Roundsounds

That's correct, without the Nav endorsement you simply need to be competent in basic IF but you will need 2hours plus competency for the Nav. What are your plans for the RPL? If it's to allow you to operate an RAAus aircraft from CTR, you don't need the Nav, just CTR which you can do as part of prep for the flight review.

I was taught / teach in an upright spin to "progressively ease the stick forward until the rotation stops, then centre the rudder, level the wings and ease out of the dive". The Piper Tomahawk AFM says something like rapidly apply nose down elevator. The Yak 50/52 will quickly transition into an inverted spin if you maintain forward stick after rotation ceases. The moral of the story is to follow the manufacturers published recovery!

the last Cessna 172 I flew didn't have a choke, is this a new option?

An excellent document, thank you for sharing. The Chipmunk is a lovely aeroplane to fly, aerobat and spin. You just need to follow the manufacturer's spin recovery technique and should be exposed to miss-handled manoeuvres during aerobatic training / checkout.

A couple of further thoughts: 1. I'm a firm believer that the name of an organisation is important. How would the average person on the street have any clue what RAA or RAAus or even the lengthy version was? A new name / logo would certainly help in promotion of the organisation. 2. Affordability - setting up a "syndicate kit" would make purchasing / maintaining an aircraft more achievable. Maybe RAA could seek input from syndicates as to what does / doesn't work in syndicates and put together a set of guidelines and written agreement members could use. It's not just the initial purchase cost, but the ongoing insurance, hangar etc which makes aircraft ownership difficult. Split it 5 ways and it's way more affordable and you have a bunch of like minded people to fly with.

Provided RAAus continue down the path of effective self regulation (self auditing, improvement and learning from past mistakes) I see a strong future for the organisation. GA will continue down the path of demise, CASR Part 61/141 will see to that. RAAus need to make the transition from GA as easy as possible, minimal / no exams and competency based along the lines of the RPL transition (ie issue an RPC, same endorsements as GA licence, type transition training based on competency and a flight review). There needs to be a greater emphasis on education rather than regulation, this needs to be guided by the safety stats once they can be analysed properly. This is an opportunity RAAus needs to grab and run with now. The technical side of things needs to be sorted before any increase in MTOW is considered. The Tech Manual is way out of date and not relevant to the modern types entering service. There's no objective assessment, recognition or training path for maintainers, this will stop the heavier aircraft being accepted. CASA has been seeking this for many years, they will have zero interest in weight increases until RAAus can demonstrate a proper system of maintenance. This system should accommodate the range of types operated, including the builders own schedule to the manufacturers requirements, there's not a one size fits all system and it will be difficult to create that without some members being adversely affected. So, the future of RAAus looks good provided it's managed properly.

NF, thanks for that. It's a sign of the times CASA having to publish a document to explain what's in the reg's! Why people don't just read the AIP etc is beyond me. By the omission of the [instructions] note in AIP ENR 12.3 the intent may be lost and pilots only reading the guide will embarrass themselves at places like Albury, Coffs etc. Nev, it surprises me that you'd do that? There are vertical tolerances factored into airspace design. You're best to fly the hemispherical levels rather than fly random vertical offsets.

AIP ENR 12.3.2 Note 2 says if the controller responds with your call sign (and perhaps instructions) you have established two way comm's and therefore may enter the class D airspace. It seems the old GAAP airport towers have modified the Class D procedures to match GAAP by simply acknowledging your "inbound" call and consider that a clearance. However the original Class D controllers continue to provide a traditional clearance before taxy or when inbound. It'd be easier for newbies (and instructors training students) to standardise class D procedures. Guys I trained at Albury would find Camden's procedures odd and vice versa.

NF, where are you quoting this shortened procedure from? AIP 12.3 still includes instructions as part of establishing comm's.

Lots of misleading ill-informed information being posted here. To answer the question about flying suitable RAA aircraft in "controlled airspace" you need to first establish the type of airspace. Class D, does not require a transponder, Class C does. A pilot operating the aircraft will be required a valid RPC (RAAus issued certificate) this allows them to pilot the RAAus rego aircraft and a minimum of a valid CASA issued RPL (valid includes a medical - minimum RAMPC and flight review) with appropriate airspace endorsements. (ie CTR, class D for class D, CTR class C for class C, CTA to transit Class C). There is no minimum IF hour requirement for an RPL, unless you want to add a cross country endorsement, you just need to meet the RPL standard. This can all be done relatively easily and without costing an arm and a leg. I recently guided one of my students through this process and assisted the GA school with their understanding of the requirements. If a GA school starts talking written exams and multiple hours of IF time to convert your RPC, walk away as they either don't understand the reg's or are trying to con you.

