Advanced Pilot Award endorsement

[Romeo Juliet Whiskey]

Anyone done the Ra-aus Advanced Pilot Award endorsement? do you recommend it?

 

Reading through the syllabus I feel like I've covered most of the topics in my normal training. Does it just cover each of those topics more in depth?

 

Hope you all had a good xmas, Rich

 

 

[Downunder]

Didn't know it existed to be honest......

 

 

[JEM]

Advanced in experience or in number of aircraft flown or in age?

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

From the Ops Manual:-

 

ADVANCED PILOT AWARD ENDORSEMENT (APA)

 

13. An applicant for the issue of an Advanced Pilot Award must:

 

(a) have reached the competency standards required under Unit 1.07 of the RA-Aus Syllabus of Flight Training; and

 

(b) be recommended by an RA-Aus Examiner to undergo the flight test for issue of the endorsement; and

 

© pass a flight test conducted by a Pilot Examiner or a CFI.

 

-------

 

The following is a summary - to read the full 7 pages, go to RAA.asn.au - log into the members' portal, search for "RA-Aus Syllabus of Flight Training"

 

A pdf will open - go to page 59. All the requirements are there.

 

-------

 

SYLLABUS OF FLIGHT TRAINING - ISSUE 7 – OCTOBER 2014

 

UNIT 1.07 – ADVANCED PILOT AWARD SYLLABUS

 

1. AIRMANSHIP

 

1.1 General Airmanship

 

2. TAKE-OFF SAFETY BRIEF

 

2.1 Engine failure safety brief

 

3. STEEP LAZY EIGHTS

 

3.1 Entry

 

3.2 Maintenance

 

3.3 Airmanship

 

4. MAINTAIN BALANCED FLIGHT

 

4.1 Co-ordination

 

5. STEEP 360 DEGREE GLIDING TURNS

 

5.1 Entry

 

5.2 Maintenance

 

5.3 Exit

 

6. SIDESLIPPING

 

6.1 Entry

 

6.2 Maintenance

 

6.3 Exit

 

7. SLIPPING TURNS

 

7.1 Entry

 

7.2 Maintenance

 

7.3 Exit

 

8. PRE-STALL RECOGNITION AND RECOVERY IN A CLIMBING TURN

 

8.1 Entry

 

8.2 Maintenance

 

8.3 Exit

 

9.PRE-STALL RECOGNITION AND RECOVERY FROM A STEEP GLIDING TURN

 

9.1 Entry

 

9.2 Maintenance

 

9.3 Exit

 

10. GROUND REFERENCE MANOEUVRES (Constant Altitude/Radius Turns)

 

10.1 Entry

 

10.2 Maintenance

 

10.3 Exit

 

11. GLIDE FROM OVERHEAD THE FIELD

 

11.1 Aeroplane positioning

 

11.2 Glide

 

11.3 Touchdown point nominated

 

11.4 Lookout

 

12. CROSSWIND TAKE-OFF AND LANDING

 

12.1 Take-off

 

12.2 Circuit

 

12.3 Approach

 

12.4 Lookout

 

13. SHORT FIELD APPROACH

 

13.1 Pre-Landing Checks

 

13.2 Airspeed maintenance

 

13.3 Use of Power

 

13.4 Touchdown Point

 

14. WEIGHT AND BALANCE

 

14.1 Loading, and Weight and Balance

 

15. PERFORMANCE FIGURES

 

15.1 MTOW

 

15.2 Normal Approach

 

15.3 Vs

 

15.4 Va

 

15.5 Vne

 

15.6 Short Field Approach Speed

 

 

[SSCBD]

Sorry but I see above as kindergarten pre solo requirements standard, except for steep lazy eights. If you cant do this list above, you .should not be flying by yourself anyway.

 

My humble opinion.

 

 

[Romeo Juliet Whiskey]

Sorry but I see above as kindergarten pre solo requirements standard, except for steep lazy eights. If you cant do this list above, you .should not be flying by yourself anyway. My humble opinion.

So why does Ra-aus have this as an endorsement? Surely there must be more to it than just some basic pre-solo stuff as you mention.

 

 

[SSCBD]

So why does Ra-aus have this as an endorsement? Surely there must be more to it than just some basic pre-solo stuff as you mention.

Have no idea. The standards of RAA flying, to me not good enough, with more practical flying needed with many varied conditions. Specifically not just at your local training strip, and in lot of varied weather, MANY different, short, difficult strips, But people have a limit to spending dollars verses experience gained.

