SSCBD

The real poll question that also should be included is, how many are flying without a current RAA pilot cert - or GA license or BFR.

Heh Frank - is that a Van Pragg built reduction?

Veteran Status - Well done. Do you still have the Scout?.

You are really in kindergarten with the holier than thou, attitude. If an CFI cant fly these bats in their sleep, then run away from them.

Yeah that's fine, was not having a shot, as the drifter is so much fun to fly in summer. I hate cold, used to fly thrusters in Sydney in winter - then Melbourne - it was the pits in winter. The a32 is nice to fly - but then again anything to get me in the air is fun, as I am still a unrepentant flying junkie still after 30 years plus.

Yes the A32 is less draggie but nothing hard. Its a learning process of handling the aircraft with speed control, just like using flaps extension speeds or wheel retract speeds, learning to fly a constant speed range is just another step which you should have been taught anyway on any aircraft you trained on, including a drifter!.

Many should not instruct or have limited hours or a new shinny instructors. Again its not hard for a rounded good CFI to fly ANY RAA two seat trainer - and they have.

JESUS AGAIN, KRviator, how you have taken this out of context. I was replying to a RAA flying school CFI flying A DIFFRENT RAA two seat training aircraft like a fox bat two seat. Keep on subject not some story that has no relation to the question.

Jesus, FLYING SCHOOLS ARE A COMMERCIAL OPERATION. what happens when a flying school gets a new type of aircraft - say a Jab - BRM - Sling for example, they fly it for an hour or so, read the book then take students. Its not hard. They also will learn while training on it. this is what CFI's are for. These aircraft are simple to fly and operate - where is this all coming from.

Nev, its a very simple high wing toy. Very easy to fly. You could say the same to other high wing RAA aircraft with gusts. Really

Its a simple aircraft to fly. Don't know why its a problem - seems the lack of experience of the instructor is the problem. . .

Many think they can - but cant. simple fact. Love to do a rating on flying schools from a independent point of view, outside RAA or GA bubble system. Then again would probably be sued from hurting some feelings of the precious. However teaching 25 hours ish to a student is not hard just tick the boxes.

This is my worst nightmare - I am really terrified when she drives the car and I am in it.

Ouch - insurance claim?

People need hands on courses (not costly talk fests) AND Kids (city) these days don't know how to change a car tire. Really - last few boyfriends of my daughters could not and I kid you not!

Hi and welcome, but get a real flying job. Dassault Falcon rules.

I basically mix it up all the time, with high and slow then on a calm day almost a stall approach all the way down with power. Some low fast flat out short finals on certain strips, and cut the power when I know I will make the fence. Depends on my mood and passage at times. Always love doing a few circuits after a fly around especially in a good strong xwind.

Identification of the failed engine needs to be both rapid and accurate and the propeller must be feathered whilst simultaneously keeping the airspeed at the best single engine climb speed, often referred to as “blue line” speed because of such a line often seen on analogue ASIs

Hargraves - the problem is that the engine may want to stop on the way up or anywhere else so you wont be on any approach. Plan for failure at takeoff is your worst problem especially the 150 ish to 500ft mark. Above that you should be bullet proof with a plan in advance. The engine will not wait for you.

Engine Failure Does Not Cause A Fatal Accident In An Ultralight Aircraft NOTE the word ULTRALIGHT IN the headline of the “ farri “ POST. To get back to the original question of this post and not transform to a free for all, and for the GA and RAA pilots or those learning on or flying nothing other than Tecnam, Slings, Jabs, BRM, ETC. and who have never flown a true Ultralight. You guys don’t know what you are missing. Some background and digression. First Problem to remember, ultralights have a very small - take-off, stall to max cruise speed range envelope. Some early and very BASIC single seat ULTRALIGHTS only have around a 0 TO 60-kilometre speed range, which is 32.5 kts! That’s flat out, to stall at half that. So your margin or flight envelope was about 15 kts all with about 20 to 30 HP two stroke motor. True Ultralights (commonly referred to as rag wings (sailcloth) with two stroke engines) are a very different animal and can have some nasty spots that can bite, (even the well trained high time GA pilot) that the aloof, types that look down on our actual heritage. It amuses me no end years ago, to watch GA pilots, for first time flying a rag wing. The initial shock on the faces of the speed washing off as fast as they pull the power back is almost the same as the rpm gauge unwinding. Also, GA pilots first flights initial reaction to no momentum (weight and speed to punch through wind gusts and turbulence). Real Example - if you got hit by a 20kt gust flying along straight and level – you felt the whole aircraft tighten up, it climbed like you were riding a thermal, you could actually feel and see the wing wire bracing tighten and the wing bend slightly at the tip but it was not sharp thump like turbulence Next the scary bit, flat out cruise straight and level say 40 to 45kts – the ASI would suddenly go up a lot, and hold for a second or two then the gust would be passed and suddenly your airspeed would drop 25 to 30 kts. No weight to punch through it with more drag. The lighter the rag wing or a single seat the more pronounced the effect. You were a true butterfly. Then the best bit, and I did have some fun with GA pilots, and this is what we did every day back in the AUF days (and as far as I am concerned criminal that we can’t now) – we turned off the engine without warning to the victim. This was of course over head, with somewhere to land and usually over a thousand feet or two so they could understand the OUTSTANDING lack glide ratio, compared to a brick!! – and how fast the ALT, could unwind in its best glide speed compared to todays slick toys. The biggest thing we had to drum into these guys was with an engine failure – “stick the nose down now before you do or look at anything”. This was a problem, because people having their FIRST real engine failure as the prop was not rotating were in stunned that it was happening to them. So having the ability of the early rag wing, two seat, two stroke training ultralights allowed us to turn off the engine in controlled conditions? for the students including GA guys, and reduce the “frozen shock and disbelief period” before they acted. They may not have liked it but it saved lives. Not like the snowflake rules we have now. So back to the question – “Engine Failure Does Not Cause A Fatal Accident In An Ultralight Aircraft” Frank has cheekily posted. Frank the answer is Of course an engine failure wont kill you – you are my proof - (how many have you had?????. However - You must have to have the right training – self-taught correct? and survived, but always have a plan to put it down without power!

We now have ballistic parachutes that can be fitted. Takes a big chunk of the engine failure argument away.

Myles Baptiste told Nine News he watched in horror as the plane hit the water and quickly sank on Sunday. "We saw a seaplane coming towards us," he said. "It made a tight right-hand turn and as it actually turned around, the wings dipped and it nosedived straight into the water."

What are you saying Nev - that no one should fly at night in a single engine aircraft or night flying should be banned? I fly night VFR, - so what's the problem? And since you fly twins I ASSUME you have a night rating - correct? I also highly recommend learning night circuits to all including RAA pilots - just in case someone gets caught out and stuffs up so at least they can put the aircraft on the ground.

So the RAA system is hog wash, and you really start from scratch. No credit on the money spent or exams done with RAA. If that is the true outcome why have our RAA leaders said nothing, is my slant. This to me sets RAA back in the caves, as it seems from above that CASA wont act on any RAA system put in place to train and be given credit for time and money spent - Correct??? My next question is - Why don't we use and teach the full PPL theory instead of the kindergarten books and exams that students pay hard money for now and is a waste if want to get into flying GA. Then at least the standard could be recognised I hope by CASA. Maybe RAA head office can enlighten us on why?

Its amazing we could ever fly for how many years before it ever existed! Oh God, us old pilots are very lucky to be around still.