robinsm

merging works for me

sounds like a plan to me Ian, brings the members together and boosts the rec site. Less work for you as well.

So does your drivers licence, doesn't need a DAME to verify your car licence.

what a load of rubbish

the old saying of be careful what you wish for applies. Could be the most important ruling as far as Recreational pilots are concverned. This will put a crimp in an avenue for enjoying the sport if it is correct....

Jeez, didn't this one go downhill in a hurry, must be a quiet day in the old folks home...lol

With out David it would not be there for us to enjoy. If he can get something out of it while we enjoy it then great. If you dont like it, either dont go there or deal with it, dont spoil it for the many many australians that have enjoyed the museum and the facilities the airport has. Some people are never happy unless they try to spoil it for anyone else.

Whatever the reason, more kudos to david for allowing the museum there in the first place and for running a great little airport.

The puish to establish a mini GA empire continues apace. The name Recreational aviation seems to be more and more aimed at the larger mopre expensive end of the market and not at the home builder with limited funds who just wants to fly. Is this elitism or just corportate arrogance. Obviously RAA does not see the value in the roots of this sport.

I saw this post from ELAAA today. What does this mean for ultralight homebuilt and current 10 and 19 reg aircraft. Are the GA maintenance rules to apply. Will it price small home built and self made lightweight aircraft out of the market. Please clarify????? I am a l;ittle concerned that the lower end of this sport is going to be ignored and costed out of the realm of affordability for the average wage earner. "... it will be based on a different platform. All Australian aircraft need to be and should be VH registered wether it be VH and numbers or letters and all pilots should have ICAO compliant licences not cetificates or RPL's which are not recognized anywhere else in the world."

The airport is used extensively during the bushfire season as a standby area for firefighting aircraft and as a watering base for the local area.

deleted...mod

The owner and the politics involved with his money grabbing ideas removed a lot of the pleasure I had flying at and using the airtport. There are many good people out there but this idiot and a stupid money grabbing council have killed most of the ancillary joy for me. Flying is still great but the ancillary garbage is crap.

this idiot is out of control. What is with the sydney contact number?

maybe he had a very old fashioned idea of being loyal to his employer?

Just a thought, why not ask the brains at Raa Aus to check it out. You pay them a fortune so let them practice some membership service for a change.

Yep, paying money makes you safe, I note that as long as you do the online tick and flick you dont have to do the practical, makes sense...not.

A piece of paper does not take the place of self preservation. Turbs...I would have assumed () that the inspection that was supervised by the L3 when the aircraft was being built would have bought up the nut problem. I stand by the statement that I believe the L1 training should be part of the training, not a $100 grab for money. Were the nut deaaths on owner built 19 aircrafts? No matterwhat courses etc you throw at people, you cannot legistlate against arrogance, know it all or stupidity.

Were those on home built 19 reg aircraft, maintained by the builders, or were they for the whole fleet, no matter what rego type. No matter what quals a person has, things happen. I had an undercarriage failure on my aircraft through a fractured bolt. The fracture was hidden under the nut so would not have been seen on inspection. I agree that maintenance should be a part of the training process anyway, but hitting a home builder with extra dollars for something they are doing anyway is just a money grab. Charging for an L1 cert after basic training when that should have been taught as part of the certificate (daily walkaround and preflight checks) is just a blatant money grab and mini GA empire building when the L1 was always part of the training sylabus anyway, and granted as part of the Certificate. I do not feel that a certificate will make people more aware of how to chan ge a spark plug etc, no matter what npeice of expensive paper you have, human nature can intervene, and sometimes does. 7 forced landings in 912 powered aircraft in 5 years with a fleet in the thousands is statistically minimal and the L1 cert is a major knee jerk reaction that is not required. If the piece of paper is that good, how come we have forced landings in all forms of aviation. Mecanical failures are not subject to pieces of paper.

Am I correct that the L1 is also required by those that built their own aircraft under 19 reg. If so then the system is a joke and a money making exercise. If you built it and got it inspected and passed then surely you can change a spark plug safely in the damned thing. Political correctness and empire building gone mad.

I believe there was another organisation mooted but it seems to have dropped by the wayside, nothing like having options eh?

so if you get into a spin accidentally then your st..fed. I always though recovery from unusual positions should be essential for ALL aircraft training. (both GA and RAA.) It would give a lot more confidence when flying in non normal conditions, more confidence in the aircraft, not teaching this is a m,ajor failing as far as I can see. All aircraft can get into unusual positions for a number of reasons and exposure in controlled circumstances is essential in my opinion.

No return on local parks and sportfields, whats the difference.

I have received 5 avdata bills in the last few years that bear no relation to where my aircraft was at the time. Apparantly I was in WA for one of them whilst proving I was at work in NSW at the time. Same as the others. At the time I had an agreement with the airport owners to pay a regular yearly fee for landings etc. I agree, the privacy issue is the problem with me, given they agreed not to do it.

many councils are selling off their local airports as a source of revenue. The purchaser then has the option, depending on the right palms being greased, of bending and breaking contracts to suit themselves. Increase fees, shut down runways, restrict free access to hanger owners etc. No one complains about ocal sports grounds and do not pay council fees for them on a per user basis. Remember, these days its all about money, people dont matter any more.