>-----Original Message-----
>From: Mike Borgelt

>
>Just checked my father's logbook and in late 1957 the gliders 
>had VH registrations.



>I think it did involve a transfer of control because until 
>1981 or so DCA and its sucessors handled type approvals, 

I think I may not have been clear enough. At around that date (1950s) a
standard of airworthiness was _introduced_, ie there wasn't one before
so it couldn't have been transferred. If it was then DCA or GFA on their
behalf running the show (tween 5x and 81), I don't know. But I suspect
it was always DCA and their descendants who had "control" with GFA doing
their bidding (or as little as could be got away with). Early ADs for
Blaniks and so forth have Doug Lyons (GFA STO/air) signature on them and
predate 1981 by many years.

first 
>of type etc. This made homebuilts more difficult for quite a 
>while (the magazines of the time make mention of the Backstrom 
>"Flying Plank" 

The impression I got from reading those articles (though many years ago
now) was that there _was_ something fundamentally wrong with the design.

and approval difficulties for it) and 
>effectively stifled glider development in this country. Before 
>anyone mentions Schneiders, the basic engineering on those was 
>done in Germany.
>The Kookabura was a pre WW2 design I believe.

Well, yes and no. In as much as the Kookaburra (and most other things
designed by humans) build on previous designs, the Kookaburra has a
strong heritage from Grunau Babies (unsurprising, eg. a Discus has
similarities to a Cirrus). But that doesn't mean it is one. 
One of the first glider types that Schneiders produced in Australia
(post war) was the ES49. I have heard anecdotally that it wasn't the
same as the German ES49 except for a superficial resemblance. Edmund
used the same name so he didn't have to go through the DCA design hoops
at the time. I can only suppose that later designs did comply with
whatever the DCA wanted (BCAR part E) although Edmund and Harry would
have been extraordinary individuals if they didn't stay in contact with
what was going on "back home".
The question, I suppose, really is: If Schneiders weren't in Australia,
would some other company have filled their place? And are we confusing
indigenous design with homebuilts. There doesn't seem to be much
evidence that home builts, as such, have ever been too hard to get into
the air, about 7% of the gliders currently on the register are
homebuilt.


>It was far worse than what happened to ultralights in the 
>1980's and represented just the first utter defeat of the GFA 
>by officialdom.

What I was alluding to was that in the late 70's/early 80's ultralights
went from a group on the very periphery of aviation (eg flight not over
300 feet, not over roads etc. No organisation for training or
airworthiness) to almost the mainstream where they are now (and I think
GFA did exactly this for gliders in the 50s). 


Regards
SWK

_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Reply via email to