walrus

....or more likely; Boeing bought Ozrunways to kill it. That is also a favourite American tactic. They just "put it on the shelf and let it gather dust" - convert the customer base to Foreflight. The giveaway, if that is Boeings intention, will be the absence of any performance incentives for the previous owners and managers in the purchase agreement, or if there are, the absence of any clause committing Boeing to invest in and foster its new purchase. One thing is for sure; whatever amount they paid - they intend to screw out of the Australian customer base. If I was an employee without any share options, I would start looking for a new job right now, because Boeing is managed by human Hyenas - which is why they have quality issues. They will destroy Ozrunways.

Well that is the end of Ozrunways. I won't renew my subscription. No American company can be trusted not to nickel and dime you to death. First to vanish is the agility and fast updates and new features. Then they start to charge for product support while at the same time complexifying the product and the documentation so you need support. Then we segment the product offerings like a Starbucks coffee. Let's see; "Student starter pack", "RAA special", ""GA Pro", "Commercial Piston", "Jet IFR". Then we have flavours - "Australian', "US", "Intercontinental". Support levels; "Gold", "Platinium" etc. Then we get airline and company specific. ....and I give you ; "BLOATWARE" that only runs on the most powerful tablet available. But we promise that won't happen..... .........not when you have five million in share options maturing next year......... Because Wall street drives everything and they are utterly ruthless. Wall street will have at least five analysts specialising in electronic flight bags next week and it is those guys at JPM and Goldman Sachs who are in the driving seat, not the former management team..

The problem with this discussion is that the issue with medical certification that prompted CAA and FAA to act, is not about "hidden health problems" at all. The facts of the matter are that the FAA and CAA proved to their own satisfaction that there is no statistical correlation capable of being detected by a medical between a GA pilots health and the potential for that pilot to have an accident. This is not to say that there is No correlation between health and propensity for accident but that, if there is, an official medical examination is a very, very expensive and ineffective way of trying to find it, to the point of being a total waste of time and money.

Mr. Farrell was allegedly a skilled paraglider, the operative question then is; would he have launched his paraglider in those weather conditions? If not, why did he think that a VFR Jabiru would be successful?

I am planning to sell my pride and joy. What is the best way to go about it? What should I avoid?

Brendan: "Just to be clear, I am not going to jump in my ultralight and go crossing mountains tomorrow, it's just something I would like to consider down the track. Maybe even the odd trip up to the licola area and back . It's not very far from west sale.". Yes Brendan, but we don't know that you aren't a complete idiot like the guy who killed himself attempting something similar, who had zero experience. That is why we all react.. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-09-20/mount-beauty-plane-crash-victim-mathew-farrell-mourned/101458134 ''I know the Mansfield region pretty well and have had one or two closes shaves....... ''Remember that there are old pilots and bold pilots, but not old and bold...

1. This is real tiger country, if you crash here, we may never find the wreckage. The weather is your enemy because you are using a slow machine. Furthermore, going from Mansfield to Gippsland you will encounter at least TWO separate weather systems, maybe more; for example hot inland concditiond with turbulence around Mansfield, a seabreeze front on a Gippsland afternoon and thunderstorms over the ranges where some mixing occurs. Then there is sea fog (yesterday around Portsea) and smoke, haze and dust north of the ranges.........and that is all on a settled day. Now if you are in some sort of bullet like a Cirrus or Bonanza, you just need a short window. You can get high enough 9500 - 10000 to pretty much see the whole route. Furthermore, at 160+ knots, a 10 knot seabreeze sprining up or a thirty km diversion around a thunderstorm is no big deal, plus you have an autopilot and excellent navigation gear. BUt you are only doing 65 knots aren't you? That means a ten knot seabreeze can ruin your day and forget about 30 mile diversions, you dont have time or fuel so your route planning needs to be very different and by the way, dont forget density altitude; if you have to land some where high you will be walking home. The advantage? At 65kmots its prettyy hard to inadvertantly go from VFR into IMC. My bugsmasher is somewhat in the middle. What I would do is treat such a project as an adventure with very wide time frames and a very flexible itinerary - like the old sailing ships - they never contracted to go for example "Melbourne to Sydney", the contracts specified they were going "from Melbourne in the direction of Sydney". Now if you can set out with an open mind about where and when you might end up, plan your trip as a succession of small stages that only nibble at tiger country with go/nogo points between them and lots of alternates you will have a wonderful tme. Just dont get caught on one side of the range with a long slow trip home in darkening weather.

Agree 100% with Ben and AOPA. The CASA proposal, as always, is redolent with weasel words and qualifications that destroy any idea of reform. The application of the criminal code doesn't help either.

Hopefully an exercise near Jamieson.

