To GA or Not to GA... That is the Question!

[Guest watto]

I have not been GA but from what I have seen over the past 12 months boths sides have a pretty good grounding from different ends of the stick, as Yenn said GA have more extensive theory training and RAA have more extensive practical due to cost we can afford to get a lot more experience for the same $.

 

I have been told that after a year or 2 flying our LS aircraft it would be an easy transition to GA due to the amount of control we put into flying these little plastic, rag and string devils and when we are given an opportunity to fly a heavier more stable Ac it generally comes a lot easier than what we have already learnt.

 

As for the snobbery, well it's human nature! these guys had to spend huge amounts of $ to learn the art of flying and it would be a bitter pill that these days people like us can achieve more, faster and perhaps better results practically for a much smaller cost and in a lot of cases we finish up with our own AC for a relatively small cost as well, when a lot of guys I know who have a GA cannot afford their own and have to hire one, most of us can walk out the door and hop in our rockets and fly off at will (must be hard to take, I wonder what the poor people are doing today) hehehe.

 

But one thing is for sure, bad manners are universal and sometimes we cut people off and do things that are ?? and we say to ourselves ,"crap should not have done that I will not do it again" and learn from it. GA or RAA, sill got to keep learning.

 

 

[Foto_Flyer]

Great comments, Watto, I think you hit the nail on the head.

 

 

 

I agree that the formal "theory" component in GA is probably more extensive, however, it is incumbent on us all, GA and RA, to maintain a high level of competency in both our practical and theoretical education irrespective of how long we've held our licence or how many hours we have.

 

 

 

I believe that we shouldn't just learn what we need to know but we should continue beyond that, even if that involves a separate theory course at a school etc. Sure it may seem an unnecessary cost considering areas covered may not be required for a particular qualification/rating. But any "above and beyond" training (theory or otherwise) can only make us safer and thus help answer the question as to what is better between RA and GA.

 

 

[GraemeK]

I believe that we shouldn't just learn what we need to know but we should continue beyond that, even if that involves a separate theory course at a school etc. Sure it may seem an unnecessary cost considering areas covered may not be required for a particular qualification/rating. But any "above and beyond" training (theory or otherwise) can only make us safer and thus help answer the question as to what is better between RA and GA.

Spot on - that's the real point!!!

 

 

[Guest watto]

What I liked about my CFI is that he was able to pick up my best method of learning which I am sure like many I am a hands on learner not a book worm so he was able to pick up on this quickly and exploit it to my advantage and where he was seeing that I was not struggling with the actual process but more with the terminology he worked around that by providing practical examples or simply telling me what he wanted to happen and allowing me to demonstrate my understanding and then either confirming or adjusting my method, I am a trainer myself and I really get frustrated by trainers who try to kill you with powerpoint or whiteboard when it is really the long way around (not all the time), but a lot of the time a simple practical gets everybody on the right page straight away.

 

Lets face it if I was thrown straight into a lot of the GA theory before now I would really struggle, but now that I have a good solid RAA grounding I would do fine because as grandpa used to say,"boy, the horse goes before the cart", so now it would be a nice progression as opposed to being in at the deep end.

 

Some of you younger guys might be saying that does not sound right but remember some of us older blokes are from a different school of thought and education and well I left school to work full time at 14 in a job I had already been working part time for 2 years so you can see where the practical learning comes in.

 

Gee I should put this on a powerpoint presentation!!!

 

 

[Guest Gomer]

Interesting reading, this. In another part of my life I am a road cyclist, and you could take every argument above and replace GA/RA with cyclist/4WD. I've long since come to the conclusion that there's idiots on both sides and it's best for the blood pressure to just walk away...

 

The trouble with arguing with an twit is that you'll never convince them and it just brings you down to their level.

 

 

[Guest Mad Dave]

True, arguing is a waste of time, but some people genuinely don't know they are doing the wrong thing, so I reckon it is always best to calmly try to point it out, and if as you say they don't want to listen, then walk away. Unless of course it is genuinely dangerous then inform the powers that be (again trying to remain calm)

 

 

[perthjay85]

back to the topic at hand. I started my pilot license about 8 months ago. im hoping to achieve a PPL within the next 6 months. I never even knew about the RAAus side of things until I found this forum. But since I am already half way through my PPL im not going to stop. What is the deal with going from GA with a PPL to the RA side of things? is there a site I can check out, I have searched a little bit but to no luck.

 

 

[slartibartfast]

PJ - you can start with the Ops Manual on the RAAus site here.

 

Section 2.13 lays it out, especially with reference to section 2.07 - basically at the discretion of a CFI (provided you have 20 hours already) with a minimum of 5 hours in rec aircraft - at least 1 hour solo.

 

 

[perthjay85]

thanks slartibartfast.

 

i just found that site about 5 minutes ago. So i will havea good read of it.

 

:)

 

jay

 

 

[Guest watto]

Just a quick question, if I wanted to get my CPL could I register my 24 built J230 VH rego so I could use it for my CPL and still fly it in the mean time on my RA certificate or is stricty RA for RA and GA for VH?

 

 

[turboplanner]

Is this the one where the verification test is going to be applied to the answers Watto?

 

 

[Guest watto]

Hahaha, of course! Turbo it's as if you have known me for years, what can I say?

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Ill have a lash, i seem to love leadin with me chin..

 

If you rego you 230 GA, you will need an PPL to fly it.. But remember, there's 2 ways to a cpl.. 150 hour course, or 200 hour course.. The 150 hour course doesn't allow RAA flights to be counted, but the 200 hour course does..

 

So, basically, if you ellect to do the 200 hour CPL, you can count all the flying you have already done.. But remember you need at least a NVFR rating aswell.. ( i think, perhaps that is for the instructor rating after cpl, im sure someone will help out with that one)..

 

 

[slartibartfast]

Gotta admit Watto - you're a master baiter.

 

:encore:Thank you - thank you. I'll be here all week. Try the veal. :encore:

 

 

[Guest watto]

Thanks Motza, that pretty much answers my question.

 

Not to sure how to take that one starti, I may need a second opinion!!

 

 

[turboplanner]

Ask him for his references......

 

 

[Mazda]

Watto, a silly question from someone who hasn't flown one, is the J230 fixed pitch? For CPL you need to be flying something CSU and 120 knots cruise. You won't need NVFR for CPL, but you will need passes in the CPL theory subjects and you'll need a Class 1 medical.

 

 

[Guest watto]

It is fixed pitch so it looks as if I will have to bite the bullet if I want to proceed and use the schools ac

 

 

[Guest brentc]

Watto, you can pretty much almost do the whole thing in the J230 with RA rego. I would cross any ideas of attempting to register it as GA.

 

Remember though, you need 10 hours on instruments so your aircraft would need to satisfy the requirements for this, plus also the CPL flight test must be conducted in an aircraft with variable pitch propellor and a TAS of 120 knots minimum. You will of course need to be endorsed for the CSU also in another aircraft.

 

You would certainly be FAR better off to do the bulk of the flying in the 230 if you own it, then finish off in a school aircraft, that's for sure.

 

An interesting situation is the Cirrus, it has a CSU, but it's automatic so you don't need an endorsement to use it, however there's an excemption on this aircraft that allows to you complete a CPL flight test in it. Therefore if doing this you'd need to have been CSU endorsed on another suitable aircraft.