IDIOTS....

[Adrian Lewer]

WOW $280 per hour.... he needs to fly a jab :) .

 

i have had alot of people ask me ( oh how many hours do you have) which i do believe is the wrong question to ask then i reply with something like (oh i am up to PFL's) and they go eh ok then. like hours matter ? like the above i don't agree with hours being the above all and end all, i could stay doing circuits for the next 10 years and get 10,000 hours and a mate could fly all over australia 20 times over and clock 4,000 hours. i would say he has the most experience of all IMO.

 

i am 100% sure i will never know it all and pride myself on asking questions (even silly ones of which people on the forum have been bombarded with) and will continue to do so well into my licence,PAX,Xcountry endorsements as well as into my own aircraft ownership, but one thing i will never do is crazy things which put peoples lives at risk. having said that i am in no way saying i will never make a mistake like wrong radio freq, wrong RWY ect but will never get in a jab and try to taxi at 30Kts or enter an active RWY these IMO are not mistakes but just stupid stupid people not thinking.. not to mention showing the public and novice flyers like myself its ok to do which is the most disappointing part of all. before i started flying i flew with a bloke who thought a pre flight check was not necacary ? what a great thing to show a person who is thinking of going for there pilots licence ?

 

anyway lets not start arguments here this is what i was trying to avoid. i will next time approach the people who i believe have done something wrong in a polite manner and if no joy i will take it further, and if i am ever seen to be doing something wrong i would expect nothing less than this to be done to me.

 

 

[Guest High Plains Drifter]

anyway lets not start arguments here this is what i was trying to avoid

Adrian Lewer, hope you wernt refering to Tony (TOSOG) and me ? There are certainly no dramas there :) ... though, He did appear a little impatient with me - did you notice the shortness of his reply

 

before i started flying i flew with a bloke who thought a pre flight check was not necacary

Bad, Bad,...Baaaad example there. Personaly, I treat the preflight before the first flight of the day as a near religious experience - Thou shalt dip thy tanks, thou shalt check thy fuel for water, etc, etc, .......you probably know the drill by now :thumb_up:

 

 

[Adrian Lewer]

High planes drifter, not at all, i was just trying to pour water on the fire before it even started. i actually agree with 99% of what people have stated on this thread, and as for your little bit of humor up the top IMO there is nothing wrong with a little humor at all, after all this is what i am here for to learn and have a bit of a laugh on the side, kinda sounds a little like me..

 

i can read between the lines and take the "constructive" criticism but absolutely hate it when people cone into a thread and go ballistic, which what i was wanting to prevent which has not happened.............YEAT................

 

so far happy with the thread and i have achieved what i set out for which was an answer to my question "what should i do about it"

 

 

[Adrian Lewer]

oh yep re read my post and i should have worded it a little more clearer..

 

 

[ozzietriker]

I have seen some really poor displays of airmanship time and time again and all from GA pilots, cutting each other off in the circuit and air rage over the radio. GA needs to be regulated more!

 

 

[Mazda]

I completely disagree! The last thing GA needs is more mandatory rules and regulation. Part of the current problem is over-complexity (so people don't understand the rules) leading to lack of compliance, and a lack of enforcement. Who would enforce all these additional rules?

 

I think the best way forward is to adopt a simple set of common sense guidelines which are understood by everyone. They would be complied with because they made sense and everyone understood them. Then it would be up to us as pilots to use airmanship, and up to the instructors to teach it!

 

No wonder people break the rules at the moment. Why on earth should someone in a trike or even a GA training aircraft have to be established on a 5 mile final to a CTAF? In England people can join on a close base or shorter final In America people can join on a close base or shorter final.

 

Not here though. Maybe because we are such idiots! Even so, it is impossible to regulate for stupidity!

 

 

[facthunter]

Centreline by five miles.

 

Mazda, are you referring to the straight-in approach? If so I can see good reasons for that. For one you would creat conflict with other circuit traffic on base and possibly downwind as well. Nev..

