Roundsounds

Knowing the pilot involved, I would doubt it.

Happy flyer, agree on the I/F times with reference to a Navigation Endorsement. You can complete 1 hour in a suitable simulator and 1 hour in flight. There are plenty of suitable aircraft on the RAA register for delivering basic I/F training, just need to train the instructors, amend the Ops Manual and gain CASA blessing. If done properly this exposure to I/F would provide enough skills to keep things upright whilst doing a 180 degree turn to get out of IMC, but more importantly demonstrate to pilots I/F is a skill requiring way more than 2 hours instruction to master and would deter flight in IMC. This would also lead to a simpler transition to the GA RPL. I'm quite confident that RAA pilots would continue to fly under RAA should they convert to GA. The costs/regulations would see to this, I would see the main reason to go GA would be to gain access to CTA and extra seats.

With reference to the simulated instrument flight, there are no minimum hours stipulated under Part 61 for an RPL. All you will need to do is demonstrate proficiency, how you gain the skills is not legislated. It's worth reading the MOS to determine what you are required to demonstrate proficiency. With reference to the English language proficiency, CASA delegates (ATO's, Flight Examiners or what ever qualification the person assessing you holds) can only certify to Level 6. You need to be assessed by a qualified linguist for a level 4 standard (ie level 4 is more difficult to assess - a bit like the downwind 05/36 example).

http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/news/latest_releases?sq_content_src=%2BdXJsPWh0dHBzJTNBJTJGJTJGZWJpenByZC5wb2xpY2UubnN3Lmdvdi5hdSUyRm1lZGlhJTJGNDQwNTIuaHRtbCZhbGw9MQ%3D%3D

djpacro, I would've put up the link to the IS28 Flight and Maintenance manual, but I was kicked off the site for adding links to posts previously. As Happyflyer says, a google search for IS28 Flight Manual will find it - go to page 4.10 (page 42 of the document) to find spinning. I've spun lots of aircraft types, but never one recommending pro-spin aileron during the entry, maybe something lost in the translation? I find some of the Yak POH translations amusing... Yak 18T manual - "no cadets allowed on the settee when performing acrobatics" or the Yak50 series "leaving the aircraft in flight" - "firstly, put aside any warm feelings you have for the airplane"

The IS28 Flight and Maintenance manual (available on gliding dot com dot au) states pro spin aileron input is required "when rotation and wing and nose stall occur". It further states "the glider does not perform controlled spin with crossed controls". A bit unconventional, but it's their train set so they know best.

The VH-CMC listed is the same one built / flown by Clive Canning and is very good hands. The aircraft is usually hangared at an ALA near Wangaratta or in Temora.

OME - I acknowledge this thread is asking about stat's on the most likely phase of flight to encounter a stall, however a stall could occur in any phase should the pilot allow it. Your best defence is to receive thorough training in the recognition of an impending stall and recovery at that stage. I am fortunate enough to instruct both RA-Aus and GA and often have the opportunity to train relatively high time pilots. I make a habit of reviewing their logbook before flying with them and often encounter people who's total stall training consists of a single flight of less than one hour. This is usually reflected in their ability to recover from a stall during the type training I do with them, conversely the pilots who have multiple stalling exercises during their initial training are usually quite competent in stall recovery. If you haven't received the proper instruction then please do yourself a favour and seek it. It would be difficult for pilots to judge whether their slow flight / stall recovery training was to a suitable standard, as a guide I have pasted an extract from the Flight Instructor's Manual below. If you don't t feel your training followed these guidelines, or you feel under confident, please do something about it. Stall awareness and ability to recover should be a skill equal to / better than to any other phase of flight. 09 STALLING AIM To teach the student the feel and behaviour of the aeroplane at low speeds, the symptoms of the stall and how to recover with the minimum loss of height. INSTRUCTIONAL GUIDE It should be emphasized that an inadvertent stall should never occur. The student must become proficient at recognizing the approach to the stall and taking immediate action to prevent it occurring. Although the student must be taught some method of entering the stall, it is emphasized that the method of entry is only incidental to the important task of recognizing the warnings of the impeding stall and the recovery from the developed stall. Even if the particular aeroplane normally does not ‘drop a wing’ during the stall the correct stall recovery technique should be taught from the start. The first demonstration of a stall should show the student that it is not in any way a frightening experience and should rid the pupil of any false ideas of danger and violent sensations. The first stall is best done at the end of the lesson preceding that on which stalling is to be dealt with in detail. Whilst no real instruction should be given during this demonstration, it is advisable to indicate the point of stall and the commencement of recovery. Obviously all the points raised cannot be taught during one flight but must be spread over several. Especially in the early stages watch for symptoms of air sickness and discontinue the exercise if necessary. As you might have gathered, this is a bit of a pet subject of mine! The CASA Flight Instructors Manual (available as a download from the CASA website) was developed from the RAAF WWII publication AP1732a. This manual was used in training pilots in high drag/low inertia aircraft like the Tiger Moth - so has relevance to RA-Aus types.

