RA-Aus's Understanding of Safety Videos

[APenNameAndThatA]

It would seem that RA-Aus made the video merely to raise awareness, so the stuff in the video does not actually have to be true. RA-Aus’s reply to my feedback…

 

Good afternoon Andrew,

 

Thank you for your email regarding our Loss of Control Video.

 

It is extremely disappointing to hear of your concerns in relation to this content. RAAus is extremely proud of what we have produced and believe that this can be an extremely valuable tool for raising awareness of Loss of Control for all pilots.

 

I have circulated your feedback within our team for review. Whilst I do not discount that this contains some valid general feedback, I do not agree that this content provides anything that is considered dangerous. This content is developed in order to raise awareness of some of the factors that may lead to a loss of control event. It does not replace the need for dual flight training and has been scripted, filmed, and reviewed by industry experts. The overall feedback from the video has been extremely positive.

 

I will ensure that your feedback is provided to the board for visibility, however, would like to remind you that under CASR Part 149 our key personnel, comprising of the accountable manager (CEO), Head of Safety, Head of Flight Operations and Head of Airworthiness and Maintenance are accountable and responsible for managing aviation safety. The board of directors are responsible for organisational governance and therefore, it is not the role of the board to be directly involved in operational matters under our CASR 149 accountabilities.

 

Based on the above, I can inform you that we will not be making any changes to the content, nor will we be withdrawing from the promotion of this content.

 

I would like to thank you again for your feedback and hope that you can view this content, as well as future episodes, based on its entirety for the purpose of raising awareness of the factors that can lead to Loss of Control events. 

 

Kind regards,

 

[jackc]

In which case I will take future RAAus videos with a grain of salt?  Bit sad really.  

While it’s appreciated that RAaus did the video in good faith, the content appears to be a little wanting.

[turboplanner]

58 minutes ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

It would seem that RA-Aus made the video merely to raise awareness, so the stuff in the video does not actually have to be true. RA-Aus’s reply to my feedback…

 

Good afternoon Andrew,

 

Thank you for your email regarding our Loss of Control Video.

 

It is extremely disappointing to hear of your concerns in relation to this content. RAAus is extremely proud of what we have produced and believe that this can be an extremely valuable tool for raising awareness of Loss of Control for all pilots.

 

I have circulated your feedback within our team for review. Whilst I do not discount that this contains some valid general feedback, I do not agree that this content provides anything that is considered dangerous. This content is developed in order to raise awareness of some of the factors that may lead to a loss of control event. It does not replace the need for dual flight training and has been scripted, filmed, and reviewed by industry experts. The overall feedback from the video has been extremely positive.

 

I will ensure that your feedback is provided to the board for visibility, however, would like to remind you that under CASR Part 149 our key personnel, comprising of the accountable manager (CEO), Head of Safety, Head of Flight Operations and Head of Airworthiness and Maintenance are accountable and responsible for managing aviation safety. The board of directors are responsible for organisational governance and therefore, it is not the role of the board to be directly involved in operational matters under our CASR 149 accountabilities.

 

Based on the above, I can inform you that we will not be making any changes to the content, nor will we be withdrawing from the promotion of this content.

 

I would like to thank you again for your feedback and hope that you can view this content, as well as future episodes, based on its entirety for the purpose of raising awareness of the factors that can lead to Loss of Control events. 

 

Kind regards,

 

And there you are, Kind regards and all, apparently forgetting the sarcastic dialogue.

 

Interestingly ALL the employees of RAA are responsible for safety, particularly the board of directors. Governments are responding to slackness among management of self administering operations with a trend of Chain of Responsibilty. It might be coplicated to some so I'll explain it as the management chain becomes like a can where you throw it at the lowest employee like you always did, but this time it's full of petrol. One senior executive has recently been banned from working in the transport industry for two years and GA & RA are in the same industry Department.

 

I often wonder on this forum why we almost never hear from the key people in the industy, the Instructors when things like this happen; nothing special but now and again offering to contact RAA and explain that this sort of reaction might not produce the best outcome.

[jackc]

When an RAA employee told me, they did not care IF I used Blue Tack to stick the wings on my plane…….when querying a condition report…….that was the end of it for me…….

There are good people in that organisation, then there are some not so good……

[BrendAn]

1 minute ago, jackc said:

When an RAA employee told me, they did not care IF I used Blue Tack to stick the wings on my plane…….when querying a condition report…….that was the end of it for me…….

There are good people in that organisation, then there are some not so good……

They don't because you are held responsible for the condition of your plane which makes me wonder why they require a condition report to start with . It doesn't make sense.

[jackc]

My related condition report I complained about, was on a plane that was about as airworthy as a 3 wheeled billycart, would be roadworthy.  

