djpacro

Plexus or vuplex plastic cleaners. I prefer vuplex from Bunnings. Certainly don’t use glass cleaners as they are too abrasive. I used to use Mr Sheen on fabric dope.

Not ambiguous at all. The website is clear that graduating students get a CPL. Licence test for a CPL is very clear - to be eligible for that test means having passes in the theory exams plus achieving the competency and experience requirements of CASA to do a test.

I visited Soar recently to have a look around and chatted to some instructors there. I also know some past students. Having got an RPC then fill in a form to get an RPL from CASA - standard procedure. Gain experience? Well, there is a syllabus to get to CPL per their website https://soar.edu.au/commercial-pilot-licence/# they'd been doing CPL in one variant of the Bristell which apparently conforms to CASA requirements however as I was told, and per the website, from next year CPL in the twin Tecnam.

You should get the quote correct! It states: "You'll also be eligible to undertake the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) licence tests for Commercial Pilot Licence (CPL)." Not that hard to read and get the info correct (I hope). That price is the annual fee so you can double it for 2 years. That is 2 years study at BHI plus flight training to get to where one is eligible for a CPL test. Get an RPC with nav endorsement along the way - gotta do that otherwise CASA's onerous regs make it virtually impossible for a student to do a solo CPL nav under training.

Somewhere in the CARs you will find a reg which states that private operations must also follow those rules for Air Service Operations. It won't be long before Part 91 comes into force - these rules apply to all. Check out the draft plain english guide on CASA's website - the regs have been published so you could go there instead. "Manipulating flight controls (91.155) A person must not, and you must not allow a person to, manipulate the flight controls of the aircraft unless the person is authorised or qualified to pilot the aircraft."

A local Decathlon recently had its ailerons jammed by the clip from a Bose headset. Pilot managed to fly it to the airport and fortunately it unjammed on final approach. Holes in the floor of a Decathlon so easy for pens, phones etc to get to where they can jam the ailerons or elevator.

When I bought the airplane it was using tacho so I continued with that for a short while until I bought a flight switch. The flight switch was U/S for a short while so I used time on my wristwatch from take-off to landing.

google found this https://members.raa.asn.au/storage/cta-faqs.pdf which, as I expected, states that it requires more than just an RPL.

The original question was simply “What aircraft had three decks?” I don’t know much of the German language but it seems to me that Driedecker is “three decks”?

What landing gear did the S-1 have? Lockable tailwheel keeps it straight whereas the standard Maule with vague steering allowed the tail to swing. Spring main landing gear instead of bungees tamed the bouncing.

Fokker Dr.I (Dreidecker

"If the pilot had selected some or full flap prior to or during the left turn, he would have been able to extend his glide distance further and reduce the aircraft’s stall speed, and potentially the aircraft’s speed at impact." He is not saying that the glide angle is better with flaps down. "However, given the location of the aircraft when he commenced the left turn, and the nature of the surrounding terrain, it is very unlikely that a collision with terrain could have been avoided." So extending the glide is insignificant compared to stalling and hitting the ground hard. "The aircraft was at about 60 ft (see GPS information) and had a groundspeed of about 124 kt (about 230 km/h)." .... "If full flap had been selected, the stall speeds would have been reduced by about 10 mph (9 kt) for the same bank angle." ... "Given the stall warning was intermittently sounding for the last 7 seconds, and the indicated airspeed decreased from 65 kt to 60 kt, it is very likely that the aircraft was close to the stall speed during this period. In the last 1–2 seconds, as the bank angle increased to about 60° and the indicated airspeed was about 60 kt, the aircraft may have entered the stall. The pilot’s use of left rudder in this period increased the potential to stall." "All of the options were likely to result in at least some level of damage and/or injury. However, with the benefit of hindsight and a detailed consideration of all the available information, the option likely to result in the least damage or injury was to land the aircraft ahead on the remainder of the beach (heading north)." Hindsight is for us to learn from. "Regardless of whether the aircraft stalled, the aircraft impacted terrain with little or no control and a significant descent rate." That is the thing to avoid. Interesting that camera and camera memory disappeared.

Pages 4 & 14 of

Polyfiber agent here http://www.pilotshopwa.com.au/store/index.php?act=viewCat&catId=68 and Spruce agent here with with the catalogue online https://www.skyshop.com.au/COVERING.pdf The Spruce catalogue is free, you just need to pay postage https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/stpages/sprucecatalog.php

Suggest that you fix the spelling of the hotshot star aerobatic pilots - Jock Folan and Gerard. I can't make it as I have a birthday party to go to. I was in Narromine last weekend however so caught up with other hotshot aerobatic pilots.

Good start! I didn't see your qualifying statement about "flying straight ahead" and stall. Anyway, my comment is pretty much the same. The objective with the use of rudder in a stall is NOT to keep the wings level, particularly not to return the wings to level after an entry to an incipient spin.

When people ask me that I generally get them (in an aeroplane) to do a stall in a turn and then recover. I don’t offer any advice as anyone who has learnt to fly or done a flight review in recent years per CAsA’s Part 61 should be competent at them.

A few points in response: I used to be scared of stalls when I was learning to fly. I know quite a few instructors who are scared of them. So your situation is quite common and there is a cure as Kyle suggested. "they are safe" - well, too many of my friends and acquaintances have been killed as a result of a stall, so nope, not necessarily. "using the rudder to keep the wings level" - that can be very dangerous so your "easing the control column forward without worrying about using the rudder to keep the wings level" is very much safer. "worrying that if I don't keep the wings level I will spin" - keeping the wings level has diddly squat to do whether you spin or not. "And die." Potentially, if you do the wrong thing and that seems likely from your post. I recommend that you now read https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/airplane_handbook/media/06_afh_ch4.pdf

As much as 6K vis? Very much less down the road at Narromine.

I guess that it is something like this https://www.iac.org/media-gallery/detail/3847/10313

The DR-109 is noticeably different. Can’t think what it is at the moment.

Obviously a big gap for him but he has been building up other aspects of his business - not new as Red Bull had a long pause a while back - e.g. just before the last race he had a charter to the outback in his King Air.

For info, I note that many put stuff like this in checklists: "check oil pressure in green within 30 seconds". Lycoming actually states: "If minimum oil pressure is not indicated within thirty seconds, stop engine ...". Short story is that it does not have to be within "the green". Quite a few variables such as different installations in different aeroplanes (my aerobatic aircraft have lots of extra oil hoses for the pump to work against when cold especially), ambient temperature and type/grade of oil.

Interesting question (miserable weather this weekend so people get to put up with me online). It seems that the book figure is 47 KIAS? I can't find the conversion to CAS. My copy of the Owner's Handbook states that the stall speed is 57 mph = 50 kts - perhaps that is CAS? I wonder if RAA knows - surely they have looked at it and determined whether it complies with the requirement for a Vso of 45 kts? Pretty simple to me - if it complies then OK and if it doesn't comply then cannot be registered RAA (I recall that we've seen this before). Interesting that CAO 95.55 simply refers to a Vso of 45 kts without stating whether it is ASIR, IAS, CAS etc. The CAO refers to the CASR dictionary which has a simple definition of Vso without stating whether it is ASIR, IAS, CAS etc. That dictionary refers to the USA FARs section 1.2 which has the same definition also without stating whether it is ASIR, IAS, CAS etc. So, nowhere do the rules state that your Vso has to be CAS so I guess you get to choose yourself? Fit an ASI which has lots of error in the right direction and demonstrate it shows less than 45 at the stall.

Refer ERSA for alternatives to NAIPS.