The way I read it, the training manual was using an example extract from a random manufacturer's maintenance schedule. The manufacturer uses the term "Heart Bolt" to describe what is generically know as a Hang Bolt. The learning from the example was more about where to find information, not about aircraft types or manufacturers?

Suggest a review of CASA AC45-01(2).

On your way past Camden to The Oaks, drop by Camden and visit the various operators there. You might be surprised, granted GA isn't cheap - but likely to be more affordable than the UK. Camden does have a grass strip available (runways 10/28) and a collection of taildraggers, Cessna/Piper and some RAAus types for hire. My recent visit to The Oaks discovered some very sad looking facilities and aircraft. I spent 30 minutes there and was prepared to do my BFR, but despite wandering around the aircraft was not approached by any of the operators.

Dafydd, I'm pretty sure the Sportavia RF-5B Sperber motor gilder was also fitted with a couple if wear strips on the belly. There was one base at my local gliding club several years ago and I recall the strips were used on more than one occasion. The Yak 52 will also run happily on retracted gear, resulting in minor damage to flaps and often the leading edge of a wing will cop a ding from a broken propellor blade.

Surely this is now a wind up? Flying schools not needing an AOC! I'd consider a Part 141 certificate the same thing by a different name.

The only problem with the US system being you must have an AMP (LAME equivalent) do annual inspections on type certified aircraft and there's a 120 hour approved course requirement if you want to maintain your own non type certified aircraft. The system here will work out ok I think, we just need to stay involved in the Part 149 development.

DrZoos, I don't believe my interpretation of the various regulations concerning the licensing requirements regarding operations in CTA to be floored or flawed. As requested by various posters I have quoted CASR, CAO and RAA Ops manual references in support of the argument. With reference to controlled airspace op's maybe CAO 95.55 para's 6.1 and 7.3 would be worth reading. So how about someone start quoting regulations supporting the argument that an RAAus aircraft can be flown by the holder of a Part 61 licence and how a GA instructor may exercise the privileges of their rating in an RAA registered aircraft? When contacting CASA regarding the interpretation of Part 61 matters, you should ask for a Flight Operations Inspector (FOI) or Aviation Safety Advisor. The clerical staff wouldn't have undergone the training course the FOIs and Safety Advisors have. I suggested Teraya as she is both GA and RAA qualified, so has need to search out answers to these types of enquiries. (I listed Teraya's number in an earlier post). As I mentioned previously, I'm not gaining anything from this discussion, I am simply trying to help people from being led up the garden path which could lead to unnecessary expense down the track.

I agree, my statement regarding Section 20AB was incorrect - thank you Dafydd. I cannot understand why the concept of only exercising the privileges of a GA instructor rating in VH registered aircraft and Pilot Certificate / Pilot Instructor in an RAA registered aircraft is so hard to grasp? To be permitted to conduct a flight review for the holder of a Part 61 licence, the instructor must hold a valid GA instructor rating with flight review privileges. A part 61 licence (current rules) does not authorise the holder to operate an RAA registered aircraft (refer CAO 95.55 and RAAus Ops Manual for the requirements to operate / instruct in RAA registered aircraft). The instructor rating is attached to the Part 61 licence, not an RAA Pilot Certificate. The argument of using a Part 61 licence privilege in an RAA aircraft in controlled airspace is not valid, it is simply a recognition of competency and is addressed in CAO 95.55, the pilot is not exercising the privileges of the Part 61 licence. The process of gaining an RPL is as stated by DrZoo's last post. You need to either: - complete the exams, flight training and flight test (61.475(2)) or - if you hold a pilot certificate (in the category of aircraft you wish to gain the RPL) issued by an RAAO you are considered to have met the requirements of 61.475(2). I cannot see this how is a contradiction. Moving on let's assume you now hold an RPL issued on the basis of your RAA pilot certificate, before you exercise it's privileges you will will need to meet the requirements of CASR Division 61.E "Pilot licensing - general limitations and authorisations" This addresses things like medical certificates, flight reviews and recency requirements. An RAA flight review doesn't meet the requirements of 61.400. (I can see this becoming a circular argument! - an RAA pilot instructor is not a person mentioned in 61.400 2© as they do not meet the requirements of CASR sub part 61T) It would be foolish of any GA instructor, given the strict liability nature of Part 61, to "conduct the review in an RAAus registered aircraft, do the paperwork and see what happens" as suggested above. I'm not trying to be difficult here, I work within these regulations on a daily basis and am merely trying to point people in the right direction and avoid them incurring penalties. As suggested earlier, give CASA a call - Teraya Miller is well aware of the requirements as are the other members of the CASA Aviation Safety Advisor team (phone 131757) If they don't immediately have the answer, they will get it and come back to you.

