boingk

Duly noted and understood prior. My comment was solely aimed at the licenses themselves. Cheers - boingk

Main difference there is that you still have to be retrained in flight, 2-axis for HGFA vs 3-axis for RAA/PPL Not knocking microlights, but RAA is a lot more similar to PPL than HGFA is to RAA in my opinion. - boingk

Its not to say that you'd have to brown-nose your instructor or anything, but I've certainly seen it in the commercial world of aviation. Definitely try RAA before going PPL. You might find its all you need. Check out the classifieds page for craft up for sale - for $20,000 or so you can pick something up that seats two and cruises at 80 to 100kts. Sure beats an athsmatic Cessna 150 and for about half the price. Cheers - boingk

Like to do maintenance? Go RAA, get your 'Level Two' certificate and then pretty much maintain the aircraft yourself. Tyres, pads, oil, filters, plugs - you name it almost. I started out with a view to get my commercial license and eventually Air Transport license with a commercial carrier. I stopped that some months ago as it became clear it was an unrealistic view, or perhaps my expectations were unrealistic. I was seeing people who were hating their jobs and getting paid peanuts, brown-nosing the bosses and corporate structures just so they could get ahead. Doesn't sound like much of a dream to me. I converted to RAA and bought an airplane and love it... but cannot really afford it currently so am doing a tactical reassessment of my needs; I'm downgrading. Love the plane, can't really justify the cost. I would recommend doing your RAA license (you can convert to PPL later if you want) and seeing how you like it. For a budget of $25,000 (Australian Dollars) you can easily get fully RAA trained and buy a nice craft of your own to fly in. There are many good, well performing craft in the $15,000 to $20,000 range. Just how I'd go about it, were I to start again from scratch. Cheers - boingk

Can people stop posting the same link without reading the thread and its posts of several identical links? Also, yeah, if the paperwork is up the shit then I wouldn't be surprised. The fact that people have been looking up defunt/crashed/unregoed aircraft that are *still on the f***ing register* might have been a bit of a giveaway, come to think of it. Sweet demon jesus, someone hand me a powered paraglider, a train ticket to the nearest HGFA training centre and a case of VB wouldja? - boingk

*chewing* Say, this pie tastes alright. - boingk

Sounds like BS to me, something along the lines of the following emails I often get: "6 easy tips to eliminate belly fat..." "Wanton women living next door are lonely for you!@!!" "Hotmail iz running out of email adresez, claim yorz nauw!" "Look!ng for m0r3 l3ngth? Make h3r throb for your m4nly m34t tod4y!" In other words... keep on the straight and narrow. I'll be flying tomorrow and I expect many other will be to. Enough of this rumor-mill highschool-locker-grade BS nonsense. See you in the skies gentlemen. - boingk

Cheers turbo. And yes, degree for sure. Mind you, if you're going to do something then surely its worth doing right? I mean, if you're relying on it in the air then you don't want it bodged... right?? No flexible pitot tubes, PVC fuel line or clip ties in my future, I can tell you that much. - boingk

True, but then again its a matter of what you feel comfortable with and whats safe. I know people who think Dash Eight's are scary! I'd wager my Minicab, somone's 912-powered trike or even a 95.10 with decent range and cruise would all be up for the task. If you're thinking of doing it with minimal fuel reserve and in a craft thats 'marginal' at best then no, I wouldn't think its a good idea either. Save it for the paddocks :) - boingk

My consideration was that, at the very worst, it'd make a good passenger headset. In the end I just got a dog from the Flightschool haha... - boingk

Yeah gotta love shameless plugs haha, figured I'd have a go for a change. Thanks for the kind words! I'd never flown tailwheel before I bought it, but got a few hours with the local CFI and he signed me off. I took it easy for about 15 flying hours and a lot of landings, then recently did a Goulburn - Bathurst trip and really gelled with the aircraft... bad thing to do considering I'm selling but, hey, I love flying! Basically its more or less like learning to taxi and land again. It flies just like any other aircraft. Once you get used to it you find its a pussycat. Cheers - boingk

I asked this question to myself after I set aside a budget. I had a few things I really wanted so I set them on the table. Here they are: 15L/hr fuel burn or less 70kt cruise or better Twin seat preferred $20k or less That gave me a rough inkling as to what was 'okay' and what was 'not okay' in terms of what I'd be happy with. I worked around it and ended up with my Minicab - a lovely little twin-seat aircraft cruising at 80kt and budgeting 15L/hr. By 'cross country' I'll assume a range of 250 nautical miles or more, or roughly 500km as the crow flies - you'll need to factor in your cruise speed and fuel duration with reserve for this one when making a judgement. Enclosed cabin is nice, but I'd also get opinions as theres 'enclosed' and 'eNclOSed', the poor cousin of the first. That definitely applies to some aircraft such as Gazelles, where although they are enclosed they are in fact somewhat draughty. I remember getting my nav ticket in one and not being able to feel my feet for about 20min afterwards because of the cold! Your endorsements may also play a part. You can always get endorsed on your own twin-seat aircraft (and in fact I'd recommend a CFI or other experienced pilot guide you through the first 5~10 hours) but you may want something familiar. Now for a shameless plug - buy my Minicab! Its a smart little low-winged craft with sturdy taildragger gear and a conservative 3.5hr range at 80kt cruise after a 45min reserve is accounted for. Two seats, luggage rack, shiny new prop and runs well on either mogas or avgas so long as you put valve seat lubricant in for the rebuilt Continental A-65 engine. Cheers - boingk

