Changing planes

[01rmb]

Funny enough, I had more trouble coming back home and now being comfortable driving two different ways. It was no longer a case of do it all opposite to what I was accustomed to.

When you are consciously thinking - "keep right", "turn right on roundabouts" etc it is okay driving on the opposite side than what you are used to - as long as you have not overstressed your mental capacity and ability to maintain the rational thought process. The danger comes when you are distracted as the result of an emergency when rational thought is replaced by the programmed automated response. I know of cases where people driving in the foreign country have ended up crossing into oncoming traffic as a result of you have a problem such as a tyre bursting because the instinctive response was to pull left (as you do in Australia) .

 

Same with flying - you need to train the muscles to react instinctively during an emergency. The problem comes when the response is different in different aircraft and you are constantly changing. If the response is the same then there is no problem but if the response is different then problems or delays may occur which could have catastrophic consequences. Hence why most systems, especially those needed in an emergency, should be standardised. No problem for most of the time but for low time pilots with limited experience it could be a concern in an emergency where an automated response is necessary. The more experience you have and better familiarity with the aircraft the more automated the response becomes and the problem becomes less of an issue since you are more able to adapt to the different environments.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

What I meant was, do you fly:- elevator for airspeed and power for rate of descent

- attitude for aimpoint and power for airspeed

 

- something different

Instructors over do the "airspeed with elevator" etc thing. An aircrafts performance is determined by power and attitude. Performance includes airspeed, rate of climb or descent and I'd suggest rate of turn too. You need to assess your energy state before making corrections to the approach. Without trying to get too technical, the aircraft has potential energy (height) and kinetic energy (airspeed). You need to assess both factors before you make any corrections. For example, you might be high and slow. So the standard thing would be reduce power to fix high, lower the nose to fix slow - before you know what's going on you're now too low. The better fix would've been to think, ok I'm high but slow - so if I lower the nose to regain airspeed, I'll also fix being too high.

 

There are also a few "armchair flying" exercises I could suggest which might help you get your head around this, the other key is to have a structured scan or work cycle. Flying is a bit like juggling, focus too long on one ball and you'll drop the others.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

What I meant was, do you fly:- elevator for airspeed and power for rate of descent

- attitude for aimpoint and power for airspeed

 

- something different

Instructors over do the "airspeed with elevator" etc thing. An aircrafts performance is determined by power and attitude. Performance includes airspeed, rate of climb or descent and I'd suggest rate of turn too. You need to assess your energy state before making corrections to the approach. Without trying to get too technical, the aircraft has potential energy (height) and kinetic energy (airspeed). You need to assess both factors before you make any corrections. For example, you might be high and slow. So the standard thing would be reduce power to fix high, lower the nose to fix slow - before you know what's going on you're now too low. The better fix would've been to think, ok I'm high but slow - so if I lower the nose to regain airspeed, I'll also fix being too high.

 

There are also a few "armchair flying" exercises I could suggest which might help you get your head around this, the other key is to have a structured scan or work cycle. Flying is a bit like juggling, focus too long on one ball and you'll drop the others.

 

 

[Ada Elle]

Hours flown this week: 13.3

 

Plane types flown: 4

 

Planes approved for solo flying/hire: 4

 

Endorsements passed: 1 (XC)

 

It's amazing what a few hours in the cockpit will do for you. All it took was giving myself an extra 200m on final and being willing to use power.

 

Next up: RPL

 

 

[Ada Elle]

Hours flown this week: 13.3

 

Plane types flown: 4

 

Planes approved for solo flying/hire: 4

 

Endorsements passed: 1 (XC)

 

It's amazing what a few hours in the cockpit will do for you. All it took was giving myself an extra 200m on final and being willing to use power.

 

Next up: RPL

 

 

[Nightmare]

I recently changed flying school, plane, airfield and instructor. I found it challenging, and set me back a little. It took me a few hours getting familiar with it all. But I think it makes you a better pilot. I just nailed 5 out of 5 really good landings in the new plane today, and to top it all off, I passed my pre-solo exam today as well!

