Bats

I'm afraid I have too many professional pilots in my circle of friends and acquaintances to be quite so positive about their impartiality. The tendency to quickly come to a decision and stick with it is desirable in their work environment, but can be a little trying when perhaps a little reflection and debate can assist in reaching a better outcome. I'd be a little wary of hitching my wagon too firmly to this report as proof of the dangers of drone strikes and that really is the crux of my original objection - the media and some of the pilot body are busily whipping up hysteria over these dangers and may indeed be shot down in due course when the drone strike is disproven. That does nothing to advance their cause overall. Just for the record, I don't fly a drone, although I have toyed with the idea of getting one to use in remote areas for photography. Where the argument stalls imo is that the average owner doesn't particularly want his expensive toy pulverised, or even thrown to the ground by wake turbulence and will avoid situations where this is likely to occur. The reckless misfit or someone with evil intent isn't going to get licenced, isn't going to register the article and couldn't give two hoots about whatever laws are enacted. Outright banning is no longer a realistic outcome and even compulsory software inclusions a bit pointless when an electronics buff can brew his own. Birds, yup seen them from the air too, particularly when they flap their wings - drones, UAS, UAV, RPV or whatever today's buzzword is - not so much. I have a little experience in the matter and speaking to a friend who was doing some filming with a professional outfit, he said the same.

So far the evidence in this one appears to be the pilot's report that he thinks he hit a drone. From personal experience of looking for one that I knew was out there at well below 100kts, I'd be very impressed if a pilot could positively identify the average little white/black drone at typical airliner approach speeds. The media, ably assisted by a certain element of the pilot body will no doubt persist in their claims, whatever the facts may prove to be.

Seems that the gent who was originally cited here is allegedly a repeat offender and the offence being investigated involved substantially more than merely manipulating the controls under supervision. As for the rest of the fanciful guff, some people would want an EIS, SWM and the rest of the BS TLA's before you were trusted to tie your own shoe laces, it would seem.

I get what you're trying to say flyvulcan, bear in mind though that the discussion isn't purely about your view on what should happen. Sticking to that though, it really would highlight the absurdity of identical aircraft being registered under different rules in one organisation and having overlapping rights and obligations. For this reason then, what I raised was a new dispensation which would encompass all private aviation, something the US is trying very hard to move toward.

I quite agree that any merger would have to include CASA involvement and the best scenario would be a move toward the system currently before Congress in the US where private aviation in aircraft of 6,000 pounds or less becomes substantially less regulated. Can I see CASA resisting the temptation to tinker and destroy the original intent? Not under the current regime but miracles have occurred before now I suppose. I speak from early experience only, but I certainly wouldn't call the SAAA's MPC an advantage to RA Aus types and it proved an enormous distraction to their membership, even if it was really only as a workaround to retain maintenance privileges. My biggest concern is that whilst LSA and SAAA types have much in common, the original ultralights, the rag and tube types would gain little if anything in any realistic merger terms and this could very well precipitate a split amongst the current RA Aus membership. Much to consider and some careful steps to be taken, but worthy of consideration I'd say.

Probably in a container waiting to be loaded on a ship by now, given their relative rarity. GPS trackers have come down in price to the extent that they are a viable proposition now - it can be enormously satisfying to roll up and repossess your goods. I once found a stolen car (pre tracker days) more than a year down the line and had to listen to the grub who'd bought it for a fraction of the true value, whining because he lost out.

True, but it pays to be careful with assumptions, the medical profession are pretty well represented amongst the ranks of depression sufferers too - in part (as related by a friend) because everyone always looks to them for answers, for a decision, for a miracle. More than that, bear in mind that those same people who are being castigated for being uncaring etc, may themselves be struggling inside, outwardly coping but with reserves reaching empty.

And we wonder why private flying is gradually withering on the vine - referring to the prohibition on letting someone have a go behind the controls. I and most of my flying friends were introduced to that most persistent of bugs, the flying bug via a generous friend who said; "here have a go", but no a hundred years of overwhelmingly positive experiences has to be weighed against the idiot who decided to teach his mate, or was it girlfriend to fly. You'd swear that you could legislate against stupidity or recklessness the way these regulations proliferate.

I had a bit of a dig around on overseas sites, it seems that the 3 episodes we've seen so far are the lot. A pity, it was good entertainment value I thought.

I believe my old grandad called it picking the flysh!t out of the pepper - and it wasn't a compliment. I do console myself with the image of a self important defender of Saudi dignity explaining to a gathering of women that actually there isn't a law stopping them from driving, including those who have been arrested for this non-crime in the past few years. Perhaps he could carry on to explain this to the King's advisory council who have the possibility of permitting women to drive on their agenda, and have done for several years? I suspect that it could be a highly entertaining spectacle.

