KRviator

Following on from musings in the Qantas cadet thread, it got me wondering just how many young people are coming through the ranks who fly for fun. It seems to me that most recreational pilots are on the wrong side of the 50-60 age bracket, and there are not an awful lot of people taking up flying for their own enjoyment at the younger end of the spectrum. My personal opinion is people simply can't afford it if you want to own a house these days, but that was also my experience 20 years ago when learning to fly out of Toowoomba... So, that leads us to the poll above, to see just what sort of demographic we have here on the RecFlying forums...

If I've used the right calculators, a new C172P cost $34,000USD brand new in 1981. According to the RBA, the exchange rate was 91.75c/USD in 1983, which I've used as the conversion rate, so a new P-model would have cost $37,000AUD (I haven't updated the purchase price from '81-83 to give the benefit of the doubt to the Cessna...). Australian inflation since then works out to 214% or from $37000 ->$116,000AUD for a brand-new C172, excluding GST and import duties...According to several articles, you could buy a house for a smidgen over $80,000 in the early '80's, with an average annual income of $21,000, or a roughly 4:1 price/income ratio. In 2015 the average Sydney house price is now over $900K with an income of $78,000, or an 11.5:1 ratio. Based on a $37,000 172 and a $21,000 salary, a new 172 these days "should" cost around $137,000 AUD. The lack of disposable income - a direct result of rampant housing & cost-of-living increases - means most working people simply cannot afford luxuries like flying - particularly on an average salary around $80,000. It is only when you've been able to pay off your mortgage are you likely to be able to afford such luxuries.

Can't fly in a GA plane less than 30-40 years old at most aero clubs.Can't fly at my local airport without paying 600/hr for circuits IN MY OWN PLANE. Can't add an experimental EFIS to a certified plane without CAR21M EO, which leads to; Can't fly behind an EFIS at most aero clubs, stuck with antiquated vacuum gauges. Require TSO'd GNSS position source for ADS-B. Can't use Dynon/Garmin solutions for experimentals. Can't import a US plane at a reasonable price due GST being applied to landed cost and exchange rate. Can't buy a reasonably-priced NEW aircraft anymore, though this is a worldwide problem now... Airports closing, being sold off, or otherwise being rendered inaccessible due cost/insurance/admin issues. Can't owner-produce parts for certified aircraft. Can't owner-maintain certified aircraft for private ops. Can't access an RPT airport without an ASIC. Which you now have to renew in person....at whatever cost every 2 years. Can't get hangarage at reasonable rates at an awful lot of airports due council/owner/insurance costs stifling investment. And I'm sure others will have plenty more examples.

Of course it matters. Australian GA is dying - and has been for years. These students that Monash - and others - are training do not go on to fly in Australia, they bugger off back to their respective home countries and fly there. Additionally IMHO, there's a huge difference between the likes of these sausage factories with their international students and integrated courses that are propping up the movement figures, vs your average weekend warriors that either no longer fly themselves, or are not being replaced by the current Gen Y'ers and Millenials.Have a look at your average aero club - there aren't an awful lot of young folk coming through these days, most members seem to be at least 50 or older...And that's been the case since I first joined the DDAC 20 years ago! I reckon it'd be an interesting poll on RecFlying, if we asked everyone their age bracket.

How many of those Moorabbin movements are training foreign students though?

When you can qualify on the heavy metal without setting foot in the real thing, one has to wonder how long it will be until a suitable simulator for ab-initio training is introduced. Zero flight time PPL's anyone?!?

Sorry. that should be VOR/NDB info, VOR shows up as a VOR, the NDB's as a "Tower_Short" icon. Can't seem to edit the above post...

Thank's lads, with Excel it doesn't take too long to do at all, so I've included the NavAids as another CSV download. It only has VOR/ILS info in it, no ILS/DME/LOC info but if you need to find an ILS in a hurry, odds are you've got bigger problems than this can help with!