I had fun doing Rod's CPL training several years ago.

A real shame we can't do like the USA at air shows like Oshkosh - no barriers at all. The local WHS zealots will ensure we don't do that here, it's only a matter of time before attendees will be required to wear highvis vests, steel capped thongs and hearing protection!

I agree with facthunter, it sets an example for those not educated about prop's. I'd bet good money that you've had to ask parents to stop their children from playing with the prop on your model 12 at air shows/Flyinns where they have airside access.

There's something odd about that video, there's a person standing behind the right wing. He doesn't react at all to the engine firing and there's no acknowledgement between him and the pilot when the pilot goes to the cockpit. There also seems to be someone in the pilot seat?

The common theme seems to be receive proper training before handling propellors. The thread started with concerns over untrained people being positioned within striking distance of propellors for photography purposes. I totally agree this practice is dangerous, but it is self perpetuating - pics of people draped over props set the standard for others. I will not allow these types of pics to be taken, my preference is to have pax stand behind wing / strut for souvenir shots.

Hmmm, I can't say I recall the Hume Highway being so close to Goulburn aerodrome.

Propellors are like guns, when handled by persons with care, knowledge and proper training they are safe. I've been handling propellors, including hand starting for over 30 years without incident. I was trained properly and treat prop's with the due caution and respect they deserve. I pass on the knowledge and skills to my students, not all learn to hand start, but all learn how to handle a propellor safely.

Timely CASA article released today: http://www.flightsafetyaustralia.com/2014/03/properly-clear-of-the-prop/

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/91-42d.pdf

Playing around with landing lights which are installed in close proximity to a carburettor full of fuel doesn't seem like a real good idea to me. It maybe worth running this by the aircraft manufacturer to see if they have already an approved LED alternative? Given the aircraft is an LSA certified type maintained in accordance with the manufacturers maintenance manual, anything other than approved components may invalidate insurance.

Spot on approach. I also note appropriate weather info on the reverse along with aerodrome diagrams and essential info (freq, elevation and any special procedures/cautions) I jot the various bits of info i'd normally record on a flight plan on the chart, very much a less paper cockpit. A method I've adopted having flown with a few ex RAAF trained pilots.

Totally agree with your comments, I have an issue with how most instructors train incipient spin / spin entry. Usually it will be from a power off, wings level stall with rudder input at the point of stall. The most effective way is to simulate an uncoordinated turn. (after an appropriate briefing as to why you're doing this) the typical killer is the overshot turn onto final. Instructors stress minimum bank angles on the final turn, so blogs uses a little rudder to "help" the turn, holds off bank resulting in a skidding turn. As the result of an increase in drag the aircraft slows, gets nose heavy so blogs holds back pressure - these are the warning signs of an impending spin entry. Do this at a safe altitude, in an appropriately certified aeroplane and instructor and you will find the penny drops and the pilot will be aware of the consequences of a skidding turn. A similar exercise can be done in a climbing turn, in a Citabria, Decathlon, Cessna 150/2 aerobat, Tiger or Chippy you will lose at least 700'. The added advantage of the climbing turn is you need to close the throttle, centralise the ailerons before identifying the direction of rotation and applying appropriate rudder, followed by elevator input to start the recovery.

Picking up a wing with rudder is one of the worst myths ever promoted! Picking up a wing prior to the stall is effected with coordinated use of aileron and rudder, at / beyond the point of stall only use sufficient rudder to prevent yaw in the direction of the dropped wing. To pick up a stalled wing with rudder is likely to result in a spin in the direction of the rudder input.

The key is to recognise the early signs of an impending spin and take action to avoid entry. The typical unintentional spin will occur at a height where recovery cannot be made. Unless you're going to do aerobatics spin recovery training is not really of much use, however a keen awareness of what an impending spin looks/feels like and what to do to fix the situation is critical for all pilots. To develop the awareness of what an impending spin entry looks like requires actual spin entry, the instructor needs to place emphasis on this phase, not necessarily the recovery. Having said that, might as well get the trainee to do the recovery.

spin awareness training is a must for all pilots, it's in the syllabus for both GA and RAA. How it's delivered is the variable, whether that be a discussion or actual spin recovery training. In my opinion, the best way to provide useful spin awareness training in an appropriate aircraft type by duly qualified instructor.