 

[facthunter]

The discussion with RAAus is on a PLANE they don't relate to.   Nev

[Flying_higher]

I’ve got to say that this is an interesting thread. 
First of all Raa made clear this was not a training video. Secondly, there are many highly experienced aviators interviewed in the video that have way more than the starter of this thread. And you can bet your bottom dollar they wouldn’t be involved in something that has some many errors or nit picks. Could it just be that they’re right and you’re not? Tbh I’m going to go with that rather than taking advice from someone that clearly set out to try and discredit the video. 
I actually think there is some good guidance in the video. The best advice given is to go flying with an instructor or do a course with people like those in the video (strike or UPRT) who have oodles of experience. 
 

Edited November 10, 2022 by Flying_higher

[facthunter]

Could be it's an "ADVERT". Using planes that RAAus doesn't cover. I've pushed Unusual Attitude Recovery for as long as I've been on this forum because I know it's important. No  response from RAAus so just what's changed and to where? Nothing specific just a few planes entering spins. RAAus doesn't allow Low level training unless for mustering??? They are "all over the PLACE"  Nev

[APenNameAndThatA]

28 minutes ago, Flying_higher said:

I’ve got to say that this is an interesting thread. 
First of all Raa made clear this was not a training video. Secondly, there are many highly experienced aviators interviewed in the video that have way more than the starter of this thread. And you can bet your bottom dollar they wouldn’t be involved in something that has some many errors or nit picks. Could it just be that they’re right and you’re not? Tbh I’m going to go with that rather than taking advice from someone that clearly set out to try and discredit the video. 
I actually think there is some good guidance in the video. The best advice given is to go flying with an instructor or do a course with people like those in the video (strike or UPRT) who have oodles of experience. 
 

I have clearly set out to discredit the video - because its garbage. I invite you to examine each of my claims. Someone has already pointed out (correctly, I assume) that the handover of the controls was correct. If Im wrong, Im wrong. My claims are numbered for your convenience.  

 

As for saying its not a training video: of course it’s a training video: the disclaimer is to avoid liability.

 

As for the contributors having more experience than me, 1) I have addressed that issue of the curse of knowlege, 2) appeal to experience is a logical fallacy, 3) I say on here over and over that I have only 200 hours, 4) I have said that if any of the experts wrote a video that it would be much better. 

 

My understanding is that the contributors did not see the video before it was released! Think about that for a moment. It’s basic quality control.  

 

As for choosing the video, that’s fine. But if you drop a wing on climb out and think that the only way there is to deal with it is rudder, you might die. And, just to repeat myself, the presenter knows that too!

 

Look at it this way. The problem is that the video makes the presenters look stupid. I never said that the presenters were stupid. (edited after BA added feedback, to add “might die” and remove “will die” (hyperbole) and add this paragraph.)

Edited November 10, 2022 by APenNameAndThatA

[Blueadventures]

49 minutes ago, Flying_higher said:

I’ve got to say that this is an interesting thread. 
First of all Raa made clear this was not a training video. Secondly, there are many highly experienced aviators interviewed in the video that have way more than the starter of this thread. And you can bet your bottom dollar they wouldn’t be involved in something that has some many errors or nit picks. Could it just be that they’re right and you’re not? Tbh I’m going to go with that rather than taking advice from someone that clearly set out to try and discredit the video. 
I actually think there is some good guidance in the video. The best advice given is to go flying with an instructor or do a course with people like those in the video (strike or UPRT) who have oodles of experience. 
 

In my opinion the presentation needs an urgent review and edit and I thank the author for his effort in explaining his reasoning (He has numbered his points to allow participation and comments; I expect he will be receptive to any corrects).  The reply he received from RAAus is ordinary at best. I believe that if RAAus does not agree to have it reviewed they are a little sensitive, little stubborn or a little stupid regarding the topic.   In the past I have communicated comments for enhancement to RAAus information and it has been acted on (example 2 comments to the released DI sheet content that each time were included in the next and then the latest version in use.

 

I have produced safety information in the marine field and always welcome feedback and comments that are considered for their merit and enacted.  There is merit in a number of changes to this current safety enhancement video (I don't see any benefit in wording what it is or is not as that enters into useless definition debate.)

 

It needs to be improved as many will view its content and such is needed for us.

 

Just my view.

Edited November 10, 2022 by Blueadventures

[APenNameAndThatA]

19 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Could be it's an "ADVERT". Using planes that RAAus doesn't cover. I've pushed Unusual Attitude Recovery for as long as I've been on this forum because I know it's important. No  response from RAAus so just what's changed and to where? Nothing specific just a few planes entering spins. RAAus doesn't allow Low level training unless for mustering??? They are "all over the PLACE"  Nev

I hadn’t thought of that. Like seeing fine dining in a McDonalds ad. You can’t get those products actslually at McDonalds, but you can visit a different restaurant later. 🤡 Curse of knowledge again. It never occurred to me that RA-Aus aircraft could do spins, but a new viewer would think that he/she could do Aa-aus and do those things. 

