For all recreational aviators

[facthunter]

Real Plane.

 

Don't worry monty. You can only be insulted by people you respect. If he hasn't flown a drifter he wouldn't know anyway. The status sensitive ego that equates your flying prowess with the size of the aeroplane is not entirely realistic. It just suits those who wish to make a big deal of it. Called "pulling rank". Nev

 

 

[Tomo]

Monty: You saying that brought back memories from when I flew into the Oakey airbase for a flyin a while back in the Drifter. I was the only "small" aircraft that arrived for a while, due to ridiculous winds that morning, and the dust storm still hanging around the horizon. Only two others turned up later, but I was the only Drifter!

 

Landed in a 22kt wind, touched down with probably a 14kt ground speed! Taxing trying not to blow away was pretty interesting. Had a heap of airforce/base ground crew help me tie down. But it wasn't a "Gee that's not an aircraft", I was getting a "You're a brave person to fly that!!" instead. Probably meant the same thing really...........

 

Had an audience of a few hundred spectators and the whole airforce watching me depart into a 25kt crosswind - apparently the whole place burst out laughing once I got airborne cause I didn't go anywhere bar up!! Took me about 10 minutes to get out of the circuit area!!!!!

 

They may not look like a 747, but boy they're a lot of fun!! :thumb_up:

 

 

[monty]

Thanks Nev, I don't get insulted It's my choice to fly it.

 

Thanks Tomo, I must admit I would have laughed as well and you were probably a lot safer in the Drifter in those winds compared to a lot of other aircraft.Big winds and cross winds most of the year out here that's one of the reasons i chose a Drifter. As you said a 747 they are not but if you take away the fun you may as well just drive your car around

 

Thanks Guy's

 

Monty

 

 

[Yenn]

There has been a bit in this subject about the quality of training and the abilities of GA and RAAus pilots. I am sure that the average GA non proffessional pilot does less hours than an RAAus pilot and therefore is less current. That was the reason I stopped flying GA and now fly RAAus. I was of the opinion that RAAus training was OK, but lately I have been having my doubts. It is not uncommon to find an RAAus pilot who does not know what is expected of him in the air. This can be seen by some of the questions aired on this forum.

 

Today I was told by a pilot that he flew down to Archerfield at way over the 5000' permitted. I asked how he could do this and was advised it was a safety issue, so he had more options in case of an engine failure. OK, I don't think this would wash with CASA. I also asked how he was flying over 8500' with no transponder and it appeared to me that he had no idea of class E airspace. When I asked him about class E he told me he was not in the control zone steps. He showed me his maps and not having ERC Low, he had no idea of class E. Hopefully he will know better in future after I showed him the area of class E he had supposedly been flying in. I say supposedly, because it was only by word of mouth that I heard of it.

 

I would have thought that any RAAus pilot would know of the 5000' limit that currently applies to us, except where rough country requires higher, and also have some knowledge of airspace they are flying in. To fly without a transponder, between Gladstone and Bridbane in class E airspace seems to me to be suicidal. It also appears to show a lack of training and maybe that is what some of the GA knockers will pounce on.

 

 

[dunlopdangler]

Bit of a worry Yenn and this would not be an isolated occurence as I have also witnessed first hand deficiencies in some pilots knowledge and in some circumstances downright arrogant with no respect to rules or commonsense and to be fair it does happen in both arenas,.. GA as well as RAA. Reading through this thread there does seem a bias against GA and as I resemble that faction more than RAA (although I enjoy flying ultralights a lot) I find this trend frustrating because I believe there is a real need for a united co-existence. Those GA guys who knock the ultralight fraternity you will usually find as those who are trying to beat up their own position as "qualified pilot" and you will usually find they fly at an aeroclub every now and again (and you will also find them crapping on in the PPrune threads) and they are usually the load mouths at parties telling everyone that will listen that they are pilots..don't let them get to you, I once had one come up and knock how the Skyfox I was flying wasn't a real plane...ignoring his comments I actually got him in the plane and once I got him to 3,000ft I asked him to step out..bewildered he looked and I then explained if it wasn't a real plane, his next step wouldn't hurt a bit..he got the message and spent the next hour totally enjoying the flight and later on actually joined the AUF as it was known then:helmet:

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

...Reading through this thread there does seem a bias against GA and as I resemble that faction more than RAA (although I enjoy flying ultralights a lot) I find this trend frustrating because I believe there is a real need for a united co-existence...

Could that be more related to the fact that this thread is probably a bit defensive, given the post (referenced article) that started it? Is the bias common across many threads? (I haven't been here long enough to know).

 

 

[shags_j]

I think Dunlop missed the point that that is what we are after. A more "united co-existence".

 

In answer to your question, while it is RA focused, I think there are almost as many GA ppls (or ex) as there are RA pilots

 

 

[Aussie Steve]

The thing that has everyone so fired up, is that it was an article published in a magazine.

 

Out there in the public domain were it is put across as gospel.

 

The Editor obviously thinks that Rec Pilots dont read any Aviation magazines, and if they do..who cares what they think.

 

Sad but fairly typical of the bias against our movement.

 

Why do you think the Controlled Airspace Endorsement got knocked on the head?

 

There was an outcry from a very small but influentual group.

 

On the whole GA/RAAus thing ?

 

""If we dont hang out together....surely we will hang together""

 

 

[Tackleberry]

here we go again

 

Recently I was reading an issue of Australian Flying may-june 2010 and came across the attached article. I have included my reply (attached) as I feel we all should be nipping this type of elitist rubbish in the bud. There is enough animosity between GA and RA Aus without some one useing a national magazine to soapbox their opinions. I was always under the impression that journalists were supposed to be unbiased......

