Training ground for poor aimenship.

[motzartmerv]

Hi folks.

 

Please allow me to vent a little.

 

For the past few weeks our school has been operating from Wollongong airfield as our grass strip is under water.

 

I have been bighting my tongue as I watch (with interest) the goings on of the only GA school that trains from there.

 

To keep this clean, i will ignore the anti RAA attitude imposed by management there and deal only with fact and observation.

 

Today while I was in the circuit with a student, two of the young instructors from the ga school had a conversation over the radio. It went for over a minute, and was composed of one instructor asking his mate to look in the aircraft he was flying for his asic. The other guy proceeded to look around the aircraft, umming and arring with his finger on the button. "no mate, its not in here, did ya leave it in blah blah blah."

 

"no i checked there, if you see it it has a picture of me on it, and covered in lipstick"...ha ha ha..

 

this back and forth went on for some time. Meanwhile I had gone from early downwind, to final with no calls due to the radio congestion.

 

I planned to approach the young fellas later to discuss it.

 

BUT>>>>

 

Later in the day, doing circuits again, both these guys were in the cct aswell with students, doing the usual, 'god my voice sounds good', 3 radio calls per cct, while I was giving turning base with intentions only.

 

Now the kicker, one of these cheeky bastards gets on the radio and ask's

 

"jabiru in the cct, are you making any calls or just flying around the place?"

 

I replied.

 

"yes mate I gave a turning base call, which i feel is all thats needed at the moment.

 

Then this guy replies with.."Well you better check your AIP mate"

 

Well, I was dumbfounded.

 

I realise that we are just lowlife RAA pilots that only fly toys and are trained to such a low standard,...actually, while i am on this subject, allow me to put forward some of my other observations of the standards being taught by this GA school.

 

1. Instructors refuelling (with a student) and not performing a fuel drain.

 

2. Instructors telling students that Pre flight inspections are not necessary after the daily. (witnessed by myself)

 

3. Performing ccts where downwind leg is well over 2 miles away from the strip (in c152)

 

4. Joining downwind miles away from the strip.

 

The list goes on but i will get back to our cheeky young friends.

 

After being told to check the AIP, i did so. BuT, i went to HIS school, and asked to check their AIP.

 

And as im sure all of us undertrained and insugnificant raa pilots (tounge in cheek icon) know, the rules state NO amount of mandatory radio calls in the cct.

 

The pilot in question was still flying so I left the page open and left, I passed him at the gate and told him that i did as he suggested and have left the aip open at the appropriate place. I told him to have a look and pint out to me where it states that 3 radio calls are required in the cct. He just went on to say that thats how its done here.

 

I simply replied that the aip states no such thing, and if your going to quote rules over the airwaves (itself an infraction) then make sure you are right.

 

I feel I have failed. Wherever We go I en devour to further RAA GA relations, and unfortunately, I often have my work cut out for me. The dsiplays of poor aimenship by this school AND THE CFI are absolutely appalling and as bad if not worse than any I have ever witnessed.

 

I could fill a page with the infractions i have witnessed but will keep this brief.

 

I am sorry for the rant, but my blood is still boiling.

 

 

[Guest burbles1]

I'm really grateful to have had thorough training from a few very good RA instructors. As I move between schools, I see instructors espousing, fairly consistently, attention to detail for every aspect of airmanship - from planning and preflighting through to inflight instruction. No shortcuts allowed!

 

It's a shame that sometimes GA standards are below par when you witness that sort of carelessness, but RA pilots can pride themselves on maintaining high standards.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Yes, even the RAA students of Bruces are Gentleman compared to these clowns.

 

A Bloke in a 172 RG had gear issues today, I was watching him takeoff and the gear only partially retracted, I jumped on the radio and sussed him and yea, he was having issues. Our GA friends at the pump just went about their business. Payed no interest. While Myself and some other RAA guys had fire extinguishes manned and ready and discussed a plan should it go pear shaped when he landed.

 

As it turned out he managed to get the gear down and locked and landed fine.

 

What is wrong with these people??.........

 

 

[Mazda]

Please don't do the RA vs GA thing because this is one particular school and a couple of people in a circuit. It is NOT standard GA practice.

 

Motz, you could submit an incident report, or a REPCON, or try to talk to their CFI to talk about currency training for their instructors and good airmanship. You could use your own good airmanship to lead by example. Or you could invite Dick Smith to fly in and give both schools a talk about airspace!

 

 

[deadstick]

["jabiru in the cct, are you making any calls or just flying around the place?"

 

I replied.

 

Well you should have replied:- the only things flying round the place will be my fists and my call is you'll be bleedin before you leave the Tarmac! lol. Gotta love arrogance and self importance from no time professionals hey? sounds like we may read about this gent in flight safety one day me thinks!

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Don't stress Motz, half the time these so-called GA instructors are only rookies with less time than you have. All they are doing are trying to build hours so they can hopefully find a half -decent job one day. Their basic airmanship leaves a lot to be desired at times.