 

 

[Nightmare]

(Also, switching stick hands - how do people do it?)

I did that, switching from a Tecnam Eaglet, which has the stick between your legs and left hand control, throttle in your right, trim buttons on the stick, and electric flaps next to the throttle, to the Lightwing which has the stick between the seats so controlled with your right hand, throttle controlled with your left, a challenge to get to manual flap lever over the left of your head, and the trim lever on the floor between your legs.... Believe me, it's taking a bit of getting used to. How do people do it? Practice I guess.

 

 

[Ada Elle]

I might have to start flying from the right hand seat; all gliders are right hand stick, left hand aerobrake/everything else.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Switching from left hand on stick, right hand on throttle to right hand on stick left hand on throttle is only a 5 second conversion.

 

I have swapped from one to the other during the same day flying different aircraft and have never had a problem.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

I might have to start flying from the right hand seat; all gliders are right hand stick, left hand aerobrake/everything else.

It just takes practice, like Dazza says after a while you won't notice the difference although you may have a preference. I'd rather fly right handed in an aircraft fitted with a stick (rather than a wheel) and left hand for throttle, trim and flaps.

 

 

[kaz3g]

Sorry - I am asking for general advice, and it was getting derailed into specifics of flying. It almost feels like mansplaining - why is the assumption (made early in this thread, for example), that I can't fly the plane? I know how to use rudders, I know how to land crosswind, I know how to use trim, I can fly a circuit. What I struggled with was flying to a familiar airport, in a plane I was familiar with but not at that airport, and not using all the visual cues from a different aircraft. I want to know how people avoid runway perspective illusions. How do you get your brain to not be tricked into little cues that will trip you up.(Also, switching stick hands - how do people do it?)

Some of the people responding to you have many thousands of hours, Ada Elle and some of the problems you have recounted indicate that, while you are flying the aeroplane (it's not a "plane"), you sometimes aren't flying it as well as you might or want to. Everyone is trying to help in their own way and it is for you to receive or reject their offerings as you please.

 

I fly my aeroplane 98% of the time but choose to do my AFR in something else just to get me out of my comfort zone...although it's not always so comfortable if my concentration lapses. That means I have to familiarise or refamiliarise myself with the particular machine. Earlier this year it was in a C172; two years earlier it was a C182RG. Before that Warrior, C150, C210 and Decathlon were in the list.

 

As you get more time up the effort required to become familiar with another type will reduce, especially while you are young and your reflexes and concentration are spot on. Give yourself a chance and enjoy every experience.

 

Blue skies...

 

Kaz

 

 

[kaz3g]

There was a bit of a discussion re left or right hand here

 

http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/left-or-right-hand.3106/page-2#post-27549

 

I did my early flying in Cessnas and Warriors then went into gliding so left wheel, right stick wasn't much of a change and the stick is so intuitive it became my favourite. The Decathlon was my early introduction to power with a stick and it's also a right hand job.

 

Felt a bit strange the first hour or two in An Auster when I first flew one because it's a left hand stick, right hand throttle, but then it has that hazard, the left hand flap lever mounted above the pilots head. Now it just seems normal :-)

 

Kaz

 

 

[Happyflyer]

I fly my aeroplane 98% of the time but choose to do my AFR in something else just to get me out of my comfort zone...although it's not always so comfortable if my concentration lapses. That means I have to familiarise or refamiliarise myself with the particular machine. Earlier this year it was in a C172; two years earlier it was a C182RG. Before that Warrior, C150, C210 and Decathlon were in the list.Kaz

Kaz, it's interesting that you do your AFR in a different aircraft. How do you get around paragraph 12.1 of CAAP 5.81-1(1) (Flight reviews), which states:

 

12.1 The CARs clearly state that a flight review must be

 

 

 

 

conducted in the aircraft in which the pilot had flown the most

 

 

 

 

flight time during the last ten flights undertaken.

 

 

https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/_assets/main/download/caaps/ops/5_81_1.pdf

 

 

[Roundsounds]

The title of the CAAP is a hint, CAAP 5.81 is based on CAR 5.81 which ain't no more.

