Demise Of General Aviation - The Canary In The Coal Mine?
Thread Starter
Demise Of General Aviation - The Canary In The Coal Mine?
There are a number of threads on Pprune that suggest, time and again, that the General Aviation Industry is in decline a postulate I tend to agree with although I have no hard evidence for it. I would like to suggest that, if true, the decline of GA is the proverbial "canary in the coal mine" - the delicate organism that is perhaps the most sensitive part of our economy and the first to signal the onset of lethal economic shock - by dying.
I label the GA industry, and aviation in general with the exception of the space industry as arguably the most sensitive creation of industrial Western civilisation. We are not an avian species and the design, manufacture, supply, maintenance, repair, operation, education, training and regulation of aviation is about as sophisticated a creation a relatively small group of people has ever developed. When we fly something we are at the pointy end of a supply chain that not only stretches around the world but stretches backwards in time - embodying everything we think we know or have discovered since the Wright Brothers.
Now in my opinion, this makes the aviation industry uniquely sensitive to the economic virus that not only killed the Roman Empire but to this day still determines the wealth of nations. The name of the virus is transaction costs. Now a transaction cost as most would know, is a cost of doing business. It is not a material cost like avgas or a new tyre, it adds nothing to the experience.
In aviation, the classic example is the release note. It tells us that the part meets specification and is legal to apply to an airframe. The release note doesn't make the aircraft fly, what it does is tell us that a myriad of transaction costs have been paid for things like raw material traceability, quality control systems, certification, insurance and legal costs, occupational health and safety, etc., etc., etc.
Now we know that some of these costs are unavoidable and beneficial - we like to know the aircraft is as safe as it is possible to make it - approved parts and all that, but the trouble is that things get more expensive as transaction costs mount up - it has even been suggested that about a Third of the cost of an aircraft these days is insurance and legal - ie: transaction costs.
To put it another way, outside of the space and perhaps the health industry, I can think of no other industry as bound up in Red Tape as aviation. Terence Kealey in his excellent work "The Economic Laws of Scientific Research", points out that what destroyed the Roman Empire was not the Goths and Vandals, it was red tape. The entire Roman economy was mired so deeply in custom, tradition, procedure and law that the weight of supporting the entire regulatory and Governance infrastructure simply crushed the agricultural industry it relied on - the labourers essential to the system were taxed so much that their families starved, no matter how much grain they produced.
It was the transaction costs that killed the Roman Empire - the weight of central Government simply got too large to support. Production fell. Taxes and tax collectors multiplied and the system collapsed under its own weight. The Goths and Vandals simply took advantage of Romes weakness. They were greeted as liberators in the Roman provinces - sweeping away a plethora of suffocating taxation and hidebound Roman law.
Francis Fukuyama adds another dimension in his work "Trust: The economic value of Trust and Cooperation". Trust has been ignored by economists. Fukuyama argues that the existence of high levels of trust between people reduces transaction costs when doing business. More importantly, he argues that you cannot do business with someone you don't trust without very high transaction costs as you try and protect/insure yourself against bad behaviour. My first employment contract was a handshake. My last was Thirty pages. Guess which contract was built on trust and what it cost.
So what has this to do with aviation, especially General Aviation? The answer is "everything" because we rely on a chain of trust from start to finish and any weakening of trust levels throughout the industry is immediately going to cause pain. So people are worried about AirServices Australia? The ATSB? CASA? What do we think we see? Declining levels of trust. Then there are the suppliers: are aircraft and related supplies getting cheaper by the day? Blame transaction costs. Is your airport under attack from shifty property developers - add another transaction cost.
Even more transaction costs are soon to be heaped on General Aviation if my own experience is any guide. Wait for the Occupational Health and Safety Nazis to infect the industry. The first signs of an infestation of these Oxygen thieves will be a rash of mandatory flouro vests on the tarmac, after that they become very creative in saddling you with all sorts of safety measures that increase your transaction costs out of all proportion to their claimed benefit - and they never stop adding to the crushing weight.
In the marine area, which I inhabit, I am aware of British regulations that require any worker even walking on a marina to wear a hard hat and life jacket. Our own planning process for an extension to our marina has taken Ten years, for The St Kilda marina, the process has taken Twenty Seven years! We are surrounded by Oxygen thieves and bear in mind that every coven of them requires secretarial support, gender equity awareness trainers, an indigenous opportunity executive and of course their own strategic plan to be printed on glossy paper at great expense.
