poteroo

Have a look at the 'last update' on some of them and you'll find that some are > 10 years out-of-date.

Have a look at the 'last update' on some of them and you'll find that some are > 10 years out-of-date.

Rectangular circuits needn't be too wide if you continue the upwind climb to 700-750 ft agl before turning crosswind. This shortens the crosswind leg and allows for an earlier turn downwind. With high wing aircraft - we teach keeping the strip roughly 'half-way' up the strut. With low wings - perhaps at the flap/aileron location? We graduate pilots onto a 'racecourse' pattern for 500ft agl circuits as a way of training them to keep the strip,(or intended landing area), in sight in marginal visibility weather,(should this be needed in their future flying). The climbing turn is initiated at 300ft agl and the 180 turn completed as the aircraft is rolled out on downwind. The approach is commenced from abeam the threshold by slowing the aircraft to Vfe + beginning a descending turn toward the threshold - which will remain in full view. Full flap is applied during the descending turn and the aircraft rolled level by 200 ft agl. It's also prudent to slow the aircraft considerably the closer to the strip you fly, and to reduce your IAS with flap extended so that you make a minimum radius turn onto final. The nose of the aircraft needs to be kept down, and power adjusted, so that it isn't nearing a stall risk. In the low level course, these circuits can be taught down to 150-200ft agl with pilots who have a good grip on their aircrafts' handling. We do teach a 'tactical overhead break' in RV's - starting with echelon right, using 2 sec intervals. The use of a 3 or 5nm 'initial' tends to require a few minutes and sometimes this can't be done due CTAF traffic. Luckily, at our home airport, we have runways wide enough for landing elements,(pairs), in formation - so we usually 'spread' the formation into a number of 'line astern' elements on entering the 1st circuit leg. The overhead breaks only look great if you are in similar aircraft, moving fast, and pull a positive 45 aob from the upwind leg. happy days,

Rectangular circuits needn't be too wide if you continue the upwind climb to 700-750 ft agl before turning crosswind. This shortens the crosswind leg and allows for an earlier turn downwind. With high wing aircraft - we teach keeping the strip roughly 'half-way' up the strut. With low wings - perhaps at the flap/aileron location? We graduate pilots onto a 'racecourse' pattern for 500ft agl circuits as a way of training them to keep the strip,(or intended landing area), in sight in marginal visibility weather,(should this be needed in their future flying). The climbing turn is initiated at 300ft agl and the 180 turn completed as the aircraft is rolled out on downwind. The approach is commenced from abeam the threshold by slowing the aircraft to Vfe + beginning a descending turn toward the threshold - which will remain in full view. Full flap is applied during the descending turn and the aircraft rolled level by 200 ft agl. It's also prudent to slow the aircraft considerably the closer to the strip you fly, and to reduce your IAS with flap extended so that you make a minimum radius turn onto final. The nose of the aircraft needs to be kept down, and power adjusted, so that it isn't nearing a stall risk. In the low level course, these circuits can be taught down to 150-200ft agl with pilots who have a good grip on their aircrafts' handling. We do teach a 'tactical overhead break' in RV's - starting with echelon right, using 2 sec intervals. The use of a 3 or 5nm 'initial' tends to require a few minutes and sometimes this can't be done due CTAF traffic. Luckily, at our home airport, we have runways wide enough for landing elements,(pairs), in formation - so we usually 'spread' the formation into a number of 'line astern' elements on entering the 1st circuit leg. The overhead breaks only look great if you are in similar aircraft, moving fast, and pull a positive 45 aob from the upwind leg. happy days,

40 year career as an agric scientist. My flying specs are on this site. happy days,

I'm sure you are intelligent enough to understand the description of SI - please PM me if you need a more specific and nitpicky explanation. Insofar as your hypothetical x/c goes - if I was your CFI, and sent you on a solo flight, you would have a specific set of directions. In that, you would be told whether to undertake a couple of circuits, or missed approaches, at that particular airport. That time would be logged as PIC, XC.

Whilst RAAus now have this in the Ops Manual, a CFI may well have a local requirement that they check a couple of students trained by an, (relatively junior), SI - just to keep check on competencies. happy days,

Good to hear things are progressing. Luckily you're closer to Cowra than us and can get up there from time to time. Dynon Skyview have CAN compatibility and so can link to the 912iS electronics - whereas the older Dynon D120, D180 units don't have CAN and so can't be linked up to an iS. One instrument that I'm very pleased with is a PAI vertical card compass. It's very steady, accurate and easy for my students to read and cross check with the EFIS magnetic readout. Worth every cent. We now have 120 hrs up on our Brumby. cheers,

Any flying school brave enough to have a taildragger 'online' for t/w endorsing will need to charge a reasonable fee. Fixing them after a groundloop can be a very expensive deal. (I've had experience with a C180, C170,and a SuperCub with t/w endorsing - and it's really hard on the gear with having to fly x/w ops). There has to be a margin for risk. It's also very costly to have a taildragger available for private hire (= hr building) because of the insurance premium sought. A dual only endorsement isn't worth nearly so much as a dual plus several supervised solo and straight solo hours. This ensures that you are properly endorsed as no instructor is about to send you solo unless they are really certain of your training....a good indicator of its' worth? And a suggestion - ensure that you are taught both 3 point and wheel landings in crosswinds because there are situations requiring one or the other. happy days,

Nothing has really changed. In order to prevent smarties flying legs just under 25nm, then landing and flying another leg just under 25nm - and so on, until they reached Darwin, the last sentence has been added. Of course you will be authorised to fly a solo nav by your CFI, and this is legal. It's no different from the CFI authorising you to do circuits, or to fly out to your training area solo. You will be PIC, and you will log it as solo. happy days,

Sad event for family and friends. Just hope they think before looking for a point of blame in the aftermath. Everyone knows the low flying rules, and whether it's 300 with exemption, or 500 as per CAR 157, is academic. The real danger zone is below 150 ft because it places you at much the same level as major lines. With spraying work, you are below 50ft and that does improve your detection of lines. Anyway, aggies have already had a good look at a map, spoken to the owner, done an overhead survey prior to dropping in to spray height, and use a full hi/lo scan as they go. They don't fly cross country at low level because there is no telling what's ahead, plus it's illegal, it's unnecessarily increasing risk, and it's foolhardy.

