Accident: Jacobs Well - blue Foxbat

[Admin]

Guys, great posts about small aircraft etc, very worthy of a thread in its own right BUT please and start another interesting thread about these interesting aircraft

 

UPDATE: Several posts from this thread have been removed into a new thread regarding small aircraft

 

 

[Phil Perry]

Guys, great posts about small aircraft etc, very worthy of a thread in its own right BUT please and start another interesting thread about these interesting aircraft

Quite right Ian. . . . ( Geeez Alan, you've got me another Bo***cking ! )

 

Great pictures guys, BUT,. . . . . can you float them down to the ground with the stick fully back ??????????

 

 

[David Isaac]

Shitstirrer ... LOL

 

 

[Phil Perry]

Who ??? MOI ? ( Never ! ) Anyway, behave yourselves now, and stick to the damn topic ( ! )

 

 

[Downunder]

.

 

 

[Phil Perry]

Hi D.U.

 

I agreed with another poster on the fuel switch subject BECAUSE. . . being a long time Cessna appliance operator for lots of years, I just LIKE. . . . the choice of a "Both Tanks" setting. HOWEVER, I realise that to accomplish this in the Foxbat would require additional plumbing, and serious Mod paperwork. And since there have been no reported problems with the status quo, I have managed to cope perfectly well with the existing setup.

 

Have YOU got no tiny niggling dislikes about something or other. . . ? ( apart from pommie flyers with weird ideas ? ) On balance, there's a LOT more I LIKE about Foxbats than not.

 

My problem is I guess, that I am a "Jack of lots of aircraft " ( master of none. )

 

 

[Downunder]

.

 

 

[Phil Perry]

Did you see both valves? I have both open on takeoff and landing. No mods required.This thread sums it up..... http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/foxbat-curiousity.49690/

Can't add any more to what I've already said mate, if you are not happy with this for some reason, then ok, so be it. I like Foxbats generally, so let's leave it at that.

 

Kind regards,

 

Phil

 

 

[turboplanner]

Was there an instructor in either of these aircraft Turbo?. My understanding was that the Tecnam at Boonah had a private certificated pilot and his grand daughter in it , and this one? Names not released yet.I would strongly defend the general instructor base in this country, believing, and knowing many have grown up with the ultralight movement and, even the GA industry in Oz and they are stringently tested and reviewed by robust processes in RA. Whether all pilots choose to adhere to the practices taught to them is another matter all together.

I can sympathise with Ballpoint's decision to bail out of this thread because is does seem like one of the few where things people are saying come out wrong.

 

It would help inform other pilots enormously if people wouldn't just hide away after an accident, but on the other hand the threads usually generate useful information even if they don't get to the precise cause of that accident.

 

However something Ballpoint has said prodded my memory, and is worth looking into for financial safety:

 

"Whether all pilots choose to adhere to the practices taught to them.........."

 

As a result of students not adhering to what they were taught in Industrial and Automotive applications, and resulting accidents it was found that in most cases instructors hadn't got the safety message across - the student hadn't absorbed it. So while the instructor thought he had taught them, he in fact hadn't, and people were being injured, not because they were exhibitionists or clowns, but because they simply didn't recall what had been taught.

 

This resulted in the Certificate IV course in Training, now a mandatory requirement for many instructors in many fields, but with a public liability exposure if, being aware of it you continue instructing people in hazardous pursuits without it.

 

What this Certificate course does is ensure the instructor knows how to assess and measure training progress in critical areas.

 

I taught a number of Australia's larger truck fleet managers how to drive a semi trailer on drive days at off-road Proving Grounds where there was no requirement to have an articulated licence, but I dropped this like a hot rock when I realised that without a Cert IV, I would be responsible if they misunderstood my instructions and took us off the road.

 

I'd recommend all instructors look into this.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Turbo, Don't know if you've noticed it at all, but the current 'younger generation' (gen huh ?)seem to have a complete block against learning from the 'older' generation, (you and I). It's like they know it all already, and they just ain't listening !!...I know of coure I'm generalizing here, but it is just so much more evident than with earlier generations. Could this be the 'perfect' school system finally catching up with us ?......

 

My experience with the 'new' generation is in dealing daily with apprentices in the aviation maintenance area, which I have done for several years, so I do have a base from which to compare.

 

I am not instructing RAA pilots, but I can imagine this would be just one more challange for the active instructor, to ensure the necessary info is actually getting absorbed as it needs to be, which is always one of the big challanges with instructing anyway ?...............................................Maj...

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

.......but the current 'younger generation' (gen huh ?)seem to have a complete block against learning from the 'older' generation, (you and I). It's like they know it all already, and they just ain't listening.....

