Channel 7 Sunday Night Program About VH-MDX
Thread Starter
Geoff. Look at my post 354. That interview took place before Harry's post was prepared so it's pretty clear what my views are about work face military ATC's
Maybe I was one of your heroes in the past because you saw me standing up for our country being as good as any in the world.
Despite claims by some on this thread I have one sole interest- that is to get the procedures and airspace to reflect the most modern and efficient in the world .
For example , changing Willy C to D just gives controllers more flexibility and empowers them to be able to act more professionally . Both IFR and VFR aircraft must comply with ATC instructions so a controller can operate D like C if he or she believes safety dictates that it is necessary.
It's the military hierarchy on the ATC side who clearly don't want their controllers to have such freedom. If it works safely in the USA it may just work here as I have never found Australian workers inferior to US workers.
Maybe I was one of your heroes in the past because you saw me standing up for our country being as good as any in the world.
Despite claims by some on this thread I have one sole interest- that is to get the procedures and airspace to reflect the most modern and efficient in the world .
For example , changing Willy C to D just gives controllers more flexibility and empowers them to be able to act more professionally . Both IFR and VFR aircraft must comply with ATC instructions so a controller can operate D like C if he or she believes safety dictates that it is necessary.
It's the military hierarchy on the ATC side who clearly don't want their controllers to have such freedom. If it works safely in the USA it may just work here as I have never found Australian workers inferior to US workers.
Thread Starter
Geoff I don't even know what the GD branch is. I have had countless meetings with the top brass in the RAAF over at least 15 years including sitting on Airspace Reform Panels with the head of the Airforce .
I have been told continuously that changes would be made and we would follow the best proven procedures from the leading aviation countries.
But nothing ever happens.
If ever we had a war I presume the GD branch people would be thrown out quick smart and replaced with capable decision makers that copy the best and the latest- otherwise Australians would die unnecessarily.
I have been told continuously that changes would be made and we would follow the best proven procedures from the leading aviation countries.
But nothing ever happens.
If ever we had a war I presume the GD branch people would be thrown out quick smart and replaced with capable decision makers that copy the best and the latest- otherwise Australians would die unnecessarily.
Strange, why would a VFR even NVFR be tracking for an IFR waypoint. A waypoint that doesn't appear on any visual charts. Easy to do now, even with a visual screen on your trusty non TSOd GPS. But back then?
What route does CRAVN live on and how is it identified? C210 with a Cessna400 ADF and VOR. Granted...a classIV IFR rating was NVFR back then
What route does CRAVN live on and how is it identified? C210 with a Cessna400 ADF and VOR. Granted...a classIV IFR rating was NVFR back then
Thread Starter
OZBUSDRIVER - What complete and utter twaddle! Possibly you do really drive a bus and have very little aviation experience?
For a start, back in your ‘ideal’ days, all aircraft owners paid an air navigation charge every year. In today’s money, that’s about $5,000 per annum for a Cessna 182. Keep today’s 182 at a country airstrip and, other than a very small fuel tax of a few cents which goes towards CASA (I can’t fathom why), you basically pay nothing for the system if you don’t require all of the AsA bumf - and most country aviators don’t.
Yes, in those days the pilot could call into a briefing office at Coolangatta – that is where he would be told he couldn’t flight plan over Williamtown.
Yes, flying night VMC he couldn’t just file FULSAR, he was forced to. But that didn’t help him at all, did it? The weather between Williamtown and Bankstown may not have been VMC at the higher altitudes – say, above 6,000 feet – but there is absolutely no doubt he could have continued OCTA and flown into Bankstown quite safely as two aircraft did before him that night.
OZBUSDRIVER, the human power to self-delude is unbelievable and you are certainly an example of this. I can see why you post anonymously and don’t put your real name.
For a start, back in your ‘ideal’ days, all aircraft owners paid an air navigation charge every year. In today’s money, that’s about $5,000 per annum for a Cessna 182. Keep today’s 182 at a country airstrip and, other than a very small fuel tax of a few cents which goes towards CASA (I can’t fathom why), you basically pay nothing for the system if you don’t require all of the AsA bumf - and most country aviators don’t.
Yes, in those days the pilot could call into a briefing office at Coolangatta – that is where he would be told he couldn’t flight plan over Williamtown.