 

Please feel free to pass this on.

 

australian flyer article.pdf

 

australian flyer reply.pdf

 

australian flyer article.pdf

 

australian flyer reply.pdf

 

australian flyer article.pdf

australian flyer reply.pdf

[Tackleberry]

I have been avoiding this thread and I have not read all of the pages and pages of responses, but I think it is time to comment.Doug Nancarrow is a well respected aviation journalist and has been for many, many years. I'm surprised people on this forum don't know of him. I can't imagine he would ever have wanted to inspire such a divisive response.

 

Now on to the subject. No one likes to be criticised but let's be realistic. RA-Aus is the less expensive alternative, and there are reasons for that. The training standards are different. Now that doesn't mean that all RA-Aus students receive minimum training, but some would. It doesn't mean that all RA-Aus instructors have very little experience, but some do. It doesn't mean that all RA-Aus pilots don't have the theoretical knowledge to pass GA exams, but some don't.

 

Some RA-Aus aircraft may be more difficult to fly than some GA aircraft, but some GA aircraft are way more difficult than some RA-Aus aircraft too. Some RA-Aus aircraft may not be maintained to GA standards, but some are immaculate!

 

RA-Aus can't have it all. It is not possible for all RA-Aus students to receive the same level and extent of training as GA pilots at a fraction of the price. Some might receive a similar level of basic training if they are fortunate with the school and instructor, but you can't count on it, and it is simply not possible to do the "extras" without GA training.

 

Every single GA pilot has been trained by a GA commercial pilot, who has passed all those exams and flight requirements, then passed an instructor course of a minimum of 50 hours at the very least. Yes, some RA-Aus instructors are skilled pilots with great teaching skills and some have vast experience - many in GA, commercial charter, flying in the airlines and military - but some are not.

 

Every GA PPL has received some instrument training and can fly in Class C and D airspace. GA pilots have the option of training in aerobatics, night flying and completing a 40 hour instrument rating, and many do. All of them hold an aviation medical. The flying schools must go through the procedure of getting a CASA AOC with significant money and time required.

 

As Ian has said, there are good RA-Aus and GA pilots, and not so good pilots in RA-Aus and GA.

 

It's too easy to point the finger quoting a single incident, but all of us make mistakes. Those who deny having made a mistake are either very inexperienced, or kidding themselves.

 

On the IFR issue, one thing to consider is that IFR GA pilots preparing for an approach have a pretty high workload and would be talking to ATS because they require traffic information and are on full SAR reporting, then transferring to the CTAF and self-separating from IFR and VFR traffic there, and flying an approach where only 5 degrees off track means they cannot continue. If using multiple radios (while talking to ATS and monitoring a CTAF for instance) it is very easy to transmit on an incorrect frequency. An IFR radio call might mention turning inbound on the NDB approach, but of course it is better airmanship to say turning inbound on the NDB approach x miles north west of wherever at x feet so VFR traffic can maintain situational awareness.

 

I'm a huge fan of RA-Aus, but please don't start attacking GA. There are so few pilots in Australia anyway, a house divided against itself cannot stand. We all love to fly and are required to comply with the rules of the air.

 

Let's work together and share the air, not attack each other without good reason.

I like your reasoning and you make sense but RA Aus didnt start the mud slinging. Dougs article has done nothing to assist in the division of RA Aus and GA. In fact it has split the two camps further. As a respected journalist he should know that airing your own opinion is for parties and the bar. Not for a respected national publication where the right of reply is not available. I wrote a reply and added it here if you are interested. Me, I,ll work with anyone to promote ALL the flying fraternity in Australia. Lets keep it that way. cheers

 

australian flyer reply.pdf

 

australian flyer reply.pdf

 

australian flyer reply.pdf

[Guest eland2705]

Or perhaps a Moderator should just step in and shut it down?

Totally agree!

 

 

[GraemeK]

Another very good reason why we need to stick together is to ensure that aviation flourishes, and we still have access to airports. Currently, after about a decade of very little traffic growth in GA at airports like YMMB and YSBK, we are now seeing declines at both these airports (on AsA stats, YMMB is down 11% in 2009 and 4% YTD, YSBK down 4% in 2009 and a whopping 21% YTD).

 

This despite significant growth in recreational flying. A worrying trend indeed.

 

Next thing the commercial operators at the old GAAP fields will have to put up charges to cover their costs on the smaller base, leading to lower traffic and we are in a downward spiral. The anti-aircraft lobby will keep up the pressure, and the operators will eye off the potential profits from the type of DFO developments we are already seeing - soon it just becomes too hard, and the city airports will just disappear under the commercial/financial/environmental pressures.

 

If I was in GA, I'd be absolutely encouraging the CTA endorsement for RAAus - because it might just be the only thing that will save these great airports from extinction.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Hi All, i just read the airmail, for this months Aus Flying, i would just like to say that Bas Scheffers, letter was well balanced and very well written article.Thank you Bas.

 

Ps- for some of the other letters, well im not going there.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Any chance you could scan the letters onto this thread daz??I'm sure we would all like to see the response to the article.

I would like to mate, but for computers, the best i can do is know where to turn it on.LOL Maybe someone else can help here.Their was a guy who thinks that after 10 to 20 hours, we can fly anywhere.Cheers mate:wave: