Garfly

True! That's Recreational Boating.

Yeah ... ya gotta miss the virile societies of our forefathers, where women (and other out-groups) knew their place, and nary a hoon would be found (alive). Cue Tucker larf:

Just came across this other Juan Browne cautionary tale about a rejected take-off :

Severe Turbulence: Unravelling the Botany Bay Airliner Crash of 1961 Peter Hobbins Hobbins - Severe Turbulence (2022).pdf https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/105854382/11503817

More like "We ignored the wisdom of the RecFlying collective!"

A

Yeah, well, let's face it, we're all only here to ease the crushing loneliness of the short distance flyer. ;- )

Yeah, but SP would have been transporting his rotary pump in (empty) ag-aircraft so not much problem there.

Nobody's suggesting that this type of pump will lift from ground level so no one is likely to be disappointed on that score. I find not having to move or manhandle a 20L can once it's up there (on a board across the fuse) simplifies and de-stresses the whole operation. I used to use a jiggler but I find a small self-contained 6V transfer pump heaps easier. For a start, both hands become free to manage the outflow and the filter. Mileage may differ. The OP kicked off with "I just had another disaster, fuel all over the wing and over me. Does anyone have suggestions for filling high-wing tanks?" We've probably all been there and some among us are happy to spend a few bucks not to have to go there again. (Replacing a windscreen costs too.)

The thing is Mike, it's dead easy to unclip and take with you. You can also move it from aircraft to aircraft - as long as you change its ID (easily done) and the other plane has an official hex code (easily obtained).

And AFAIK, at this point, the SE2 is still the only portable EC device of its kind approved by CASA. https://www.uavionix.com.au/news/skyecho2-portable-adsb-inout-now-approved-in-australia/ The SkyEcho2 portable ADS-B transceiver has been accepted by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) as an approved Electronic Conspicuity (EC) Device as an enhancement to “See and Be Seen” from 16th July, 2020. SkyEcho2 is the world’s first commercially available portable ADS-B IN and OUT system. Complete with an integrated TSO certified SBAS GPS and barometric altimeter, SkyEcho2 transmits your aircraft location, altitude, and identification via 1090MHz ADS-B, enabling you to be seen by nearby aircraft equipped with an ADS-B receiver. In Australia, the integrated ADS-B IN receiver connects wirelessly to your favourite Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) application adhering to an industry-standard protocol for ADS-B traffic – including OzRunways and AvPlan EFB.

Yeah, it's not designed to for high lifting so I tend to just use it with the jerry (20 or 10) up on the turtle deck, resting on a board. I can manage to get 20L up there (just) but then I don't have to manhandle it in a tricky pouring situation. But the little pump is also handy on the ground transferring from 20's to 10s, for example. Less messy than pouring through funnels - so many opportunities for things to go wrong. Batteries have not been a problem, so far. The pump is only running for minutes at a time. It's also small and light enough to carry on board.

This (AA) battery powered unit from Easyflo works well for me. https://easyflo.com.au/

This Canadian trip-video (04:30 to 09:00) includes a good illustration of how simply useful a simple ADSB system can be, VFR enroute, even when radio comms are established. (Especially if hemispherical level-keeping constrains vertical separation - as might be happening here). They were probably miles apart at all times but you can see how much anxiety was caused. And how easy the solution can be.

Yeah, I wouldn't have thought otherwise, Nev. I should have included a quote to make it clear who and what I was reacting to. In this case: APenNameAndThatA said: "I agree with you. And if RA-Aus was more sophisticated, that’s the reason RA-Aus would have stated. Just to restate: the logical reason you gave is not RA-Aus’s reason, otherwise they would have said so. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️. If only they had spoken to you first. "