Yes, flying night VMC he couldn’t just file FULSAR, he was forced to. But that didn’t help him at all, did it? The weather between Williamtown and Bankstown may not have been VMC at the higher altitudes – say, above 6,000 feet – but there is absolutely no doubt he could have continued OCTA and flown into Bankstown quite safely as two aircraft did before him that night.
OZBUSDRIVER, the human power to self-delude is unbelievable and you are certainly an example of this. I can see why you post anonymously and don’t put your real name.
I can see why you post anonymously and don’t put your real name.
Dick, thanks for your compliments. I SAID even with all the free stuff and FULL REPORTING it didn't make any difference to the decision made by the PIC. He should have waited for a clearance through Willie...but what happens then...two planes made it through in front of him but who is to say the wx would not have closed in around Hawksbury Bridge...not a lot of light around there for the lane entry and you are hoping for traffic on the pacific to keep you right way up? And once you leave Willie coastal there is only Belmont and Warnervale...unlit...as aerodromes. Once you pass aeropelican...You are committed!
I was waiting for you to trump in with the personal bit. Dick, do you really know what this truck driver knows? My opinion of this guy..in this weather..at this time of the day...with these possible unserviceabilities? Hoping for a clearance across a Mil CTR? Dick, I have flown around that country, coastal only twice. So be it for experience. I know what rotor does, I know what standing wave does...been in real good one over Boonah. I would not have continued past TRE without a heap of good reasons why...In FACT I would not have launched past Coolangatta when my gyro failed. Are you saying YOU would continue on into crud wx with known or possible failures of your flight instruments and possibly electrics...That is pretty damn poor airmanship! Even if you could go visual over Willie...who can say..NOW... if the wx would hold enough to get through the next 30 minutes. Why risk it? Why continue if you do not have an out?
As for your crusade against Willie...does it hurt just that little bit more I got praised for my support and argument against you over the issue of that C182 a few years ago...DOES IT HURT YOU, YOU WERE BEATEN BY A TRUCK DRIVER? Dick, you have meddled too long , mate. Give it up!
Nav Charges were dropped. Fuel levy in its place. Was it a good thing that AirServices...the cash cow...was split from the DCA/CAA...the money loss? You railed against TWR charges and RFF levies...we still got TWR charges and bloody expensive they are. Try flying out of EN? Ask yourself, Dick. A little bit of pain for all avgas users are a bloody lot of pain for people who actually have to fly out of a place like EN.(Gee, it certainly kept AVGAS cheap...NOT!) Or...how about those IFR charges?
Do not pick on me for my perceived experience, you really do not know how professionally I fly. I fly when I can afford it. I am happy with my lot in life. If you do not like it just sue me instead of having others threaten me.
We will never know how things would have evolved because you short circuited that path. You do not know what would have happened.
I was waiting for you to trump in with the personal bit. Dick, do you really know what this truck driver knows? My opinion of this guy..in this weather..at this time of the day...with these possible unserviceabilities? Hoping for a clearance across a Mil CTR? Dick, I have flown around that country, coastal only twice. So be it for experience. I know what rotor does, I know what standing wave does...been in real good one over Boonah. I would not have continued past TRE without a heap of good reasons why...In FACT I would not have launched past Coolangatta when my gyro failed. Are you saying YOU would continue on into crud wx with known or possible failures of your flight instruments and possibly electrics...That is pretty damn poor airmanship! Even if you could go visual over Willie...who can say..NOW... if the wx would hold enough to get through the next 30 minutes. Why risk it? Why continue if you do not have an out?
As for your crusade against Willie...does it hurt just that little bit more I got praised for my support and argument against you over the issue of that C182 a few years ago...DOES IT HURT YOU, YOU WERE BEATEN BY A TRUCK DRIVER? Dick, you have meddled too long , mate. Give it up!
Nav Charges were dropped. Fuel levy in its place. Was it a good thing that AirServices...the cash cow...was split from the DCA/CAA...the money loss? You railed against TWR charges and RFF levies...we still got TWR charges and bloody expensive they are. Try flying out of EN? Ask yourself, Dick. A little bit of pain for all avgas users are a bloody lot of pain for people who actually have to fly out of a place like EN.(Gee, it certainly kept AVGAS cheap...NOT!) Or...how about those IFR charges?
