I considered not using the word pilot until I realised that he "was" a pilot, regardless of whether his membership or ASIC card was paid up.

A car has a driver, an aircraft has a pilot.

Whoa there
 

WOC – there really was no offence intended. If I intend to offend, you would know it. So whilst I mops up me boots, I'll attempt to explain.

The Ag boys fought well, hard and long for their 'free' status. The Glider guys have for many years enjoyed a well deserved freedom from the authorities clammy paws. RAA is similar and as Jabba says, should be a great deal for all. I have no doubt that the RAA is a sensible, well run and advised operation. Long may it remain so.

My concern is that these groups may loose some of the hard won freedom because of the actions of others. Joe Public only sees a "little" aircraft, in the hands of a dangerous lunatic in a potentially deadly situation. What if this Muppet had hit the boat and killed a couple or three. The lack of skill demonstrated makes it only a matter of luck that he didn't. Next stop the local Polly; "Something has got to be done" they scream. Next stop CASA and that sir, makes life tough for everyone.

I fully realise that it is (and was) almost impossible to stop this type of fruit bat, but this incident should be publicly "seen" for what it truly is, an aberration and certainly not the norm.

So, no not an anti RAA rant at all, just concern over how to stop this sort of thing "seeming" to happen so often that something will be done; official like.

There, boots nice and clean now.

VH-XXX - My definition of a pilot is someone whose skills and understanding of the laws of flight and aerodynamics, entitle him to a qualification, bestowed on him by his peers, and which enables him to operate an aircraft in a safe and professional manner.
This bloke was merely an idiot at the controls of an aircraft, with little understanding of the consequences of what he was doing with his aircraft, and thus does not rate as a pilot.
I note that the RAAus spokeperson claimed his "student certificate had expired". This seems to indicate that the "pilot" had not even completed his student studies. The crash appears to reinforce this belief.
One is constantly reminded of the bumper sticker that reads... "Dead Pilots Society - practising random acts of good airmanship". :suspect:

Ok then, he was "piloting" the aircraft :ok:

I am advised that representatives of CASA have already introduced themselves to "the dark side" at Holbrook. The decent folk down there are furious I'm told.

As an aside, and not trying to change the topic, but this is the second Sapphire I've personally seen in a major prang where the pilot has walked away more or less without a scratch. It says something of an aircraft I once thought "flimsy", to go through an 80KT sudden stop. I note the tail boom which I thought most fragile appears intact. Top marks for a tough little aeroplane.

Jabba, I would pretty much agree with all you said, I've got a leg in both camps.
I did see some statistics around which showed about equal fatality rates, although with their slower stall speeds, there may well be more RA aircraft bent and fixed or thrown on the tip without the necessity for medical treatment of the Pilot.
This was certainly a cowboy act, but I'd divide your statistics into flying for recreation and flying for business, which takes out the professionals you referred to leaving people who purely fly for fun.
These I would further divide into those who could really afford to fly and those who are struggling to make ends meet.
The second group often don't fly enough to keep up their proficiency, cut back on maintenance, and "have to get back to the office"
I have no statistics on that group but suspect they account for a proportion of fatalities.
Of the balance most are responsible, some are cowboys but whether the cowboys are accumulating at the cheap end I'm not sure. We've seen some very strange fatals in the last couple of years coming from the more skilled end of aviation.
This guy of course was in no man's land because he didn't have ANY licence, GA or RA, so we'll see if the 2 years prison sentence is applied. That might take the sparkle off a few other cowboys.



Kharon, as we've seen in the past there is the thinnest of slivers on this site that can turn a sensible thread into a frothing sea of abuse against "others"

I did not put up any statistics. I made some worded comment and for that I did divide things up quite well I thought.

I think you did raise one point very well though....the number of RAAus incidents that do not result in a fatality that would otherwise in a higher performance machine is hard to measure but quite likely significant.

Add to that the number that go unreported.....and now we are talking ;). I am sure you know what I mean. There are plenty.

I should have realised where a reasonable discussion would be taken.

I know an old RA instructor that used to boast of his "nil-reported accident history" :ok:

What this one?
It is the truth. Just never officially recorded. Everything from a bent u/c leg to far worse. Anyway, believe what you want.

You too, nothing like a bit of fantasy.

Serious Qestion?.
 

He is to be prosecuted under the cat, dog, fruit bat, and vagrant Act, 1902, as amended as a summary offence, since repealed, but renamed as strict liability so it can be shoved off to Harbours and Marine because it involved a boat. The aircraft became a boat when it made contact with the water and it appears he was probably unlicensed to drive a boat into the water.

I hope this clears things up?

At last Frank you make things clear for me, Thank you.:E

Stop screwing up the thread Wallsofchina. Agree to disagree and move on.


Good question Kharon. It doesn't seem to matter whether CASA has jurisdiction or not, the magistrate always seems to slap on a sizeable fine that he sees fit on the day that is never in line with CASA's penalty system.

Like where did 17.5k come from for the guy that flew his RAA gazelle into Cairns?

summed it up nicely Jab!...............

it seems that in some areas there is not a sense of pride/humility/amasment in the priveldge of 'leaving the earth' and returning to it in one piece..

this accident will result in a lot of enforcement action by the regulators...

maybe..its time..

Methinks it may have something to do with the mass of the machine involved, ie not many A380's are likely to survive a glide into a paddock compared to a C172 into same paddock? My .002aud worth

Pilot or not?

I suspect that this would have been a CASA matter regardless of whether the plane and pilot were licenced / registered etc. The RAA operates under the same body of rules as any other aircraft and subject to CASA oversight, but provided aircraft and operator are appropriately certificated / registered, there are exemptions to certain of those rules eg PPL requirement and maintenance by LAME are two obvious ones, coupled with restrictions eg controlled airspace. CASA may have chosen to palm off a simple crash investigation and generally has done in the past, but given the allegations about old mate's prior behaviour and the public and media interest.......:(