Some of us hope to avoid the oxygen thieves and their baskets of transaction costs. I plan to move to the country and I'm building a kit aircraft, but I have no illusions. They will come after me eventually when they have finished kiling GA. Then they will kill the rest of the Australian economy - just ask the miners how long an approval process now takes. Furthermore, don't even think about building a new petroleum refinary, airport or power station, the sun will die before the approvals are granted.
Merry Christmas, lets pray the Mayans were right.
I label the GA industry, and aviation in general with the exception of the space industry as arguably the most sensitive creation of industrial Western civilisation. We are not an avian species and the design, manufacture, supply, maintenance, repair, operation, education, training and regulation of aviation is about as sophisticated a creation a relatively small group of people has ever developed. When we fly something we are at the pointy end of a supply chain that not only stretches around the world but stretches backwards in time - embodying everything we think we know or have discovered since the Wright Brothers.
Now in my opinion, this makes the aviation industry uniquely sensitive to the economic virus that not only killed the Roman Empire but to this day still determines the wealth of nations. The name of the virus is transaction costs. Now a transaction cost as most would know, is a cost of doing business. It is not a material cost like avgas or a new tyre, it adds nothing to the experience.
In aviation, the classic example is the release note. It tells us that the part meets specification and is legal to apply to an airframe. The release note doesn't make the aircraft fly, what it does is tell us that a myriad of transaction costs have been paid for things like raw material traceability, quality control systems, certification, insurance and legal costs, occupational health and safety, etc., etc., etc.
Now we know that some of these costs are unavoidable and beneficial - we like to know the aircraft is as safe as it is possible to make it - approved parts and all that, but the trouble is that things get more expensive as transaction costs mount up - it has even been suggested that about a Third of the cost of an aircraft these days is insurance and legal - ie: transaction costs.
To put it another way, outside of the space and perhaps the health industry, I can think of no other industry as bound up in Red Tape as aviation. Terence Kealey in his excellent work "The Economic Laws of Scientific Research", points out that what destroyed the Roman Empire was not the Goths and Vandals, it was red tape. The entire Roman economy was mired so deeply in custom, tradition, procedure and law that the weight of supporting the entire regulatory and Governance infrastructure simply crushed the agricultural industry it relied on - the labourers essential to the system were taxed so much that their families starved, no matter how much grain they produced.
It was the transaction costs that killed the Roman Empire - the weight of central Government simply got too large to support. Production fell. Taxes and tax collectors multiplied and the system collapsed under its own weight. The Goths and Vandals simply took advantage of Romes weakness. They were greeted as liberators in the Roman provinces - sweeping away a plethora of suffocating taxation and hidebound Roman law.
Francis Fukuyama adds another dimension in his work "Trust: The economic value of Trust and Cooperation". Trust has been ignored by economists. Fukuyama argues that the existence of high levels of trust between people reduces transaction costs when doing business. More importantly, he argues that you cannot do business with someone you don't trust without very high transaction costs as you try and protect/insure yourself against bad behaviour. My first employment contract was a handshake. My last was Thirty pages. Guess which contract was built on trust and what it cost.
So what has this to do with aviation, especially General Aviation? The answer is "everything" because we rely on a chain of trust from start to finish and any weakening of trust levels throughout the industry is immediately going to cause pain. So people are worried about AirServices Australia? The ATSB? CASA? What do we think we see? Declining levels of trust. Then there are the suppliers: are aircraft and related supplies getting cheaper by the day? Blame transaction costs. Is your airport under attack from shifty property developers - add another transaction cost.
Even more transaction costs are soon to be heaped on General Aviation if my own experience is any guide. Wait for the Occupational Health and Safety Nazis to infect the industry. The first signs of an infestation of these Oxygen thieves will be a rash of mandatory flouro vests on the tarmac, after that they become very creative in saddling you with all sorts of safety measures that increase your transaction costs out of all proportion to their claimed benefit - and they never stop adding to the crushing weight.
In the marine area, which I inhabit, I am aware of British regulations that require any worker even walking on a marina to wear a hard hat and life jacket. Our own planning process for an extension to our marina has taken Ten years, for The St Kilda marina, the process has taken Twenty Seven years! We are surrounded by Oxygen thieves and bear in mind that every coven of them requires secretarial support, gender equity awareness trainers, an indigenous opportunity executive and of course their own strategic plan to be printed on glossy paper at great expense.