May be we need some senior (yes elder ) ex CFI types who have a couple thousand hours say, who are allowed to advise or babysit with new shinny students as "mentors" and they gain this hugely valuable experience when they get there cert for small rewards for time spent.

 

Watch the current working instructors jump on this one.

 

I know a few ex's who just shake their heads these days. Smile Frank.....

 

 

[facthunter]

It's been around for a while. Might be a precursor to getting the CFI rating. If you aren't in the running for something like that what would be the need to have the "notation" as distinct from having the skills listed if you took the trouble to be instructed in them. I'm all in favour of high skills levels being available as well as being very much a requirement for a CFI as well as any instructor worthy of the name. IF you can't do it it's not much point having an endorsement, But ALL endorsement s are like that. You make the standard on the day and at any recurrent testing time when you renew. It's all a balance this stuff, and a lot comes with experience. A new pilot only meets a fairly minimum standard, and there's no practical way around that except to implore people to fly within their limits at all times. Nev

 

 

[Downunder]

So why does Ra-aus have this as an endorsement?

The RAA board was full of instructors at one point.

 

More endorsements equals more training equals more money for said instructors.....

 

 

[SSCBD]

The RAA board was full of instructors at one point.More endorsements equals more training equals more money for said instructors.....

Still is, and or with vested commercial interests, I believe.

 

 

[M61A1]

So why does Ra-aus have this as an endorsement? Surely there must be more to it than just some basic pre-solo stuff as you mention.

Probably because the current RAAus idea of safe flight means that they would rather that hand over cash for your factory built, unmodified aircraft, then spend several hours documenting all your pre-flight planning, after which you will spend a considerable amount of time looking at your aircraft trying to find a reason not to fly it. Assuming that you didn't try hard and found nothing wrong with your aircraft (and documenting that), then you may aviate, but you must climb out immediately to a safe altitude of several thousand feet AGL with nothing but shallow turns, then you may navigate (documenting as you go) to your chosen destination, staying as far away from the edge of the sky as possible and in a straight line, arriving overhead with almost full tanks. You will then carry out a massive circuit while telling everyone on the frequency, every move you make (even if it was just dropping your pen), even though you are the only aircraft in the CTAF. After touching down halfway along the runway, you may backtrack to the tie down area, where you may finish documenting your safe flight and contemplate the article you will submit, about how you almost forgot to dot an I on your flightplan of 27NM and you could have mistaken it for a 1 (if you had actually forgotten) and the possible outcome to your fuel calculations.

 

 

[facthunter]

Might be better IF there were more ACTIVE pilots there rather than" Business Mainly" orientated people. People who want money don't do instruction to get it. It's never been an even reasonable prospect as a way to get a living. They do it because they like flying. They would not make good instructors if they didn't, would they? Nev

 

 

[M61A1]

Might be better IF there were more ACTIVE pilots there rather than" Business Mainly" orientated people. People who want money don't do instruction to get it. It's never been an even reasonable prospect as a way to get a living. They do it because they like flying. They would not make good instructors if they didn't, would they? Nev

I have also met one or two instructors that appear to just enjoy a "god complex".

 

 

[SSCBD]

I have also met one or two instructors that appear to just enjoy a "god complex".

only one or two - where have you been - living in a shoebox.

 

 

[SSCBD]

Probably because the current RAAus idea of safe flight means that they would rather that hand over cash for your factory built, unmodified aircraft, then spend several hours documenting all your pre-flight planning, after which you will spend a considerable amount of time looking at your aircraft trying to find a reason not to fly it. Assuming that you didn't try hard and found nothing wrong with your aircraft (and documenting that), then you may aviate, but you must climb out immediately to a safe altitude of several thousand feet AGL with nothing but shallow turns, then you may navigate (documenting as you go) to your chosen destination, staying as far away from the edge of the sky as possible and in a straight line, arriving overhead with almost full tanks. You will then carry out a massive circuit while telling everyone on the frequency, every move you make (even if it was just dropping your pen), even though you are the only aircraft in the CTAF. After touching down halfway along the runway, you may backtrack to the tie down area, where you may finish documenting your safe flight and contemplate the article you will submit, about how you almost forgot to dot an I on your flightplan of 27NM and you could have mistaken it for a 1 (if you had actually forgotten) and the possible outcome to your fuel calculations.

Don't care - let the feds take me in. I could fly GA all day - in OCTA - without 75% of this crap and without radio.

