You're probably right Pace in terms of the cultural need to over-regulate...the difference is that Australia is far, far more efficient at enacting new regs/laws and far more efficient at policing them...and sadly in general the Australian public support and defend this approach...and it is intellectually difficult to counter any of the reasoning for regulation....

However there is something to be said for the ponderous system of government here in the UK which provides a natural barrier to knee-jerk regulations....and definitely something to be said for the vigorous opposition to any unnecessary regulation in the US....

Awqward, if you really are an Aussie you would know once you are west of the Blue Mountains there isn't too much to navigate by at night or even to help with any sense of an horizon on a moonless night. Launching off to/from places in the bush really is taking off into a wall of black. Unlike the UK or most of the USA where cities and towns are everywhere and at night stand out for many miles. It would be hard to get disorientated and fly into the ground with so much lighting around.Needless to say the training therefore would need be more here. The 500ft rule you should know is above ground not structures. The German was following the highway in the desert between Alice and Tennant Creek on memory. He hit the only thing there was to hit for hundreds of Km's a powerline strung across the road.
You sound more to me like a disgruntled immigrant to Australia that either got homesick or couldn't make a go of it,went home and now it's all Australia's fault.

I wasn't going to respond....but I'm afraid you are wrong on several points. First - I agree that solid instrument skills are required on a moonless night away from cities or towns....however this is not unique to Australia....I ive in Scotland and away from the coast there are very few lights (only mountains)....and I have flown very long distances in California, Arizona and Nevada where there are almost no lights.... Second - in the US (and the UK pre-EASA) it is perfectly legal to fly within inches of the ground (ar water) provided you fly no closer to 500 ft of any person or structure....now I agree this is not always wise and I for one would not do it... Third - I was born and bred in the Aussie bush....my nearest ancestor NOT born in Australia was one great-grand mother...one of my ancestors helped draft the Australian constitution....my grandmother was even born in Adelaide (we may be related!)....I only have one (blue) passport....Aussie enough for you? Far from being disgruntled I consider myself enlightened by having lived and worked (and flown) in many parts of the world...

I stand by my assertion that the Aussie culture is to creation of rules in anticipation of a problem that may or may not even exist....you mentioned 9/11...the US does not require an ASIC to be revalidated every two years (or ever)...only foreigners are vetted - not citizens...and why renew every two years? Is there a high risk of becoming a terrorist in the interim??...and they don't require secondary locks on aircraft.... You also mentioned formation flying - of course training should be conducted first...but there is no CAA rating in the UK...same as aerobatics (although this will likely change with EASA)....

And now I've started ranting I may as well mention ATC/airspace.... I wanted to fly VFR across Perth a year ago only to discover that VFR transits over YPPH are prohibited! Why? Less traffic than Aberdeen and way less than the Class B airports in the US where a simple radio call will get you through/over/around....and with a helpful attitude....And forget about even asking to use the couple of approved sight-seeing routes if you haven't filed a written flightplan....and military airspace (which takes up half the airspace around all the state capital cities)...don't even ask them...ever....

So no, I don't consider it the country's fault....it's the fault of the unquestioning, accepting (even encouraging) attitude of many (but not all) Australians

Forgive, please, if this is already covered in the previous couple-dozen posts:

It's not too unusual here in the colonies for a teen (pre-16) to take dual instruction, then be issued a student ticket on his/her 16th birthday and told to go solo. I don't remember the precise sequence regarding medical or other formalities. BTW, for a glider license, 14th birthday.

FWIW, Dad often had me holding heading in the Howard before I was a teen. It sometimes took a heavy right foot.

Indeed Silvaire.... so it's not just me!

Barit...my son started logging hours (in Scotland) when he was 15....although he could have started at 14....and he only started so late as he would be unable to solo until 16 (as you say)....of course he was actually manipulating the controls from an even earlier age!! :oh:

AQ