Some of us hope to avoid the oxygen thieves and their baskets of transaction costs. I plan to move to the country and I'm building a kit aircraft, but I have no illusions. They will come after me eventually when they have finished kiling GA. Then they will kill the rest of the Australian economy - just ask the miners how long an approval process now takes. Furthermore, don't even think about building a new petroleum refinary, airport or power station, the sun will die before the approvals are granted.
Merry Christmas, lets pray the Mayans were right.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunny,
An excellent post and a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you as well. Don't worry about the Mayans, they just forgot to buy next years calendar.
Your thoughts on GA have echoed something that I have been pondering on for some time now - stuck as I am in GA. The cost of compliance is killing GA. I don't just mean regulatory compliance but that has an enormous part in the equation. Principally, the majority of GA is stuck behind the 11 pax rule which is making the cost per seat enormous and approaching the point where it is uneconomic for the customer to consider charter. However, in the airlines the size of aircraft is unlimited and increasing (within some sort of physical limit - think airport size, runway availability etc.). Therefore they are able to keep the cost per seat within what the pubic will tolerate.
Already it is being suggested that the replacement aircraft for the A320 and B737 NG will be larger again. This is the only way that airlines can keep offering discount seats which gets the majority of travellers to fly rather than catch a bus/train/don't travel at all. Think back to the days of the 2 airline policy (for pilots, halcyon days that grow rosier as the memory fades). I recall reading a figure that only about 20% of the Australian population had ever flown let alone flown more than once, now the figure is closer to 80%. Aircraft seating capacity has grown from 36 (Comet 1) to the gawd knows how many (A380) yet in GA the numbers have hardly changed.
There are a lot of other aspects to the decline of GA as well but I agree with you, the dismal science of economics is gradually killing it.
An excellent post and a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you as well. Don't worry about the Mayans, they just forgot to buy next years calendar.
Your thoughts on GA have echoed something that I have been pondering on for some time now - stuck as I am in GA. The cost of compliance is killing GA. I don't just mean regulatory compliance but that has an enormous part in the equation. Principally, the majority of GA is stuck behind the 11 pax rule which is making the cost per seat enormous and approaching the point where it is uneconomic for the customer to consider charter. However, in the airlines the size of aircraft is unlimited and increasing (within some sort of physical limit - think airport size, runway availability etc.). Therefore they are able to keep the cost per seat within what the pubic will tolerate.
Already it is being suggested that the replacement aircraft for the A320 and B737 NG will be larger again. This is the only way that airlines can keep offering discount seats which gets the majority of travellers to fly rather than catch a bus/train/don't travel at all. Think back to the days of the 2 airline policy (for pilots, halcyon days that grow rosier as the memory fades). I recall reading a figure that only about 20% of the Australian population had ever flown let alone flown more than once, now the figure is closer to 80%. Aircraft seating capacity has grown from 36 (Comet 1) to the gawd knows how many (A380) yet in GA the numbers have hardly changed.
There are a lot of other aspects to the decline of GA as well but I agree with you, the dismal science of economics is gradually killing it.
A major cause of the rise of the oxygen thieves is the media, and consequently politicians, obsession with legislating away all risk. In the case of GA that is further reinforced by the media obsession with any aircraft accident, where ever it happens. Any light aircraft accident in Australia will be reported with a summary of the accidents in the area over the previous 10 years. These reports are also reinforced with ignorance and an absolute disregard for facts.
Simialr reactions arise from motor vehicle accidents involving the "immortals" males between 17 and 25! The media seem to believe that more laws will stop those who disregard rules as a matter of course.
One thing we in GA could do is ensure that our representative bodies do what their US counterparts do - provide an effective factual response to every such report and to also be more pro-active in promoting the benefits of GA. We usually only seem to tell those stories to ourselves while complaining that we are having a hard time.
I am not sure that all of GA is dying. Look at the data in the CTAF thread and the CASA and BITRE reports. Aircraft numbers are up, flying hours are slowly improving. 3500 RA-Aus aircraft and 1800 amateur built VH registered aircraft are not signs of death. Twenty years ago there were only about 350 amaueur builts on the VH register.
Simialr reactions arise from motor vehicle accidents involving the "immortals" males between 17 and 25! The media seem to believe that more laws will stop those who disregard rules as a matter of course.
