Maritime_Ev Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 After a couple of years of practice, interupted by all kinds of non-flying issues, I finally managed to book and pass my PPL flight test a month ago. And now, according to the CASA website, the licence is in the mail! So just to make sure the missus doesn't get used to the money not going to flying training , my question is: What to do next? So many fun options out there :) Of course, first of all I just need to go flying; the plan is to rent a 172 or something equivalent and go and tour up north along the Queensland coast and have a look out back as well. But then when I get back, what would be the highest bang-for-buck in terms of becoming a better pilot/having lots of fun? -Tailwheel endorsement, highly recommended by my instructor and probably good for my lazy feet and not-sensitive-enough back side. Also most of the aircraft I've been secretly looking at online have two wheels in front. Could even be done cheap(ish) in a drifter at Gympie, even though I'm not sure if that would transfer over to my CASA licence (looks like fun flying tho!). Otherwise, is there any place in SE Qld where you could do a TW Endo in a Cub? -Aerobatics/upset recovery training/spinning endo, probably good for the same reason as the TW endo; learning to fly more precise and just to get more confident in handling the aeroplane. Could even combine the two if I did it in a Decatlon or Citabria (although I heard that they are not 'real' TW aeroplanes because they are too easy to land?) -Do some gliding: probably the cheapest option of them all, lots of educational value and probably heaps of fun flying without engine. Only downside is that it is mostly a club thing and mostly on the weekend, I don't really have the time to properly contribute as a club member (I get my free time in blocks of 5-6 weeks and the weekends are usually fully booked). Would it be frowned upon at gliding clubs to just come for a few Saturdays and pay the introduction flight rate? And where would be a good place to do that? I'm about an hour drive from Gympie, or an hour flying from Kingaroy if I can find someone to join me and share the cost of the flight. -Get signed off in the C206 (not sure if that would be a type rating?) so I can take a few more people to visit the family in Rural NSW or take my mates fishing at Fraser Island. I know that the idea with Cessna is that "they all fly the same" but I guess something that big and complex is probably best left untill I got a few years and a couple of hundred hours under my belt (right?) -get a PIFR; also probably something for down the track, I really do enjoy looking out of the windows while I'm flying, after all SE Queensland is stunningly beautiful from the air. But that said, my one flight into Coolangata, flying in class C airspace and doing the whole procedures thing was kinda cool too. And it would make flying to places more of a legitimate transport option (with a much smaller risk of getting stranded on your way back from a weekend in the whitsundays). But then a PIRF with a few navigation and approach endorsements would probably be more expensive than my whole PPL. -Continue for a CPL; why not... Once I get some more hours in I might be tempted to just give it a go. But that'll be a long term project. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgmwa Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 - Build/buy your own plane? rgmwa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maritime_Ev Posted January 30, 2015 Author Share Posted January 30, 2015 That's something to consider indeed, but I don't think I'm ready for aircraft ownership just yet. And most importantly I wouldn't know what to get: maybe nicely restored Cub to fly around slowly with the doors off? Or build a RV-8 to hoon around in? (really like to looks of the RV taildraggers, but I think I need to finish the house before I can start thinking about building one). Or maybe just a sturdy C172 so the kid(s) can fit in the back. Guess I have to try 'em all before I can make that choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgmwa Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Yes, there are lots of options to spend lots of money on. The missus would probably prefer to finish the house before buying the Cessna though, so that might be a smart next step while you think about the other choices. rgmwa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 If you are going to tour a PIFR is much better than Night VMC. On some of those types you get retract and C/S prop. I don't think you get Individual "type" endorsements for aircraft under a certain weight that are single engine anymore. Unusual attitudes is a good idea to complete your concept of 3 axis. Decathlon and Citabria too easy? Push them to the limit before you say that.. Nev 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Citabria and Decathlon are straightforward to land three-point, I agree easier than some other types, however it is not easy to master wheeler landings in them. See Gerry at Redcliffe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 I hardly ever see people landing three point these days. I hardly ever don't, myself ..