Mazda

It was a Pitts S1 Bluey, I believe the pilot was OK.

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.

Shags it is harder with a family as some of the options (like heading to the outback to work) can become problematic, but the CPL can still be done. 30 is not old! I know a guy who started flying at 30 and he's now an Airbus pilot.

Simon the problem is that some people don't want to employ low time CPLs, whether 150 or 200 hours. I don't know that most schools run a separate 200 hour CPL "course" as such, it's just meeting the minimum requirements and standard then do the test. To be employable it is good to have an instrument rating or an instructor rating, but think about it the other way too. If you go to a school as a student, do you want an instructor with perhaps 200 hours total time? Or someone with a bit more experience? Whether you do a 150 or 200 hour CPL there is room in there for some extras.

I'm pleased to hear you are OK Dexter!

Welcome Kevin, that Aerochute sounds like fun. Pitt Town is a nice part of the world.

Facthunter it sounds as though Shags hasn't done PPL navs yet, and most schools follow an approved 150 hour training syllabus for everyone in the early stages. Shags if you let the school know they can make sure you comply with all the requirements. If a PPL technically speaking from can be done in 40 hours, that leaves 110 hours minimum (or 160 hours min) to work towards CPL. The 150 hour syllabus doesn't mean you must do your test at exactly 150 hours, it is a minimum requirement.

Mazda agreed with Planey because not everyone had a pink sunset and ridiculously awesome start to the day. Some of us (or maybe just one) spent a fitful night outside in a sleeping bag with a broken zipper, trying to entice two pussies. One was taunting, crying forlornly, the other had shot through, or perhaps been shot by unkind forumites. Sleeping out revealed the presence of not one possy, but two (as opposed to the two pussies), who seemed intent on stealing the bird food. As dawn broke the lorikeets arrived to find their food had been stolen by a posse of possums, but like a good packet of Tim Tams their feeders seem to somehow have an endless supply of tasty treats. As pussy feeding time came around, the forlorn crying black pussy, seemingly destined to be the first ever cat skeleton to be found on a roof, turned up at the door ready for breakfast, without even an escort of friendly firemen. Alas though, the exotic "indoor girl" Abyssinian pussy was gone, and has not returned.

Shags that is true in theory but in reality most schools will do the same training in the early stages, so all you need to do is notify them you are heading for a 150 hour CPL and they will make sure you complete the 150 hour syllabus. I know of people who have done the 150 hour CPL after starting out planning to do a PPL. Just advise the schoolf of your intentions.

I haven't flown the Jab but in general use flap as required. If planning a short field take off or landing I would use the POH settings and technique. I'm trying to get my head around Dog's runway 27 landing though. How long was the strip Dog? The 30 knot headwind would have meant you didn't need much room, manual flaps work well, and having a bit of power on would have assisted in a short field landing. There are often obstacles associated with short fields, sometimes requiring a steeper approach, but I can't work out what the problem was?

Shags look at that pre-PPL. The 150 hour syllabus is assumed to be from the start, with ALL exams done at certain times during your training, including BAK.

Who is accountable for starting this?

Shags do check the rules on when you need to do theory exams if you are aiming for the 150 hour CPL. Ask your instructor and if he or she is a bit vague about it, either look it up yourself or get your instructor to do it. Otherwise you will need another 50 hours. The time for theory exams applies right from the start, not just the CPL theory, so it is important to check this. The assumption is that the 150 CPL is an integrated training syllabus. Also, if you are aiming at 150 hour CPL, make sure your school knows so they can use the 150 hour syllabus, plus you will save money as you don't pay GST for training towards CPL.

A lot of airports have preferred runways. If there's no wind no traffic, use the preferred runway. If there's no wind and there is traffic, the traffic would most likely conform to the preferred runway anyway, but use the same runway as the traffic. If there's wind, use the runway into wind, which most likely will be the one in use by other traffic.

I've been to the Sir Hubert Wilkins Cottage, it is something to see. It's very small!

