aro

The error typically varies with airspeed. E.g. using the calibration chart from a C172 POH, if you calculate 1.3 VS0 based on IAS, you actually only have 1.14 VS0. About 8-10 knots worth of the "extra" airspeed is just reduced error as the AOA reduces.

As djpacro pointed out, that gives you IAS which can have significant errors near the stall. If you are calculating margins you need to use CAS not IAS.

I have definitely encountered turboprop aircraft flying 1500' circuits. The occasional jet also visits, but I haven't been in the air at the time. I suspect they fly a straight in approach usually.

There have been references in discussions of this accident to a previous accident involving the same aircraft type - are you sure you're not confused? I haven't seen anything similar about this accident, it seems early to know those sort of details anyway. Have you heard details first hand about this accident - i.e. not just read it on the internet?

I don't think this is true. Airservices don't provide a feed. Flight Radar 24 receive their data from a network of people running a receiver on a e.g. Raspberry Pi with a USB radio, and sending the data over the internet. It is basically the same as the ADSB devices that feed data to Avplan/OzRunways etc. in flight.

I don't think it's legal to install a transponder without functioning ADSB-OUT for many years now. So if it was professionally installed I would expect ADSB out to be working. I would not rely on Flightradar 24 as an indication it wasn't working.

How many FR24 receivers are at Cowra, and where are they located? There is a difference between adsb transponders show on fr24 and adsb transponders always show on FR24. FR24 could be interrupted by internet outage, receiver offline, someone parks a van next to the receiver etc. What's the registration? I can see if I can find other flights on FR24

I doubt there is any problem with your installation. I'm pretty sure it is illegal to install a new transponder without full ADSB out capability now, so if it was professionally installed it should have the required functions. More likely the person at Cowra wasn't taking the limitations of the receiving equipment into account.

Is it the form that's the problem, or the flight review? (Presumably you already do flight reviews) This is what I can't figure out - exactly what you are asking for. No form? No training? No requirement for transponder etc? No medical requirements? Can you be explicit about what you actually want? Having observed RA-Aus over many years, I would expect them to add their own requirements in excess of what CASA require for RPL...

https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certificates/pilots/pilot-licences/getting-recreational-pilot-licence-rpl If you have an RA-Aus pilot certificate An RA-Aus pilot certificate is equivalent to an RPL. To get a CASA-issued RPL: complete application form 61-1RTX Recreational Pilot Licence and send it with evidence (the form tells you what to provide and how to submit it) do the flight review for your aircraft rating. Your category rating, aircraft class rating and design feature endorsements will transfer across. You will also get a recreational navigation endorsement if: your certificate authorises you to do cross-country flights you've done at least 25 hours flying time, including 20 hours dual and 5 hours as pilot-in-command. You need to fill in a form and do a flight review. Then you can do the endorsement for controlled airspace. There's actually less requirements for a RA-Aus pilot to get a RPL than for a commercial pilot to get a RA-Aus certificate.

This thread sounds like no-one has actually flown circuits with other aircraft. If you have this much trouble, get an instructor, do some circuits with other traffic and practice spotting other aircraft. It's not hard - you see the aircraft in front and make sure you don't cut in front of them. Generally, faster aircraft will do wider circuits due to turn radius etc, and the greater distance covered means the times are about the same. The biggest danger is on final - particularly when you have faster aircraft behind slower aircraft, if they allow the spacing to tighten up. The reason we fly a circuit is to put everyone in a predictable pattern where you know where to look and can see other aircraft.

I can think it through, but the rules say different. Here it is straight from AIP: Pilots should not descend into the traffic circuit from directly above the aerodrome... ... the aircraft should descend on the non-active side of the circuit and be established at circuit altitude as it crosses the runway centreline on crosswind

How long ago? This procedure is exactly what is depicted in the diagram from CASA in a previous post. It is what has been taught for decades. It doesn't seem clumsy to me... what does seem clumsy is pilots who are in the circuit, but not yet at circuit height and are descending into circuit traffic.

Overfly at 1500 AGL (or 2000 AGL if there might be high speed traffic doing 1500' circuits.) Check the windsock, determine which runway to use. Descend to circuit height on the dead (i.e. non-active) side. Join the circuit at circuit height. This is pretty basic stuff - anyone post area-solo stage should know it.

Not in the last 20 years at least... You are supposed to descend on the dead side (or non-active side if you prefer) and be at circuit height before you cross the runway and join the circuit. Descending into traffic on the downwind leg is a no-no. Among other things, it is much easier to see the traffic you are supposed to avoid if you are not above them.