Ask them why they're not listening and 99% of the time they'll tell you you're trying to make them learn something they're not interested in or they don't need to know. I don't think it's any different from the generations before, I think my teachers complained about the same thing. My wife's been helping a kid overseas to learn English via the net and Skype. He has exceptionally bright parents and they were devastated that he's been almost bottom of the class in English (English is a second language for the family) even though the kid is brilliant too. His average score in weekly tests was 4/10.

 

In November my wife told him about the plane I'm building and he went off and researched planes and piloting and then decided he wanted to be a pilot. My wife told him he could never be a pilot and he was devastated. A day or two later he wanted to know why he couldn't be a pilot and she said it was because his English was terrible and all flying was controlled in English so he had to be perfect at English... and he obviously couldn't learn English so forget it... etc. Over there they've been back at school for two weeks since the Christmas break and he's scored 10/10 for both weekly tests. Now he has a reason and incentive to learn - and so he does.

 

I think that's what the Cert 4 course is partly about, not so much about the subject you're teaching but the subject of teaching - how to get the student to want to learn.

 

 

[facthunter]

HITC, you have nailed it. Whether there is a resistance to what you are saying for any reason, ( and there may be many), you have to motivate them. SOMEHOW.

 

The skill of teaching is a significant one. It's not just a question of knowing what to "get over". ( The message) The technique you use and how YOU gauge the effectiveness of it and follow-up to correct errors of knowledge and perception are all part of the process.

 

We have a course that is less than a day to cover 'Principles and methods of instruction". Totally inadequate...

 

It is an insult to the people who are qualified somewhere near adequately, to think you could do it in that time.

 

Some people think they can be taught how to weld in a day too. There is a lack of depth and appreciation of the finer points of anything happening today so that much of the information borders on superficial, so the training falls short.

 

Don't bother me with that! I know what I'm doing. OK, got it. Let's go flying!

 

Sh&t!!!!. Why did it do that? Nev

 

 

[M61A1]

I think that's what the Cert 4 course is partly about, not so much about the subject you're teaching but the subject of teaching - how to get the student to want to learn.

I think that is more likely what makes a natural teacher/instructor. The CertIV and other CERT concepts are purely about ticking boxes and providing a paper trail to cover arses, it does not and never will produce quality outcomes. The quality outcomes come from those who really want to do what they're doing, both instructors and students, and moreso the student, because a student that wants to learn will do so even if his instructor is not up to scratch. I think that there are three parasites sucking the life out of industry these days, the training system, quality system and the health and safety system. I don't see that these sytems actually provide any of these things, just a paper trail for our wonderful govt to use as a measuring stick to tell us how good they are and to make sure no-one sues them.

[Teckair]

Yeah, I wodered if someone would dig this one up !!!!!!!!!I have not seen one fly, but I'm reliably informed that they DO !! ( I've actually heard it described as nothing more than a streamlined ENGINE with SOME lift and directional control ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! )

I am impressed to think there are people good enough to fly some thing like that, they look like they would have a stall speed of about 120 knts and the touque factor would be an interesting challenge. An engine failure situation would be a hell of a challenge also.

 

 

[facthunter]

As a design they are more a curiosity factor. The aspect ratio of the wings!!! . How efficient is that? How pleasant would it be to fly it? What is the point really, beyond some perceived challenge. Anything will fly if you give it enough power. Nev

 

 

[Teckair]

As a design they are more a curiosity factor. The aspect ratio of the wings!!! . How efficient is that? How pleasant would it be to fly it? What is the point really, beyond some perceived challenge. Anything will fly if you give it enough power. Nev

Yep all true but like the Gee Bee pilots you would really have to be on top of the game.

 

 

[dazza 38]

BAE systems had a great way of motivating us to pass all of our Panavia Tornado aircraft systems exams. It want something like this " If you guys fail a exam you have ONE chance to resit a exam. Anymore failures & you will be sacked." IIRC nobody failed a exam. Minimum pass was 75% in most exams, some safety related exams - pass was 100 %

 

 

[facthunter]

That's one way of motivating them. There are often 100% required for pass, subjects in aviation. Eg Fuel management and weight and balance. Seems reasonable, if you think about it. After all, you are a long way up Nev

 

 

[M61A1]

Don't bother me with that! I know what I'm doing. OK, got it. Let's go flying!

Sh&t!!!!. Why did it do that? Nev

A halfway decent instructor will notice the eyes glazing over, then perhaps go flying, make it do that..........then explain why it does it, while you've got their attention.I think it takes a certain personality type to instruct, whatever type that it is, it's not mine, I'm really crap at reading people. No bit of paper will ever change that.

