Aerobatics

[blueline]

Very interesting reading some of the comments about an RA-Aus pilot not being trained to a good enough standard to go on and do an aerobatics rating.

 

Some RA-Aus pilots would have trouble with aerobatics BUT so would some GA pilots!

 

 

[djpacro]

Thanks for the background, Fred Bear.

 

I intend getting involved in RAA aerobatics with a Clipped Wing Cub - after Part 103 is implemented.

 

Perhaps we need an Aerobatic Chapter of the RAA to tackle the issues raised in some of the posts here.

 

Yenn - I was a student at Grovedale back in '67. Aub later taught me aerobatics. He's still going strong.

 

 

[Guest J430]

If you want to do aerobatics, it would be far safer for you to study and sit your PPL and enroll for some very thorough training, and a suitable aircraft of course. Don't try to push the envelope of RAA. That's not what is was meant for.

 

As for increasing training I agree with more is good, but now you have 5000 members with varying levels of training from basic RAA thru to retired ATPL's, aerobatics etc. So you would need a lot of retraining to bring all those skills up across the board.

 

I think its best to keep RAA what it is meant for, and was set up to be. You dont buy a standard V8 Commodore and expect to race in the V8 Supercar series do you? And ask your granny to drive it!

 

The beauty of RAA is that it does not complicate life with endorsements for Controlled airspace, aerobatics, class 1 or 2 medicals, and I really think the later generation retractable and CS props are pushing the envelope enough. next some of you will want IFR in a drifter.......yes and some I am sure have done it!

 

As for Medicals, if you start pushing towards more of the aforementioned CASA might bring in a full medical system, and that would effectively "kill off" many of our senior members. Sure it does not worry me ...just yet....and most of us I assume, but who wants the expense every year of $130-$250 just so a few can have RAA doing effectively what GA is now.

 

Stick to the good life! AND LIVE!!

 

Cheers

 

J:)

 

 

[facthunter]

Upside down planes.

 

Very well put, j430, Sums it up nicely. Very wise. It's easy to get enthusiastic & not think it through . N....

 

 

[Yenn]

djpacro. I was training at Grovedale from June to November 1967, with Bill Ricketts and Alan Reid. Both of them got jobs with airlines and Alan was the check pilot who approved Australias first woman airline pilot. I also flew from Lovely Banks in a chipmunk which is aerobatic although I didn't do much. A twelve turn spin which went to flat spin was a good experience and very easy to recover from in about 2 turns from memory.

 

I really don't think aerobatics is a good idea for RAAus as there are a lot of cowboys in the ranks and given an inch they would take many miles.

 

 

[Lamiunto]

I am all for change, and allowing more freedoms, but like it was said before, you have to limit those freedoms to keep RAA flying as easy and cost effective as it is now. Aerobatics is a very complicated sport, which is why it has remained in GA and as an endorsement for so long, you need to be able to handle everything in the first place (most can) then you need to have a firm grasp of the theory, the number crunching and many more pencil and paper stuff before you even try. Aerobatics is not just something you do, you need to plan it out, and if you have trouble with the load, landing, take-off charts and their calculations, plus some of the physics involved in the GA syllabus then you will be hard pressed with the theory aspect of aerobatics.

 

I myself have told my CFI that while I am going for an RAA certificate, I want to do all the study that would allow me to go for GA, all the expectations of performance must be the same. It all comes down to personal preference. If you want to be the best RAA pilot you want to be, you can do it if you so wish, I know I will most likely get all the CPL study material just to increase my performance and understanding as a pilot. This does not mean that you now have to force the rest of the pilots out there to comply with the same standards. If you are going to be flying a drifter in the middle of the outback with no controlled airspace for miles, why would you need to study a syllabus which is up to par with the GA one? RAA is keeping the medium perfectly, some pilots just want to get up there and have a good time, and not worry about all the aspects on the theoretical side, they just enjoy flying the simple way. Then you get people like me, who love theory, complex calculations, standards etc, but just because I like it, doesn't mean you have to enforce it on everyone else now.

 

CASA is already trying to give is just a bit more freedom by allowing you to fly in controlled airspace if you have the appropriate endorsement. And for those of us who would love it, I am sure the small amount of extra theory isn't going to bother you, the bit of extra time with an instructor, another quick exam, all with the end goal of flying in CTA, I find that acceptable. But for the pilots who don't want to, then they don't have to, CTA flying will be an endorsement, so if you don't want to do the extra studying, then so be it, you don't need to, you just won't be allowed to fly in CTA but if that doesn't bother you, then there is no problem. So it comes as an option to you as an RAA pilot, if you don't need it, don't use it. You aren't forced to learn the theory for that endorsement, but the option is there if you ever want it.

 

So that is my opinion, if they can give you extra freedoms as optional extras, it would work out much better for the community. But, if they made these extras compulsory, like CTA flying, then it could have a negative impact. As an optional extra, costs are not raised for those who don't want it.

 

 

[djpacro]

Just some brief comments on some of the previous points made:

 

Aerobatics is included in the draft Part 103 which is supported by the RAA. They also support an increase in the weight to 750 kg and that will bring in a much higher number of aerobatic trainers than the current weight limit. Perhaps the RAA doesn't want to get involved with the infrastructure required to support the sport - let's see what's in the draft Part 149. If the RAA stays where it is, it will be left behind in the development of recreational aviation after Parts 103 and 149 are implemented.

 

Lamiunto's comments on controlled airspace is spot on and the exact same principle applies to aerobatics: "CASA is" ... "trying to give is just a bit more freedom by allowing you to fly" aerobatics "if you have the appropriate endorsement. And for those of us who would love it, I am sure the small amount of extra theory isn't going to bother you, the bit of extra time with an instructor, another quick exam, all with the end goal of flying" aerobatics, "I find that acceptable. But for the pilots who don't want to, then they don't have to," aerobatics "flying will be an endorsement, so if you don't want to do the extra studying, then so be it, you don't need to, you just won't be allowed to fly" aerobatics "but if that doesn't bother you, then there is no problem. So it comes as an option to you as an RAA pilot, if you don't need it, don't use it. You aren't forced to learn the theory for that endorsement, but the option is there if you ever want it.

 

I agree that there's more to aerobatics than flight in controlled airspace however aerobatics is of less interest to CASA as only those directly involved are at risk. Refer CASA's new policy of 14/5/07.

 

Yenn - Alan Reid and Bill Ricketts were both instructors of mine in '67. I don't recall the Chipmunk at Lovely Banks when I started flying there in late in '68.

 

What's the best way to deal with cowboys? Provide rules, standards, guidance and oversight for the aeroplane and pilot or offer nothing so that they're on their own? I recall some-one saying to me "I don't have an instrument rating therefore I don't have any limitations."

 

 

[rick-p]

Ian read your first post, remember you started it, and your last post.

 

Were you ever a a politician?

 

See you at Raglan and you can give me your answer then.

 

Rick P

 

 

[Yenn]

Rick-p. not a politician, just a stirrer, but you have lost me on this one as I can't remember the first and last posts, unless you are referring to Anzac day.

 

I just had a look back at the start of this thread and Find I did start it. Will be good to meet you at Old Station. I hear that they have been very busy building accomodation units there. I have not decided wether or not I will overnight there as I hate loud music and it is very hard to get away from.