Do not pick on me for my perceived experience, you really do not know how professionally I fly. I fly when I can afford it. I am happy with my lot in life. If you do not like it just sue me instead of having others threaten me.
We will never know how things would have evolved because you short circuited that path. You do not know what would have happened.
Thread Starter
Evilroy
I would usually agree with you about anonymity except have you looked at OZBUSDRIVER’s post (#355)? He says things like, “Dick what you are doing is reprehensible”. He then says, “I could easily hold you and all those who back you responsible for carving up the system…”.
In effect, Evilroy is accusing me of some pretty serious things which he doesn’t like, but he is doing this anonymously. Wouldn’t you believe that if a person is going to assert that someone is doing something “reprehensible” they would at least have the guts to put their own name beside the post?
That is the point I am making.
I would usually agree with you about anonymity except have you looked at OZBUSDRIVER’s post (#355)? He says things like, “Dick what you are doing is reprehensible”. He then says, “I could easily hold you and all those who back you responsible for carving up the system…”.
In effect, Evilroy is accusing me of some pretty serious things which he doesn’t like, but he is doing this anonymously. Wouldn’t you believe that if a person is going to assert that someone is doing something “reprehensible” they would at least have the guts to put their own name beside the post?
That is the point I am making.
Dick,
Can I kindly ask for your opinion on this following accident? (Anyone else who wishes to make comment on it please feel free to do so. I apologise to anyone that may feel this post is a bit of a thread drift but I feel there is a connection to the topic at hand.)
On the 11th of December, 1991 a CFIT accident occurred involving a Be400 Beechjet registered as N25BR near Rome, Georgia, USA. The NTSB Summary Report (NTSB/AAR-02/01/SUM) can be found here: http://libraryonline.erau.edu/online.../AAR92-01S.pdf (I am sorry for the low image quality of the document but it is still easily legible, it just doesn’t look neat).
A short summary of the accident is as follows:
I would like to know what factor or factors you feel contributed to this particular accident.
Can I kindly ask for your opinion on this following accident? (Anyone else who wishes to make comment on it please feel free to do so. I apologise to anyone that may feel this post is a bit of a thread drift but I feel there is a connection to the topic at hand.)
On the 11th of December, 1991 a CFIT accident occurred involving a Be400 Beechjet registered as N25BR near Rome, Georgia, USA. The NTSB Summary Report (NTSB/AAR-02/01/SUM) can be found here: http://libraryonline.erau.edu/online.../AAR92-01S.pdf (I am sorry for the low image quality of the document but it is still easily legible, it just doesn’t look neat).
A short summary of the accident is as follows:
(Page 2)
The CVR transcript indicated that the airplane's engines were started at 0930. Shortly thereafter, the captain told the first officer that given the prevailing weather conditions, "We could run out under the edge but there’s no edge anymore." The flight crew taxied the airplane and commenced takeoff on runway 1 at 0937 under visual flight rules (VFR).
…
(Page 2)
At 0937:13, the captain contacted the Atlanta Air Route Traffic Control Center (Atlanta Center) informing them that the airplane had just departed Rome, was flying under VFR, and was "looking for a clearance over to Huntsville." Atlanta Center gave the crew a transponder identification “squawk” code and told them to maintain VFR because "we have traffic four and five right now southeast of Rome. [We will] have something for you later."
…
(Page 3)
At 0940:07, the captain directed the first officer to fly "back to the right." At this point, the CVR transcript indicates that the pilots recognized that the airplane was close to obscured terrain. The CVR stopped recording at 0940:55. At 0941:21, Atlanta Center attempted to contact the airplane but that attempt and all subsequent attempts were unsuccessful.
…
(Page 3)
Rescuers located the wreckage of the airplane and found that the airplane was destroyed and all nine passengers and crew had been killed.
…
(Page 3/4)
[The aircraft] It was not equipped, nor was it required to be equipped, with a ground proximity warning system (GPWS).
…
(Page 7)
The captain elected to depart Rome under VFR at a time when, as he knew or should have known, the ceiling obscured the tops of nearby terrain in all quadrants, leaving only a few miles in all directions in which he could legally and safely fly VFR.