One thing we in GA could do is ensure that our representative bodies do what their US counterparts do - provide an effective factual response to every such report and to also be more pro-active in promoting the benefits of GA. We usually only seem to tell those stories to ourselves while complaining that we are having a hard time.
I am not sure that all of GA is dying. Look at the data in the CTAF thread and the CASA and BITRE reports. Aircraft numbers are up, flying hours are slowly improving. 3500 RA-Aus aircraft and 1800 amateur built VH registered aircraft are not signs of death. Twenty years ago there were only about 350 amaueur builts on the VH register.
Aircraft numbers are up, flying hours are slowly improving. 3500 RA-Aus aircraft and 1800 amateur built VH registered aircraft are not signs of death. Twenty years ago there were only about 350 amaueur builts on the VH register.
And all caused by what??
The reforms of what is now Part 21 of the CASRs in 1998, and the removal of great regulatory imposts are entirely responsible for this --- freeing up the whole system for amateur built (and maintained) including the 19- register for Experimental amateur built administered by RAOz, ne. AUF.
Getting rid of meaninglessly restrictive regulation.
Make no mistake, moving on from the highly restrictive 101.28 AABA type of amateur building to the freedom of the US style Experimental Amateur Built (so vehemently opposed, at the time, by those who equate "restrictive regulations" with "increased safety") was absolutely pivotal in the subsequent boom in amateur building.
And all this without any "reductions in safety" by greatly lightening the "certification" burden.
And further making the point about the increasing "over regulation" of what is left of conventional light GA, and it's inevitable result . The big increases in aircraft usage in the mining/oil/gas provinces disguises the steep decline in light private and business GA.
A pity we couldn't learn from Canada, and how they allow (with a modified C.of A) owner maintenance of older ( which means almost all) single engine light aircraft --- as if they were Experimental Amateur Built --- but, of course, the loudly baying naysayers all pronounced that "this wouldn't work in Australia", and the project died in CASA.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 20th Dec 2012 at 23:45.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: The Last Resort
Age: 52
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent Post
What a great analysis of why GA is doomed. $120 for a wheel bearing with an aviation stamp, $20 for the bearing at the local. Will the cheaper bearing fail before the aviation bearing, unlikely, but jack the aircraft rotate the wheel and find out. Trying to prevent Darwin from taking the dumb is dragging the whole population down to the lowest common denominator and destroying productivity.
The reason RAA-AUS was thriving is because risk management of maintenance and flying was left to the individual and commonsense prevailed. Yes people died who didn't know what they were doing but one could argue that death didn't allow them to contaminate the gene pool. Now RAA-AUS has grown so large that the influx of idiots has to be protected from themselves and RAA-AUS has morphed into GA. A victim of its own success.
Try making the simplest modification to a GA aircraft such as putting in an aftermarket Dynon EMS. No TSO but now well proven and cheaper than a JPI with twenty times the functionality. An improvement in safety but not allowed. Every GA aircraft should be fitted with synthetic vision for as little as $6000 but aircraft the world over are still CFIT'ing on a regular basis. Try trusting a LAME's judgment over very simple changes instead of a 20 page engineering order. Get rid of magnetos and replace with solid state electronics like everyone else did 30 years ago.
The price of GA has become horrendous this is why everyone has gone to RA
but don't hold your breath because CASA is stepping in there too. Very soon I will start building my own aircraft so I can control my own destiny. It is the dreamers that created aviation and suppressing the dreamers will destroy innovation.
The reason RAA-AUS was thriving is because risk management of maintenance and flying was left to the individual and commonsense prevailed. Yes people died who didn't know what they were doing but one could argue that death didn't allow them to contaminate the gene pool. Now RAA-AUS has grown so large that the influx of idiots has to be protected from themselves and RAA-AUS has morphed into GA. A victim of its own success.
Try making the simplest modification to a GA aircraft such as putting in an aftermarket Dynon EMS. No TSO but now well proven and cheaper than a JPI with twenty times the functionality. An improvement in safety but not allowed. Every GA aircraft should be fitted with synthetic vision for as little as $6000 but aircraft the world over are still CFIT'ing on a regular basis. Try trusting a LAME's judgment over very simple changes instead of a 20 page engineering order. Get rid of magnetos and replace with solid state electronics like everyone else did 30 years ago.