Not sure what the fuss is about - people go on and on about how they love low altitude operations, or even how they like cruising along at a perfectly legal 1000ft AGL.To me those are both examples of a hazardous flight as they don't allow enough margin for error. All crossing the Strait entails is that you get a margin of error under you (ie plenty of alt) and go across. How long has your longest flight been? Is your navigation up to scratch? Is your aircraft well maintained and not nearing service intervals? If you're indicating the right answers to all those then I wouldn't be too put off. By the by, I haven't done this one yet so take all of my advice as purely tounge-in-cheek. - boingk

Sounds very handy when you put it that way, Herm. To be honest I haven't investigated the higher end headsets as its, for me at least, simply another thing that I can't afford or justify. Maybe later on I'll get a 'good' set but for now I'm selling my Minicab and on the lookout for a 95.10 regoed 'beast'. Cheers - boingk

You're apparently legally allowed to fly there RAA, but I'd want to go via one of the islands. Make sure you read your ERSA (aka 'Sky Bible') before heading off as it will tell you the appropriate minimum height restrictions to maintain radio contact (4000ft I believe). I would want a high level overfly trip of around 8,000ft to ensure you have a large margin for error should you suffer engine failure. You would ideally want to overfly one of the several islands between Tasmanian and the mainland - either main islands have substantial national parks and conservation areas, and as such have minimum flyover heights and horizontal distances. I would read your ERSA and either mark or copy appropriate pages and highlight any necessary information. From memory minimum flyover is 2500ft. Again, I would want to be at 8000ft for the crossing to give safety margin. Cheers - boingk

All good valid points and, no, the RA-900 isn't ANR. Then again, I haven't had a problem on it in either Rotax 912 or Continental powered aircraft.As far as fit is concerned I have a somewhat large, tall head with ears on the larger size. The RA seems to suit this fine with generous adjustment and good earpiece sizing. On the compatibility of the headset with music, all it uses is a simple 3.5mm to 3.5mm lead so anything you can listen to with headphones is compatible. I've used several types of phones and even an ageing (2005 vintage?) iPod with a black-and-white LCD screen. All worked fine, some slightly louder than others. Worst was my very cheap Huawei smartphone (RIP) which was somewhat quiet, although still audible, and didn't get great reception for radio. For mobiles while flying... I'm up there to escape. If you want to call me then leave a message and I'll get back to you. I'd also rather not have the added distraction of a mobile whilst flying - can you imagine having the ringtone go off while on final or, worse yet, a forced go-around? If you're close enough seb7701, I'd be more than willing to fly/ride over and show you the headset. I really do think they're a good bit of kit, especially for the money. And no, I'm not affiliated in any way! Cheers - boingk

Rugged Air RA-900. After using the field Air/Sigtronic headsets and some high level David Clarke's I ordered some RA-900's sight unseen from a supplier in the states. They're comfortable for over 2 hours flying, well made and have a few bells and whistles like full-flex boom, stereo/mono switch, independent audio adjustment,, PTT on the left earpiece and a 3.5mm jack-in for inflight music. I regularly use my phone to give me radio/music inflight and, even at max music volume (easy to listen to while cruising in a Gazelle or C150) on the phone, the radio calls from other planes are easily heard over the top. Love it. Big selling point for me was the price of about AU$190 shipped. For the comfort, noise protection and usability on offer its hard to go wrong with them and I recommend them to anyone looking for a first headset or perhaps one with a few more bells and whistles. Heres the link: http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Rugged-Air-RA900-Aviation-Pilot-Headset-Aircraft-NEW-/230404123790?pt=Motors_Aviation_Parts_Gear&hash=item35a527ec8e Cheers - boingk EDIT: Now cheaper at around AU$165 shipped due to our dollar.

Floats vertically so strobe is above water and antenna vertical. Part of the reason I bought it - simple no BS design that was affordable and had good battery life. Cheers - boingk EDIT: Just realised my above post should say "121.5MHz for localized homing".

True, but I'd rather a legit beacon than a bushwalker style pocket model that may not broadcast as far or for as long. Another point is that your craft probably won't fly any different with an extra half kilo. God knows most of us have at least a few to lose from ourselves, anyway! - boingk (eating banana + muffin for healthy lunch)

Currently have the non-GPS GME ELT - the GME MT400. Good size, has a lanyard and comes with a bracket you can fix to the aircraft. Floats in water and transmits for up over 48 hours once activated. Has the new 406MHz as well as 201.5MHz for localized homing. Weighs 550g by itself, or 650g with bracket. Easy to grab and throw in the cross country kit bag. Was very affordable compared to some beacons. Never had to use it in an emergency so can't comment on that but seems very easy to use. Cheers - boingk

Nice craft you have there but could not see the development of cumulus other than was already there. Cheer- boingk

Well said Sapphire - I have often abandoned a flying occasion because of feeling average. Once was with a procpective buyer of the craft was flying because I got a bad mag check - turned out it was fine and a full throttle run down the strip cleared it - but I'd like to be better safe than sorry. Also landed Gazelles and C150's in max cosswind components without issues... if you're claiming other factors in accidents then you are c;ear;y inexperienced or simply not up to it. Cheer - boingk

Could be for CG or cowling reasons - possibly availability? We're talking about the UL Power direct drive aircooled job here right? I'd struggle to see any other reasons than that as from all accounts (if its the engine I'm thinking of) its a good engine. - boingk

Good old first world problems... - boingk