Incident at Mangalore
Howard F Lowndes
I wish to make a clear statement with regard to the unfortunate
incident of the runaway aircraft at Mangalore on Sunday last.
The Ultrabat aircraft involved in the incident is usually referred to
as an ultralight aircraft.
However the Australian Ultralight Federation Inc. (AUF), which is
responsible for the administration of ultralight aircraft operations
in Australia, does not have any Ultrabat aircraft on its ultralight
register.
There is one Ultrabat aircraft on the Australian aircraft register and
that carries the registration of VH-ANT as shown on the register
current at 30 Mar 98 and its administration is the responsibility of
the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).
The incident was regrettable and the AUF sympathises with those
injured in the incident, but the AUF must dissociate itself from the
incident and from any person associated with the incident, and from
the operation and administration of the aircraft involved in the
incident.
Howard F Lowndes
NSW Board Member
Australian Ultralight Federation Inc.
Howard F Lowndes
In this newsgroup, lan...@albury.net.au (Howard F Lowndes) wrote:
>There is one Ultrabat aircraft on the Australian aircraft register and
>that carries the registration of VH-ANT as shown on the register
>current at 30 Mar 98 and its administration is the responsibility of
>the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).
Further to my earlier post. Another Ultrabat was added to the
Australian aircraft register on 1 Apr 98 with the registration of
VH-RAR. This latter would appear to have been the aircraft involved
in the incident. The administration of both aircraft is still the
responsibility of CASA and not of the AUF.
Howard F Lowndes
NSW Board Member
Australian Ultralight Federation Inc.
These are my opinions. Today's price, to you, is AUS$0.02 |
Howard F Lowndes mailto:lan...@albury.net.au ICQ:3398299 _|_
LANNet Computing Associates http://albury.net.au/~lannet __|---|__
PGPkey http://albury.net.au/~lowndes/hfl_pubk.asc ___________|_$_|___________
PGPkeycheck 09A25BEA 8D3B2793 519E3DD2 72782532 / | \ VH-MDL
A Grumman Yankee is a F14 Tomcat on Jenny Craig O O O
Jon Herd
Howard F Lowndes (lan...@albury.net.au) wrote:
:
: The incident was regrettable and the AUF sympathises with those
: injured in the incident, but the AUF must dissociate itself from the
: incident and from any person associated with the incident, and from
: incident.
:
Fine, but what i would like to know, and this ain troll or a stir up, is
why was the aircraft permitted engine start up that close to children?
The aircraft may not have been the responsibility of the AUF, but the
aircraft movements surely are.
A child's life is far too expensive to fool around with.
Was this pilot breaking the rules, or were the rules untested
until an incident occurred.
I'd just like to know, because normally the AUF (and the SAAA) are
very professional.
--
Cheers,
Herdy
/----------------------------------\
| Jon Herd | |~~\__/~~~\__ |
| Graduate School of Business |___________\___ ===== )-+
| University of Newcastle | ~~~| /~\~ |
| New South Wales, AUSTRALIA | o o
| c940...@alinga.newcastle.edu.au | Victa 115
\----------------------------------/
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/1744
Howard F Lowndes
In this newsgroup, c940...@alinga.newcastle.edu.au (Jon Herd) wrote:
>Fine, but what i would like to know, and this ain troll or a stir up, is
>why was the aircraft permitted engine start up that close to children?
I don't know that it was started up close to children. From the
reports I have heard it travelled some distance before losing its left
wheel and then doing pirouettes (sp?). I would still ask: 1. was the
aircraft chocked; and 2. was there a pilot in the cockpit, given the
situation. It might appear not from the footage that I saw.
I believe that it was a hand propped start, which on a Rotax 582
(according to the registration details) is no easy task.
>The aircraft may not have been the responsibility of the AUF, but the
>aircraft movements surely are.
No. Absolutely nothing to do with the AUF. CASA registered aircraft
and CASA licenced pilot. IMO operations were the responsibility of
SAAA, the airfield operator/owner, and the pilot.
>A child's life is far too expensive to fool around with.
Not only a child's.
>Was this pilot breaking the rules, or were the rules untested
>until an incident occurred.
No comment.
>I'd just like to know, because normally the AUF (and the SAAA) are
>very professional.
Thanks for the compliment.
Howard Lowndes
Howard F Lowndes
Howard F Lowndes
Howard F Lowndes
Stuart Hilsberg
Howard F Lowndes wrote:
>
> I wish to make a clear statement with regard to the unfortunate
> incident of the runaway aircraft at Mangalore on Sunday last.
>
> The Ultrabat aircraft involved in the incident is usually referred to
> as an ultralight aircraft.
>
> However the Australian Ultralight Federation Inc. (AUF), which is
> responsible for the administration of ultralight aircraft operations
> in Australia, does not have any Ultrabat aircraft on its ultralight
> register.
>
> that carries the registration of VH-ANT as shown on the register
> current at 30 Mar 98 and its administration is the responsibility of
> the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).
>
> injured in the incident, but the AUF must dissociate itself from the
> incident and from any person associated with the incident, and from
> the operation and administration of the aircraft involved in the
> incident.
>
> NSW Board Member
> Australian Ultralight Federation Inc.
Howard
Can we expect a similar "Statement of Dis-association" in regard to the
double fatal near Singleton whilst they were on the way to Narromine??
Stu
Howard F Lowndes
No comment.
Thanks for the compliment.
Howard Lowndes
Howard F Lowndes
In this newsgroup, Stuart Hilsberg <stu...@mpx.com.au> wrote:
>Howard
>Can we expect a similar "Statement of Dis-association" in regard to the
>double fatal near Singleton whilst they were on the way to Narromine??
>Stu
This was a very tragic accident indeed, but where the pilot and
passenger may have been destined has little if any relevance on the
matter.
My information is that it was an AUF registered aircraft and an AUF
certificated pilot. Beyond that I will not comment as the accident is
the subject of a BASI investigation and probably a coronial inquest.
I made the statement in connection with Mangalore in order to correct
the incorrect information that was being put out by some media
sources.
Howard F Lowndes
No comment.
Thanks for the compliment.
Howard Lowndes
Martin Hone
I understand Howard to be saying that the VH registered Ultrabat that
featured in the unfortunate incident at Mangalore over Easter is not an
AUF responsibility, and rightly so. It was being operated by George
Markey (incidently the founder of the AUF) but a starting problem
earlier in the day seemed to have resulted in the ignition switch being
left on, so that the magneto was still hot when he returned to hand prop
the snowmobile-powered aerobatic aircraft prior to his scheduled
aerobatic routine. The Ultrabat was at least 100 metres from the public
at that time, but should have had a competant person at the controls
during hand propping. It certainly makes you think. Thankfully it was a
pusher aircraft. Good to hear that Narromine was a success for the AUF
and the many ultralights that were able to attend
Martin Hone
Chris Carabott
G'day
I was next to the aircraft when it was started and it is true that it had
to travel across the taxiway and approximately another 10 to 20 metres up
it before it reached the crowd. It was unfortunate that it lost the wheel
when it did and began spinning because I believe that if it didn't loose
the wheel it would have continued into a metal barrier well away from the
public.
Cheers
Chris Carabott
pilko
Seems to me that the AUF is good at passing the buck. IT WASN'T ME!!!! aint
that a typical response when we have an incident .
Well guess what Howard it was the pilots responsibility to make sure he
started up safely......brakes ?? (do they have brakes?) a pilot at the
controls ?? such hard stuff to do.
I just dont understand your pitiful attitude . Shame on you Howard !!