 

 

[Mazda]

Yes Nev, and I disagree entirely because it works everywhere else in the world. Are we so dumb that we can't work it out? People in Jabirus don't need to do a 5 mile final when out at a bush strip somewhere when there are no other aicraft within 30 miles! Why can't they join on base?

 

If someone is approaching from the base leg side, in other countries they join on base. It's not rocket science, people join on base at GAAP airports all the time and there is no separation service in the air at all.

 

But we can't do that here. Instead we have to turn and fly away from our destination out to 5 miles, so we can turn and fly back in again! Or we have to turn to face the traffic to reposition for downwind. Or we have to overfly and circle around spending longer in the circuit where the traffic is. And we still have to do all of this if we are flying the only aircraft in the circuit.

 

I'm not saying we should mandate shorter finals, or base joins, or anything else.

 

We'd be much better off using airmanship, rather than mandating which leg of the circuit you have to join on, or how far away you need to be. That would mean you could join on a 5 mile final if that was the best thing to do on that day, or you could join on a close base if that kept you away from the hills, or slot in behind an aircraft on downwind if that was best for the traffic situation on that day, or join on a 1 mile final to a private bush strip with no other traffic around.

 

It is what they do everywhere else. Maybe we ARE all idiots incapable of such tough decision making.

 

 

[Guest airsick]

I have seen some really poor displays of airmanship time and time again and all from GA pilots

 

And RAA pilots are all like gods too. This is ridiculous all this mud slinging and us vs. them crap. Why can't every one just wake up and realise that no matter where we are or what we fly there will always be fools. I have seen idiots in GA, RAA, trikes, gliders and so on. Hell I even recall a Lufthansa crew making what looked like a pretty stupid decision a few months back.

 

Maybe we ARE all idiots incapable of such tough decision making.

I'd like to think not but I am really struggling.

 

[Guest TOSGcentral]

Yup, I will have a piece of this as well.

 

 

I got fed up with GA a long, long time ago. The BFR was less an exercise in flying skills as it was mainly a check that you were up to date with regulation – and damn they changed often enough!

 

 

I have no grouse with the straight in approach if you are in what was once termed an MBZ where radio was mandatory. It would be a significant help and cost saving to the RPT guys

 

 

I cannot come to terms with it OCTA where carriage of radio is not mandatory. The basic and simple Rules of the Air have served us well for so many years, the enabled self regulated traffic, supported the exercise of airmanship and were a practical safety aid.

 

 

These days mid field rejoins, or join downwind at an angle and all the rest of the clap-trap smack to me of expediency that causes more potential conflict, when a dead side or extended downwind rejoin were very simple exercises and kept you in full view of other interested parties.

 

 

I will relate a small story to underline the point.

 

 

Some years ago, before this straight in approach was formulated, I was struggling with trying to keep my flying school active in the face of the annual major QVAG fly-in at Watts Bridge. This BTW is a great event and comes up again towards the end of August – do not miss it if you can get there!

 

 

But damn it gets busy!

 

 

I was on base leg in a Thruster (what else?) with eleven aircraft in circuit behind me that ranged from a Sea Fury to a Drifter with the isolated Trike and Twin Beech to add spice. Everyone was being terribly good about concentrating on separation!

 

 

In the middle of all this a couple of non radio Austers (totally illegally at the time) elected for a straight in approach. The bastards trapped me on base under the standard rules of the air. My student could not cope with this and I took over.

 

 

I had to give way to them. They were on established approach to land. They were on my right. I could not turn right because of the left hand circuit and known faster traffic outside me, and I could not reach the dead side ahead of them!

 

 

I hit the power, had my student hanging out the non-existent doorway to check there was nobody inside us and had to orbit left then fly down the live side of the circuit, going in the wrong direction along the left hand side of the airfield until I had sufficient height and clearance to rejoin downwind. It was a prick of a position to be in!

