Roundsounds

You could, but why go to the expense? The Sydney basin only has The Oaks available for FTFs, should The Oaks become unavailable where would RAAus aircraft operate near Sydney? Wedderburn is not friendly from a terrain perspective and they don't allow any commercial ops there. Camden is class D, an FTF can operate from there with a load of restrictions, but as soon as the pilot gains their RPC they are no longer allowed to fly solo without going the RPL route. By contrast, the gliding clubs operate in class D at Camden without the same restrictions imposed on RAAus pilots. The gliding guys have a certificate (not a licence) and self certify medicals - ie the same as RAAus pilots. In fact, an RAAus pilot can join Gliding Australia and do a powered glider conversion with Gliding Australia's equivalent to an FTF, then fly solo / carry pax in a motor glider at Camden in Class D without needing a class 2 medical, GA licence and ARF.

Camel, the final Answer from the FAQs you quoted mentions "recommendation for Type Training". I don't read the ops manual as saying this is a recommendation, rather being a requirement. I would suggest a Type is a type (eg Jabiru J170, Skyfox Gazelle etc) not a class, group or fitted equipment (eg high performance, two stroke, glass cockpit, spoilers etc.)

Don, if you want a hand to put forward a submission I'd be happy to assist.

There is provision to make a written submission to the Ops Mgr for approval to fly a type without an endorsement: (e) provide written proof to the Operations Manager of an appropriate recognised qualification.

I had a discussion with Ops when ver 7 was still in draft suggesting they go the GA way, but the intent is training on each aircraft type. eg If you learn in a Jabiru and now want to fly a Technam Sierra - you need an "endorsement" irrespective of your experience. This change is the result of several accidents involving early / first flights on a new type and reportedly involved pilots with little and lots of experience. The sooner the incident database is up and running the better, cause you'll be able to prove / disprove these assumptions.

Are you saying CASA is denying RAAus RPC holders access to class D airspace on the basis of them being "cowboys"? I would have said it is a legacy of the days of Skycraft Scouts etc and the incompatibility of mixing with GA aircraft. Existing rules allow an RAAus pilot to come and go from airports like Albury, mixing with RPT, when the Tower is closed but not when it's open. How does that stack up from a safety perspective, which is CASA's purpose in life.

Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but..... TYPE TRAINING (AEROPLANE) 18. An applicant undertaking training for a specific aeroplane type must: (a) hold the appropriate aeroplane Group rating; and (b) complete theory training to the satisfaction of an RA-Aus Examiner; and © undertake flight training to meet the competency requirements of Unit 1.11 of the RA-Aus Syllabus of Flight Training, in the type of aeroplane sought; and (d) pass a flight check with an RA-Aus Examiner; or (e) provide written proof to the Operations Manager of an appropriate recognised qualification. I recall having a discussion with Op's about this when version 7 of the Op's Manual was being drafted. See section 2.05-9

Under CASR Part 61 you can't just jump into an aircraft in the class your licence allows you to fly (eg single engine aeroplane) with appropriate design feature endorsements. 61.385 the General Competency rule applies. 61.385 Limitations on exercise of privileges of pilot licences— general competency requirement (1) The holder of a pilot licence is authorised to exercise the privileges of the licence in an aircraft only if the holder is competent in operating the aircraft to the standards mentioned in the Part 61 Manual of Standards for the class or type to which the aircraft belongs, including in all of the following areas: (a) operating the aircraft’s navigation and operating systems; (b) conducting all normal, abnormal and emergency flight procedures for the aircraft; © applying operating limitations; (d) weight and balance requirements; (e) applying aircraft performance data, including take-off and landing performance data, for the aircraft. So you need to be familiar with the operating procedures and handling characteristics of the particular aeroplane before launching. The rules don't say how you do this, a person with a broad range of type experience may be able to read up then go flying. Whereas a less experienced person might need some dual instruction. RAAus require training on all new types, even more restrictive than GA.

I know this thread is old, but thought I'd fire it up again. Has anyone considered there is another RAAO who's pilot are permitted to operate in controlled airspace, both D and C. Their pilots hold a certificate issued by the RAAO, they self certify their medical and operate in class D regularly, without the same restrictions as RAAus, from Camden - no GA licence or class 2 medical. The RAAO is Gliding Australia (Gliding Federation of Australia), an interesting double standard.

Sadly, probably using the road as a ground reference line.

Instructors over do the "airspeed with elevator" etc thing. An aircrafts performance is determined by power and attitude. Performance includes airspeed, rate of climb or descent and I'd suggest rate of turn too. You need to assess your energy state before making corrections to the approach. Without trying to get too technical, the aircraft has potential energy (height) and kinetic energy (airspeed). You need to assess both factors before you make any corrections. For example, you might be high and slow. So the standard thing would be reduce power to fix high, lower the nose to fix slow - before you know what's going on you're now too low. The better fix would've been to think, ok I'm high but slow - so if I lower the nose to regain airspeed, I'll also fix being too high. There are also a few "armchair flying" exercises I could suggest which might help you get your head around this, the other key is to have a structured scan or work cycle. Flying is a bit like juggling, focus too long on one ball and you'll drop the others.

