Prof Avius..Really??..This is the best we can do??

[old man emu]

I just did a search of this forum. Seems we have been unhappy with Professor Avius since 2011. The topics he/she has written about may change, but the response of readers has remained the same - incredulity at the errors in the column.

 

Perhaps members of RAAus should contact their Regional Reps and complain that erroneous material such at this, appearing in the organizations official publication raise serious doubts about the competency of of those entrusted with the supervision of flying activities conducted under the RAAus banner.

 

Old Man Emu

 

 

[facthunter]

What HAVE WE been HAPPY with since 2011? Nev

 

 

[rankamateur]

What HAVE WE been HAPPY with since 2011? Nev

I don't think it is funny at all. We are talking about my entire membership of RAA and I have to talk myself into renewing each year. I was hoping that would get easier under the change of guard, but gee I would like to see some evidence soon.

 

 

[spacesailor]

Thanks for your thoughts motzarmerv.

 

I gave up my training because I could'nt get my simple mind around the academic wording, plus the abbreviations and acronym’s. ( thanks,auto-correct) that fill pages of training manuals.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[facthunter]

Nor do I ranka. I'm hoping we ARE much better now. In fact, I FEEL we are. But the period I refer to has been (NOT FUN). I'm not blaming the RAAus for everything either. Hang in . You are probably younger than me. Nev

 

 

[gandalph]

What HAVE WE been HAPPY with since 2011? Nev

Nev!

 

 

[rankamateur]

Got something to add Chuck??

 

 

[gandalph]

Got something to add Chuck??

Who's chuck?

 

 

[Guest john]

To give interested members who have never experienced the wrath of instructors like the unlearned "Professor Avius" (who obviously thinks he or she thinks is GODS own gift to aviation because they have leaplets on the shirt shoulders), I recall an incident some years ago when I was doing a GA BFR in the instructors C150 (simply because I was not prepared to allow the instructor to be in control of my Comanche simply because he had no idea how to fly such a sophisticated plane).

 

I had to utilize this incompetent local instructor for the BFR because there was no other nearby instructors at the time in the area & due to my business committments did not allow me the time to go further afield.

 

At the time of doing this BFR my log book indicated several thousand hours of flight time over a period of about 30 years mostly in constant speed rectractable aircraft, particularly the Comanche.

 

During the BFR in the C150 this incompetent instructor asked me an aviation question which I can't remember now what it was about, & I provided what I considered to be a reasonable answer. In response I vividly remember the incompetent instructor shouted above the 0200 engine noise: "YOU IDIOT, YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT AVIATION". I

 

I had to be like a humble schoolboy in front of the headmaster & shut up, even though I wanted to tell him there & then to get fxxxxx.

 

We finished flying the 1 hour required for the BFR & I asked him what I owed, & paid the barstxd & he then stamped my log book & signed it off for a further 2 years.

 

These type of unlearned instructors like Professor Avius are still amongst us little people today .

 

 

[facthunter]

Epaulettes don't make an Ace of the BASE then ? No one should speak like that to a customer anyhow. Some are a bit ignorant... Nev

 

 

[kaz3g]

Who's chuck?

Unfortunate name for a pilot!

 

Kaz

 

 

[shags_j]

It would be really interesting to find out if his articles are peer reviewed. I would bet no. In which case why are they being printed. Any article like this that is factual from an organisation should be peer reviewed in the very least.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

They couldn't possibly be. If they are, we need new peers!!!

 

 

[Coop]

There is a great chapter near the end of the book "Stick and rudder" by Wolfgang Langewiesche called "The Dangers of the Air". (This chapter is actually written by Leighton Collins.) It describes how most students and newly-minted pilots fear engine failures, yet engine failures rarely kill pilots unless the pilot loses control of the aeroplane- usually as result of a stall/spin accident. It describes how these accidents happen, and how the right sort of training can reduce the chances of being caught out this way.

 

The entire book should be required reading for all pilots of light aircraft, in my opinion. With appropriate permissions, excerpts from this book would be a much better inclusion in flying magazines than some of the material cited above.

 

Coop

 

 

[spacesailor]

REQUIRED reading!,. Another HumanFactor's rubbish book, no thanks.