(Gusty conditions excepting). My limit thing was considering slipping approaches and max crosswind handling. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maritime_Ev Posted January 31, 2015 Author Share Posted January 31, 2015 I think the story about the Decathlon/Citabria was that they are a bit more benign than say a cub or a C120, hence the quote marks. After all: what do I know about taildraggers, only have time in the C172 and C162. Think the Decathlon has a CSU so that would be another more design feature endorsement in one go (well, probably a fair few more than one). About the touring part: there may be a lot more of that, but I guess that will all depend on how the trip up north is working out with my wife, as I never managed to get a GFPT she hasn't flown with me yet. Guess she'll be right tho, she's less prone to sea-sicknes than me (and I'm a pro!), they're tough as those Aussie chicks The PIFR is definitely something for later on, if ever, and I don't think I'll be getting my N-VFR at all: not to start a flame war but the whole concept of flying around visually in a situation where you can't really see just seems flawed. The CASA Part 61 booklet stated that it was possible for a single pilot aircraft to need a type rating, so wasn't sure, but I just had a look at the COMLAW website and you are right, none of the SEP cessnas are on the type rating list (from the singles only the 208 is listed, but that's obviously another beast altogher). It's an accademic point anyway, no owner will let me fly one without a lot more training and experience. Anyway, fun times ahead for sure! But for now I'm off to my bunk, it's alsmost midnight on this side of the world and my weekend only starts in about 3 weeks from now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhysmcc Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 could do your PIFR in a c206 to cover both the flying and the IFR training, although it wouldn't be as cheap as a c172. I think Redcliffe and RQAC both do c206 training. if you go with IFR make sure you'll be doing a lot of flying to keep current. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben87r Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 One of the Brisbane schools (maybe Redcliffe ild have to check) have a C210 online, be a better option then the C206. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maritime_Ev Posted January 31, 2015 Author Share Posted January 31, 2015 My current school at YBSU has both an IFR 172 and a 206 online, even flew the G1000 172 for my flight test cause the analog one was out for maintenance. But both a PIRF and a 206 checkout are for the long term though, let the finances recover a bit first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayavner Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 The CASA Part 61 booklet stated that it was possible for a single pilot aircraft to need a type rating, so wasn't sure, but I just had a look at the COMLAW website and you are right, none of the SEP cessnas are on the type rating list (from the singles only the 208 is listed, but that's obviously another beast altogher). hi Ev, Just wondering about this - are you saying there is a list that will show all of the single engine planes one can fly without a specific type rating? That part was a bit confusing, as my licence says SEA up to 5700 kg, but that covers a lot of territory and there are of course ones that would be < 5700 but still would require an endorsement due to features (csu or retract eg.) It would be handy to have a list of every plane I can fly with the current basic licence. (obviously with proper familiarisation and checkout, before the beard-tearing group set on me...) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Perry Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 It's a big wide world you're talking about now EV,. . . . yes,. . . some aerobatics,. . .improve coordination, and prcision in your flying, that would be a good choice,. . . prior to that of course, renting and flying around a bit to get more familiar with the radio procedures here and there, and just generally build some EXPERIENCE. . . . .Gliding. . .Why not ? good idea, but you really Must have plenty of time if you want to go gliding. Nearly all gliding sites are of the " Muck in and help" type arrangement where you join the club and help out for most of the day pulling and pushing aircraft about and finally ( if you're a newbie ) get a flight or two at the end of the day, depending upon the size of the club. . . gets you really in touch with how to maximise your flying using visual clues, cloud formations etc. . . to stay up as long as possible, and this is all experience you can use in general flying. Other posters have mentioned PIFR, I never heard of that when I was in OZ, but I gather it's an instrument rating for PPLs. . . . super idea, 1) if you can afford the training,. .and as someone else pointed out, 2) you need to USE it regularly to stay in practice, so you'd need to price up practice instrument approaches to a local "G.A. Friendly" airport with the required facilities to keep sharp. . . in the UK, I think Birmingham International ( my closest A/P, EGBB ) charges around £20.00 plus 20% VAT on your card for each instrument approach to a "Missed approach finale. . ." . . .you