…
(Page 8)
If the captain had requested an IFR clearance from the Rome airport to Huntsville, ATC rules would have mandated that the airplane depart within a specified 5-minute period. However, if the passengers did not return in time to allow a departure within this period, the clearance would then have been voided. If the captain had then attempted to obtain a second clearance from Rome, it is likely, because other aircraft were present in the non-radar environment, that he would have encountered a delay possibly as long as 30 minutes. Therefore, the captain may have believed that the only alternative available to quickly leave Rome was to depart under rules that would not have required a departure clearance, i.e., VFR, attempt to proceed to Huntsville, and receive the clearance once aloft.
The CVR transcript indicated that the airplane's engines were started at 0930. Shortly thereafter, the captain told the first officer that given the prevailing weather conditions, "We could run out under the edge but there’s no edge anymore." The flight crew taxied the airplane and commenced takeoff on runway 1 at 0937 under visual flight rules (VFR).
…
(Page 2)
At 0937:13, the captain contacted the Atlanta Air Route Traffic Control Center (Atlanta Center) informing them that the airplane had just departed Rome, was flying under VFR, and was "looking for a clearance over to Huntsville." Atlanta Center gave the crew a transponder identification “squawk” code and told them to maintain VFR because "we have traffic four and five right now southeast of Rome. [We will] have something for you later."
…
(Page 3)
At 0940:07, the captain directed the first officer to fly "back to the right." At this point, the CVR transcript indicates that the pilots recognized that the airplane was close to obscured terrain. The CVR stopped recording at 0940:55. At 0941:21, Atlanta Center attempted to contact the airplane but that attempt and all subsequent attempts were unsuccessful.
…
(Page 3)
Rescuers located the wreckage of the airplane and found that the airplane was destroyed and all nine passengers and crew had been killed.
…
(Page 3/4)
[The aircraft] It was not equipped, nor was it required to be equipped, with a ground proximity warning system (GPWS).
…
(Page 7)
The captain elected to depart Rome under VFR at a time when, as he knew or should have known, the ceiling obscured the tops of nearby terrain in all quadrants, leaving only a few miles in all directions in which he could legally and safely fly VFR.
…
(Page 8)
If the captain had requested an IFR clearance from the Rome airport to Huntsville, ATC rules would have mandated that the airplane depart within a specified 5-minute period. However, if the passengers did not return in time to allow a departure within this period, the clearance would then have been voided. If the captain had then attempted to obtain a second clearance from Rome, it is likely, because other aircraft were present in the non-radar environment, that he would have encountered a delay possibly as long as 30 minutes. Therefore, the captain may have believed that the only alternative available to quickly leave Rome was to depart under rules that would not have required a departure clearance, i.e., VFR, attempt to proceed to Huntsville, and receive the clearance once aloft.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue folks is that the US develops systems to handle the available traffic. We develop conservative systems and then shut out the traffic it can't handle. One can just about draw a line between any two points in the US and fly there VFR. Some use Flight Following, some don't. No nonsense about descending to 500 ft and being grateful for it. Straight through military bases with a VFR clearance. No fuss no bother. Appparently US registered aircraft have windows out of which pilots look, not at the scenery but for other aircraft. That is unknown here. Listen to the gabber that goes on in Qld/NT. Radio arranged IFR separation in VMC. That will only work if the traffic is very light! People like Dick and Boyd Munro have seen and used these convenient ways of operating and are frustrated and angry at our archaic user unfriendly systems, designed for airlines at the expense of GA. Its an uphill battle as we have settled into lazy ways, possible only because we don't have the traffic. I have had an F100 pilot telling me when and where to fly and he was quite offended when I asked if his windows were painted over. "I am a jet!" he hollered. Bet his Mum is proud of him. Nobody out there has watched the "radio alerted see and avoid" DVD it seems. To manouevre to avoid another aircraft is neither an emergency nor a near miss. It is what one does in the rest of the world.
I well remember the bank run days when pilots raced to get out of YSBK in the early am before the tower was manned and the zone was closed!
In the US GA is strong and won't be treated like children. Ours is week and therefore largely ignored.
(This should stir up a few crazies.)
I well remember the bank run days when pilots raced to get out of YSBK in the early am before the tower was manned and the zone was closed!
In the US GA is strong and won't be treated like children. Ours is week and therefore largely ignored.