The devil is in the detail - this is where AVMED and Spence will short change us; look at all those qualifiers: "most of Australias private pilots". .....AND RECREATIONAL pilots. "private pilots who meet fitness requirements" "those who meet eligibility criteria and satisfy requirements" Then of course this massive disclaimer... '"The self-assessment would see applicants answer a simple set of questions using CASA's current online systems. ....simple?? Access to training modules and comprehensive guidance material will help you make a well-informed and appropriate decision........appropriate? says who? Adoption of the proposal will mean that most people who fly the majority of hours in private operations will be able to apply for a Class 5 medical self-declaration, noting the medical exclusions and operational limitations........most can apply, but most won't get it. We estimate the new system will cover about 70% of the Australian aircraft fleet.".......about 70% of the fleet? Aeroplanes don't need medicals, - pilots do. ...and we conclude: There will, of course, be exceptions and some people will still need to see a doctor."........ in other words anyone with a "condition" - which means everyone, is still fair game for the medical inquisition. The only thing absolutely sure is that AVMED will require a bigger budget and more staff to give us this new "freedom".

Thruster, I fear you the GA and the RAA community are in for a huge disappointment regarding medical certificates very shortly. Don't you realise that the simplest approach to medical certificate reform is to remove the RAA self declaration option? That will silence GA regarding the equity issue. AVMED will not do anything that threatens their careers.

Where does it say RA-AUS registered aircraft are banned? It IMPLIES permission is required but not that it isn't forthcoming unless you are a microlight/ultralight/weight shifter. It also says that the aerodrome is not available to anyone for training and suchlike. There is no blanket ban on RA aircraft in controlled airspace. Having said that in my opinion and remembering certain events involving previous mass "arrival" of RA aircraft, it would be extremely unwise for someone without a CTA endorsement to head for Bathurst and the operator is entirely justified in excluding unqualified people.

The core of Qantas strategic weakness is that it isn't a national airline at all. It is a Sydney - Centric organisation with very deep connections to the NSW political establishment. The reason for this connection, and it's importance, is that direct international flights are a major determinant of the destination for international business investment and tourism. Qantas deliberately biases its offerings to intending travellers from London and Los Angeles towards Sydney and have been doing it since at least 1975.\\ The way this works is that flight schedules are arranged so that Brisbane and Melbourne are effectively at least three hours further from LHR and LAX than SYD ona round trip basis. There is a cost penalty too. That means that investors get off the plane in Sydney and choose it as their headquarters. This is how Sydney became headquarters for arriving foreign banks and IT companies in the 1970's. A recent check using a VPN to masquerade as a British or American traveller shows they are still doing it. 'Every business decision Qantas makes has to take account of this secret bias and it seriously distorts their business. For example Qantas hogs the available Sydney slots but still opposes foreign competition because they will run direct flights out of Melbourne and Brisbane.

Moorabbin is going to close the instant the Minister thinks she can get away with it. To believe otherwise is naive.

Spaceman, wash your mouth out! You are talking facts and logic. That doesn't apply to the Greens.

Anyone think that the Minister for Qantas has the slightest interest in GA and recreational aviation? I do not. ''I wouldn't be surprised if the aviation white paper sacrifices piston engined aviation to the Green zealots. Forget changes to medical certification, weights and regulations. If anything, they may become more severe in my opinion.

A TV repairman committed suicide many years ago after a TV station did one of those phony repair exposed shows. ‘’Trouble was that the TV repairman diligently went through an expensive fault finding process before discovering. the “ten cent blown fuse” - and charged according to his time as he should, only to get abused by 60 minutes or whoever. Translation: Stop confusing the apparent minimal nature of the change with the cost of the process to determine its safety and pay up. If you don’t think that’s right, then go buy your aircraft fasteners at Bunnings, after all, according. to you, a 1/4 inch bolt is a 1/4 inch bolt isn’t it?

rotax 912 iS ECU requires two rotations at more than 200 rpm with twelve volts on ECU, so don’t bother trying to hand start it.

Anyone who thinks electric cars are the answer doesn’t understand physics or logistics or failing those, is a potential genocidal dictator. A short drive through any third world city will demonstrate. Consideration of the marginal productivity of one litre of oil to a peasant farmer will indicate that the economic imperative is against you.

A standard sized cooler, Rotax or setrab should be fine provided you are not doing anything unusual. Your Airmaster comes set at about 5700 for takeoff and 5500 for climb.

I suspect part of the problem might be Covid. The other part may be that the engines may be used in drones and there is a war going on……..

See my PM and don’t worry.

Onetrack, it has mechanical injection. No electronics.

Section 10 refers, but section 11 is wanting. There is one manouvre that should be absolutely prohibited: that is a “touch and go” on a short strip intended for STOL training. ‘It is axiomatic that if it’s a real short strip with obstacles at each end then when you “practice” STOL landing techniques then there is no room for error once you are committed. Think about it; to be successful you cannot do a touch and go because technically that requires at least the full length of the strip and then some. A failed touch and go almost involved me in a crash but for the extreme actions of the demonstrating instructor.. ‘’In my opinion, either practice STOL techniques with a touch and go on a looong strip with no obstacles. If you are practicing for real on a short strip, make a commit height decision and once committed, land, do a full stop , backtrack and takeoff. I assume the instructor wrote our incident up but no action was taken by anyone. ‘’The technique of using touch and go for teaching STOL or precautionary landings on “real” short strips is akin to testing your cars brakes by charging at speed at a concrete wall to see if your judgement and brakes are sufficiently capable. If they are lacking and you are not killed, you get to buy a new car. ‘’Precautionary or STOL touch and go is in the same class as practicing engine failure on multi engine aircraft.

Boycott BP?