wouldn't want to pay an actual LANDING / handling fee there. . .! And as for CPL, well,. . . . . there are hundreds ? maybe more,. . . bright eyed people with ink still wet on their CPLs looking hard for some sort of employment in the Pilot industry. . . some of whom have spent more than the cost of a cheap house to finance their training. . . . .this is why various organisations seem to be able to pay peanuts and get away with it, as all these young CPLs, Senior CPLs, Atpls, will work for nothing just to get their bum into a paying job, no matter what it is. In the uk, a candidate requires a Minimum of 750 Hours P1, plus an Instrument rating to even apply for a commercial licence, and to even be considered for a "good" job. . a lot more. The older route used to be. . . . .take a flying instructor course, then get a job as an UNPAID Assistant instructor, for hours building. The result of this practice, which went on for many years, was that often, your flying instructor seemed rather irritable, and the student felt like an accessory to the operatiopn, since the guy in the right hand seat was an hour builder, and NOT someone who had YOUR interests as a genuine student at heart. Fortunately ( or not perhaps ) this route to commercial flying was stopped a few years ago, and anyone who would like to be a flying instructor, wants to do it because they want to share what they know, and not use YOU as a few more rungs on the slippery ladder. Personally, and I know I'm sticking my neck over the parapet a bit here, . . I do NOT believe that ANY pilot should be considered as a flying instructor candidate, unless thay have ammassed at least five hundred hours of varied flying. . . . yet in some countries, an instructor rating can be attained with HALF this amount. . . ? ? ? what's all that about ? I know there are some prodigies out there and there will always be the exceptional pilot here and there, but if you're going to be serious about turning idiots into proper aviators, then I believe that a REASONABLE level of experience should be paramount in the selection of instructor candidates. Anyway,. . . . . Another Philzrant over. I like your enthusiasm EV. . . .keep us posted Sir. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soleair Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 What to do now? 1] Go gliding 2] Build a MiniMax 3] Enjoy! Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happyflyer Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 hi Ev,Just wondering about this - are you saying there is a list that will show all of the single engine planes one can fly without a specific type rating? That part was a bit confusing, as my licence says SEA up to 5700 kg, but that covers a lot of territory and there are of course ones that would be < 5700 but still would require an endorsement due to features (csu or retract eg.) It would be handy to have a list of every plane I can fly with the current basic licence. (obviously with proper familiarisation and checkout, before the beard-tearing group set on me...) The list is only of the types you need training on before you can fly them such ast Cessna Caravan and Pilatus PC12. If you have the design feature endorsement you can just about fly any piston single. However, there is a catchall section of Pt 61 that says the pilot has to satisy himself he has been adeqately prepared for the flight. This may ( and often should ) inlude checkrides. Certainly it is self regulating in that if you rent the owner will want you to prove your competence and also insurance will have minimum requirements. On the whole thought it is much less restrictive than the new RAAus regulations in relation to type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhysmcc Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 hi Ev,Just wondering about this - are you saying there is a list that will show all of the single engine planes one can fly without a specific type rating? That part was a bit confusing, as my licence says SEA up to 5700 kg, but that covers a lot of territory and there are of course ones that would be < 5700 but still would require an endorsement due to features (csu or retract eg.) It would be handy to have a list of every plane I can fly with the current basic licence. (obviously with proper familiarisation and checkout, before the beard-tearing group set on me...) I think it's the other way around, in that their is a list of aircraft that require a type rating (such as the mentioned Cessna Caravan C208). If your aircraft isn't on the list then SEA or MEA class rating covers it. As I don't fly anything bigger then 1500kg i've not really looked into the type rating aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben87r Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 All they have done is move the legal responsibility for training on new types SEA, and now MEA into the industry, no longer do they say (MEA) 5 hours endorsement training is enough to meet the required standard, may be more, may be less, CASA aren't putting their name to it. But yes their are still single engine types that require a rating. Haven't seen the list but sounds like all turbine AC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanR Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Tailwheel