 

 

[turboplanner]

You wouldn't get the bit of paper if that was the case M1. Certificate IV is not as simple as depicted above. I looked into it and there was a substantial amount of study to be done. The only reason I didn't go ahead was that my work had moved away from direct sales.

 

One thing I can promise you is that it isn't a Government CYA.

 

 

[facthunter]

To teach does take a certain personality, and patience. No student should have to put up with a "cranky" instructor especially when the student is paying.. I think a lot of "instructors" only do it to get hours up. There are two problems with that. Their heart is not in it, because they are looking beyond it to something they see as better, and they often have minimum experience.

 

Training plays a big part in anything. The difference between a Thruster pilot and an A-380 pilot is training if the guy has what it takes.

 

You can be trained to teach or fly but a "natural" ( A rare animal) has advantages. It used to be called "aptitude" but we are not allowed to see some as superior to others are we?

 

You become skilled by a combination of a lot of things over time. Knowledge is the base of it. Understanding how and why things happen helps retention and performance and aids awareness. Learning it by "rote" is inferior by far. Nev

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

.... Certificate IV is not as simple as depicted above......

Yea, there are a lot of 'Certificate 4s'. My wife did hers in Financial Services and it was a one year course and was very beneficial in her work.

 

I think what we're talking about here is a Cert 4 in 'Workplace Training' which allows pretty well anyone to teach whatever they've previously been doing in industry (or whatever) for at least X many years (5yrs I think). So the WT certificate is based on teaching methods rather than knowledge of the subject that is going to be taught. As far as I understand it...

 

For example a mate of mine has been a boilermaker for half a lifetime and his knees finally gave up so he did a Cert 4 in Workplace Training and now makes double his previous hourly rate teaching boilermaking theory at TAFE. IIRC my mate's WT course was only about 6 months and he reckoned he didn't learn anything about anything but had to have the Certificate to be able to teach in TAFE.

 

 

[M61A1]

You wouldn't get the bit of paper if that was the case M1. Certificate IV is not as simple as depicted above. I looked into it and there was a substantial amount of study to be done. The only reason I didn't go ahead was that my work had moved away from direct sales.One thing I can promise you is that it isn't a Government CYA.

All govt jobs require Cert-whatever, therefore is CYA, meaning that when it goes wrong- "we've got all the boxes ticked, so it must be a problem somewhere else". Also have met many Cert-whatever instructors, some are good, many are very average, they got their bit if paper, but dont have the personal skills. The industry I'm in has changed to CertIV based, I do not believe for one moment that it has turned out better Aircraft tradespeople. I have CertIV in couple of trades, and all companies in my line of work require that, but at the end of the day, it has just been a box ticking exercise.

Perhaps a new thread required........we're way off topic, but worth discussing.

 

 

[turboplanner]

That's exactly right Head, it's not about the subject matter, you have to learn that from specialists.

 

The key components, which relate directly to producing a safe student are:

 

• On completion of the course, you will have the knowledge to assess the student's absorption of the module in a quantitative way (as against some of the comments above)
   
   
  
• You will know the implications of turning loose a student who has behaved in the way outlined in some of the other posts, and is not yet a safe operator.
   
   
  

 

 

Talking about instructor aptitude, or inbuilt training skills is fine, but you aren't firing the instructors without them, so you are leaving risk on the table. Cert IV is a way to remove that risk.

 

 

[turboplanner]

All govt jobs require Cert-whatever, therefore is CYA, meaning that when it goes wrong- "we've got all the boxes ticked, so it must be a problem somewhere else". Also have met many Cert-whatever instructors, some are good, many are very average, they got their bit if paper, but dont have the personal skills. The industry I'm in has changed to CertIV based, I do not believe for one moment that it has turned out better Aircraft tradespeople. I have CertIV in couple of trades, and all companies in my line of work require that, but at the end of the day, it has just been a box ticking exercise.Perhaps a new thread required........we're way off topic, but worth discussing.

I think you've got it back to front.

 

If you train someone and he screws up, how would the Government be sued, and which Government.

 

If you train someone and he screws up and blames you, you will be sued, and a defence might be:

 

"I trained the student according to a formal, approved process"

 

"That process included the issue he made a mistake on, in Module 3"

 

"He was present for Module 3 training"

 

"I assessed him on completion of module 3 as meeting the standard for completion"

 

"I am qualified to do this as a holder of a Certificate IV in sword juggling"

 

The alternative is to imagine the plaintiff's lawyer asking you each of those questions