What have we surrendered to.

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

If you have a read of the Training Syllabus - the Advanced Pilot covers things in more detail and to a higher standard. The scoring to achieve a tick is on a scale of 5 to 1. In a nutshell 5 - needs further instruction (can't proceed), 4 - needs practice, 3 - pre solo standard, 2 Pilot Certificate standard, 1 competent to teach.

 

It's an award for pilots seeking higher skills at a higher level. No one if forcing us to do it.

 

 

[SSCBD]

If you have a read of the Training Syllabus - the Advanced Pilot covers things in more detail and to a higher standard. The scoring to achieve a tick is on a scale of 5 to 1. In a nutshell 5 - needs further instruction (can't proceed), 4 - needs practice, 3 - pre solo standard, 2 Pilot Certificate standard, 1 competent to teach.It's an award for pilots seeking higher skills at a higher level. No one if forcing us to do it.

As a scout veteran you should automatically qualify. Not being rude at all.

 

 

[M61A1]

only one or two - where have you been - living in a shoebox.

Alrighty then.. I was being conservative...

 

Don't care - let the feds take me in. I could fly GA all day - in OCTA - without 75% of this crap and without radio.What have we surrendered to.

Probably needed a "sarcastic" button, but then again, I don't see it as far from the truth after reading the last few years of Sport Pilot and various other bits and pieces.

I used to love reading the military Air Safety Digest, but the ones I've read lately are just downright scary, not because they have serious incidents, but because they make very minor things into major issues, and that scares me because I can see that's where we're headed.

 

 

[SSCBD]

Alrighty then.. I was being conservative...Probably needed a "sarcastic" button, but then again, I don't see it as far from the truth after reading the last few years of Sport Pilot and various other bits and pieces.

 

I used to love reading the military Air Safety Digest, but the ones I've read lately are just downright scary, not because they have serious incidents, but because they make very minor things into major issues, and that scares me because I can see that's where we're headed.

Really - I can see where were headed - my answer is, we are already here!! - smile and enjoy the freedom of flight.

 

 

[facthunter]

If "something" is easy to get it wouldn't be worth a lot having it. I can't see how one should try to dissuade some keen young fella/girl away from trying for it and being proud of it if they get it. I don't see it as something you would go around showing all and sundry as if you have "arrived" at some exalted point, either. Skills should be safety orientated but push the limits a bit to hone and develop you confidence In yourself and your aircraft, but still be keenly aware if it's and your limits. Not every pilot feels like going down the path of doing extreme. (wrong word but you know what I MEAN) manoeuvers. Some will always hate sideslipping or inverted flight, or spinning. and that is their choice. As far as instructors thinking they are god, of course there may be some and not only instructors but I haven't come across it that much. I would be more concerned about some of the idiosyncratic things some teach that aren't based on good physics or good airmanship. It's easy to change instructors if one bothers you. Some authoritarian types think they are obligated to find heaps of things wrong when you do a BFR. You are paying for it and you don't HAVE to cop it if you think it's unfair the WAY it is done. Being perfect on a check might require a god like performance. No one ever does a perfect job of any flight. It can always be improved. Nev

 

 

[M61A1]

Really - I can see where were headed - my answer is, we are already here!! - smile and enjoy the freedom of flight.

If we were already there, then it couldn't get worse....I have seen the future, I work there, it will get worse, and RAAus isn't there just yet. But they want to be.

 

 

[poteroo]

At the risk of offending anyone, I feel a comment or two is appropriate from an industry oldie who is still fully engaged in both RAAus and GA.

 

1. Have never thought the 'Advanced Pilot' thingy was useful. (somewhat agree with post #5). Under CASR 61.385, we have to ensure that any pilot meets competency standards for any aircraft they are qualified on, doing any manoeuvres they are qualified on, in any airspace they are qualified for........ This is non-negotiable, and complements the 90 day currency rule in any class of aircraft.

 

2. Many instructors suffer from a personal 'competency' deficiency because they don't actually get out to do what I'd term 'personal skills practice.' It detracts from their instructing efficacy, but only $$$ can ensure that an instructor maintains skills - one can't use the students time for this!! This has long been a problem in GA as well.

 

3. Yes, students are trained to meet a described competency. They only maintain this 'standard' if they fly fairly often, and are diligent in their flight. Unfortunately, (as Nev points out), many don't fly enough, and their skills go backwards. (I once had a PPL who turned up for a BFR and had his 3 previous reviews all on the same page - mine just fitted on!His skills were declining and he quit soon after the review).

