Windfarms 3
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Close
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Windfarms 3
I see that the current Select Committee on Wind Turbines sat again yesterday in Canberra. I also see that this matter would appear to be far from over with some 471 submissions provided thus far for the committee's consideration.
From reading some of these submissions it is quite clear that the issue of wind turbines and the varying positive and negative benefits or detractors relating to same are being taken quite seriously. From an aviation perspective in particular submission 30 provides some insight into the issues surrounding the Crookwell aerodrome (NSW). The author of this submission, (who is well known and highly respected within the industry) has certainly put the committee on notice as set out in the following quote from the closing page of his submission...
I read somewhere in another post that someone alluded to the fact that there are no "old or bold" pilots. I'm not so sure about that as quite clearly such pilots have alot to offer.....
No doubt there'll be more to come regarding this topic as the hearing continues.....
Stiky
From reading some of these submissions it is quite clear that the issue of wind turbines and the varying positive and negative benefits or detractors relating to same are being taken quite seriously. From an aviation perspective in particular submission 30 provides some insight into the issues surrounding the Crookwell aerodrome (NSW). The author of this submission, (who is well known and highly respected within the industry) has certainly put the committee on notice as set out in the following quote from the closing page of his submission...
It is my firm belief that it is not a matter of “if”, it’s a matter of “when” there will be a fatal accident involving the collision of an aircraft or helicopter operating from a rural airport.
I read somewhere in another post that someone alluded to the fact that there are no "old or bold" pilots. I'm not so sure about that as quite clearly such pilots have alot to offer.....
No doubt there'll be more to come regarding this topic as the hearing continues.....
Stiky
Last edited by Stikybeke; 20th May 2015 at 02:26.
At 432 metres elevation I'm surprised that nobody has ever run into the Omega tower in Gippsland, Victoria, based on the comments in the article above.
It had been there for 32 years and has just been demolished. It was harder to see than a wind farm turbine is exponentially, plus it had guide wires that gave it a significantly large footprint, as much as several wind turbines and it was even adjacent an RAAF low flying area.
It had been there for 32 years and has just been demolished. It was harder to see than a wind farm turbine is exponentially, plus it had guide wires that gave it a significantly large footprint, as much as several wind turbines and it was even adjacent an RAAF low flying area.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I would imagine there is some other motives, it can't be just the hazard.
I am not defending wind farms either….I think they are an eyesore and not a particularly good energy solution.
I am not defending wind farms either….I think they are an eyesore and not a particularly good energy solution.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a pilot who works below 500ft everyday, i think that the wind turbines themselves arent a huge hazard. Its the monitoring towers placed on or in the general area (or just at random wherever they thought was a good site) that pose the greatest risk to safe aviation. These things are basically unmarked (except the smallest of marker balls that you have to be within 100m of to see) and unlit. On any given day the are almost invisible to the human eye, even when you know they are there......somewhere!!!!
Whether they are a safe, environmentally friendly way to produce power, well......................depends on which 'expert' you believe.
Whether they are a safe, environmentally friendly way to produce power, well......................depends on which 'expert' you believe.
................
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From a house and hangar a community that had preistage views to a community that is devided by those that have and those that don't. To now poeple that won't them of their land. Poeple that are now sick can't sleep can't work on their own property's can't sell their places can't live in their places have their places devalued by half .
Yep vested interest.
One word.
Moron
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crookwell wind turbine facts.
Each turbine is 450 feet agl. Dia of the blades is 100 meters.
100 meters is a foot ball field.
Now work out at a 12 knot wind speed tip speed.
Look at take off speed of say a 747. Wing length.
Tip vortices
8 deaths in the USA from a direct hit from a blade/ tower
18 accidents from guild wire hits.
Now these don't produce power more than 30% of the time.
These turbines are constant vortices.
Each turbine is 450 feet agl. Dia of the blades is 100 meters.
100 meters is a foot ball field.
Now work out at a 12 knot wind speed tip speed.
Look at take off speed of say a 747. Wing length.
Tip vortices
8 deaths in the USA from a direct hit from a blade/ tower
18 accidents from guild wire hits.
Now these don't produce power more than 30% of the time.
These turbines are constant vortices.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Definition of vested interest.
Get on a forum let's say aviation.
Convince everyone they need a product.
Let's say Mmm run lop.
Oh I run a course on lop.
Charge people to go to the course.
Provide no data lead with miss truths about engine o/h time etc.
not have the course recognized because it's not approved.
Not approved because the data not approved.
Next time ****e comes out of your mouth get your facts first. The gentleman you refer too have more credibility in his little toe than you will ever have.
But because you live in Sydney Melbroune or Brisbane f anyone that lives in the bush. F them as they have no rights. Well f u.
You think I'm up set well yes. Do I have a right. F yes I do.
When you have done what he has done or just part off it then feel free to make comment.
As for vested interest he didn't wish to see anyone hurt.
Get on a forum let's say aviation.
Convince everyone they need a product.
Let's say Mmm run lop.
Oh I run a course on lop.
Charge people to go to the course.
Provide no data lead with miss truths about engine o/h time etc.
not have the course recognized because it's not approved.
Not approved because the data not approved.
Next time ****e comes out of your mouth get your facts first. The gentleman you refer too have more credibility in his little toe than you will ever have.
But because you live in Sydney Melbroune or Brisbane f anyone that lives in the bush. F them as they have no rights. Well f u.
You think I'm up set well yes. Do I have a right. F yes I do.
When you have done what he has done or just part off it then feel free to make comment.
As for vested interest he didn't wish to see anyone hurt.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAAct 9A and a proper safety case
The matter is about whether or not casa is properly looking at wind turbine proposals and that is where the senators are leading the questioning.
casa have not properly answered the questions on 19th May 2015 and that is the underlying issue.
Ask KSA whether approval was given for a hotel to protrude into the overlying airspace and issues of safety??
Answer is by 3metres.
Ask casa about intrusions into Canberra airspace by Goulburn skydivers and issues of safety??
Answer is, never met a safety case.
AND you want us to go on?
This is not casa bashing lookleft/ tintillbilla, but the raising of safety concerns by the community and the hiding of them by casa.
No doubt CAAct 9A applies hare and has not been met.
casa have not properly answered the questions on 19th May 2015 and that is the underlying issue.
Ask KSA whether approval was given for a hotel to protrude into the overlying airspace and issues of safety??
Answer is by 3metres.
Ask casa about intrusions into Canberra airspace by Goulburn skydivers and issues of safety??
Answer is, never met a safety case.
AND you want us to go on?
This is not casa bashing lookleft/ tintillbilla, but the raising of safety concerns by the community and the hiding of them by casa.
No doubt CAAct 9A applies hare and has not been met.
Last edited by Up-into-the-air; 21st May 2015 at 01:55. Reason: spelling - Again!!
Spelling mistakes and punctuation errors. Malapropisms. Yay, Yr right is back!
Surely if you wanted people to agree with a point of view you would want to make it easy for them to comprehend this with a reasonable standard of English rather than this barely decipherable rubbish.
I teach English and I still can't work out from the context what you mean by the misspelt word, "devided." Do you mean "divided" or "derided?"
How about some sympathy for the readers of your posts, Yr Right?
Surely if you wanted people to agree with a point of view you would want to make it easy for them to comprehend this with a reasonable standard of English rather than this barely decipherable rubbish.
I teach English and I still can't work out from the context what you mean by the misspelt word, "devided." Do you mean "divided" or "derided?"
How about some sympathy for the readers of your posts, Yr Right?