(This should stir up a few crazies.)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Canberra, ACT, Australia
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick.
<<Both IFR and VFR aircraft must comply with ATC instructions so a controller can operate D like C if he or she believes safety dictates that it is necessary. >>
Isn't that something of an oxymoron? VFR is VFR, not Controlled VFR (CVFR) which, as far as I'm aware, does not exist in Australia.
When I first started out in aviation (mid-'50s) I was taught that the overriding criteria for VFR was that it had to be conducted during daylight hours. I believe that's why NVMC came about because you can't fly VFR at night if you don't have clear sight of the ground and what obstructions it might contain. NVFR and NVMC are two entirely different things - the first, not existing in any sane airspace.
RAAF active airspace is never VFR airspace because aircrew have to obey ATC instructions although this is a somewhat clouded perspective (forgive the pun) when it comes to dealing with knuck air traffic - they do what they want until it becomes IMC. Even knucks flying in RAAF airspace may be granted a clearance to operate VMC between certain height and lateral constraints and other traffic has to be kept clear of their operating area on an IFR procedural or radar basis.
<< I don't even know what the GD branch is. I have had countless meetings with the top brass in the RAAF over at least 15 years including sitting on Airspace Reform Panels with the head of the Airforce . >>
However, that aside, I think that you really should 'know your enemy' if you are tilting at the RAAF windmill. GD stands for General Duties and it is why we have an Air Force. Everything other than the GD Branch is there to support the operations of the GD Branch - nothing else whatsoever. Without them there is no reason to have an Air Force. The GD branch is composed of aircrew only, you know, the ones that actually fly in those machines with kangaroo roundels on them. In the RAAF, anything that is designed administratively is designed with only one goal, to support the aircrew that fly around the skies in some of the most sophisticated machinery available. You, as aircrew yourself, must understand that ethos, surely?
Just as a little aside, the Chief of Air Force is always a GD officer and that is why, not too many years ago, the CAS (as it then was titled) was an Engineer Branch member with aircrew qualifications - to become CAS he had to transfer to the GD Branch.
<<If ever we had a war I presume the GD branch people would be thrown out quick smart and replaced with capable decision makers that copy the best and the latest- otherwise Australians would die unnecessarily.>>
Come on now - what a statement!
I'm sure that you are aware that Australia has been at war in several theatres since WW II and the Air Force has been present in most of those areas.
If you were to replace the hierarchy of the Air Force with someone else, who would you nominate - a professional military aviation officer corps, or the local farmer's association doing their daily mustering in a chopper? Come on, let's not impugn the professionalism of our Air Force personnel - they are more professional in their aviation activities than a heck of a lot of other supposed 'professional airmen' in this world. If we didn't have military aviation officers managing military aviation operations, just who do you think might be qualified for such a position - the 'diddly-squats' of this nation?
Before you saddle up for another Quixote tilt, just examine the reason why we, as an independent sovereign nation, have an Air Force, an Army, a Navy. I'm damn sure that if we didn't you would be speaking Japanese or German and you wouldn't be living in a free Western society. Remember all those that have died to let you enjoy that freedom (including posting here
).
<<Maybe I was one of your heroes in the past because you saw me standing up for our country being as good as any in the world. >>
Yes, precisely. Just remember that Dick. I'm standing up for the RAAF ATC Controllers who are as professionally proficient as any in the world You should tilt your lance at the right spot, not just 'in the general direction of...'.
<<Both IFR and VFR aircraft must comply with ATC instructions so a controller can operate D like C if he or she believes safety dictates that it is necessary. >>
Isn't that something of an oxymoron? VFR is VFR, not Controlled VFR (CVFR) which, as far as I'm aware, does not exist in Australia.
When I first started out in aviation (mid-'50s) I was taught that the overriding criteria for VFR was that it had to be conducted during daylight hours. I believe that's why NVMC came about because you can't fly VFR at night if you don't have clear sight of the ground and what obstructions it might contain. NVFR and NVMC are two entirely different things - the first, not existing in any sane airspace.
RAAF active airspace is never VFR airspace because aircrew have to obey ATC instructions although this is a somewhat clouded perspective (forgive the pun) when it comes to dealing with knuck air traffic - they do what they want until it becomes IMC. Even knucks flying in RAAF airspace may be granted a clearance to operate VMC between certain height and lateral constraints and other traffic has to be kept clear of their operating area on an IFR procedural or radar basis.