 

 

If there was any satisfaction in this it was personal only. A very senior CFI sauntered by when I was down and casually remarked “Good airmanship Tonyâ€. Shortly afterwards the pilot of the lead Auster crept up and gave me a very sincere apology – which I accepted.

 

 

The poor sod came from a sleepy little country strip and had no idea of the hornet’s nest his (to him) simple activity would cause.

 

 

Yeah! Let’s keep Rec Flying just that – Recreational, not this half baked ‘professionalism’ and regulation that has an essential place in regulated airspace – but not OCTA.

 

 

Aye

 

 

Tony

 

 

[facthunter]

Order/chaos.

 

Mazda, we would have to be in front of a white-board or something to kick this one around properly, but I like to have some idea where the traffic is coming from. People breaking the rules in the circuit, currently, worry the hell out of me. PERSONALLY,

 

1 I never fly against circuit traffic, when anywhere near a circuit pattern.

 

2 I make sure that I never descend on other possible conflicting traffic.

 

3. I have never run out to 5 miles to commence a final. The MINIMUM reasonable height at that point would be 1500 feet AGL (3 degree slope and that is too shallow for most high-drag machines).

 

4. When I fly myself, I tend to do quite small circuits, for whatever type that I may be flying ( I always have, it's a sort of habit). This keeps your time in the circuit to a minimum, and keeps your concentration going.

 

5. I have been flying since 1959,( not trying to pull rank here), so I have probably gotten used to flying over the top, and looking at windsocks , and doing 3 legs of a circuit, although the downwind one could be a bit abbreviated, so I have never regarded it as much of an imposition. Do you honestly believe that your thoughts on this could be widely applied without a degradation of safety? Nev..

 

 

[Mazda]

Yes, I do believe it would not reduce safety at all, and would probably increase it. It would prevent people blundering around circling the the circuit area. It would reduce the need to pilots to fly way out over water or tiger country to get that 5 mile approach.

 

It has been used in other countries since way before 1959.

 

It is not using contra circuits, it is using joining on the leg or at the distance that best suits the situation on that particular day, using the normal circuit direction/spacing. If a 5 mile final is best, great, do that. If flying a trike, doing a 5 mile final over water or tiger country could be far more dangerous than joining on base.

 

I don't see the problem, people join on base all the time at GAAPs where there is more traffic! There is NO separation provided, just traffic information, which you can (generally) get by radio at CTAFs. People still blunder in, make the wrong radio calls, or lose radios in GAAPs. So why can't we join on base at CTAFs like everyone else does everywhere else in the world?

 

It is pointless to say it is safer if radio is mandated because most incidents involving lack of radio alerting involve aircraft with working radios. It's really easy on some aircraft to push the wrong button to select the wrong radio, an even experienced multi-crew airline pilots end up on the wrong frequency sometimes.

 

Yes, radio is very important, but if you assume that you can hear everyone out there (even at a mandatory radio airport) you could be in for a nasty surprise. Always look out and never assume.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

I think Mazda's ideals of see and be seen are right on the money.. she ellicates this in many of her post's and responses and obviopusly comes from personal experiance.. I think the fundemental that she preaches with regard to radio being a backup only in seperation is a very valid point. Having done most of my flying at the same strip as she, i can vouch for constantly seeing (and hearing) poor procedures done by pilots of all walks..The best peice of equipment on board the acft is what i call the VFR seperation radar and navigational aid.. Its two 20 mm bifocal, colour display,range finding radar dishes attached to the front of our heads..

 

Having said that i can also see the need in non radio mandatory locations to all use the same procedures joining, as long as evryone's on the same page i reckon it should be able to work fine.

 

My 2 cents

 

 

[Guest TOSGcentral]

I've missed something here! I do not see any conflict between what Mazda and Facthunter are saying. They appear to be espousing the same message of safety and seem to be on the same page.

 

What exactly is the conflict?

 

T.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Have i missed something?? who said there was a conflict??