 

It's hard to believe, but CASA hasn't updated the CAAP to reflect the Part 61 stuff. For example, it's now acceptable to complete an AFR in a MEA class aeroplane and it covers your SEA class.

 

 

[DrZoos]

have you ever driven on the wrong side of the road, a'la US or France? its kinda similar, in that we expect it to be worse than it is, but we adapt pretty well. I have yet to land a plane from the right seat however, that's gotta mess with you!

I had no problems doing this in the US till on about the 20th day, on a lookout road above Denver CO, i realised I was on the left after 2 minutes driving along a windy road over blind crests..that was an awakening moment...

the real problem was making a turn into poorly defined areas like carparks with no lines...

 

And as someone else said, coming home was wierder, because suddenly my brain had no natural left right preference happening....several times i found myself confused in the first month back home for a second or two...

 

Yet flying i have absolutley no probs gooing left or right, other than the visual perspective from each seat is different.

 

 

[DrZoos]

Kaz, it's interesting that you do your AFR in a different aircraft. How do you get around paragraph 12.1 of CAAP 5.81-1(1) (Flight reviews), which states:

12.1 The CARs clearly state that a flight review must be

 

 

 

 

conducted in the aircraft in which the pilot had flown the most

 

 

 

 

flight time during the last ten flights undertaken.

 

 

https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/_assets/main/download/caaps/ops/5_81_1.pdf

Classic CASA that we have to do an RPL flight review in a GA aircraft ....dumb dumb dumb

 

 

[Happyflyer]

The title of the CAAP is a hint, CAAP 5.81 is based on CAR 5.81 which ain't no more.It's hard to believe, but CASA hasn't updated the CAAP to reflect the Part 61 stuff. For example, it's now acceptable to complete an AFR in a MEA class aeroplane and it covers your SEA class.

Thanks for that. I guess since 1 Sep 14 CASA have been to busy trying to understand part 61 to issue any guidance.

 

 

[kaz3g]

HF

 

Dumb luck, I guess.

 

But if you took this literally, you would have to wonder how the drivers of single seat aircraft like the S1S got by.

 

The answer, I think, is that the poorly written CAR meant the "type" of aircraft, not the particular aircraft.

 

As you would know, the type is a SE, fixed wing less than 5700 kilos.

 

Kaz

 

PS. They also seem to have been too busy to get around to issuing Part 61 Licences...it's more than 3 months since I did the AFR and I haven't got mine as yet. Perhaps Australia Post is demanding extra postage because of the weight?

 

 

[djpacro]

But if you took this literally, you would have to wonder how the drivers of single seat aircraft like the S1S got by...Kaz

I always take the law literally but sometimes I ask your advice.Per the old CAR it was permissible to undertake the review in a single seater and there was provision for a different aircraft to be used.

 

 

[ben87r]

Not sure if it's different when using a renewal for an AFR, and I haven't read the CAAP, but mine was in a twin, first time I had flown a twin in command since my last flight review.

 

 

[ben87r]

With further thought, part 61 says that a multi engine pilot is granted the privilege of single engine which would cover it, still isn't a recent type tho so a contradiction

 

 

[djpacro]

I think you'll find that Part 61 reviews don't have the same requirements as CAR 5...

 

 

[Ada Elle]

CAR 5.81 (which is obsolete) also says: 'unless the person otherwise approves having regard to the circumstances of the case'

 

My email from CASA says that they're running about eight weeks behind on new Part 61 licenses. I don't know what the lag time on a Part 5 to Part 61 conversion is.

 

I have an aviation law question (about CAO 95.55): it says

 

the aeroplane must not be flown over a built-up area at a height:

 

(i) from which it cannot glide clear of all dwellings, buildings and

 

persons within the built-up area; and

 

(ii) that is lower than 1 000 feet above ground level;

 

Does this AND mean that you do not need to be able to glide clear if you are above 1000 feet? In other words, is this just the requirement from CAR 157?