Maybe give Teraya Miller at CASA a call 131757 or 0434 558 088

Dr Zoos, I did quote the regulations backing up my argument in earlier posts, maybe you should sit down and review them and the regulations quoted. Failing that call 131757 and ask to speak to a Flying Operations Inspector or an Aviation Safety Advisor (Teraya Miller would be best as she is both RAA and GA qualified).

CASR 200.025 and CAOs 95.10 and 95.55, para's 5, 6.1(b) and 6.1© state that you must operate an RAAus registered aircraft in accordance with the ops and tech manuals. To operate an RAAus registered aircraft on a CASR Part 61 Licence or Rating is a breach of Section 20AB of the Civil Aviation Act.

King_daniels, the key to the answer is, as I have mentioned previously - in the privileges of the instructor rating. A GA instructor cannot exercise the privileges of their rating in an RAA registered aircraft, nor can an RAA instructor in a GA registered aircraft. Even if the individual instructor holds both ratings, they cannot certify both flight reviews in a single flight. At best, a GA flight review can be accepted by RAA as a high performance flight review as the RAA Operations Manual allows it. There are no provisions in the CAR, CASR or CAO rules to allow an RAA flight review to be accepted as a GA flight review. As I have said, it relies on which "hat" the instructor is wearing, that comes down to under which set of rules the aircraft is operating, which is in turn determined by the aircraft registration. This has always been the case, any instructor signing off both in past years has been doing so incorrectly. (This interpretation was confirmed by a phone call to my local CASA FOI)

You will not find a CASR Part 61 reference saying you cannot do a flight review in an RAA registered aircraft, it comes down to the privileges of the instructor rating. Even if the instructor holds both RAAus and GA ratings, the aircraft he is conducting the review is either operating under the CAO 95 series exemptions and the RAA Ops manual or CASR Part 61. The instructor cannot certify for a GA flight review if they were operating under RAA regs and visa versa. The analogy of proficiency checks in the airline world is no longer valid under Part 61, as a proficiency check on a type rating only covers ops in the type eg A330, B747-400 etc. If the type rated pilot were to fly a single engine light aircraft they would need to have a current flight review for single engine aeroplanes (SEA) class operations.

A flight review for the purposes of satisfying CASR Part 61 cannot be completed in an RAA registered aircraft. For a grade 1 or 2 instructor to exercise the privileges of their instructor rating the flight needs to be completed in an appropriately VH registered aircraft. Think in terms of an RAA instructor completing a flight review, it cannot be completed in a VH registered aircraft. Under certain circumstances a GA flight review may be accepted by RAA for high performance category aircraft (OM 2.07, 3(i)) but there are no reciprocal provisions under CASR Part 61. The reference to an equivalent aircraft was intended to apply to say a VH registered version of an aircraft the pilot is familiar with and current on. (Jabiru, Piper J3 Cub, Piper Light Sports etc).

It doesn't need to be that difficult or costly and you can do it in phases. An RA-Aus Pilot Certificate holder can obtain an RPL then complete the Flight Review in a type they are familiar with, OCTA and use a Recreational Aviation medical (RAMPC). Be prepared for the flight review and it should be too extensive if you're up to standard: http://casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/download/caaps/ops/5_81_1.pdf Don't let people con you, a grade 1 or 2 instructor can complete flight reviews in their own right, so you don't need to go through a school. You only need a school to complete flight training towards gaining a licence or rating. Endorsements and flight reviews are not considered to be flight training. The initial exercise shouldn't cost more than an hours dual plus the CASA fee and medical (which isn't a bad thing anyway). Further down the track you can add airspace and check-outs on other types, if you want to carry more than 1 passenger (aircraft limited to 1500kg Max takeoff weight - Cessna 182, Piper Arrow fit in easily), do the class 2 and away you go.

I would suggest the Flight Review requirement under Part 61 must be performed by a suitably rated flight instructor who holds a Part 61 qualification. A GA. Instructor cannot exercise their Part 61 privileges in an RA registered aircraft.

I agree and gaining simulated partial / complete engine failure experience in a variety of different aircraft types will improve your ability to handle real failures.