 

 

[Guest TOSGcentral]

Motz - yes you did miss something. I was attempting to see what the apparent conflict was between Mazda and FactH - because I cannot see one. Had nothing to do you with your post/

 

T.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

LoL.. dont worry about me tony.. im sick as a dog today.. dam this flu, stopping me flying, thats when i really get cranky..:thumb_up:

 

 

[Ben Longden]

The best pilots are the ones who admit to the fact they buggered up, and learn from that.

 

There have been a few interesting things happen nearby, such as 300ft circuits in a PA28 in and out of cloud, and a run a way Jab on startup.

 

My gut feeling is simple overconfidence, and lack of currency.

 

With the reporting side of things, why not approach the CASA safety advisors in your state, have a chat with them to give them the heads up without going down the terror track of a formal report. That way, they can step in without being heavy handed and shut the stable door BEFORE the horse bolts.

 

Ben

 

 

[facthunter]

Heavy handed.

 

Don't like that course of action. Has the leopard changed it's spots? Keep it in house and give our organisation a chance to do something first. You could shoot yourself in the foot. If it's a GA plane , then it's a different matter, it's not under our jurisdiction...Nev..

 

 

[Guest Elk McPherson]

Reporting

 

Nev I disagree

 

...only because RAAus has a vested interest in keeping safety issues "in house"

 

I am not for a minute impugning the integrity of Mick or Lee. However, I believe this does not make for an open and accountable safety management system.

 

As a GA airwork & charter operator with one pilot and one aircraft, CASA requires me to have a SMS that is documented and able to be audited by "them".

 

So far as I know (and I would be delighted to be wrong) there is no such system for the RAAus with its 8,000 members and 5,000 aircraft. Repeating above about MP and LU I personally think there have been some very questionable safety outcomes.

 

I agree wholeheartedly with your circuit philosophy by the way :thumb_up:

 

Brent I presume Mazda has a number of Kingair hours?

 

Standard of airmanship

 

I have seen the good, bad and ugly on both sides of the fence... and that's not just because I held both tickets when I did stupid stuff :black_eye:

 

O have taught GA and RAAus with my instructional experience split evenly between.

 

There is a "compliance" culture in GA and a medical examination. However, for some inexplicable reason some GA pilots appear to believe that the law no longer applies (not even the laws of gravity) in a RAAus aircraft and they do the most apallingly stupid, illegal, dangerous things.

 

With no medical examination and a different attitude to many aspects of pilot training ("YES! EVERYONE can fly! just ask us how!) I have observed many people joining the RAAus that have otherwise been intimidated by the (percieved) high-handedness of the GA culture or otherwise not felt that they would fit in or be accepted.

 

There is an element in RAAus (I should probably say in the AUF!) of the old axe "rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obendience of fools", and a legacy from the old days and the 'pirate' culture that "we do not operate under the CAA". These two groups form a counter-culture within the RAAus. I hasten to add, it also exists in GA.

 

It is my opinion there is an ongoing safety issue in some sectors of the RAAus community founded in some bad underlying attitudes which, I am sure, have been described in the RAAus mag before.

 

We all need to keep these guys focussed on the ongoing expectation that they will follow the rules...if only as an ongoing example to the feeble minded lesser pilots like GA, you and me

 

 

[facthunter]

where we are at.

 

EMcp. I don't think we are as far apart as it might seem CASA are coming at us saying trust us we are from the government . We are here to help you. Sure convince me! I have been in this game for a long time. CASA is a police force ' Unlike America where the system is devoted to the growth and advancement of aviation, In australia , Casa sees itself as a policeman, not as a promoter of the industry, and it's resources are dedicated to enforcing rules. They operate under the legislation that controls them. This is where the problem lies.

 

Raaus has a lot of enemies. What I am trying to say is don't provide them with the ammunition to shoot us down. Look! having reread your thread, I don't disagree with anything that you have said except to say that we have never had such agood opportunity to m0ve ahead in aviation without the constraints that are traditionally imposed upon us.That is all I am saying. I just hope that we don't blow it, and throw the opportunity away. Nev....