The price of GA has become horrendous this is why everyone has gone to RA
but don't hold your breath because CASA is stepping in there too. Very soon I will start building my own aircraft so I can control my own destiny. It is the dreamers that created aviation and suppressing the dreamers will destroy innovation.
I always wonder how much of what is expressed on PRUNE is fact, personal experience, assumption or just prejudice. I have built two aircraft from scratch, one under 101.28 and one EXPERIMENTAL. The latter was granted a 101.28 ABAA on the basis of a package of data I submitted to the CAA/CASA under the safe history of operation criteria. I did not find 101.28 "highly restrictive". I decided on the Experimental option because to provided more opportunities for me to carry out and certify my maintenance. I do not however believe that building automatically qualifies one as a maintainer as the knowledge bases of assembly/manufacture and inspection are quite different. There needs to be an absorption of both.
On the basis of review of the VH register and walking the flight line at events like AUSFLY or display days at Temora, I suspect that the advent of highly prefabricated kits such as the RV family have done much to increase the number of amateur built aircraft. The RVs would have had no issues under 101.28 and in fact the RV 3 and RV 4 have acceptance under 101.28.
While many like to hate the regulator, we all need to remember that people in CASA have assisted and in some cases driven the changes to the regs which we now enjoy. Ober the years there have been some opposed to change but the extent of change shows the limits to their influence.
I also note that some seem to assume that CASA has not had a role in RA-Aus. and that they are only now getting involved. That is not the case. The Civil Aviation Act applies to ALL forms of aviation activity and the Parliament holds CASA accountable for that.
On the basis of review of the VH register and walking the flight line at events like AUSFLY or display days at Temora, I suspect that the advent of highly prefabricated kits such as the RV family have done much to increase the number of amateur built aircraft. The RVs would have had no issues under 101.28 and in fact the RV 3 and RV 4 have acceptance under 101.28.
While many like to hate the regulator, we all need to remember that people in CASA have assisted and in some cases driven the changes to the regs which we now enjoy. Ober the years there have been some opposed to change but the extent of change shows the limits to their influence.
I also note that some seem to assume that CASA has not had a role in RA-Aus. and that they are only now getting involved. That is not the case. The Civil Aviation Act applies to ALL forms of aviation activity and the Parliament holds CASA accountable for that.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is exactly why I'm such an evangelist for electric propulsion in both cars and aviation. Thankfully it's now happening in cars and will soon reach critical mass there. Aviation will take a bit longer and need some more innovation - but it is coming.
The beauty of electrification is that it can't be controlled or taxed as fossil fuel can. Governments love proprietary technologies or assets that can't move freely - that's why almost all countries have some kind of taxation on property. Houses can't move to tax havens. And for gas, they can tax it because we, the laymen, can't produce it. We're in the hands of big refineries and cartels that control the refining and distribution. If we all could buy small refineries and have in our backyard and then order some crude oil in barrels and do it ourselves, then it would be another matter. But we can't.
Electric energy can be produced in a number of different ways, all of them with equipment you can buy over the shelf or construct. Solar, stream, heat, steam, nuclear etc. It's the equivalent of having that own refinery in your backyard. Now, this won't stop them trying to tax it, of course. If you invented a car that ran on water tomorrow, they'd tax that. They're not going to give up billions and billions of gas tax revenue quietly. So they'll tax the sh** out of electricity when the whole car fleet is electric, you can bet on that. But they will never be able to get to all of it - there are too many options to generate electricity. Ban solar power, ban steam power, ban stream power? They can't do that.
Therefore, I see the future as rather bright for GA. I think with electrification, we'll see not only much cheaper flying, but much safer. Maybe, just maybe, the utopian 20's idea that we'd all be flying around in aircraft 100 years later might just happen with electricity. Albeit, 100 years later than planned perhaps....
For anyone interested in electrification and the benefits to aviation, have a look at a thread I started years ago here:
http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...-aircraft.html
The beauty of electrification is that it can't be controlled or taxed as fossil fuel can. Governments love proprietary technologies or assets that can't move freely - that's why almost all countries have some kind of taxation on property. Houses can't move to tax havens. And for gas, they can tax it because we, the laymen, can't produce it. We're in the hands of big refineries and cartels that control the refining and distribution. If we all could buy small refineries and have in our backyard and then order some crude oil in barrels and do it ourselves, then it would be another matter. But we can't.
