now they have something that needs examination and limitations." The following is speculation - I have no medical/psychiatric training. Given: ADHD is a relativly modern diagnosis - did not exist in my childhood/youth. If it did, you were considered a tad strange, bit of a personality, on a diffrent planet, etc but generally accepted as being part of the broad spectrum of human behavior. Sure there were "bad" kids who likly need a more empathetic approach than flogging but most of them seemed to "make their way" eventually. Seems to be on the rise - why? The accompanying rise in the use of medications that users are likly to become dependent on. May have a long term negative impact on the user. I agree with the observation that there is no such thing as a monochrom "normal" human being - we all exhibit a range of behaviours that I am sure can be plotted on a Bell Curve (BC) demonstrating that at some times/situations, we may stray from the central "normal" range of behaviour and a few unfortunates, permanently on the lower slopes, must "live" and manage their lives somehow. I accept that people who exhibit traits that are at the extremes of the BC may need some chemical assistance, to function in society and on what I hope is rare occasions, this may require lifelong usage. I speculate, that the apparent pandemic (if true) in ADHD (& other personality disorders) is as much a fashion statement, brought on by the media and parental anxiety, as anything else. I lived for much of my youth in Ireland and later England - eccentricity (difference in social interaction & presentation) was celebrated (to a point). It seems Australians are far less tolerant, seeming to seek a bland adherence to "the norm" . I suspect that most of those diagnosed with ADHD & similar, would eventually find their own way in life, without recourse to medications, special behavioural interventions, etc, just like everyone else.

Moneybox, All too often I have driven for 10 + hrs with only a fuel stop or two and I know better -it's stupid but that's what testosterone does for you. The problem is, by the time you start to feel fatigued/bit sleepy, your ability to handle an emergency, has already degraded to the point being lethal, if not for you then other road users. People think microsleeps are the problem - they are but a symptom of extreme exhaustion. In this situaton the driver has been increasingly unable to respond, in timely/appropriate manor, to a sudden problem for very many hours.

Interesting -when driving (generally more stimulating environment) opinion is stop every two hrs. Can't say I follow this advice "religiously" but do accept its good. We don't just need to stay energised & hydrated, we also benefit from a brisk walk, brief change of scene/pase, possibly a chat with a fellow pilot. Fatigue is insidious, can not be prevented but can be managed to some degree. From memory: Industrial studies, measuring response times (as a measure of fatigue - wish I could find the relevant chart) show that at the beginning of the work day, there is a steep rise in alertness, followed by a slow decline/increase in fatigue. This pattern is repeated after every break with the peak alertness being lower after every break, as the day/duty cycle continues. The overall decline is a continuous slope down from the initial high. So breaks slow, do not prevent, the inevitable onset of dangerous levels of fatigue. An experienced individual (say driving a truck) will learn to mask the effects of fatigue, continue to function is if unafted BUT when tested for response times, shown the same decline as a non experienced person. The limit of safe function is about 9 hrs, with appropriate breaks. This is for experienced truck drivers - relate this to a pilot in a small aircraft, operating in a three dimensional environment, in changing weather conditions, possible low level hypoxia, communication demands and unfamiliar rout/airfields. The take home message is clear: You may feel you are in top form BUT put you under stress/an unforeseen/unusual situaton and you may be a danger to yourself and others - take the breaks and limit the total flying hours per day.

For several years, I have been planning my big cross country, Sydney/Perth/Return . I have based my flight legs, on 2-3hr X 2 legs /day. From past experince 2-3 hrs is about right for me. A wee break and a walk to exercise muscles that have been in one position for a tad to long, brings me back up to speed. In the past I have flown for 6 hrs in the one day, again with 2-3hr legs - doable IF refueling doesn't take too long, the air is smooth and there is a known bed/food at the end of the day.

Watched it. Seems REX jumped into the big time before it was ready. Interesting comment on Security Controlled Airports (ASIC) - One local Council (forget which) decided on implementing/imposing an ASIC system at its airfield - supposedly REX id not want to do this/contribute financially. This comment is at variance with Griffith Council who wanted to dismantle ASIC, only to have REX threten not to serve that community, if this happened. Where is the truth? Could be REX wanted ASIC, the Council complied but said REX would have to pay?????

"Many of these are towing for the first time in their life as well and most demonstrate exceptionally good driving skills." Conjecture, based on only a few observations and much scutlebut; I see brand new (often high end) 4X4's towing huge caravans, at speeds a long way below the freeway/road limit, with the bonnet of tug in the air & the van hitch near the ground. Incase there are those who see nothing wrong with this picture; Wherever safe to do so, you should drive at the posted speed limit (or close to it). Driving below the posted limit, creates a moving barrier to other traffics free flow. This in turn creates a dangerous situaton for you and the other road users. Just because it's legal, to drive at any speed below that posted, does not mean its safe or considerate to do so. Trailers (caravans) and their tug (4X4 or other) are designed to ride level. This optimises the performance of suspension, breaks and steering. When all is level the combination is at its most stable, manoeuvrable and wear/tear is minimised. Could be the caravan combinations, crawling along the public road, are doing so because the driver is in a state of terror, due to the unstable ride & steering. I have seen and heard many a story about the caravan/4X4 turning up at park and requesting someone else back the unit into its assigned space. Mind you if they are on the round Australia trip, if they manage to get half way (near Cue for Esties 😁), I would expect the above mentioned issues to have been resolved - living in hope 😈

Please expand - how did CV19 "generated significant behavioral changes" in relation to road accident/driver behaviour?