Instructors over do the "airspeed with elevator" etc thing. An aircrafts performance is determined by power and attitude. Performance includes airspeed, rate of climb or descent and I'd suggest rate of turn too. You need to assess your energy state before making corrections to the approach. Without trying to get too technical, the aircraft has potential energy (height) and kinetic energy (airspeed). You need to assess both factors before you make any corrections. For example, you might be high and slow. So the standard thing would be reduce power to fix high, lower the nose to fix slow - before you know what's going on you're now too low. The better fix would've been to think, ok I'm high but slow - so if I lower the nose to regain airspeed, I'll also fix being too high. There are also a few "armchair flying" exercises I could suggest which might help you get your head around this, the other key is to have a structured scan or work cycle. Flying is a bit like juggling, focus too long on one ball and you'll drop the others.

I'd suggest completing the RPC with a school who train to a standard equivalent / higher than the RPL. Conversion to the RPL should be pretty straight forward. To boost membership by attracting more GA pilots to convert to RAAus the minimum of 5 hours in an RAAus type should be removed for 3 axis and based on competency (a flight review). Should the FR reveal any shortcomings (eg need to develop EFATO skills on low inertia aircraft) then provide whatever training is required. There's nothing to stop the existing 5 hours requirement to be accrued on a couple of Navs, which does little to prove competency.

I'd suggest completing the RPC with a school who train to a standard equivalent / higher than the RPL. Conversion to the RPL should be pretty straight forward. To boost membership by attracting more GA pilots to convert to RAAus the minimum of 5 hours in an RAAus type should be removed for 3 axis and based on competency (a flight review). Should the FR reveal any shortcomings (eg need to develop EFATO skills on low inertia aircraft) then provide whatever training is required. There's nothing to stop the existing 5 hours requirement to be accrued on a couple of Navs, which does little to prove competency.

Sure: https://www.raa.asn.au/school/classic-air/

Sure: https://www.raa.asn.au/school/classic-air/

The Pitts, Yaks 50,52,55 all have a tendency to "fall on their back" due to gyroscopic effect as the aircraft yaws through 180 degrees from the up line to the down line. (ie to the left in the Pitts or right in the Yaks). They also tend to roll in the same direction as the yaw, so in a Pitts you'd have full left rudder, right aileron and forward stick. Once the aircraft starts to accelerate it now has the correct control inputs for an inverted spin entry, which often occurs early on in conversion training if these control inputs are held for too long. Pilots who aerobat aircraft like the Tiger, Chippy, C150/152, Citabria tend to be taught to reduce power as the nose of the aircraft approaches the horizon and therefore don't experience this. When I was instructing in the Pitts S2A / Yak 52 I spent a great deal of time training people in recovery from inverted spins entered from a stall turn, the entry often occurred unintentionally.

The Pitts, Yaks 50,52,55 all have a tendency to "fall on their back" due to gyroscopic effect as the aircraft yaws through 180 degrees from the up line to the down line. (ie to the left in the Pitts or right in the Yaks). They also tend to roll in the same direction as the yaw, so in a Pitts you'd have full left rudder, right aileron and forward stick. Once the aircraft starts to accelerate it now has the correct control inputs for an inverted spin entry, which often occurs early on in conversion training if these control inputs are held for too long. Pilots who aerobat aircraft like the Tiger, Chippy, C150/152, Citabria tend to be taught to reduce power as the nose of the aircraft approaches the horizon and therefore don't experience this. When I was instructing in the Pitts S2A / Yak 52 I spent a great deal of time training people in recovery from inverted spins entered from a stall turn, the entry often occurred unintentionally.

Kermode's Flight Without Formulae is also a great reference.

There's a nice Champ for hire at Wangaratta for $150/ hour solo (Classic Air). It's a fair drive or train trip, but it's apart half the price of a Citabria. There's also a freshly refurbished DeHavilland Chipmunk at Albury, contact Hazair.

Try this recovery method in a stall turn in a Pitts, you'll find yourself in an inverted spin 9 out of 10 times. You need to install the wings, which may require back stick.

I'm pretty sure some of the factors quoted here do not alter the indicated stall speed. ie: wind velocity, air temperature, air density and I'm not sure what is meant by aircraft performance? The critical one missed is load factor, it tends to be the killer of pilots who blindly rely on IAS as a stall predictor. I believe ALL instructors should hold an aerobatic flight activity endorsement. There's no other training that will allow you to fully appreciate how an aeroplane can stall at any IAS and attitude or how to recover from the stall, or more importantly the impending stall. The number of instructors I've flown with who are tentative (or simply scared) of stalling is frightening. I believe the stick position is by far the best stall warning. Every pilot should stall a new type when converting, including clean, landing configuration, power on, power off, level flight, turning and various combinations of these configurations.

Nowra is another tax payer owned facility which is under-utilised and over controlled.

VH or RAAus rego?

Unfortunately this doesn't always make it from the text book to real life. There are still many "wrong lever" incidents occurring despite the unique shapes of various knobs and levers. Nothing like looking, thinking, then actioning. The trim and carb heat knobs on Citabrias are significantly different in size and subtly differ in shape, yet errors still occur.