Pleased to see that this topic has been reborn. That's some interesting stuff you've posted there Yr Right! From what you've written and the F111 observation you're clearly from Crookwell or if not probably grew up there. Lucky you. It's a top part of the country. Actually Jabba I did some googling on the net and learnt that Jim Hudson is actually Jim Hutson who is a highly experienced and well respected pilot /LAME in Ag and other circles. Apparently has been flying over 50 years or so. Yr Right would definitely have to know him so he would definitely benefit as you suggest. Sounds like RFS will be taking their ops elsewhere though which is a pity.
Sticky

RFS Operations
 

If these are removed from Crookwell, having also serious flight time in the region, there will be increased:

• Costs;
• Time to response;
• Risks to pilots and aircraft

Remember, Crookwell is some 1000FT AGL above Goulburn and there are very limited other strips in the area for these RFS operations, which would meet a reasonable safety case.

Further, I believe the issues are:

1. Has casa properly protected us from the wind turbines?;
2. Do the wind turbines affect aviation?;
3. What is the proper distance from an airport;
4. What protection is being made for the future?;
5. Is casa being consulted by approving organisations for proper effects on aviation?;
6. Are the proposers using proper and correct information from aviation savvy people?;
7. Has CAAct 9A been breached by casa in respect of approvals of wind turbine farms??
8. How does the movement [without approval] by 385metres in the Crookwell area, affect the actual approval and aviation? and
9. Was this confirmed [post final approval] OR
10. Does the constructing company and the approving organisation breach CAAct 9A?

Only thinking.

UITA

Yes jabba I know and speak to Jim somewhat on a regular basis.
The reason why there are not more turbines around the crookwell aerodrome is because of the work he and others done to prevent them. As I recall these where the first in Australia to be stopped

Bit of a head scratcher why the thread were shut down ? :confused:

http://www.pprune.org/pacific-genera...windfarms.html

If an aviation facility has problems with green idiocy affecting their operations you'd think all avenues of defence would be looked at including the very reason for the wind generator facility existance.

If the very premis of the wind facilitys reason for being can not be justified then there is no facility.












.

I guess the thread was starting to lose its way. Given the rebirth maybe I should change my name to Laserous?

Yr Right, just being curious here but,,,, on another note and taking into account your vast experience in giving evidence how would you approach this issue if someone, due to EFAT or as part of a forced landing or any other reason hit one of these things and you were called as an expert witness? For a start from an aviators standpoint who would be liable? Or would you look at the construction regs etc. taking into account the Crookwell example. Thanks.
Stiky

I think we better get rid of all those coal mines ....

I guess it depends if your one of the 14 minding your own business. And if you have the miss fortune to have had an incident we'll let's say we'll
It's to late for you. But I'm sure there be lots of people around to support your family in the insuring court cases.

Cool, despite our differences….glad to see you are helping out :ok:

I am here to assure you that if I were approaching any airfield, I would make it my business to be very aware of the possibilities of any obstacles I may encounter on said approach, including but not limited to wind farms, Power lines,
Trains (Temora & Cootamundra) mountains etc etc .... As to the business model of said wind farms I have no particular preference .....

Hmmm... 3000 eh..:hmm: i think you need to put some more thought to that Avgas172. Just for a start, what is the death rate for the mines that supply the wind turbine materials ? e.g. rare earths, etc. I think we mine more coal then the poms in Oz... 3000!... work place health and safety would be having a fit.

Also, a link to your quote would be nice. I've done the old copy and paste a sentence to google trick and no credible site luck yet.











.

read it and weep bingles ....
Clearly your google finger is broken.

While i'm here...

The Rottnest island wind generator were given as a pro wind power example in the previous thread. I've been having a look-see...

In reply to guest complaints, Chakra Resorts Manager at Rottnest Lodge writes...

"...Due to the Rottnest Island Authorities goal of sustainability, we rely on power from the wind generator located towards Geordie Bay. Unfortunately this does not allow for air conditioning in the rooms..."

Rottnest Lodge (Rottnest Island): See 177 Reviews and 69 Photos - TripAdvisor

:D:D:D....:hmm:

I've just started to look through some of the financials of the island admin. Looks to have cost about 3.2million to establish the wind geny facility. Comments about the wind geny annually saving some diesel. NO comments about the generator annually saving money..:hmm:

...and those diesel generator maintenance costs. Would the highly fluctuating wind power supply have anything to do with it ? :rolleyes:












.

"THE death of two miners at a NSW coalmine takes the number of mining-related deaths in Australia since July to nine, more than four times the total for the previous financial year."

April 2014 Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian











.

You've got gall A172: who knows where referencing balanced argument, devoid of links to nutter websites could lead?

Aircon on Rottnest? You'd be in the serious princess category to need that.

The comment I got from the local rangers was that the 1/3 of the total load supplied by the turbine made desalination of potable water feasible, reducing the drain on the water table in the face of increasingly dry seasons. I see that's also reflected in the Rottnest Authority info.

A quick point.
1 turbine dose NOT make a wind farm. There was a fella on Abc RN this morning that made some really good points. I would suggest that you should listen to that on the net

Agreed there, though, the Rottnest wind geny was introduced to the discussion as an example of a 'good' system operating near an airfield - its not. It also shows many of the reasons just why wind 'power' does not make economic sense.



I've had a quick look-see and caint see nothing. A direct link or some keyword search terms would be handy. Chaps name perhaps ?








.

It's called.
Coal to remain biggest fuel source into the future. On RN page. By Robert Bryce I didn't hear it all but what I did hear made sense to me

Link to 2RN progamme
 

Here is the link yr-right:

Coal to remain biggest fuel source into the future: US expert - RN Breakfast - ABC Radio National (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

I tend to agree that coal as a generation source isn't going to be usurped any time soon, however the alternative power sources are helping to REDUCE the dependence on fossil fuels and associated pollution ... just a balanced view.
However if I should ever smite my 172 into any one of these power sources so be it. :E

So just back to the aviation side of the house in the event that I was unlucky or foolish enough to collide with one of these due to positioning of the structure in the vicinity of an airfield. I wonder if there are any within the wider circuit OCTA world? Will there be any expert evidence from you YR Right re this? I'm just curious to learn what you would provide if you were asked given your exposure to the legal system in such areas. I think sharing this would benefit all.
Thanks
Stiky