walrus

Keith, what concerns me is that the associations don’t become miniature CASAs and then inflict pain on their members like CASA allegedly does to GA.

I hope the survivor makes a good recovery. Three points that might or might not be relevant: 1. With a constant speed prop, the engine can often make rated rpm but produce little power. Manifold pressure won’t tell you. You have to check fuel flow to confirm you are making rated power. Flow would be about 23l/h at 5800 full power. Mere engine noise won’t tell you much. Furthermore, if the prop is installed and adjusted correctly, you should be able to take off on the full coarse pitch stop at the cost of overloading the engine. 2. When the aircraft takes off it is flying relatively easily in ground effect until it reaches about 1.5 times wingspan. Climbing above that depends on power available and aircraft weight. 3. I have a 912iS, not yet flying, it has lots of redundancy. About the only things, I think, that might go wrong absent complete mechanical collapse, are air and fuel flow. On my aircraft, shutting the fuel cutoff stops the engine in about two seconds. Rotax normally supplies two fuel pumps in one assembly. Provided both were on for takeoff there shouldn’t be a fuel problem unless there was a restriction like a clogged filter(gascolator and high pressure filter) or water somewhere. The pumps and ignition use generator A and if that fails there is instantaneous switch over to generator B so if the engine was turning the pumps were running. Assuming the Aircraft had an EFIS, you would expect voltage and fuel pressure warnings.

Only listed businesses are required to close. Some like cafes can offer takeaway. Schools are optional in some states. I don’t think there is anything specific about flying schools. There is advice against non essential travel but no definition other than “common sense”. Doing a BFR involves “close contact” which is your only problem. However beauty salons, dentists, physio, chiropractors any other business not listed is allowed to operate.

Who. told you recreational flying ceases?

Aircraft type? VH?

My understanding is that aircraft that are designed and built as LSA have a design and certified mtow of 600kg. if you build something with a higher mtow that is not built by a manufacturer as an LSA, then you can get the higher MTOW. Is that correct?

Weekend course for an international certificate of competency and you can charter a yacht in europe.

And

Jet fuel is a very good insulator and that means it is a great source of static electricity- much more than petrol - which is often “dirty” so conducts. Several explosions and fires have been caused by “switch loading” - filling an empty tank that had petrol in it with diesel or jet fuel. Petrol leaves an explosive vapor and the diesel provides the spark. But back on topic, to get an explosion from fuel vapor you need to have the concentration between the upper and lower explosive limits and then supply a spark of a high energy. Fuel proof phones and radios are termed “intrinsically safe” if they can’t produce a spark of sufficient energy. All you are trying to do with bonding and earthing is to get all the gear at the same potential.

Looks to me to be a good setup. The only thing you might like to consider is using an aluminium suction side tube instead of plastic - less chance of spark production. If you are using a recognized fuel hose (ASTM - something) that should have enough conductivity to prevent static build up. Assuming your aircraft battery is earthed to the airframe and the pump frame is also earthed to negative, then you shouldn’t have a spark generating issue - except that poly pipe. If your switch breaks the positive wire, then everything stays connected after switch is off as long as you remove hose from tank before removing the Anderson plug.

How does your vane pump handle suction?

CASA have published the paper on the MTOW increase proposal. Generally, people are for it. However the devil may be in the detail in regard to maintenance and medical standards. We will have to wait and see. If I was cynical, I'd be concerned that there is an element of 'divide and rule' in CASA's thinking because the proposal as it stands, disadvantages associations other than RAA. It could perhaps be wondered if the weight increase is a "present' to RAA for swallowing the self management bait. https://consultation.casa.gov.au/regulatory-program/dp-1912ss/results/socondp1912ss.pdf

They hate private aviation, period.

Going back to the early 1970’s - flying around Australia with three friends in a tri pacer, our leader made a point of having us rotate into the RH front seat and do the flying in cruise so he could navigate. Only problem was that one of us non pilots flew into cloud...

Engine failure followed by an attempted turn back?

Read the first paragraph of your privacy policy. You are called "customers" not "members". This has huge strategic implications because the association is now a "business". There are huge implications for members control over RAA implicit in that.

Airsickness will stop after acclimatisation. Ask any DAME, its quite common when you start aerobatics.

If you read the regulations for 149, in my opinion, RAA is jumping out of the frying pan into the fire because CASA actually INCREASES its control of sport aviation under these regulations. CASA must approve all major staffing positions and there are criminal penalties attached to the administration of all RAA activity. CASA can direct in detail all RAA operations and the members get no say whatsoever. Of course if you are a CASA approved RAA staff member, you can name your own salary because replacing you can be made virtually impossible by CASA. RAA effectively becomes a CASA ‘mini me” and can be all the more vicious because it is outside even the lax prudential controls that limit CASA behaviour.