[APenNameAndThatA]

46 minutes ago, Flying_higher said:

I’ve got to say that this is an interesting thread. 
First of all Raa made clear this was not a training video. Secondly, there are many highly experienced aviators interviewed in the video that have way more than the starter of this thread. And you can bet your bottom dollar they wouldn’t be involved in something that has some many errors or nit picks. Could it just be that they’re right and you’re not? Tbh I’m going to go with that rather than taking advice from someone that clearly set out to try and discredit the video. 
I actually think there is some good guidance in the video. The best advice given is to go flying with an instructor or do a course with people like those in the video (strike or UPRT) who have oodles of experience. 
 

Also, one of the reasons I posted here was to get feedback, and make sure I was not totally wrong. In the past, I have posted here and everyone told me to shut up, broadly speaking, which I have taken to mean I actually was wrong. 

[turboplanner]

So just more confusion, even from within, and we will see some aerobatic crashes of RA aircraft. Stupid is as stupid does.

 

[APenNameAndThatA]

Well, here's a turn up for the books. I contacted a presenter, they looked at the video, and this is what they told me. 

 

Hi Andrew,

I have reviewed the video and your comments, as well as discussed the content of the video with other industry professionals. 

I can see no issues with the content, and my colleagues agree. 

Best Regards,
 

I don't know what to think. Maybe I'm too obsessional to expect/insist that material in videos should be actually be true, instead of merely just conveying a good vibe? The presenter obviously knows how to fly and aircraft. 

[trailer]

I am glad the alternate view has been sent to RAAus. It is no suprise the content is endorsed. I thought it was the least irrelevant of the series, I watched all podcasts. I found that they were long, full of opinion, repetitive and in some spaces disconnected from the experiences of recreational pilots I know. 

 

I think safety month was a missed opportunity to connect with the members because I don't think they understand who many of their members are. Most members are responsible, safety concious and make smart choices often. 

[facthunter]

There is more knowledge out there  in the membership than they realise or want to acknowledge. Never really been utilised or welcomed. Bit like Qantas. You'll take what we give you and like it. Nev

[jackc]

11 hours ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

Well, here's a turn up for the books. I contacted a presenter, they looked at the video, and this is what they told me. 

 

Hi Andrew,

I have reviewed the video and your comments, as well as discussed the content of the video with other industry professionals. 

I can see no issues with the content, and my colleagues agree. 

Best Regards,
 

I don't know what to think. Maybe I'm too obsessional to expect/insist that material in videos should be actually be true, instead of merely just conveying a good vibe? The presenter obviously knows how to fly and aircraft. 

It’s hard to find high grade Wheat when there is so much to sift and the Chaff content is overwhelming. 😞 

[APenNameAndThatA]

If anybody thinks that my main criticism of the video was wrong or overblown, I would really like to hear from them. Please. 

[turboplanner]

11 minutes ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

If anybody thinks that my main criticism of the video was wrong or overblown, I would really like to hear from them. Please. 

People defend their turf and their beliefs; that's not what RAA are there for, but that's what came across.

No one apologised for classifying a flat tyre as an engine failure.

 

So I wouldn't dwell on it; what you were saying rang true with me.

[trailer]

39 minutes ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

If anybody thinks that my main criticism of the video was wrong or overblown, I would really like to hear from them. Please. 

I don't see outrage at your feedback, many members of this forum are also  RAAus members so it is not unreasonable that RAAus could acknowledge concerns when they are raised here or any other forum. The problem is not your observations of the presentation, which at the end of the day are your opinions. The problem is many of your opinions are shared in vary degrees by those of us who fly, instruct or maintain as RAAus members and have long felt a disconnect between the organisation and our activities. 

[APenNameAndThatA]

Thanks for the feedback. 

[djpacro]

Quite a contrast to https://www.faasafety.gov/SPANS/event_details.aspx?eid=117601&fbclid=IwAR1g8RGw7wUDd8X3RJw9FnNBqFAS3-BDh-dAkgNphv3V8kKzw60g1w-CBB0

"Teaching Control In The Pattern - Topic: Discussion With In-Flight Videos Covering: Pilot-Induced Oscillations, Wake Turbulence Upsets, And Stalls At Low Altitudes." I saw it live today - video will be in the archives.

(I even got credit for my flight review).

[Bruce Tuncks]

Turbs, could you tell us more about " classifying a flat tyre as an engine failure ?"

That sounds like a sacking offence to me.

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

Turbs, could you tell us more about " classifying a flat tyre as an engine failure ?"

That sounds like a sacking offence to me.

It should have been; that was published on this site in the last RAA report to CASA on Jabiru engine failures, which many people on this site mistakely thought was the empirical evidence CASA had.