 

spacesailor.

 

 

[Coop]

While it does talk about human factors, it is not a human factors book per se.

 

It was first written in 1944 by a man who learned to fly in 1934 (well before the term "human factors" had been thought of), and revised in 1972. He was puzzled by the discrepancy between what pilots said they were doing and what they were actually doing, so he set about writing a book to redress that. "Stick and Rudder" was the result.

 

If you've not read it, then I suggest you hold off on dismissing it until you have.

 

It's approach appears a little radical, at times. For example, in the first chapter, it doesn't explain how an aeroplane is flown, but how a Wing is flown. Because that is what we are doing when we fly an aeroplane. We are flying the wing. Almost everything we do with the controls is aimed at controlling the wing, and once that is understood, much of the rest of what you need to know falls into place.

 

By the way, the author was a test pilot for Cessna and Chance Vought, among others.

 

He proposes a few other radical ideas too. For example, he doesn't much like the term "elevator" for the moveable flaps on the back of the stabiliser (tailplane). This is because the elevators do not make the plane go up, the throttle does that. (If you don't believe me, try taking off without using it.) He feels the word "elevator" conveys the wrong impression, but we are stuck with it. He regards the elevator as the angle of attack control with which we control the angle of attack of the wing.

 

And so on....

 

If you intend to fly light aircraft, or if you are already a qualified pilot, this book will enhance your understanding of what you are actually doing, I guarantee it.

 

But don't believe me, get your own copy and read it, and then pass judgement. It is such a well-regarded book that you can still buy it from Amazon, even though it was originally published 70 years ago....

 

Coop

 

 

[pmccarthy]

Someone like Professor Avius who likes to show off his (or her) knowledge would find this forum irresistible. So own up, which of our well-known posters are you?

 

 

[facthunter]

Some of the stuff is a bit dated and more appropriate to another time. This doesn't mean don't read it, but it's PART of what you should know.( Or another slant on things). Make up your own mind. I haven't found a flying related instruction manual that I can't find fault with. I don't think we have arrived for the modern era to correct faults specifically there. This book was to correct misconceptions of the time. (This has stuck since yesterday folks, just found it.) Nev

 

 

[old man emu]

Someone like Professor Avius who likes to show off his (or her) knowledge would find this forum irresistible. So own up, which of our well-known posters are you?

I definitely ain't me. The buggers don't pay for contributed articles.

 

OME

 

 

[Coop]

Joined this forum in 2008. Haven't been active for a while. I represent no-one but myself. But I understand your cynicism.

 

 

[Coop]

Some of the stuff is a bit dated and more appropriate to another time. This doesn't mean don't read it, but it's PART of what you should know.( Or another slant on things). Make up your own mind. I haven't found a flying related instruction manual that I can't find fault with. I don't think we have arrived for the modern era to correct faults specifically there. This book was to correct misconceptions of the time. (This has stuck since yesterday folks, just found it.) Nev

Yep, it is a bit dated. For example it refers to taildragger undercarriage as "conventional". But the basics are still the basics, tailwheel or nosewheel.....

 

Coop

 

 

[dazza 38]

My gut instinct points to a particular CFI, but I have no proof what ever so I will keep it to myself. I will say that it isn't a forum member, unless they are here under a false name.

 

I better add it is not my CFI he is a ATPL with over 25000 hours.

 

 

[Methusala]

G'day Coop, you'd best keep radical ideas such as "the elevator doesn't make the aeroplane go up" pretty quiet around here. I remember a thread some years ago that lasted an age . The subject was "does the throttle control ascent/descent or does the elevator?' (By the way, I was arguing on your side). Elevator controls airspeed and throttle controls ascent/descent. Regards Don (And I was "just sayin' ", I don't want to visit that argument again.)

 

 

[Coop]

G'Day Don. Yeah, it got a bit involved, didn't it? I think the upshot was that it makes sense for lighties, but not for the heavies.

 

Hope you're getting lots of flying in.

 

Coop

 

 

[kaz3g]

Don't forget the AAAA Flyin is at Echuca next year, Coops. See you there?

 

Kaz

 

Oops...corrected to next year (March)