 

I'm sure we have much more fun anyway!!.........................................................Maj...

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Yea guys, I am RAA and GA aswell, I am not knocking GA . Just this particular crew seem to have some Bug up their bottoms. And no, I don't think there is any mutual respect at all. I won't go in to details, but he has proven on several occasions that this is the case.

 

I don't care who they are, what they fly or who they have shot, when we are in the air we are all in the same "boat"

 

 

[Guest Wigg]

I have to agree with your last comment Motz, doesn'tmatter if your GA orPAA the planes all fall the same way. The misuse of the radio for personal chatter is bad enough I was taught that it is there for your calls or for emergencies only, this was taught to me when I was learning to fly (GA) or was I perceiving the message incorrectly. Sue

 

 

[facthunter]

Misuse of allocated frequencies

 

Sue , you are correct. It is not on, but it's also a breach of the law. IF some one does the wrong thing, do not respond in the AIR. You are there to fly the plane and you are in no fit state to do that well if you are angered. Don't lower yourself to their level. This sort of thing should be stopped before it becomes the norm, or even 1/2 tolerated Nev

 

 

[Guest Mark Mac]

Yep, small training tream dynamics. You can always pretend to be the King, when you are dealing with poeple who have no other terms of reference. There will always be arrogant poeple regardless of what sytem they are in.

 

Can someone please tell me if RAA is a subordinate scheme to GA?

 

 

[Ultralights]

Sadly it happens quite regularly, all we can do is be as professional as possible, tolerate the bad airmanship and keep out of the way and respond to it on the ground by submitting a report to casa if it is dangerous or leads to a dangerous situation.. Even at bankstown, regular blasting from the tower over poor radio calls and flying still doesn't get the message through.

 

 

[rgmwa]

I'm GA, and the misuse of the radio by those two irresponsible instructors would never be tolerated by the school (or the tower) where I did my training. That kind of behaviour is both unprofessional and potentially dangerous.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

...Can someone please tell me if RAA is a subordinate scheme to GA?

Not in anything I have found. Both are legislated by the Federal Government and CASA, but CASA administers general aviation directly while recreational aviation administration is outsourced to RAA, HFGA, etc. by aircraft type segment (with some overlaps, such as RAA and HGFA).

 

Subordination is just a perception based upon the exemption from some GA requirements, that lead to a subset of allowable actions and some different capabilities.

 

One could just as invalidly say that GA is subordinate to RAA, since RAA aircraft owners can maintain their own aircraft (provided it is used for private purposes), whereas GA aircraft owners must use a LAME.

 

As with many comparisons, you can spin it any way you like to suit the position you are advocating.

 

 

[Bikky]

Saw this just two days ago and I am still flabbergasted. Took 3 adults with about 50kgs of baggage and a baby to our station strip for a 3 hour flight to our major regional centre. Not the best day for a comfortable flight. 39* in the shade and winds to 15 kts. Instead of the usual twin, there was an OLD Stationair parked ready to go. I know appearances aren't everything but this aircraft was definitley shabby looking.

 

I asked the pilot what it was like up there and he said it was quite bumpy as you would expect. I joked with him that he would need a fair bit of the strip to get airborne at which he laughed and said, "Naah, she'll be right."

 

Everybody onboard and I waited for them to be airborne before I left.

 

Instead of taxi to the end of the strip for a conventional takeoff, the pilot gunned it from the apron and performed a downwind take off. He made it but he used nearly all the strip to get airborne.

 

Is it just me, or is this just plain wrong!? Pax did make it to their destination but not safely in my book.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

100 hr pilots with an instructors rating? bit like being taught to drive by a P plater!

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

100 hr pilots with an instructors rating? bit like being taught to drive by a P plater!

While I understand the sentiment, I would have thought that a 100hr pilot instructor, having demonstrated "a 90% minimum accuracy in examination", should have the rules fresh in their minds.

 

I'm not even sure that this low expectation of 100hr pilots is fair. I am not that much over 100hrs and I know a number of others. I'm sure that there's plenty of low hour pilots who would not behave in the manner described, and would be critical (although not over the air) of others observed to be doing so.

 

Apparently, there is still a lot of confusion over the 3 June changes to radio use. I think I can attribute that to too many people relying on others to explain the change rather than reading it for themselves. The CASA documentation is only confusing if one fails to understand that the AIP in this regard is supplemented by the CAAP 166 which provides an explanation of how to comply.

 

Even our RAA CEO did nothing to correctly clarify the confusion when at Holbrook a few weeks back he essentially implied that you don't have to make any calls if you think that's ok, and that you might well only make a 10mile call and if nothing heard give no more. I can think of a number of scenarios in which this behaviour would not achieve the objective of adequately supporting "alerted see and avoid". It does require the pilot to think about the current situation and act thoughtfully. Neither does that mean making a lot of redundant calls when everyone in the circuit knows and can see where you are.