<< I don't even know what the GD branch is. I have had countless meetings with the top brass in the RAAF over at least 15 years including sitting on Airspace Reform Panels with the head of the Airforce . >>
However, that aside, I think that you really should 'know your enemy' if you are tilting at the RAAF windmill. GD stands for General Duties and it is why we have an Air Force. Everything other than the GD Branch is there to support the operations of the GD Branch - nothing else whatsoever. Without them there is no reason to have an Air Force. The GD branch is composed of aircrew only, you know, the ones that actually fly in those machines with kangaroo roundels on them. In the RAAF, anything that is designed administratively is designed with only one goal, to support the aircrew that fly around the skies in some of the most sophisticated machinery available. You, as aircrew yourself, must understand that ethos, surely?
Just as a little aside, the Chief of Air Force is always a GD officer and that is why, not too many years ago, the CAS (as it then was titled) was an Engineer Branch member with aircrew qualifications - to become CAS he had to transfer to the GD Branch.
<<If ever we had a war I presume the GD branch people would be thrown out quick smart and replaced with capable decision makers that copy the best and the latest- otherwise Australians would die unnecessarily.>>
Come on now - what a statement!
I'm sure that you are aware that Australia has been at war in several theatres since WW II and the Air Force has been present in most of those areas.
If you were to replace the hierarchy of the Air Force with someone else, who would you nominate - a professional military aviation officer corps, or the local farmer's association doing their daily mustering in a chopper? Come on, let's not impugn the professionalism of our Air Force personnel - they are more professional in their aviation activities than a heck of a lot of other supposed 'professional airmen' in this world. If we didn't have military aviation officers managing military aviation operations, just who do you think might be qualified for such a position - the 'diddly-squats' of this nation?
Before you saddle up for another Quixote tilt, just examine the reason why we, as an independent sovereign nation, have an Air Force, an Army, a Navy. I'm damn sure that if we didn't you would be speaking Japanese or German and you wouldn't be living in a free Western society. Remember all those that have died to let you enjoy that freedom (including posting here
).<<Maybe I was one of your heroes in the past because you saw me standing up for our country being as good as any in the world. >>
Yes, precisely. Just remember that Dick. I'm standing up for the RAAF ATC Controllers who are as professionally proficient as any in the world You should tilt your lance at the right spot, not just 'in the general direction of...'.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://au.news.yahoo.com/sunday-nig...inding-vh-mdx/
At 15.40 on the vid, Dick made the following (recorded) allegation in respect of the preview for this weekend's program:
Despite all the chat on here, this remains the underlying accusation that Dick will not retract. In short, the RAAF deliberately killed people. I'd be interested in any other interpretation, given the stridency of the view put by Dick.
I'll repeat -
For Capt Bill Pike and Captain Leady, a really simple no/yes answer without obfuscation, since you seem to be in the cheer-squad:
Do you support the contention by Dick Smith that:
No obfuscation - a simple yes/no please. You either back Dick on this one in straight terms, or you don't.
At 15.40 on the vid, Dick made the following (recorded) allegation in respect of the preview for this weekend's program:
The Royal Australian Air Force sent these people to their deaths
I'll repeat -
The Royal Australian Air Force sent these people to their deaths.
Do you support the contention by Dick Smith that:
The Royal Australian Air Force sent these people to their deaths.
I don’t think it’s so much about Australia’s GA sector being weak Bill Pike. I think it’s more that in Australia the citizens are far more culturally comfortable with the concept of being the subjects of government and individual rights being subordinated to the government. If something is being controlled by government, it must be necessary and good. Why else would the government do it?
Citizens accept that Australia couldn’t possibly defend itself if it didn’t have thousands of cubic kilometres of almost-continuously empty airspace from which mere citizens are presumptively banned but tolerated under strict controls. How would Australia’s airborne military forces be able to train effectively, if they had to deal with the threat of unidentified and uncontrolled traffic?