You have to cut RAAus a bit of slack here since much of the horse-trading would, necessarily, be happening behind the scenes. What matters is not winning the argument but winning the day. And RAAus has made it clear that a good outcome for them would be the government deciding to properly fund the ATSB to do its job; the whole of it, and that includes us. After all, most of the lessons learned from RA accidents are perfectly applicable to the GA scene. In NZ and other jurisdictions, the arbitrary distinction would seem absurd. I wouldn't be surprised if the ATSB quite agrees with RAAus. They may welcome just such an extended role if only they had the financial wherewithal. No other outfit has the expertise, arms-length-status nor the legal protections that they do. But who knows? It's hard to say what goes on in bureaucratic backrooms, but equally, it's hardly fair to judge RAAus' strategy without knowing. Be that as it may, the organisation has put its position publicly and clearly, most recently in this ABC report on the Nullarbor tragedy: " ... Esperance Detectives took on the case after the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) declined to investigate, saying it typically did not investigate recreational aircraft accidents. Recreational Aviation Australia (RAA) criticised the move, saying it wrote to the Minister for Transport Catherine King in November raising concerns about the ATSB's inability to conduct investigations due to limited funding. "We have seen at least five fatal accidents in the past 12 months and many in the years prior where the ATSB has chosen to not investigate," RAA chief executive Matt Bouttell wrote in the letter. "This equates to a significant cost to the Australian people through awaiting State Coroners to arrive at findings that often result in diminished safety outcomes due to a lack of subject matter expertise during the investigation and evidence-gathering phase. Mr Boutell told the ABC that RAA has provided police with technical support in the past, but it has no legislative powers to conduct fatal accident investigations. "We have previously provided police with on-site support at accidents, including performing analysis around the circumstances of the accident however, in recent times it's become clear that due to the lack of legislative protections, we cannot keep 'propping up' the ATSB by doing so," he said." "We have therefore said enough is enough, and that the Government should fund the ATSB for the purpose it is established for." https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-12-20/pilot-in-nullarbor-crash-identified-as-43-year-old-perth-father/101793432

The

It's not as if nothing along these lines has ever been thought of, or that no procedures are, in fact, in place. To start with, a few excerpts from the RAAus website: "Fatal Accident Investigation Process RAAus has developed an emergency response plan to ensure serious and fatal accidents are managed ... ... First and foremost is the fact that RAAus is not able to attend any accident scene without the express permission or invitation from local authorities, usually the police who are despatched to the accident scene. In some cases RAAus is not invited and instead the ATSB may investigate or a third party may be invited to work with police. It is always RAAus' preference that the ATSB investigates RAAus accidents due to their increased resources and investigative capabilities, however when they elect to not investigate, RAAus offers technical assistance to the police in order to provide aviation expertise by trained aviation accident consultants .... Who are RAAus Accident Consultants (ACs)? Accident Consultants (ACs) are typically RAAus employees who are requested to assist at accident sites. ACs who are employees of RAAus are required to complete the ATSB Accident Investigation Training, or an equivalent course, to formalise their qualifications. RAAus is also supported by other subject matter experts and the ATSB. Role of the RAAus Accident Consultant Due to the specialist nature of aviation accident investigations, the police may request assistance from RAAus as Subject Matter Experts (SME) and in a specialist advisory role. This is the only way RAAus can attend an accident scene. RAAus has no authority or power to enter an aircraft accident without an express invitation from the police or local authorities. An RAAus Accident Consultant (AC) is only there to assist the police in their investigation and to gather the facts and present them to the police. Under no circumstances are staff expected to lead the investigation. RAAus ACs do not have any jurisdiction under the Transport Safety Investigation (TSI) Act 2003. The role is intended to provide the police based Investigating Officer (IO) of any aviation related hazards and specific industry or aviation knowledge to assist them in their investigation. When an AC is dispatched to an accident, incident or other emergency site they are to abide by RAAus AC policies, procedures and checklists. Processes and Procedures .... Regardless of who provides the notification, RAAus’ first action is to check our database for the aircraft file to determine whether a ballistic parachute system is fitted or if any other dangers exist. This is provided as advice to first responders to ensure they are aware of potential hazards when conducting onsite rescue efforts ... ... The ATSB may elect to investigate a RAAus accident, in which case RAAus presence is simply to provide RAAus operations subject matter expertise. ATSB assesses the safety value of ATSB attendance at an accident and generally the investigation is conducted by police with assistance by RAAus. The ATSB may provide invaluable technical and analytical support to RAAus later in the process ... ... One major point of difference between ATSB and RAAus processes however is the Transport Safety Investigation (TSI) Act 2003. If the ATSB conducts an investigation, the TSI Act provides the ATSB with legal responsibility for the investigation, which while conducted with cooperation of local police, results in the ATSB publishing a report on their website. The ATSB is protected under the TSI Act from any civil or legal action by anyone associated with the fatality. RAAus however, is not protected from legal or civil action at all by the TSI Act, resulting in RAAus only being able to provide a report for the police and Coroner and only providing relevant and general safety information to members. Once the on-site portion of the investigation is completed, which typically takes 24 - 48 hours, investigators will also continue to work with the local police, interviewing relevant people, reviewing the pilot logbook and aircraft maintenance logs and if required, arrange for the ATSB to conduct a technical analysis and data extraction of any onboard GPS, Engine Flight Information Systems (EFIS), video footage or other assessments. Any ATSB technical assistance typically results in the production of a report regarding this assistance by ATSB, which is published on the ATSB website in due course. On return to the office, the investigators will continue to work on the investigation, assessing a variety of relevant factors including human factors, environmental, mechanical and operational considerations. Components like the engine, propeller and airframe may be torn down and assessed by an engineer, including metallurgical, fabric or fibreglass and carbon fibre analysis may be conducted and fuel may be subjected to testing. If the accident involved a student, a review of relevant training records will be conducted. RAAus has an internal commitment to the production of a report for the police and Coroner within 6 months of the accident and an immediate commitment to our members to provide any relevant safety information as soon as possible ... " https://members.raa.asn.au/safety/fatal-accident-investigation-process/