 

4. Mentoring? Well, many old instructors spend a lot of time with new students that isn't in the syllabus, and it's foc. We also 'check-fly' with RAAus pilots who feel they need a 'once-over' of their competency. (cost = a good bottle of local vino). I do quite a bit of 'mentoring' for our local RV pilots as well. It's a good idea, but for it to be effective, you need older, (retired or semi-retired) senior instructors who love their flying and love the opportunity to teach. I regard mentoring of already qualified pilots as 'advanced training' because I put them through some rigorous low level, short field,and tight low speed manoeuvring - not just more-of-the-same-old. Formation is also a good 'advanced' skill if done thoroughly and frequently.

 

5. As to the 'sky-God' comments.......give us a break. Most of my generation got over that in the 60's and 70's. Why do you think the instructor average age is so high? It's because instructing is a poorly paid job - unappealing to younger people with family commitments, but doable for retirees who do it for cost or love - whichever is the least. There is a near-future 'crunch' coming where there will be a lot less flight schools and available instructors on the map of Australia. A bit more respect for the profession might be in order.

 

6. Currency improves competency. Plan to fly - and fly to plan. Aviation is rather akin to golf - you can never break your handicap without training and practice.

 

happy days,

 

 

[Camel]

No pilot will ever know it all !

 

What will hurt you is what you don't know !

 

If you think getting the basic knowledge and that's enough then something may hurt you !

 

I have taken extra lessons for many reasons including HGFA, AUF, GA, conversion type, GA BFR, RAA instructor training and ongoing Flight reviews for a SI rating, I have a APA and it's not a badge of honour but a sign I have had extra training and am competent and interested in not getting hurt ! Those who want to bag instructors should take notice of what they go through to get their qualification and then the experience to teach !

 

I've met lots of big mouths and some write on this forum, of the ones I have met some have bent planes, it was no surprise as their attitude was not right, if your not prepared to keep learning or listening to others with experience then you may get hurt !

 

If I lived near Poteroo I would take a few lesson for the heck of it, he is very unique as he has been flying and teaching a long time ! I met him at a conference and he was a gentleman and had a lot to offer, I'm proud he writes here with his valuable opinion.

 

Remember the sayings, " there are old pilots and bold pilots but there are no old bold pilots ". " learn from other people's mistakes because you won't live long enough to learn from your own "

 

You can buy training but you can't buy experience that comes with practice and time.

 

 

[M61A1]

At the risk of offending anyone,

5. As to the 'sky-God' comments.......give us a break. Most of my generation got over that in the 60's and 70's. Why do you think the instructor average age is so high? It's because instructing is a poorly paid job - unappealing to younger people with family commitments, but doable for retirees who do it for cost or love - whichever is the least. There is a near-future 'crunch' coming where there will be a lot less flight schools and available instructors on the map of Australia. A bit more respect for the profession might be in order.

 

happy days,

No offence taken.

The "sky god " comment from myself was aimed at a couple of instructors I've met. They are usually younger, although I know one that is older. They appear to get off on being "in command", they love barking orders and get very upset if they aren't carried out. They love to ask ambiguous questions so that they can make sure that you're wrong no matter what your answer is, and they hate being questioned. For the most part, they appear to be doing whatever it takes to build hours so that they can move another step closer to becoming the object of their worship and fly a big tube of people. The fact that their poor instruction leaves people with empty pockets and a bit more wary of people wearing a flash shirt with some wings and epaulettes with gold bars.

 

I am aware that instructing is more of a lifestyle rather than a living, but, I have had at least one instructor who seemed more intent on making his living than me actually learning to fly. Unfortunately his need to get more cashflow at my expense, simply meant that I could not afford to fly with him and had to go elsewhere. I'm fairly sure he no longer has a business.

 

 

[facthunter]

Instructors have a great responsibility to their pupils and aviation generally. As I've said ad nauseum "you are only an ab initio ONCE" .That time is the foundation of the flying experience you gain later. IF it has serious flaws in it, it may cost you more than money. Some shouldn't do the job. They don't have the temperament. Many have commented to me they wouldn't have the patience to do it and that is OK. Not everyone wants to, and the building hours thing is out there. A career in instructing is a very worthy aim, but not very rewarding from the money angle. Make the most of those you have now as it's not likely to get better. Some of it is up to you also. You may end up being a good pilot despite some of the instructors you have had. Nev