Citizens accept that it’s complicated enough joining and flying in the circuit – what with the ‘fast jet’ speeds and all the buttons and moving pictures and all that – without mere citizens flying, unannounced, in a straight line at 140kts at 5,500’ overhead. Some citizens are rumoured to be carrying toilet rolls on board as well…
And citizens know that, but for those red lines on the charts and the military traps set to spring if the lines are crossed, bad guys would be flying suicide missions into military bases. “Dirka dirka, mohammed jihad, dammit restricted area we must ask for a clearance, dirka allah.”
Citizens accept that Australia couldn’t possibly defend itself if it didn’t have thousands of cubic kilometres of almost-continuously empty airspace from which mere citizens are presumptively banned but tolerated under strict controls. How would Australia’s airborne military forces be able to train effectively, if they had to deal with the threat of unidentified and uncontrolled traffic?
Citizens accept that it’s complicated enough joining and flying in the circuit – what with the ‘fast jet’ speeds and all the buttons and moving pictures and all that – without mere citizens flying, unannounced, in a straight line at 140kts at 5,500’ overhead. Some citizens are rumoured to be carrying toilet rolls on board as well…
And citizens know that, but for those red lines on the charts and the military traps set to spring if the lines are crossed, bad guys would be flying suicide missions into military bases. “Dirka dirka, mohammed jihad, dammit restricted area we must ask for a clearance, dirka allah.”
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi There Howabout,
(Do you still molest boys in public toilets?
No obfuscation, a simple yes no answer will suffice.
I am not in the dock thank son.)
I contend that the system that did not allow flight planning along the coast contributed largely to the crash of MDX.
I am on the side of truth and justice. I am not in anyone's cheer squad, however I am certainly not anti to everything Dick Smith says regardless either.
(Do you still molest boys in public toilets?
No obfuscation, a simple yes no answer will suffice.
I am not in the dock thank son.)
I contend that the system that did not allow flight planning along the coast contributed largely to the crash of MDX.
I am on the side of truth and justice. I am not in anyone's cheer squad, however I am certainly not anti to everything Dick Smith says regardless either.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually Creampuff I kinda agree with you. In my view, our convict past made Australians more ignore and avoid authority rather than face them down. So we had liquor laws and sly grog shops, betting laws and SP betting shops etc . Also, being fiercely independent, we are not "joiners" like the Yanks, who had to fight for their liberty and thus treasure it more than most. This general apathy worked OK for a while but in later years has been used by politicians and especially the entrenched bureaucracy to the general detriment. "Random Breath Tests" have become "Random Licence Inspections", "BFR's" which we were promised were purely training and which one couldn't fail became seamlessly and without comment "AFR's" which one could fail despite no evidence that BFR's did anything positive to the accident rate. Australians were disarmed and the home invasion rate went up by four times without a whimper. We have become whingers not fighters.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi There Howabout,
(Do you still molest boys in public toilets?
No obfuscation, a simple yes no answer will suffice.
I am not in the dock thank son.)
I contend that the system that did not allow flight planning along the coast contributed largely to the crash of MDX.
I am on the side of truth and justice. I am not in anyone's cheer squad, however I am certainly not anti to everything Dick Smith says regardless either.
(Do you still molest boys in public toilets?
No obfuscation, a simple yes no answer will suffice.
I am not in the dock thank son.)
I contend that the system that did not allow flight planning along the coast contributed largely to the crash of MDX.
I am on the side of truth and justice. I am not in anyone's cheer squad, however I am certainly not anti to everything Dick Smith says regardless either.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Capt Bill re your comment as regards my alleged predilection for molesting boys in public toilets. I'll give you a straight answer - NO.
Your suggestion is probably libelous, but let's drop it.
Can you please return the courtesy by answering the original question with a YES/NO.
Do you support the contention that:
Pretty simple.
Your suggestion is probably libelous, but let's drop it.
Can you please return the courtesy by answering the original question with a YES/NO.
Do you support the contention that:
The Royal Australian Air Force sent these people to their deaths
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi There User Name,
Whatever your opinion of me is is I am happy for you to have it, After all, water can rise no higher than it's source.
Wanna hear what I think of people who hide behind thin pseudonyms on this site and then insult people? "Weak gutted" does not even come close .
Whatever your opinion of me is is I am happy for you to have it, After all, water can rise no higher than it's source.
Wanna hear what I think of people who hide behind thin pseudonyms on this site and then insult people? "Weak gutted" does not even come close .