 

 

[naremman]

Firstly, I reckon there is no universal formula for perfect touchdowns! We are all individuals, who are influenced by either instructors or observing other pilots, who ultimately adopt approaches that we feel comfortable and hopefully confident in, and operate safely in where we choose to fly.

 

I learnt to fly in a variety of Cessnas over forty years ago, and at the time of acquiring a PPL felt quite comfortable in hacking the old Wichita product around the sky. The next 100 hours challenged the reality and belted the ego.

 

Firstly I expressed interest in an Airtourer 100 that was being sold on very attractive terms by a local pilot. A couple of hours of mutual flying with me in the RHS, throttle and stick familiar with what I was used to, developed a "love at first sight" scenario with the Airtourer. In those days we required specific endorsements on every type we flew, so the following endorsement procedure with an instructor, and this time in the LHS was liking running into the brick wall. 3 hours to feel competent, and 20 hours before I was starting to feel at least a little confident. An aerobatic rating with John Douglas at the Royal Aero Club of WA accelerated the learning curve very sharply.

 

Following the purchase of the Airtourer I then started training for what was then a Class 4 Instrument rating, now known as a NVFR. If ever you are gonna learn, it is about now. No external reference, look at the flarepath and when it starts to flatten out progressive backstick is a good idea. I reckon the best landings I have ever done have been at night, because when you get it right you really get it right.

 

The next endorsement I sought was in a PA28-235. This would give me a CSU endorsement as well as all the Cherokees up to the 235. The first circuit had me pull out a standard Cessna approach and flare which had the Cherokee stop flying about 15' above the deck, and had booth the instructor and I check whether our teeth fillings were still in place. "For God's sake fly it like your Airtourer" intoned the instructor.

 

Over the next month I acquired both Chippie and Tiger Moth endorsements which both considerably expanded the experience envelope. I was sure glad to have the Airtourer experience with stick in the right hand! Flying both aircraft for about $30 dual was far from a bad proposition!

 

The 65 hours to acquire a PPL was a great experience. The following 150 hours was where the real learning took place.

 

For 32 years I owned and flew both the Airtourer and a Cessna 172. Both were so markedly different that transitioning from one to the other was never a problem. I could sit either seat in each of them and never be phased.

 

I had much joy in 2012 when a 48 year old Airtourer and its 58 year old pilot entered the WA Light Aircraft Championship and cleaned up the Spot Landing competition. Lobbing into the spot can be a brutal affair, with accuracy prevailing over comfort!

 

Most of my flying has been done operating off short farm strips. Attention to airspeed on approach is vital, the speed over the fence is critical. Kinetic energy works at the speed squared!! That extra 5-10 knots is a lot of energy that has to be washed off, which turns to runway behind you, and is one of the most useless commodities known to pilots. Mushy elevators and saggy ailerons are sometimes not bad things.

 

The above comments are proffered by a pilot of 42 years who still has the same number of landings as take offs, and long may it continue!

 

 

[DrZoos]

CAR 5.81 (which is obsolete) also says: 'unless the person otherwise approves having regard to the circumstances of the case'

My email from CASA says that they're running about eight weeks behind on new Part 61 licenses. I don't know what the lag time on a Part 5 to Part 61 conversion is.

 

I have an aviation law question (about CAO 95.55): it says

 

the aeroplane must not be flown over a built-up area at a height:

 

(i) from which it cannot glide clear of all dwellings, buildings and

 

persons within the built-up area; and

 

(ii) that is lower than 1 000 feet above ground level;

 

Does this AND mean that you do not need to be able to glide clear if you are above 1000 feet? In other words, is this just the requirement from CAR 157?

No it does not

 

It is clearly separated with ";and"

 

meaning both (1) and (2) are both required...

 

In English from a judges perspective that means you must be not below 1000ft "and" at a height which it cannot glide clear of all dwellings, buildings and

 

persons within the built-up area.

 

or the way it should be worded for a beginning pilot is, you must be above 1000ft "and" at a height which you can glide clear of all dwellings, buildings and persons within the built-up area.

 

Breach either of those and your in doggy doo...