Don't take this personally, but I would question the relevance of this 'fast' flight . Flying fast at LL means you shorten the available reaction time to decreased forward visibility, and you increase your radius of turn. It's not what I teach. My syllabus is CASA approved for LL, and I've done 150+ of them. Perhaps we need to shift this to another thread because it might explain, in part, why many pilots collide with obstacles and terrain? cheers,

If I recall, we discussed this POH 'maximum' before. It depends on the wording - generally it says 'maximum demonstrated crosswind component. That isn't necessarily the upper limit - simply what the test pilot did on the day of testing. Companies don't set out to create a high cross wind limit for their POH - rather, they tend to be conservative. However, if you have not maintained your skills since either your PC test, or the last BFR/training session - then you are going to have to adopt other tactics. A diversion to another strip? Land diagonally on the runway to minimise the crosswind component? Use less flap and land slightly faster? Several possibilities but nothing beats prior practice. Dare I mention the old P-P-P-P-P-P acronym? happy days,

Nev, If you are referring to my last post ....... never intended the comment for anyone in particular - instructors in general. Sorry if you read it that way. BTW, my example pics were flown in nil wind, (so allowance for gusts not required). In my experience, pilots have lots more difficulty in landing safely on shorter strips in nil wind, or a slight downwind, than they do with a headwind. Hope you found the pics illustrative of the principle. cheers,

Pilots should know what numbers their aircraft will stall at in its' current weight and configuration. It's never going to be the 'book' quoted figures. Pilots should be taught how to establish Vso - but Vso with a certain amt of power added to keep the aircraft stable in approach - but 'behind' the drag curve. In the above case - adjust power with full flap and stall the bloody thing.....only then can you x 1.3 and have some realistic idea of the safe late final approach speed. If you can't, or won't, teach your students how to do this, then I question your instructing bona fides. happy days,

Agree in principle for all normal flying. Certainly not acceptable for Low Level flight. Training @ 150-200 ft agl dictates a more immediate recovery than 25o ft. Part 61 M-O-S spells out other competencies.

And Northern boundary as well. Gives some support to the visual reports from the Maldives which sounded pretty credible at the time. Biggest low flying aircraft around there would be a DHC-6 Twin Otter floatplane so they must have seen a different aircraft alright.

It will be interesting to know just what caused the cabin smoke. An engine fire may not lead to this, because of the firewall sealing via grommets, whereas an electrical fire aft of the firewall will. A C210E is a mid 60's model, and the chances of an 'electrical' would be higher on my list of possibles. Cabin smoke is a real panic inducer, and one of those events where you need to conduct a couple of immediate 'vital actions'. I'm curious as to whether the landing was achieved under power, or deadsticked? Maybe ATSB will glean some useful facts out for us before posting their report? A good outcome tho.

Hangarage has been in short supply at Albany Regional Airport for over 10 years now. There have been no sites available for at least 6 years, (plenty of space tho'), because the landlord seemingly cannot make a decision about whether it wants to be a landlord or not! Our landlord has also been tardy in recognising that the entire hangar area has a drainage problem, much less fixing it permanently. As a consequence of this procrastination, many owners have migrated to Denmark, where a number of new hangars have been built in the past 5 years. There has been 'talk' for years about a mass migration to a new, small aircraft location - but with an expanding City of 35,000, the surrounding land has become expensive, and the smaller farm owners less amenable to any form of noise. The 'going' rates here seem to be from $90/month for a smaller aircraft up to $140/month for a C182 size. Full security airport requiring ASIC, plus gate card for vehicle access to hangar area. Original 20 year leases all expiring, and hangar site lease rates have jumped from $1.80/m2 to $9/m2 on only a 10 year lease with many 'picky' conditions. Lessees must pay for their own power connections. No water service. happy days,

Right on! Students need to manoeuvre on the ground using power,(=judgement), well before brakes. On landing - use/teach 'aerodynamic braking' by arriving at stall speed and holding the nose high attitude until elevators ineffective- then use brakes only if necessary. Given that brakes are not so effective on many types, it's best they not be applied until the aircraft slows...probably well below 35-40 kts. (I think the big boys use thrust reversal plus spoilers 1st - then brakes last when they have weight on the wheels and the slower speeds avoid overheat. Same principles apply). It should become a point-of-pride to rarely ever use your brakes. happy days,

Have seen a wedgie cave in the leading edge of a T6-Texan,(Harvard), so far that the drag made it almost impossible to fly. Over the Darling scarp east of Perth - managed to get it back to Jandakot for repair. (PIC was a verrry experienced driver).

One of the major gripes we hear in this industry is where inexperienced CPL's fly-for-free so as to gain experience. So, in effect, the charterer of the aircraft is only paying for the 'hire' of the aircraft. But the aircraft is operated under a charter AOC, and so the operation is legal in CASAs' eyes. You can see where this is heading........? happy days,

In the accidents section, Ultralights posted: 'a combination of regulation saturation and a shortage of decent training in advanced aircraft control from career oriented instructors' I can certainly agree with the regulatory comment, but I cannot really comment on the final 2 points because I just don't know exactly what is meant by the terms: decent, advanced and career-oriented. Poteroo