mnewbery

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-07/tensions-between-rex-airlines-dubbo-council-hit-new-highs/11682130

Only one or two at the top. But that is all it takes

Crystal ball says "care to play again?"

So far nobody has mentioned the four rotor abomination produced by Rolls?

Number of wings on prius/prii/pruises = zero. Interestingly someone is fluffing about with a hybrid cessna skymaster. The results of that will be informative

Uber, Tesla ... and now ... WeWork!

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/podcast-asis-richard-mcspadden-on-stall-spins/

VFRG was updated this year so I bought that. I also have the 2015 version

Anyone who sells NGK spark can order off the catalogue. I just got a set of iridium plugs for an FZ-1 from Motor Spares for about half the quoted price of the motorcycle Stealership. You might need to wait three or five days for them to turn up, is all. Also the B8ES and BR8ES are a very common motorcycle plug

They have existed for years. Mostly the same jack in the box design as used for ultralights like the Moyes Dragonfly. Yes there are zero-zero drone chutes too but they are quite expensive

I agree to the first point. As to the second point, I submit that anyone with a CPL and a current instrument rating is probably already flying on someone else's coin. That is to say they already have a job flying IFR (or teaching students to do same) and are not available for Community Service Flights, as a qualification to "not having enough instrument rated pilots". I think I will throw my money in the same direction as Bruce Tuncks. Further I feel this may be a very good opportunity for Air Services Australia to waive fees for anyone doing instrument initial or currency training in support of Angel Flight (or any CSF) ... to help dilute the current stink over Air Services way. (Lemons into lemonade!)

Given the roll rate I think the A380 would need to start so high up nobody on the ground would be able to see it

Ask @Manwell

http://www.australianflying.com.au/latest/tyabb-air-show-canceled

There goes one of those questions now...

Ahh! I was reminded of the opening lyrics of the title track of th album "Destroy rock and roll" by Mylo. Definitely a religious tone in there

https://www.avweb.com/flight-safety/accidents-ntsb/accident-probe-twin-training/ No I don't know how many "a lot" is. Nobody pretend that they do, please

I recognise that vertical tail...

I'm going gliding this weekend ... If it doesn't snow. If it does snow, I'm going to the pub so I can enjoy the view from there instead

Wait till @Manwell sees the thread on ASICs

see post #28. The regulation applicable to RA-Aus AND SAAA is CAR262AP Part (5). Yes RA-Aus has its own form as does SAAA

I know what you are doing. I am putting you on my ignore list

Yes! I'm going to follow this up tonight and see what shakes out. I doubt he had a working knowledge of it.

In Canberra, the airport has made the online training mandatory before they issue an ASIC. I'm pretty sure this is new and they are the only ones ... in the end I used another service agent and quelle suprise, mandatory training ... isn't. Also I saved about $40

I think you missed my point. I sought out and completed UA and spin recovery training. In America "a lot" means: How many of those occurred during training? How many occurred in Australia over a similar time? ATSB covers about 10% of the data required to objectively provide an answer. That is to say the data to identify and report on fatal dual or solo training accidents that were directly attributable to stall, spin or UA training does not exist. The query exists for the ATSB database down to single engine land aeroplane dual or solo training but the detail of each report does not specifically identify "spin training was being taught then people died". Also ATSB public records go back to about 2003 only. ICAO goes back to 2008. NTSB had woeful recording prior to 1960. Therefore the publicly available data does not prove or disprove that "Spin training at the Sport Pilot, RPL and PPL level increased the number of fatalities". One of the issues is that when people die in training accidents, its hard to tell exactly what they were trying to do at the time and ATSB don't report things that they can't point at objectively. So ... people died in training accidents mostly in the US. Their aviation operations are roughly 10 x Australia's so when people die/d in training accidents there and make changes, people in Australia take/took note and make/made changes here. This isn't my opinion. Also I don't care if its a good idea or not. Its just what happened. People decided to change something in reaction to something else bad happening in the expectation that it was the right change and bad things would stop happening. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.830.1760&rep=rep1&type=pdf Page 15 The same document says the NTSB and the FAA are at odds regarding spin training. Hell of a way to start a bar fight @Manwell