Microlighters

http://www.caa.co.za/press_files/2011/P ... 0Fines.pdf

An urgent appeal to our aviation community is to heed to the following document and the serious implications it imposes. Without too much detail gents, this is very serious stuff and it AFFECTS ALL OF US. We are currently embroiled in a battle in respect of a reported incident (blown out of proportion in my opinion) where this action has been imposed by CAA on 2 pilots.

Let me just say, if you are going to be in contravention of the AVIATION ACT or what is prescribed in AIR LAW (die rooi boekie!), your are going to get more than a slap on the wrist I'm afraid...

Ouch

John can you share with us what the two incidends were and how much has been fined?

I was courteously reminded by someone that CAA has been doing this for sometime... I think we are only now being faced within our own sector by this!

(b) when flown elsewhere than specified in paragraph (a), shall be flown at a height less than 500 feet above the ground or water, unless the flight can be made without hazard or nuisance to persons or property on the ground or water; and

Without detail : A single occurrence... outflight coastwise & return... Two trikes.... R 10 000 each!

Even though not related to this, some of you may recall when Greg & I urged and warned certain gents to refrain from their actions... we were told in no uncertain terms publicly & via pm's by certain people how idiotic, petty and full of nonsense we were being! What can I say....

Let me refresh your memory.... viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14438&hilit=flamingos

Personally, I do think that applying monetary fines is a good idea (tea with the commissioner has proved to be a rather ineffective deterrent), I was under the impression that the discressionary fines under 185.00.1(m) would be in the order of traditional traffic fines.

R10,000 for a first offence is ludicrous.

Just out of curiosity, how was the exact altitude of the aircraft in question determined?

A couple of photos which I feel can be interpreted in many ways....

Ek kry nie die PDF file oopgemaak om die sittuasie na behore te begryp nie, maar wat ek aflei is dat die howe (?) n exhobitante boete aan twee trike pilots opgele het wie te laag gevlieg het.
Kan iemand asb besonderhede deurgee want nie almal van ons kry die file oop nie.
Indien dit waar is en die boete is buite verhouding (wat blyk te wees) dan is dit die mense wie ons by CAA vereenwoordig se plig om sulke buitensporigheid onder die aandag van die owerhede te bring en ook die pilots te help met n apel. (apeal)
Ons lewe in n land waar onbevoegde persone wetstoepassers geword het.
As ons nie beswaar aanteken teen al die ongeregtighede nie sal ons die slagoffers daarvan bly!!!
As iemand n fout gemaak het kan hy beboet word maar binne perke asb.
Help die dom donners reg.

John - do I understand correctly from your link - an old issue that was resolved, is now reopened and the pilots involved are facing fines? Or was that flamingo - link just an example??

Never mind - I read more carefully - not related.

Here is a new one for them to prosecute.. although I don't think my Dad will lay charges against me!

PS: Kids - ONLY try this at home if your dad is the owner of the land and equipment in question - otherwise you might cause a "nuisance". (This was done at the behest of the potential complainant (dad) in order to obtain some cool pics for his album, in calm conditions over open terrain far from obstacles. Low flying pics grabbed from video - lots of speed in these pics. Worst outcome is a landing in the soya fields.) Got a couple more nice frames!

Oops... be careful Asterix - there doesn't necessarily have to be a complainant!

Blue Max

The link does not contain information or details pertaining to the incident... it contains the process and monetary fines system of CAA!

Noting, it makes no place for "VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE"

Jip. I know. Nice pics nonetheless? I've got more..

Nice pics nonetheless

Now there I agree and of course I do enjoy the videos as well....

In any event - I think that thought out low flying in calm conditions is FAR safer than taking of and climbing to thousands of feet in IFR weather. The latter have killed more people over the last few years or so than a bit of low flying in known terrain, or am I wrong?

This is just more "Big Brother" trying to "in" a couple of more bucks to allow government officials (thieves) to go on stealing. Remember that government is expanding - more thieves - they need to grow the cake from whence to steal..

In any event - I think that thought out low flying in calm conditions is FAR safer than taking of and climbing to thousands of feet in IFR weather. The latter have killed more people over the last few years or so than a bit of low flying in known terrain, or am I wrong?

This is just more "Big Brother" trying to "in" a couple of more bucks to allow government officials (thieves) to go on stealing. Remember that government is expanding - more thieves - they need to grow the cake from whence to steal..