-Rod-

Hi Gents, A NZ Drifter Pilot, Kelly Martin is after some spare parts, original engine mounts for the Rotax upright 582. A contact for a supplier appreciated that I will forward on. Cheers Rod Birrell AirSports Flying School (Victoria) [email protected]

If you want to put quality and reliability ahead of price, with good support, local service and factory guarantee (Melbourne), consider the ICOM A220 panel mount. Includes excellent dual com feature. See Icom Australia | Everything in Radio: Air Band | IC-A220

Also a question, the privately run aviation weather decode site has been down for some time, it was at http://www.pemet.com.au, any advice as to its status? Where is it now ?

Looks like a change occurred : "Head to www.bom.gov.au/GAF/index.shtml" Reply "BOM : Bureau Home > Page not found" One link currently working is at: Graphical Area Forecasts

Sorry, typo, posting at the back of the clock always a problem .....

BOM site user guide for Graphical Area Forecasts http://www.bom.gov.au/aviation/data/education/GAF-user-guide-V1_final_15SEPT2017.pdf For an easy to use overview for flight plan winds, see Windy TV .com see Windy as forecasted zoom in for more detail, all the way to an airfield location. It will also display wind forecasts for specific nominated heights - worth looking at as an added information aid. Roid Birrell

As another option Airsports Flying School at Riddells Creek has a Storch available for $165 for local flights. Of course there is an expectation that renting pilots are current, capable and reliable. The Topaz for $220 solo is also available (although not very often due to its training role.) See www.airsports.net. Syndicate purchase is also available at most recreational airfields around Melbourne. Typical running costs of $45 per hour a lot more affordable!! Rod, Airsports

Cameras at high points on transit lanes worth extra consideration in survey, as an example MtWilliam north of Melbourne, 'seeing' the actual cloud base and wind in real time would be a great advantage along high use lanes.

A little off topic however a 'permit to fly' is available on application to fly to a point of repair. With conditions of course. This can be completed directly with approved CASA/RAAus officers, contact the RAAus Tech Department for specific advice.

A positive function of the Rec Flying Forum are the down to earth views that are given. Sometime the advice is on the harsh side, the anonymous nature of posts can be a problem, however most contributors are fair and frank. The RAAus Board is continuously looking at its various business functions and Sport Pilot magazine is no different. Current REC/Forum views on Sport Pilot Magazine and the future direction it should take would be appreciated - to be forwarded to the RAAus Board. Rod Birrell

ICOM Australia aviation radio dealers sell an ICOM factory cig lighter lead with noise filter (and fuse) designed for the ICOM A20. Some may have units 'on the shelf'. If you want one I have a couple available (we used them on our Drifters at the flying school), on the members market, new but old stock (no Drifters anymore).

Agree, well presented case. The goal here, to encourage the culture change needed within RAA - a difficult mission! Rod Birrell

The problem is that no robust documented safety case was presented to prove multiple compulsory homebuilt aircraft stage inspections were necessary. RAA's serious accidents do not show this area of our operations is a problem. A cost benefit analysis would also have been a good idea with regard to the new rule changes. No one doubts advisory, non compulsory, regular, competent, peer advice is recommended with any homebuilt project. In the same way that the SAAA and the EAA work with their homebuilt projects. Multiple compulsory inspections, that are likely to come with legal liability problems (over who approved or didn't approve the airworthiness standard of any particular project) is in my view going to be an ongoing problem for RAA. Rod Birrell

When I started on the board, I was critical of some decisions made by previous boards. These included giving every board member a free ASIC, paying for board members’ partners to fly-in to meetings and accommodating them at members expense and having an open bar for the board after meetings. SportPilot October 2016 The above comments really should not go unanswered. Every RAAus Board member did not receive a free ASIC card - and that is a fact. It was made available on request. I expect most Board members did not apply for a ‘free’ card (including myself when a Board member). Those that did may well have needed it to attend unpaid RAA meetings/events held at or via ASIC airports Paying for commercial airfares for partners of Board members attending RAA meetings was never a Board policy. Travel with a partner in a car or sport aircraft in company with a Board member was not an additional cost for RAA nor a financial problem, just as occupying the same hotel room was never a cost for RAA. Having staff and partners join the Board for a meal after an official RAA meeting has been considered a justifiable expense. The Board has a responsible drinking policy, this policy has been if force for years and i expect its constrains will continue to be followed in the future. Board members wishing to drink more were always expected to do so at their own cost. Yes, there is a cost to have a Board of directors, this cost compared to the cost of running RAA as a whole or other organisations such as CASA are absolutely minimal. RAA is getting good value for its money (or lack of it). My concern here is that is by implication the previous and ongoing financial loss by RAA, is to be attributed, even in part, to excessive spending by RAA Board members. For the record supporting this view is neither fair, reasonable or true. Rod Birrell

Just for the record the current RAA Tech Manual was initially produced as a confidential 'secret document'. Requests to release the manual in the same way as CASA, as a NPRM (Notice of proposed rule making), were refused and the new Tech Manual regulations have been implemented. Other than a select group of persons this manual was not seen by RAA members in advance of its introduction. Not an ideal result for RAA sport aircraft pilots, builders and maintainers. Having as wide a group as possible view proposed rule changes always ensures a better end result. My view, is that this is what should have happened with the new RAA Tech Manual. Rod Birrell