Because I am a good-natured bloke (and get bored easily) I decided to work out a way to import all published Australian airports into my SkyView system - a process that was relatively painless using the DAH, Adobe and Excel. However, as the RecFlying forum architechture doesn't allow uploading of *.CSV files, you'll need to actually download them from my post at the Dynon Forums, over here... Now, given there are many hundreds of Certified and Uncertified/ALA's in Australia, I cannot guarantee these are accurate inasmuch as I haven't screwed up something in the PDF-XLS conversion, but those in my immediate vicinity correlate perfectly with the OzRunways VTC overlay. That is my way of saying you use these files and the data therein at your own risk. If you get lost, that's your own fault, these are intended for situational awareness only. Furthermore, I haven't been anal enough to go through and categorise each and every airport to their respective icon in SkyView. If it's a Certified airport, per the DAH, it gets a "Filled" icon, if it is a Uncertified aerodrome or an ALA, it gets a "Hollow" icon. Additionally, these will show up as User Waypoints in SkyView, so you need to have the "display user waypoints" option selected at a suitable map range to enable you to see them. I will endeavour to keep these two files updated with each revision of the DAH unless AsA has a dummy spit, or I get tired of doing so. Anyway these are based on the November 2017 revision, with the next being due in May 2018. Eventually I might do the NavAids as well, but for now, here's the two airport files. Happy Flying!

If you're happy to let an instructor learn on your plane, you're more than welcome. Me on the other hand, feel this is an unnecessary risk, particularly when it can be avoided and I wouldn't stand for it. The 'suck it and see' mentality has no place in aviation.See that plane below? It was someone's Belite. Here's what happened in the pilots (note, NOT the owner) own words.

It is just another plane, but like most every plane they all handle differently, that's all. As the instructor, you need to be aware of the aircraft's handling quirks to be able to catch a students mistake, which, if you've never flown it, means you're learning at the same time as the student and that doesn't leave you much time to be able to salvage something if the student fluffs it - clearly not an ideal scenario.The Foxbat also has this funny arrangement for mounting the elevator and flaperons that leaves you with the impression a series of bolts, washers and clevis pins have fallen off, when that's just the design - which if you didn't know about it could lead you to trying to ground a perfectly serviceable aircraft. And the flap handle is inboard between your heads, so you can't simply drop the flaps anytime you want, you need to be established in a comfortable flightpath, swap hands on the (centre) stick, drop the flaps, then swap hands again.

I could probably teach someone to fly a 737 even though I've never flown one, too... I flew in a FoxBat today (3rd time) for my BFR after 18 months flying my RV and it was different enough to cause a few hiccups. I wouldn't want to try to learn from someone who themselves is learning the plane!Don't stress too much about the RAAus aspect. Learn under RAAus in a Foxbat, send the form off to CAsA to RPL your RPL (sorry, couldn't resist...), and away you go. The only limitation may be if your Foxbat is VH-...

AND IT WORKS NOW! You can now transfer your flight plan from your old iPad2 running iOS9 to SkyView via the WiFi connection. BIG thanks to the OzR lads!

Pretty much, yep. The 24.2 is accurate based on flight time tests, not just indicated fuel flow, though it does vary slightly up to 24.5 sometimes. This is for flight at 8,500', and it takes 10.5L to climb to and descend from that altitude. With the engine in my -9A, you can run MoGas too, so there is not a significant difference in operating costs between a Rotax-powered Lightning, (for example) and an RV-9A. And depending on your mission, the -9A can be registered RAAus too - mine is one of two on the register.

FP Sensenich G/A prop, 145KTAS at 24.2LH in my -9A, and I could probably have pushed that out towards 150KTAS if I had paid more attention to drag reduction during the build. EFII would also make a significant-enough-to-warrant improvement next time too!

Wait till the missus buys one of those Google Home things and you test it out with things like 'Ammonium Nitrate bomb receipie' or 'How to assassinate Donald Trump'.She gives you one of "those" looks...

Good thing CASA can't intervene. Remember that bloke with the drone who wanted a Bunnings Snag?

