The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Light aircraft crash Leigh Creek

Old 8th Jul 2019, 14:47
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,246
However fitting landing lights could be seen by CASA as intention to break the law.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 8th Jul 2019, 16:19
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 578
Originally Posted by Sunfish View Post
However fitting landing lights could be seen by CASA as intention to break the law.
Crikey! I hope not.

Far rather it were perceived as an effort to comply effectively with the principle of “see and be seen”!!!
RadioSaigon is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2019, 16:49
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,246
I’m just being flippant radiosaigon.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 8th Jul 2019, 17:03
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cairns FNQ
Age: 67
Posts: 159
Originally Posted by Sunfish View Post
However fitting landing lights could be seen by CASA as intention to break the law.
Exactly what I thought.
cowl flaps is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2019, 17:12
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cairns FNQ
Age: 67
Posts: 159
Originally Posted by zanthrus View Post
Why were they flying so close to last light or after it? RAAus aircraft are allowed to fly day VFR only regardless what equipment or lights are fitted.
Agree.
Regardless of whether a pilot has an RAAus licence,- a PPL, CPL, or whatever,- surely common sense must come into their flight planning calculations.
cowl flaps is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2019, 17:12
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,246
I don’t know enough about the aircraft or it’s fuel system. I would like to understand about useable and unusable quantities and the possibility of sucking air at nose low attitudes with low fuel quantities as well as any cross feed valve fitted.

My back of the envelope fuel calculations would be about the same as Poteroo; 143nm at 92 knots about 95 minutes. About 1.6 hrs at 20 lph - 32l., 10l statutory half hour reserve. 5 - 10l start, taxi and faffing about, makes 47 - 52l required without a climb fuel computation........And that’s before you add your own personal reserve for mum and the kids. Poteroo estimates he could have taken up to 80l.
, in which case there should have been between at least 10 to 40l. in the tanks on landing.

Last edited by Sunfish; 8th Jul 2019 at 17:24.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 8th Jul 2019, 20:34
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: There abouts
Posts: 3
With respect to the type of aircraft involved, Sunfish and Squawk 7700, it has everything to do with it. Statistically ‘amateur’ built aircraft are three times more likely than GA aircraft to be involved in an accident. Further, injury and fatalities are five times more likely in an amateur built aircraft compared to a GA aircraft if involved in an accident.
Once Were Warriors is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2019, 21:16
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,153
Originally Posted by KRviator View Post
I'm not aware of any similar GA accidents recently.
How about this one?

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...r/ao-2017-069/
Squawk7700 is online now  
Old 8th Jul 2019, 23:31
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 181
Once were warriors

If you are going to quote "statistics" provide your data source. It should also be noted that the Brumby is not amateur built and build status is not a causal factor.
Vag277 is online now  
Old 9th Jul 2019, 00:03
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,840
Originally Posted by Vag277 View Post
If you are going to quote "statistics" provide your data source. It should also be noted that the Brumby is not amateur built and build status is not a causal factor.
Folks,
I would add: The Brumby model in question is one of the most thoroughly tested small aircraft around today ---- anywhere ---- regardless of its nominal design/certification category.
Test flying, in the hands of a highly respected and experienced REAL test pilot went well beyond the minimum requirements of an LSA, indeed well beyond the minimum requirements of FAR 23.
Or, put another way, if I was a buyer for an LSA ---- that would be my choice, based on a detailed engineering/aerodynamic assessment.
Tootle pip!!

Last edited by LeadSled; 9th Jul 2019 at 00:05. Reason: minor edit.
LeadSled is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2019, 06:16
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Originally Posted by LeadSled View Post
Folks,
I would add: The Brumby model in question is one of the most thoroughly tested small aircraft around today ---- anywhere ---- regardless of its nominal design/certification category.
Test flying, in the hands of a highly respected and experienced REAL test pilot went well beyond the minimum requirements of an LSA, indeed well beyond the minimum requirements of FAR 23.
Or, put another way, if I was a buyer for an LSA ---- that would be my choice, based on a detailed engineering/aerodynamic assessment.
Tootle pip!!

It's all about documentation and certification, many manufacturers make these claims but very few have the certification paperwork to back up the claims.

The aircraft is an LSA and therefore it is approved upon a statement of compliance from the manufacturer.

Very few LSA aircraft manufacturers have ever been audited by a national CAA to the FAA standard.

How do I know this ? because I went through a two-week FAA audit to validate the FAA form 8130 – 15 which is the US certification statement from the manufacturer.

Knowing what goes into these audits I doubt anyone in Australia has seen anything close to this level of interrogation and validation.

Now, despite the claims above, (which are made by a person who is passionate about a particular manufacturer) if the aircraft has exceeded all of these requirements then it would be appropriate to have it certified in a higher category as well as LSA because it would increase sales. I

t really does annoy me that some people make all of these claims about some aircraft, a classic was XYZ aircraft who for years said "ours is the safest aircraft in the sky because despite all the crashes we have never had a fatality"..... say what ?

Nothing can replace full certification, an LSA manufacturer can get away with whatever it wants until it comes time for an audit and then they have to validate their statement of compliance. If they can't validate their statement of compliance then the aircraft get taken down to a lesser category like amateur built.

