djpacro

Late here so .... it is goodnight from him.

Individual parking spots saved in their G1000.

complied with the rules at the time .... but Part 61 is now very specific as to the registration of an aircraft which a PPL may fly (but this is just my opinion from my recollection of reading these rules quite some time ago).

Interesting to compare this lesson plan with CASA's new sample syllabus for Part 141.

Good Oscar, I was about to respond. Lots of ifs and buts in FAR 23 - my favourites are wrt Maneuvering Speed.

Nope, read 23.395 then 23.397 then 23.399.

Interesting that the new ontrack guide suggests a radio call outbound but not inbound. I use words something like traffic eastern lane then as per that guide. If cloud base is low there may be opposite traffic at the same altitude so I like to keep to the right of the pretty purple dots and avoid nice round numbers on the altimeter - scary to see others as they pass close by.Personally I prefer the Glenburn gap if the weather is good enough.

Perhaps the significant cost in transitioning to the new Parts 61/141/142 rules contributed.

will oblige many aerobatic aerobatic aircraft inbound to Moorabbin after a typical aerobatic flight to call "MINIMUM FUEL" as we're typically unable to carry much more than a generous 45 mins fuel reserve to stay within max aerobatic weight limitations. Lucky that CASA doesn't also require us to wear parachutes.

Nope, not a fact at all. For parts which require a safe life then it is whatever it turns out to be. If for a part it is, say 1000 hours, for discussion then it will not break (unless operated contrary to that expected for fatigue life determination) at that safe life which is a small fraction of the life determined for it. Simply buy another one and take comfort in the safe life concept.

and you need to keep the policy in place for some years after you stop the work.

Not according to my lawyer some years ago. only if the policy specifically covers that activity.

Gday Mike.

Article on spin training in the Feb issue of Sport Pilot - with this note:

Same medical requirements too, I hope.

I was referring to my own Bocian flying, same thought.

I'd forgotten about the Bocian, it was a very long time ago.

The Cessna 150 will readily get into a stable, fully developed spin; a 152 needs a more aggressive entry technique but can also get into a stable, fully developed spin. As for recovery, well, the full story is here: http://www.kopingsfk.se/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/10.-Spin-Characteristics.pdf about the 150 through to the R172.

Yes, I still see some teaching incipient spins only - it bites some-one down the track when the poor technique is found not to be effective in a fully developed spin. I still see quite a few who do not teach spin recovery iaw the flight manual for the type and too many pilots who have not read the flight manual for the types that they spin. Somewhat similar to the very old rules in Australia. Spin training was not part of the PPL syllabus although I was required to do spins in each subsequent aerobatic type that I got an endorsement on. Separate endorsements for the Fuji 160 and 180 as the latter had a C/S prop - consequently did many spins with Roy Goon who insisted that every one be six turns before initiating recovery. The Beagle Pup required aft ballast for spinning as I recall. My Chipmunk and Tiger flying came after those individual endorsements were abolished. The flat spin, fully developed spin mode in the CT-4. The every which way spins of the Pitts from upright steep accelerated to inverted flat (full throttle, full aileron then move the stick full back). Interesting that PB's Wolf Pitts does not recover using the Beggs-Mueller technique. Quick guesstimate: 8000 spins and still spinning. A plug for an excellent book on the subject: http://www.amazon.com.au/Stalls-Spins-Safety-Revised-Edition-ebook/dp/B008P1HLJ4/ref=pd_sim_351_1/375-1724477-6355605?ie=UTF8&refRID=0SZT71MJNJ0QWSKP0MV1

WARNING - it is addictive.

I remember that.

not bad for a trainee tailwheel pilot.

Its all in the report.

Yep, it is a good but basic summary of stuff. I used to have that Fortran program on my computer.

Yep, so did his predecessor.