Shags how far have you gone so far and how many hours do you have? If you are heading for the 200+ hour CPL you could get stuck into the theory and get your PPL and CPL exams done. If you are going for the 150 hour CPL check the rules on that because you can't do all the exams, they must be done at certain times during your training. You can do much of your CPL training in a non-CPL aircraft. You will need to do your test in a 120+ knot CSU aircraft, but you don't have to do all your training in one.

That's why ADS-B hasn't been mandated. There is no world standard yet. The US actually proposes two separate systems, one for high level, one for low level. The planned model for the US low level one does NOT use Mode S extended squitter, which means US pilots will need both a transponder and ADS-B. However the US hasn't mandated ADS-B for quite some years and things may change. In parts of Europe there is yet another system. The problem is the US manufacturs most equipment, and if we end up with a different system, there won't be any mass produced units at a reasonable price because we don't have the market. Also beware of ways to display traffic because there are standards for approved ADS-B and so far the approved "in" units are tens of thousands of dollars - if you can find one.

I just paid as I flew. It takes time but you can get there. Schools might offer hours for help too, if you can take bookings, refuel aircraft, paint the briefing rooms etc. Now if you are talking helicopters that does get expensive, and that's why it is cheaper to get fixed wing first then convert.

That is not quite true about ADS-B. Not everyone can pick up the signal and display traffic at all, they require ADS-B "in" which is very expensive and not like TCAS at all as it does not provide an audio signal with traffic advisory or resolution advisory due to patent issues. If the other aircraft had ADS-B "in" and happened to look at the screen at that particular moment they might see you. Yes, ATC would see you if you were in coverage and could pass you on as traffic, but it is a misconception that if you "have ADS-B" you can see all other traffic.

It comes down to risk management. What is the risk being addressed? Are most accidents caused by structural failure, or things like controlled flight into terrain or loss of control at low level? Would you be better off investing the money on this, or in additional training (such as EMT or some instrument time), aircraft maintenance or upgrading equipment? I suppose it could be a good thing if everyone had loads of spare money - why not add another safety device if you can afford it? However it might not do much to save you and it is probably better off spending money on other things first. The extra weight means less fuel, which could actually reduce safety. In many cases it probably isn't viable. Thinking about aeros I can't see even where it would go in something like a Pitts, and I don't know too many aeros pilots who would spend all that money in order to gain weight & lose performance.

Hi Jase, welcome back to flying. It really won't take you long to get used to the 172. The R is a fairly new model so should be well equipped, probably better equipped than the old warriors. Differences? Firstly, the high wing will mean you cannot see approaching traffic on final, you will have to stop at an angle at the holding point. You won't be able to see through the turn due to the wing either, which means you won't see the runway during turns in the circuit. Choose a reference point off your wingtip before you turn, and when doing circuits maybe set the heading bug to the runway direction, which will help you in the circuit. Also remember to lift the wing before you turn, because you won't be able to see traffic. The 172R glides pretty well and doesn't have the old barn door flaps that the older 172s did, so if you end up high on approach, you might not get in. The best way to lose height in them if you need to is to slow down (a lot). You can also get the first stage of flap out early, it's outside the white arc. Your instructor will go through this. They are a bit more responsive than the old Warriors but they are a bit more of a handful in a crosswind, so try to get some good crosswind training. They don't like a fast approach and they prefer a slightly higher nose attitude. I'm splitting hairs here though, they are not vastly different. Oval circuits are good. Military pilots tend to use them, and twin pilots often do. It won't take long to adjust to that. Just be aware when looking for traffic that aircraft may also be flying a rectangular circuit so look out for them. Which school are you going to at Archerfield?

Owen I've just been to Kununurra, beautiful flying country, you'll love it. Please keep us informed so we know where you are.

Danger areas are just somewhere to be careful and look out. Training areas are classified as danger areas - have a look at your VTC. No clearance is required to enter a danger area, just keep a good look out. Restricted areas require clearance for GA, I'm not sure if RA aircraft are able to obtain a clearance. Prohibited areas mean you can't go in at all.

If you read the supporting documentation there are quite a few people who can certify it for you, it's explained in the bit about how to fill out the form. You might find people around the airport who can certify it for you. Meanwhile, fill in your ASIC renewal and get that underway!

If anyone is there today and wants to catch up give me a call or send a text. 0435 397 490