Electric energy can be produced in a number of different ways, all of them with equipment you can buy over the shelf or construct. Solar, stream, heat, steam, nuclear etc. It's the equivalent of having that own refinery in your backyard. Now, this won't stop them trying to tax it, of course. If you invented a car that ran on water tomorrow, they'd tax that. They're not going to give up billions and billions of gas tax revenue quietly. So they'll tax the sh** out of electricity when the whole car fleet is electric, you can bet on that. But they will never be able to get to all of it - there are too many options to generate electricity. Ban solar power, ban steam power, ban stream power? They can't do that.
Therefore, I see the future as rather bright for GA. I think with electrification, we'll see not only much cheaper flying, but much safer. Maybe, just maybe, the utopian 20's idea that we'd all be flying around in aircraft 100 years later might just happen with electricity. Albeit, 100 years later than planned perhaps....
For anyone interested in electrification and the benefits to aviation, have a look at a thread I started years ago here:
http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...-aircraft.html
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Sydney NSW
Age: 76
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vag, you said:
Not quite so Vag, for example: -
Also you said -
Don't forget that your aircraft type was granted an ABAA based on the safe history of its operation in another country, where it was allowed to fly in the first place, under experimental legislation. Couldn't do that here until experimental became law.
Happy Christmas all.
I also note that some seem to assume that CASA has not had a role in RA-Aus. and that they are only now getting involved. That is not the case. The Civil Aviation Act applies to ALL forms of aviation activity and the Parliament holds CASA accountable for that.
Civil Aviation Order 95.55 Instrument 2011
3.1 If the conditions set out in this Order are complied with, in relation to an aeroplane to which this Order applies, the aeroplane is exempt from compliance with the following provisions of CAR 1988:
(a) Parts 4A, 4B, 4C, 4D, and 5;
(b) regulations 36A and 37;
(c) subregulations 83 (1), (2) and (3) in respect of VHF equipment;
(d) regulations 133, 139, 155 and 157;
(e) regulations 207 and 208;
(f) regulation 210 as far as advertising of flying training to qualify for a pilot standard specified in the RAA Operations Manual is concerned;
(g) regulation 230;
(h) subregulation 242 (2);
(i) regulation 252;
(j) regulation 258.
5.1 For section 20AB of the Act, a person is authorised to perform a duty essential to the operation of an aeroplane to which this Order applies, without holding a flight crew licence if he or she complies with the conditions set out in subsections 6 and 7.
3.1 If the conditions set out in this Order are complied with, in relation to an aeroplane to which this Order applies, the aeroplane is exempt from compliance with the following provisions of CAR 1988:
(a) Parts 4A, 4B, 4C, 4D, and 5;
(b) regulations 36A and 37;
(c) subregulations 83 (1), (2) and (3) in respect of VHF equipment;
(d) regulations 133, 139, 155 and 157;
(e) regulations 207 and 208;
(f) regulation 210 as far as advertising of flying training to qualify for a pilot standard specified in the RAA Operations Manual is concerned;
(g) regulation 230;
(h) subregulation 242 (2);
(i) regulation 252;
(j) regulation 258.
5.1 For section 20AB of the Act, a person is authorised to perform a duty essential to the operation of an aeroplane to which this Order applies, without holding a flight crew licence if he or she complies with the conditions set out in subsections 6 and 7.
I have built two aircraft from scratch, one under 101.28 and one EXPERIMENTAL. The latter was granted a 101.28 ABAA on the basis of a package of data I submitted to the CAA/CASA under the safe history of operation criteria. I did not find 101.28 "highly restrictive".
Happy Christmas all.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is not mine!!!
This I found recently and I post as we are near the silly season:
New Scientific Discovery! « International Liberty
New Scientific Discovery! « International Liberty
« “Cash for Clunkers” Symbolizes Government StupidityOver-Sensitivity Alert »
New Scientific Discovery!
August 4, 2009 by Dan Mitchell
A major research institution has recently announced the discovery of the heaviest chemical element yet known to science. The new element has been tentatively named “Governmentium”.
Governmentium has one neutron, 12 assistant neutrons, 75 deputy neutrons, and 11 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.
These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert.
However, it can be detected as it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A minute amount of Governmentium causes one reaction to take over four days to complete when it would normally take less than a second.
Governmentium has a normal half-life of three years; it does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.