endorsement is fun and challenging - my son just did his in conjunction with the MPPC endorsement and loved it (he only got his PPL last year). Certainly teaches you to understand all the controls ! The other one thats purely fun if you can get a second person is formation although many schools would require a minimum hours before they will teach that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happyflyer Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 All they have done is move the legal responsibility for training on new types SEA, and now MEA into the industry, no longer do they say (MEA) 5 hours endorsement training is enough to meet the required standard, may be more, may be less, CASA aren't putting their name to it. But yes their are still single engine types that require a rating. Haven't seen the list but sounds like all turbine AC. There is no such thing as a "type rating" for a specific single engine aeroplane. What is need is specific training on certain aircraft followed by a flight review which is then recorded on your part 61 licence. The list of aeroplanes is below. The link is http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/lib100191/class-rated-aircraft-training-flight-review.pdf Single-engine class-rated aeroplanes requiring training and a flight review Type of single-engine aeroplane Aero Vodochody Aero L-39 Albatros Aero L-29 Delfin BAC BAC 167 BAC Jet Provost Cessna C208 (Caravan) Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation CAC CA-27 North American F86 Daher-Socata TBM700 (all models) De Havilland DH-115 Vampire Fouga CM-170 Hawker Hunter Mikoyan MIG 15 (all models) MIG 17 (all models) MIG 21 (all models) Pilatus PC12 PC9 PZL TS-11 Iskra (all models) Quest Aircraft Kodiac 100 SIAI - Marchetti S211 SOKO Galeb G2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayavner Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Welll... what i was really interested in is more a list of - ok, <5700 kg... what does that get me? I start running out of ideas after I've rattled off the well known Cessnas and Pipers etc. Short of compiling a list of every single engine airplane then looking up the specs to find the weight, then cross-referencing it against the above list... surely someone in the Agency has done that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhysmcc Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 No there is no list of what you CAN fly (with SEA), only a list of what you CAN'T fly, it's up to you to work out the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayavner Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 fair enough. I was trying to think of a single engine aeroplane around 5700 kg and couldn't think of one. At this point the biggest I've flown is the Archer, but its fun to dream up what might be in time :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Perry Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 fair enough. I was trying to think of a single engine aeroplane around 5700 kg and couldn't think of one. At this point the biggest I've flown is the Archer, but its fun to dream up what might be in time :-) The only single I can think of after this much Aussie plonk is the Antonov AN-2. This weighs in just under the UK 12,500 LBS ( 5700 kGS ) and can be legally flown here on a PPL. But at 48 Gallons per hour cruise consumption, you really need to fill up the 12 odd seats in the back with victims, . . .er,. . .friends to share the fuel cost for your 85 Kt cruise around. . . . . Beautiful aircraft to fly though,. . . .bit like a heavy thruster,. . .it will maintain flight with full auto slats popped out at around 35 Stat miles per hour, and is remarkably STOL . . . . 400 metre strip being quite adequate with a half load of pax. . . . I don't know if there is a more up to date aircraft at that sort of weight. . . Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happyflyer Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 fair enough. I was trying to think of a single engine aeroplane around 5700 kg and couldn't think of one. At this point the biggest I've flown is the Archer, but its fun to dream up what might be in time :-) P51 Mustang, a bit over 5400 kg MTOW. Just need deep pockets. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Perry Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 P51 Mustang, a bit over 5400 kg MTOW. Just need deep pockets. Especially for maintenance and a bit of fuel ? Also there's the Insurance bogey. . . . Privately operated warbird types in the UK have to pay premiums of circa £50,000 per annum if they are taking any passengers. . . . passenger carriage has now been approved following a ban which lasted from 2005, I tried to organise a ride for a friend ( Foxbat owner ) in a two seat Spitfire Mk 9, he had terminal throat cancer and was prepared to pay £4,000.00 for him and his Foxbat co-owner friend to have thirty minutes each, but regrettably the Spitfire owner had to refuse due to this ban. The same bloke flew another friend in it in 2001, Pre-ban. There are a lot of warbirds operating in private hands in the USA, I wonder if the Insurace rates are as severe there too. . . . Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now