You are completely missing the point. What must be understood is that safety, like all other decisions, is about costs and benefits. You have forgotten the benefits side of the equation like most people. So yes, you might possibly be right about reducing accidents but have you considered the economic benefits of car driving? No. You can easily reduce car accidents to zero by prohibiting driving. The trouble is you are then faced with the massive economic consequences and costs of moving goods and people manually. Use horses? They had massive costs including safety issues as well. Use public transport? Same same. The free market generally works and the driving standards and technology we currently use provide something like the lowest cost option. Electric cars and self driving technology may reduce those costs again. This is why CASA approach to aviation regulation is such a disaster, they refuse to use a risk management cost benefit approach, even though ICAO codified everything I’ve said in manuals, right down to the probability figures to be used as thresholds.

You had better hope that your “basic class 2” medical standard does NOT become law or RAA pilot numbers will collapse and with it your association. I think it is well understood that a major source of RAA membership is previously CASA licensed pilots migrating to RAA aircraft when it becomes expensive or difficult to hold a class 1 or 2 medical certificate. RAA can research this number if they like. However while you are told by CASA that their new basic class 2 is the same as the Australian truck driving standard, that’s not quite correct. It’s “based” on that standard but CASA has the same nasty twists as before which makes it far more difficult to obtain than mere self certification. You will not notice this until you read the instructions to certifying doctors and the application paperwork itself - which is not too my knowledge freely available on the web for download. You have o sign up for one of these things to get access to it. Then you get to read the fine print......The doctor has to sign that she has “no reservations and unreservedly certifies” that you meet the standard, but the whole list of conditions that make it hard to keep a class2 - diabetes, heart conditions, stents, blood pressure, etc., etc. have to be disclosed and are by definition reasons to make reservations. Catch 22. To put that another way “joe blow meets the requirements but for (insert condition)” and you don’t get your certificate. Furthermore doctors realise they are carrying the full legal liability for certifying you. Instead of today, where you carry the liability of certifying you. Sure, there are let outs for hearing and visual standards, but that is all. And the truck driving standard is harder to meet then the current car driving standard

What’s the criteria for listing?

Thank you again for your continued abuse of private pilots.

I am sorry for your loss. I stand by what I say. Tragedy is all around us every day but we ignore it. Your tragedy, respectfully, is no different from thousands of others although I understand it’s personal impact. Your reaction is also perfectly normal. However your claim that your personal tragedy is somehow so strikingly different from the norm that, because of it, Angel Flight is somehow to blame and needs to be destroyed or changed beyond recognition is not justified by it. I am not some armchair idiot with no empathy. I have suffered divorce, the slow death of a later partner by cancer, and various vicious attacks in my life. I am a volunteer firefighter and have unfortunately seen tragedies just as bad as yours. My son is a policeman who has seen much worse death and suffering than I have and is now paying the mental price for that. I am now fighting two other personal battles, through no fault of my own, just like you, that have the capacity to destroy what’s left of my life. I wish to suggest to you that the best response, outside religion and suicide, is to try to rise above these tragedies and do good. For example, why are regional health services so rotten that AF is even needed? How can you assist AF in its mission in memory of your family? If you allow it, as it seems you might have, bitterness, rage and anger will consume you, making you another victim of the accident. Walrus.

Families are decimated by road accidents every day of the week. So a few die in air crashes.....who cares? If if we let CASA and it’s ATSB lapdog regulate road transport, we’d all be driving at 30 kph daylight hours only, wearing crash helmets, 4 point harnesses and roll bars. We would also have to stop when it was wet. Everything in life carries risk. Get used to it.

A quick back of the envelope calculation indicates there is nothing wrong with Angel Flight at all. BITRE data from 2015 shows total VH relevant private flying time (not training, parachuting, mustering etc.) is about 289,000 hrs pa. ATSB data quotes “2006-2010 72 vfr into imc incidents - 7 fatal” I’m assuming here that we aren’t talking professional pilots having these accidents. So if we said about 1 fatal private vfr into imc per 150,000 hrs is that far wrong? Now look at Angel Flight - 46,000 flights over ten years, 2 fatal. Assuming 5 hours per AF mission that’s 230,000 hrs - for 2 fatals. That is not significantly different from the general private community in statistical poisson distribution terms.