 

CASA also ran some excellent seminars as well.

 

"In the end, if pilots are unable to make sensible judgements of when calls are needed, CASA will revert to mandating calls..." Paraphrased from one of the CASA seminars.

 

I'd support reporting pilots who flagrantly disobey the rules, especially if it diminishes safety.

 

 

[frank marriott]

It apears the problems exist in some areas more so then overall.

 

I fly into Townsville regularly in an RAA registered aircraft and experience complete courtesy form all aircraft and tower.

 

There is a couple of both GA and RAA pilots who overuse 126.7 but I have found this everywhere.

 

As a side note in all my RAA flying I have only (so far) had one smart **** comment [in which he was wrong] and that was from another RAA aircraft at Watts Bridge fly in. I was temped to reply but the area was busy encough without two of us exchanging opinions over the air.

 

With no saftey issue involved I decided to forget the mouth and enjoy the day.

 

Frank

 

 

[Barefootpilot]

Don't stress to much Motz these guys are just your typical junior GA instructors who are only there to fill the log book so they can run off and fly a nice shiny jet. They couldn't care less about the student or standards they are setting.

 

 

[Guest burbles1]

junior GA instructors who are only there to fill the log book so they can run off

Tell me about it - my training at Camden was interrupted a couple of times by taking duals with young instructors who were there just to get their hours up. Unfortunately, one took off to do ATPL studies. Another came along, and had to do 25 hours familiarisation in a Jab before he could take me. Then he disappeared after a short time. I'd had enough of breaks in training, and found another school with more stability and a more senior instructor.

[dunlopdangler]

Motz, these guys aren't indictive of any mindset out there in ga ga land...as others have posted, they would get sorted out at many establishments where professionalism is a given. I have flown into Albion Park and I now must say this would not be an isolated incident as I witnessed some fairly ordinary airmanship as well on my visit there...didn't say anything at the time because everyone can make a mistake and seems that it may be a reflection on the school there. With attitudes like these guys are displaying, they will probably not get into the pointy end of the big silver thingies as they will more than likely fail the physc test..

 

 

[motzartmerv]

yes, I apologise if my comments seemed anti GA, that certainly was not what my vent was about. I really feel sorry for the students learning there as i believe that 'attitude is the foundation of airmenship. And, attitude is passed on to students. One thing that has always stuck in my mind from instructor training is that students will fly like their instructor. If your sloppy and lazy, then expect them to be the same, if you dont perform checks then expect them not to also. If you chat to your mate on the radio about your weekend then expect them to.

 

And to get to my final point, and the point of the vent,

 

I firmly believe that if we could boil all that makes a good pilot down into a single word, i would say that word is..."attitude" Teaching a poor attitude is by default, creating a bad pilot.

 

 

[Yenn]

Sad story. When I learnt to fly I was tought by a couple of young instructors who were building hours, and they both got airline jobs as I got my licence. They were better instructors than the first Instructor I had who was running his own school, charted business.

 

Maybe I was lucky, or maybe Schutt Aviation knew who to employ, but those two blokes taught me airmanship.

 

 

[djpacro]

Teaching a poor attitude is by default, creating a bad pilot.

Contagious too.I see from the latest Flight Safety Magazine that a Pitts S-1 crashed (nil injuries) at Wollongong on 19th Sept. I wonder if that was the same guy that I had occasion to chat with earlier in the year?

 

Plane crash closes Canberra's airport - Local News - News - General - The Canberra Times This was another accident that I was pleased to see (no-one injured) but this modified Pitts was dangerous in my opinion - it would've killed some-one eventually - problem fixed.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

DJ, no, not him, but one of his co-orts

 

 

[Mazda]

I wrote a long reply but fortunately my computer dropped out.

 

Suffice to say I'm sick of the GA bashing on here (not Motz). You cannot presume to know what GA instructors aspire to do, I've had several career GA instructors, and no GA instructor can have 100 hours - they are only half way to CPL at that stage, let alone having the required 50 hour instructor course (not 20), night or instrument rating, spin training, class 1 medical, CPL theory. RA only instructors can't go to the airlines because, being realistic, they are not qualified to do it. GA instructors may do it because GA pay is lousy and they may not be able to support their families unless they take a better paying airline job.

 

There is poor airmanship on both sides, I could go into the RA ones like flying through major jet airline airport zones and conflicting with traffic, completely oblivious. I've heard stories on here from RA pilots that no GA pilot I know would ever do. If CFI needed the callsign for some reason to avoid a collision, he could have asked them to repeat it, which is completely useless when dealing with some RA pilots with radios that cannot be heard. They make all the calls, but the static and noise means there is no meaningful information. No GA aircraft would get throught its maintenance with a radio like that.

 

I do not wish to say anything against RA, it is a good thing, but the generalisations on this thread are unfair and unwarranted.