An important topic. I count myself fortunate to have survived life's ups and downs thus far, largely intact and without having to resort to professional help, but have first hand experience of friends and family who haven't been as fortunate, to the point of suicide. And that's really all there is to it - good fortune and I'm acutely aware of the old "there but for the grace of (insert your particular deity), go I!" Not everyone will agree, but it was suggested to me after one loss that it wasn't my role to stop a friend from committing suicide, but to try and support him should he decide not to. The advice resonated with me, because in the particular instance, I and other friends had expended considerable time and energy on the person who ultimately decided to end it and unfair as it may be, there was an element of feeling that we had failed because we didn't get the outcome we desired. Another issue which may be divisive but arises for those standing by, is that your efforts may not appear to be appreciated. Sometimes there are even difficult decisions which need to be made and you'll need to be the baddy for the greater good. I was elected to explain to an uncle that he probably shouldn't be driving until such time as he was stabilised on medication, following a serious bout of depression. In the abstract I was satisfied that his judgement was impaired and had even seen him taking what appeared to be stupid risks in a vehicle - but actually having to play god as it were, was confronting, particularly when my motives were questioned and I had to swallow a flood of abuse for even broaching the subject. I guess what I'm getting at is it is all very well to say you must support your mate, but you need to be aware that their responses will not always be strictly rational and it can put a massive strain on your own mental resources. Look after yourself too.

Media reports are quoting the authorities as saying they are satisfied it was a deliberate act and there are no suspicious circumstances. He apparently called his daughters before taking-off and sent at least one text message shortly before the aircraft disappeared off the radar, obviously content not disclosed but it doesn't take too much imagination to work out what was probably said. Tragic all round.

I suppose that accusation was almost inevitable in the current airline work environment - I noticed over at the petrified plum that many commented after seeing the pilot's roster that it was no worse than many there were doing. IMO it will probably prove (as so often in aviation) to be a combination of factors, fatigue, a selection error whether it be autopilot mode, altitude or another, coupled with poor manual flying skills when a sudden reversion from an automated go around was required. That said I was rather surprised when the last pieces of debris had hardly settled and it was already concluded that there was no terrorist involvement. Shades of Metrojet in Egypt?

What part of "they do not issue licences to woman" did you not understand Winsor? Perhaps I need to reduce it to basics with a local analogy - "Australian Aboriginals are not banned from voting, we just refuse to register them as voters" Is the concept clear enough for you now? As a aside, ever noticed how the self styled guardians of tolerance and light find it entirely acceptable to reduce their viewpoint to personal insult and abuse?

Aiee those evil Westeners - leading people astray again. There should be a law against it! Yenn, I see things in much the same way. If we're going to play trumps though, (no not that idiot) the game, there are 5 people in my circle of friends who happen to be Muslim and this discussion has been had more than once. I don't pretend to understand the cultural imperative, however they seem extraordinarily reticent about condemning their fellow Muslim and I have a problem with that, mostly because us evil Westerners have no compunction about distancing ourselves from our own kind that act in ways we find abhorrent, however there is no parallel call for the Edmund Burke position amongst our peers who are of another faith. Frankly I find it inherently racist to expect less of others than I do of my own. Our difference in viewpoint won't stop us being friends, but I'm not going to adopt the usual whitefella cringe because I differ with them on this point.

Yip and some of those 300,000 are already posting on facebrick that it is the Western nation's fault. Couple of them focussed on a fellow named Drumpf, who last I checked was only a candidate for one of the US political parties, but why let the truth get in the way of an anti-semetic rant?

Here's a link to the video I saw;

Ah, probably the one I saw from an overseas site earlier. Slowed playback down and in the last frame or two you could see aircraft quite clearly, 60 deg nose down at a guess and rolled well over as well. Didn't look anything like the graphics I've seen of AF447 coming down wings level and belly first. Edit: Yes that looks like a frame from the video I saw.

"Video removed by user" ?

Really? Must be a recent development then, because they certainly were banned from doing so when I visited about 18 months ago. Their attitude to the subject is probably best summed up by this case; ie batshit irrational! http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30602155

Might also be that they haven't been able to nail the cause down yet - no point in saying "nothing to worry about" and it turns out there was an aircraft issue

And that's how we all learn - rather people air the dodgy advice their mate imparted at the bar and have the error of their ways explained to them (politely), than have gravity impart the lesson. I learn a lot from these threads, even if it's what not to do sometimes. :) Getting people talking and thinking about these things can never be a bad thing in my book.

As usual the elderly plum has a mix of insightful comment and utter BS. I see the earlier version of "the aircraft struck the runway on go around and lost control" has now been discounted and the CCTV video reinstated as credible (all part and parcel of the confusion following accidents I guess) - the go around appears to have been initiated well above runway height, as was the first one and the aircraft climbed and accelerated more or less as you would expect, before nosing over at a steep angle and diving into the ground near the threshold. The one other comment that struck me, was that alternates out in the wilds of Russia are not as you would expect in Europe/US etc - you could easily end up stuck in a cold plane with no ground support and a plane full of unhappy pax. Thus a 2 hour hold would be considered preferable to the alternates.

Correct - it was a quick n dirty look at the trace and a reaction to the suggestion that they were burning off fuel. Hanging around for that long between approaches indicates a fair degree of determination to get in, especially when others in the area pushed off to alternates. Avherald are quoting officials as saying aircraft clipped the ground during a second go-around and then dropped back to the ground near the upwind end of the runway. Some translation confusion as to whether it was a wing or the tail that struck the ground. From the photos and video doing the rounds it looks as though the aircraft was pretty much reduced to kit form, with small pieces scattered over a large area.

Reports say the wx was pretty ordinary and the crash occurred on a second approach to the airport. I'd say hold, then a few orbits, followed by an approach and go around, followed by a second approach following a similar track.