Most of the LSA manufacturers do a great job, they are responsible and passionate about what they are doing but there are some (I am referring outside of Australia in this case) that don't have a clue and I just selling what they can, while they can.
mcoates is online now  
Old 9th Jul 2019, 07:10
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,828
Talking about the Brumby LSA. Has the official report on the Terry Otway Brumby accident north of Penfield, Victoria, been published yet?.
Centaurus is online now  
Old 9th Jul 2019, 08:50
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 445
Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
Talking about the Brumby LSA. Has the official report on the Terry Otway Brumby accident north of Penfield, Victoria, been published yet?.
That Was very tragic, I knew Terry a little, nice guy, around 80 years old, very keen flyer. The low wing Brunby had previous A/P problems I believe, might have had something to do with the accident, we may never know - I know of another high wing Brumby (same as accident A/C) that the owner has had lots of trouble with it since new, wouldn't get me in one of them but seems like this sad accident was straight pilot error?
machtuk is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2019, 09:01
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,840
It's all about documentation and certification, many manufacturers make these claims but very few have the certification paperwork to back up the claims.

Funnily enough, I do know that!!

The aircraft is an LSA and therefore it is approved upon a statement of compliance from the manufacturer.

And that!!

Very few LSA aircraft manufacturers have ever been audited by a national CAA to the FAA standard.

Obviously, because of the two points above!!

How do I know this ? because I went through a two-week FAA audit to validate the FAA form 8130 – 15 which is the US certification statement from the manufacturer.

Bully for you!!

Knowing what goes into these audits I doubt anyone in Australia has seen anything close to this level of interrogation and validation.

But nobody claimed they had, which is, in any case, not relevant.

But, in fact, there are quite a number of Australian companies who do business via the FAA and EASA, manufacturing business,(OEM, PMA and STC) and know all about compliance and audit
standards. Indeed, in one very small and specialized area I carry a bit of FAA paper to sign off audits as required in that little corner.

Now, despite the claims above, (which are made by a person who is passionate about a particular manufacturer) if the aircraft has exceeded all of these requirements then it would be appropriate to have it certified in a higher category as well as LSA because it would increase sales.

"which are made by a person who is passionate about a particular manufacturer", ------- actually no, if I turned up down there I would probably be marched of the premises ----- but I do know a lot about the engineering design that is the basis of the structural durability, including accountability for gust loading, and also the flight test schedule and who completed it .
As for your "higher category" comment, you really know little about aircraft manufacturing, and the market in Australia, otherwise you would not make such a statement.


It really does annoy me that some people make all of these claims about some aircraft, a classic was XYZ aircraft who for years said "ours is the safest aircraft in the sky because despite all the crashes we have never had a fatality"..... say what ?

Consider yourself annoyed

Nothing can replace full certification, an LSA manufacturer can get away with whatever it wants until it comes time for an audit and then they have to validate their statement of compliance. If they can't validate their statement of compliance then the aircraft get taken down to a lesser category like amateur built.

You don't seem to know much about CASR 21, either, or the history and intent of the LSA Category, and the intent of the "consensus standard" . That being the case, you will probably be scared rigid by the new FAR Part 23, which is similarly intended to remove the current blocks to innovation and modernization of small aircraft design, at less than astronomically high and commercially untenable costs. Established by the same consensus standard process.

Most of the LSA manufacturers do a great job, they are responsible and passionate about what they are doing but there are some (I am referring outside of Australia in this case) that don't have a clue and I just selling what they can, while they can

You are entitled to your opinions, just as you are entitled to be wrong.

Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2019, 11:20
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,153
With all due respect Leadsled, you’re disagreeing with the largest and most successful importer of LSA aircraft into this country, importing the highest number of aircraft types, along with building aircraft. He also holds exclusive distributorships across the USA and many other countries for a large range of aitrcraft. You can confidently know he’s telling it as it is !
Squawk7700 is online now  
Old 9th Jul 2019, 12:39
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,828
The low wing Brunby had previous A/P problems I believe, might have had something to do with the accident, we may never know –
A/P problems? Do you mean autopilot?
I understand there had been an instance of the Brumby aileron control column jamming full over discovered when a pilot at Penfield was conducting his before takeoff drill. Third hand info only. After all this time I have yet to see an ATSB input report; if any
Centaurus is online now  
Old 9th Jul 2019, 12:57
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 445
Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
A/P problems? Do you mean autopilot?
I understand there had been an instance of the Brumby aileron control column jamming full over discovered when a pilot at Penfield was conducting his before takeoff drill. Third hand info only. After all this time I have yet to see an ATSB input report; if any

Yes Autopilot and that's exactly what happened, whether it had any influence on the said accident we may never know?
machtuk is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2019, 13:48
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,246
Possible Misinformation in re Light aircraft crash Leigh Creek

Squawk:
With all due respect Leadsled, you’re disagreeing with the largest and most successful importer of LSA aircraft into this country, importing the highest number of aircraft types, along with building aircraft. He also holds exclusive distributorships across the USA and many other countries for a large range of aitrcraft. You can confidently know he’s telling it as it is !
http://vocasupport.com/wp-content/up...ding-Final.pdf

Last edited by Sunfish; 9th Jul 2019 at 14:37.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 9th Jul 2019, 14:59
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: adelaide, Australia
Posts: 424
Well after reading the Coroners report above I'll be sticking with GA aircraft thanks.
As for the comments about Mr Coates I am speechless!
mostlytossas is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2019, 21:10
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,153
Originally Posted by mostlytossas View Post
As for the comments about Mr Coates I am speechless!
So am I. It’s like they were written by a journalist with no idea about aviation. I mean how much maintenance would you do in a hundred hours of ownership anyway! That chap continued to fly the aircraft when the vibration was so bad, you couldn’t read the numbers on the instruments, until one day the crank shaft broke.
Squawk7700 is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.