 

 

[Guest Elk McPherson]

Nev

 

I think we are in heated agreement, although on different sides of the fence.

 

I come from a background of GA CHTR and instructing, with a Bsc in Aviation (mostly applied psych, ergonomics, CRM studies) and six years in U/ground mining adding a Grad Cert in OHS.

 

I am a firm believer in creating a good "safety culture" and I am also a firm believer in the notion that Aviation is as safe as it is (or perhaps, was) because of the need to document accidents, find a cause, and report it to fix the system.

 

I don't believe RAAus has that... and it desperately needs it.

 

In one case I know of a young fella crashed his Jodel a couple of years ago and very very nearly died - he was extremely lucky. I would give you a number of contributing causes, holes in the swiss cheese if you like, including:

 

• aircraft not completed (no aileron gap seals, no engine cowl, no wing fairings, and only one carby spring... which broke)
   
   
  
• aircraft not flight tested, owner doing circuits as first flight (!)
   
   
  
• Pilot not qualified (no tailwheel endo)
   
   
  
• poor safety culture at his local aero club (board member, not an instructor, gave him sly tailwheel lessons in a ...big GA tailwheel thumb_down)
   
   
  

 

When the engine failed on take-off the pilot tried to turn backonto the airfield, the aircraft stalled, and he rode it into the ground.

 

The RAAus wasn't especially interested and there was no investigation per se.

 

The report in the RAAus magazine basically said the engine failed and the pilot crashed it on landing.

 

Who is going to learn anything from that? :black_eye:

 

I also know of a Club/flying school that has had hell's own time sorting out the fuel system in their Foxbat and have had several fuel starvation engine failures resulting in outlandings. Not one of these has been reported and no lessons learnt.

 

I have been a Chief Pilot and a Chief Flying instructor for most of the last 10 years and had to deal with CASA on a frequent basis. The ONLY time I found them to be pr!cks was when I had done the wrong thing and frankly, they had me. :hittinghead:

 

Since that one incident about 8 years ago I have had to prove myself but I now have a useful relationship with the regulator.

 

 

[Guest High Plains Drifter]

I am a firm believer in creating a good "safety culture" and I am also a firm believer in the notion that Aviation is as safe as it is (or perhaps, was) because of the need to document accidents, find a cause, and report it to fix the system.

Elk McPherson, with the comment "(or perhaps, was)" are you suggesting RAAus becomes more like GA ? ... LAMEs, etc

 

 

[Guest Elk McPherson]

I would like to see a whole heap of things, but more regulation probably isn't one of them.

 

Each of us brings our own qualifications, experience and beliefs to RAAus and my hobby horse is safety management systems, reporting, no-blame accident investigations and open discussion of mistakes to facilitate learning.

 

There is an emerging trend towards the prosecution of pilots following an accident (Yogyakarta for one and there was one in NZ in the last few years) that makes openess and full investigation harder to achieve. There is also a real fear of authority in "private" aviation (GA and RAAus) and good outcomes are being lost because people are scared of admitting mistakes.

 

RAAus has become enough like GA already but I will ask you this - do you think RAAus will be allowed to continue expanding upwards (in weight and capability) and outwards (in membership) without more controls?

 

We are all being careful about public perceptions and political fallout and we are constantly being told that the organisation and its liberties are under threat. But what will the political fallout be when there is a series of accidents and it is shown RAAus didn't do all that it could?

 

 

[Guest Elk McPherson]

Rturning to the whole purpose of this thread, I might also echo Mazda's comments:

 

Everyone makes mistakes. It doesn't sound like these were intentionally made to ruin your day. Plenty of experienced people have landed with the gear up. People in 152s are most likely to be pretty low time students who are still using a fair bit of effort to fly the aeroplane and may lack awareness. People sometimes get radio frequencies wrong, or have the wrong radio selected.By all means lodge incident reports, but it might also pay to have a friendly chat to the people concerned. Maybe they will learn something from you. Maybe have a talk to the flying school's CFI about some of the incidents to see if training can be improved.