In fact, Governmentium’s mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes. This characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientists to speculate that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration.
This hypothetical quantity is referred to as “Critical Morass”.
You will know it when you see it.
New Scientific Discovery!
August 4, 2009 by Dan Mitchell
A major research institution has recently announced the discovery of the heaviest chemical element yet known to science. The new element has been tentatively named “Governmentium”.
Governmentium has one neutron, 12 assistant neutrons, 75 deputy neutrons, and 11 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.
These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert.
However, it can be detected as it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A minute amount of Governmentium causes one reaction to take over four days to complete when it would normally take less than a second.
Governmentium has a normal half-life of three years; it does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.
In fact, Governmentium’s mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes. This characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientists to speculate that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration.
This hypothetical quantity is referred to as “Critical Morass”.
You will know it when you see it.
Last edited by Up-into-the-air; 21st Dec 2012 at 09:08.
don't even think about building a new petroleum refinary,
Next to our brand new ($1.7 billion) desal plant, also not being used.
Last edited by Arnold E; 21st Dec 2012 at 09:21.
What a great analysis of why GA is doomed. $120 for a wheel bearing with an aviation stamp, $20 for the bearing at the local. Will the cheaper bearing fail before the aviation bearing, unlikely, but jack the aircraft rotate the wheel and find out.
--- In all but the rarest of cases ---- mostly helo. rotors, the bearing is the same.
Some time ago (but nothing's changed) AOPA ordered a set of wheel bearings for the main wheels of a C-152 from a well known parts supplier, knowing full well the answer!!
And the answer was: Come back after 13.00, we will have them.
Next question: Why after 1300?
Answer: Because Bearing Services Co's next delivery will be about 1200.
And the lesson here (and the huge price difference at the time, about $15.00 per bearing versus about $67.00 a bearing) the only difference was the release note/invoice made then "legal". Turned out, they were delivered shrink wrapped just like you would see them hanging on the wall at Repco., rather than the usual manufacturer boxes.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: OZ
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Revisiting Medusa
Beware Ppruners! Our Medusa CASA has morphed into one giant poisonous snake with divided fangs.
On the one hand (or fang) he is all knowing/all powerful. On the other he is a seeker of revenge, where his little mind probes to destroy the very people he was set up to protect and serve.
The werewolf is nothing by comparison! CASA does not need a full moon in order to perform.
He has gathered other shape-changers around him, smilng assassins who run to do his biddiing , before they too, meet their fate. They enjoy annihilating hard-working, law-abiding air folk, who try to make sense of the often ambiguous instructions CASA has provided.
These instructions seem to be deliberately obtuse and open to interpretation, in order to give CASA a means of using them to his advantage. eg Barrier Aviation.
Beware this snake! It is part boa-constrictor and oozes poison indiscriminately. But it lives - therefore it can die.
How do we kill it? With apples my friends. Very special apples that don't grow on trees. They are called 'strength of purpose" - "resolve to be right" - "seekers of truth" - etc
The more we show the truth of things, the better justice will be served. Don't believe the cynics who say you don't get justice. They are lazy and don't care.
Be proud of your purpose.
Always - Always - remember that you who surf the skies, have friends everywhere.
Happy Christmas to all (and watch out for ice-bergs).
On the one hand (or fang) he is all knowing/all powerful. On the other he is a seeker of revenge, where his little mind probes to destroy the very people he was set up to protect and serve.
The werewolf is nothing by comparison! CASA does not need a full moon in order to perform.
He has gathered other shape-changers around him, smilng assassins who run to do his biddiing , before they too, meet their fate. They enjoy annihilating hard-working, law-abiding air folk, who try to make sense of the often ambiguous instructions CASA has provided.
These instructions seem to be deliberately obtuse and open to interpretation, in order to give CASA a means of using them to his advantage. eg Barrier Aviation.
Beware this snake! It is part boa-constrictor and oozes poison indiscriminately. But it lives - therefore it can die.
How do we kill it? With apples my friends. Very special apples that don't grow on trees. They are called 'strength of purpose" - "resolve to be right" - "seekers of truth" - etc
The more we show the truth of things, the better justice will be served. Don't believe the cynics who say you don't get justice. They are lazy and don't care.
Be proud of your purpose.
Always - Always - remember that you who surf the skies, have friends everywhere.
Happy Christmas to all (and watch out for ice-bergs).