"Aircraft metals have not responded to emails." Do you mean; https://www.airportmetals.com.au/ OR https://www.aircraftmaterials.com/ OR http://www.aerospacematerials.com.au/products/metals/index.html Did you try http://www.calm-aluminium.com.au/

Why do we persistently avoider the SINGLE major factor in ALL road accidents - THE HUMAN behind the wheel. His / her age may be a factor, road condition undoubtedly have a part to play, the speed being driven at may have multiplayer effect on the outcome BUT the car (at this time) does not drive itself. The human decides on the speed, to indicate or not, to tailgate, to not reverse park, turn left from the right lane, lane hog, etc THE COMMON FACTOR IS THE HUMAN!!!! So many of our drivers believe they are safe drivers, simply because they observe the posted speed limit - HOW DUMB IS THAT! This is the consequence of decades of focus on speed, to the exclusion of almost all other factors. As I said earlier, all the fluffing around the edges by politicians & various authorities, is akin to the doctor prescribing an analgesic for pain and completely ignoring the broken leg.

Hi Flightrite, With the acception of your "...stupid drivers!" comment, I can not accept your premise, which is essentially that speed kills. This concept has been around since the dawn of mechanised transport and has no foundation in fact. Fact - as soon as a vehicle starts to move, it becomes a danger to those around and in it - Many a child/pet/passing pedestrian, has been killed or injured by a slow speed vehicle backing out of a parking spot. Fact - Almost every accident is the result of one or more bad drivers, making a series of bad decisions culminating in an accident - The Swiss Cheese concept of how a series of bad decisions, combine to cause an accident. Speed (ie a moving vehicle) is without doubt a multiplying factor - the accident is likly to be more serious the faster the vehicle is moving. BUT how did the vehicle come to be involved in an accident in the first instance? There is only one answer THE DRIVER. While humans control vehicles, the only way to reduce accidents is to appropriately train & test the potential driver, maintain driver skill/knowledge, by regular review (BFR model) and fail (remove license) drivers who do not make the grade. Drivers who wilfully drive in a dangerous manor, endangering life & property should be APPROPRIATELY penalised, not some random fine that does not reflect the seriousness of the transgression. The political/policing efforts to reduce the accident rate, by controlling driver speed, had some initial effect (akine to proscribing an analgesic for pain, without addressing the cause) but like all poorly targeted control measures, it has become ineffective - the accident rate is rising. Posted speed limits are essential - unfortunately all to often are inconsistent and appear to be set without a scrape of logic (revenue raising??)

Onetrack, The hypothesis, inherent in your statement, is; (I have simplified to make a point) There are bad drivers at both ends of the age range. The young driver exhibits a lack of experince, combined with bravado, which makes him/her a bad driver. The old driver lacks cognitive awareness which makes him/her abad driver. I do not agree - My theory is we start with very poor driver training/testing, this is compounded by poorly targeted policing & failure to retest (bring the driver up to standard) on a regular basis. In short Australian drivers (of all ages) exhibit a very low level of driving cultural awareness and are downright awful. This is further exacerbated by the political focus on SPEED as the primary cause/control of accidents, Focusing on speed, almost to the exclusion of all other factors, is a bit like focusing on a skydivers descent safety, while ignoring the packing & condition of his parachute. (please don't take this analogy too literally)

".....when testing and it's better to do this in a targetted manner." Testing for a disease/syndrome, that tends to effects a certain cohort, is nothing like testing for the maintenance of a skill & knowledge base. "Similarly testing the skills competency of people is best done to address the actual risks. I don't object to testing every 5 years however 5 years is far too long for older people. People often have a significant cognitive decline over a single year." 5 years was nominal - every two years would be better . I do not disagree with the concerns over geriatric drivers - I just don't see that they deserve to be targeted, any more than every other crap driver on the road, irrespective of age.

Why limit regular testing to above a certain age - go to any parking area, and you will see just how many people can't even reverse park - they are not all over 60.

"If you want to pick on drivers I suggest you start with driving instructors who fail to understand or practice the rules of the road" The problem with driving instructors, for that matter any instructor who depends for their living on students passing whatever test. Naturally the focus on passing the test - this is what bring repeat customers and $$$ in their pockets. Turning out skilled, knowledgeable, courteous drivers, does not pay the medical bills/school fees. Do not blame the instructors, blame the system (governments) which encourages this sort of dumbing down. Its the governments job to set the standards (no the instructors) - the "bar" is far too low.

From my perspective it is ageism. Why? because I am an advocate of periodic (every 5 years?) driver review/test for ALL including so called professionals, like the police (who I often see demonstrating poor driving attitude). If all were tested on a regular basis, then those with health issues (affecting driving from any cause) AND POOR DRIVING SKILLS/KNOWLEDGE ,etc would lose their licence. This, appropriate policing, logical & consistent laws/signs would bring about cultural change and dramatical reduce vehicle accidents.

There was a service at Mudgee (Airborne Avionics) -no longer BUT they will refer you to their past employee/ technician, who has gone out on his own. Last service (befor aircraft out of test flying) provided by Pacific Avionics , Bankstown - pricy but did the job.

Did you check out Peter Ansons offerings? https://www.ansoneng.com/sample-page/products-summary/6-pneumatic-tailwheel-to-suit-sonex/

".....for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap."

As a "None-Pilot" you may have to factor in the cost of a Tailwheel Endorsement (training)

Is this about the tail wheel or the whole aircraft?