Here is a link: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-12-20/pilot-in-nullarbor-crash-identified-as-43-year-old-perth-father/101793432

With a little bit of luck, a man can duck (or, failing that, get a good dictionary.)

Low level circuits are part of the RAAus (and CASA) training syllabus so they should be trained for, and practised, at airports, as they are, in fact, every day. Following the syllabus is a rule, too. Obviously, normal traffic separation procedures apply. Just because there might, on the off-chance, be some unknown, NORDO, slower craft sharing that 500' circuit at any given time, does not a prohibition make. The intruder would, after all, be on your same level; whoever's behind should see the one in front. Speed differentials, within reason, can be managed, as they commonly are in 1000' circuits - and at 1500'. No one needs to be killing anyone; or even violating rules. Precautionary landings are something else again.

Yes, I don't think there's any doubt about any of that.

But this comes back to Yenn's objection. I have to say, I'm not familiar with the principle of turning 'into the wind' - once airborne - to gain altitude. I'd have thought that once you're in the wind, there's no turning into the wind.

For another perspective on the weekend's activity, here's Planet's airplane-to-be with its speed brakes deployed. ;- ) For a demonstration of the folding concept here's a video of the aircraft's designer - our Pylon500 - showing how it's done. Arthur folds wing.m4v (Meanwhile, planet47 - who's happy to remain anonymous - took a break from riveting this weekend to polish up the nose cone.) And, oh yeah, it does have an engine. It should be a riveting Xmas!

It seems that wraparound sunglasses are especially popular with cyclists. https://www.99bikes.com.au/apparel/eyewear/sunglasses I've read that the main reason is to do with peripheral vision being so important to riders; you don't want glasses frames blocking anything from the sides. But, as you say, Nev, there appear to be good reasons for anyone to use them: https://www.eehealth.org/blog/2017/07/not-just-eye-candy/ Choose sunglasses that wrap around your face. Wraparound sunglasses offer additional protection from the sun’s rays. Some studies have even showed that when enough UV rays enter around standard sunglass frames, it reduces the protective benefit of the lenses. A frame that fits close to your eyes and contours to the shape of your face will prevent exposure to UV rays from all sides, even from behind.