Not always, no you don't. Take a look at some of the restricted areas closed off around Williamtown, Amberley, or even the CTR around some of the major airports, and the only practical option to get around, under or through, these areas is not overly friendly. The lane through Dungog and Gloucester has an upper limit of 1000AGL. Do I fly over tiger country? Certainly. But I am comfortable wrapping the -9 up into a ball to walk away, and with a stall speed in the mid 40's, I am confident such an arrival would not be life-threatening. Painful, perhaps, but not fatal.

A big thing that needs to be instilled in pilots IMHO is this:When the engine fails, destroy the aircraft if you have to, to ensure you walk away! It seems too many people focus on attempting to save the aircraft, resulting in a stall/spin/other undesirable outcome. If you condition yourself to accept the aircraft is disposable - even if you built it yourself - you are likely to be happy to fly it into trees under control, rather than trying to stretch the glide in an attempt to reach that unreachable clearing.

But look at their definition of a model aircraft: A boomerang fails on that point...

I went from RAAus -> VH -> RAAus with my RV-9 a few months ago. The transition back from VH -> RAAus was about as painless as it could possibly have been, thanks mainly to Jared S at RAAus HQ. I didn't keep it VH- as the SAAA refused to provide the MPC dates that would enable me to re-weigh the plane and compile a valid MR. Be stuffed if I'll pay a LAME to do it for me when I built the plane and its' flown near-on 100 hours under RAAus already...Still haven't heard if there are going to be any MPC's run this year either...If going from RAAus -> VH, use caution in filling out the CAsA form if it is still on the RAAus register. You will get it back, while being called a liar from CLARC because CAsA defines "foerign" as "any register other than ours", notwithstanding the context of the question is asking about other countries...Then end up in a 30 minute argument with them about it. Anybody want to buy low-time RV-9?!?

If it is Australian ones you want, check out Sect 17 & Sect 20 of the ASA Designated Airspace Handbook. Every cert/reg airport in Aust, and every ALA as listed in the ERSA. And Sect 21 has the Aids too. Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V and off you go! :-)

If you want an international listing of airports and codes and coordinates, etc, Google one of the Flightsim NavData packages. You can grab them as a TXT file, and their have all the navaids, airports, etc, with country, Lat/Long, magnetic variation etc etc.

Okay, so perhaps you could clarify how filing IFR helps you find your landing spot over conducting the flight under the VFR? You still can't see the fence, judge height AGL or find that SWER you talked about. And you're not likely to have your visual chart open vs an ERC-L.The only practical benefit I can see in conducting the flight using a PIFR is in case of inadvertent IMC the outcome may - and I emphasise may be better. Certainly, to the minima, then off you trot to your alternate, as you can't get visual. Same as a NVFR- rated pilot who couldn't acquire the airport or maintain VMC. Who said anything about illegal ops?!? Big difference between using them in the planning phase and trying to find a landing spot in a hurry in the IFR environment in IMC. As is managing those risks - which you haven't addressed one iota except to say it's safer under the IFR, with no real justification. The only risk addressed by that is inadvertent IMC (which introduces additional risks that then need mitigating...). Taking that away and most everything else I can see is the same.

How so, given your commentary below? Try contemplating an off-field landing in IMC. Finding one suitable - when you likely don't even have a visual chart available, yet alone any topographical information available. As soon as you descend below LSALT you are on your own, with exactly zero guidance. Methods of determining wind direction under the IFR are equally applicable and available as under NVFR. GPS/VOR/NDB tracking is all available under the NVFR, IAW the AIP. Members have been contesting points you raise, but you continue to parrot your alarmist rhetoric. What if this...What if that...as though a PIFR in a single is somehow the magical cure to these maladies when someone with your claimed experience should realise it isn't - and in those cases you raise a PIFR rating exposes you to more risk than simply flying VFR. While conveniently neglecting to point out the many dangers of SE IFR... And fog forms exclusively at night? That experience is equally applicable to VFR or IFR pilots. Remember fog is cloud on ground, so you wouldn't be visual at the minima, so off you go to your alternate. Or if that is fogged in too you are in exactly the same predicament no matter your flight category.