CAsA - Making crashing illegal

[spacesailor]

If I had to do the routine the aviators do, for my car (weather,time,duration,  & all the other things flyers do prior to takeoff.

 

My wife would beat me to the car, complaining of me taking FAR too long to go shopping !. LoL

 

I have done the morning  preflight checklist,(as student)  but it was never entered in my log book, SO therefore never happened. LoL

 

spacesailor

 

 

[turboplanner]

Because of the number of comments I've just ripped out a few headings from notes: DISCLAIMER This is just an example, not for real time use (but it might head you in the direction of getting some training).

 

Some of these things you will already be doing before each flight, but others, if you are not doing them would be breaching this and other regulations.

 

Speeds: The aicraft's set of standard speeds is required to calculate things like endurance and fuel burn as well as handling and navigation.

 

ALA:  You are supposed to know all the dimensions for an ALA you intend to use, so the above legislation is no different to what you're required to comply with now.

 

Max (and Min) Station Load: Before you take off in a Drifter you might be required to carry some ballast; same with passengers and baggage in six seater aircraft.

 

Take off Distance: someone in the flying school probably did it for all temps years ago;  but QNH could be 990' Elevation could be 3500', Pressure Height could be 4190, Outside Air Temparature could be -6 and Density Height 2630. In this case the cool mountain air is helping the density and lengthening the takeoff, but if OAT was 27 you'd need a LOoong runway. Most people have a scare once they start travelling. Take off Distance is one of the OKtoGo checks.

 

Weight and balance: A 15 kg tool box placed on the passenger side in a Morgan at one time took it out of control on takeoff and the pilot was only just able to wrestle it to the ground.

 

If two burly people in an LSA exceed the MTOW you don't take off. All light aircraft up to and including six place aircraft require accurate W&B calculations, which may require offloading some fuel or luggage or passengers to get the aircraft within the flight envelope. In most cases the problem is solved by shorter trip legs. W&B is one of the OKtoGo checks.

 

Fuel Burn calculation: I've quickly ripped out a rough process below. Fuel Burn calculation is one of the OKtoGo checks

 

Calculating your fuel burn is done after you've done your Nav Flight plan, so you have a known distance. If you want to have a look around, say, a dam, mine site, National Park, budget for a time spent airworking around, and that can be calculated into the fuel burn. If you go over time at the park you are likely to fail to arrive with your minimum reserve if min was what you planned on, but at least you'll know you're in trouble well before the destination, and can find an alternate airfield.  Fuel Burn calculations come together with navigation where you mark off each ten minute segment. That way if something goes wrong like a horrific head wind, you can quickly calculate your endurance and if necessary make a 180 turn and use the tail wind to help find an alternate.

 

There are heaps of fuel exhaustion cases in RA, mostly because the pilot has no idea what his fuel endurance was.

 

Performance and Operation Items

 

Certificate of Registration

 

Certificate of Airworthiness

 

Flight Manual

 

Maintenance Release

 

Daily and Pre-flight Inspection

 

Log Books

 

Speeds

 

Operational Class

 

Time Sheet

 

Category

 

Fuel Reserve

 

Fuel Types

 

Refuelling Precautions

 

After Refuelling

 

Pilot’s Responsibility before Flight

 

Tying Down

 

Engine Starting

 

Maximum Range

 

Maximum Endurance

 

Landing Distance

 

Takeoff Distance

 

Total Fuel, Useable and Unusable

 

Authorised Landing Area

 

All Up Weight

 

Empty Weight

 

Fuel Weight

 

Passenger Weight

 

Maximum Takeoff Weight

 

Maximum Landing Weight

 

Effective Operational Length of Runway (EOL)

 

Corrected EOL

 

Maximum (Minimum) Station Load  (eg baggage locker) structural limitation on airframe

 

Weight Calculation benchmarks

 

Datum (VE)

 

Centre of Gravity (COG)

 

Station

 

Index Units

 

COG Envelope

 

Loading Graph

 

Pressure Height and Density Height

 

Variation of QNH from QNE, calculation of Pressure Height

 

ISA International Standard Atmosphere

 

Density Height from ISA

 

Calculate Pressure Height and Density Height

 

Weight and Balance calculation

 

Calculate Takeoff Distance

 

Calculate landing distance

 

Calculate Takeoff and Landing speeds

 

Calculate fuel burn incl reserve

 

Fuel Burn

 

Once an aircraft is calibrated for fuel burn in climb, cruise and descent, the fuel burn figure can be calculated quite accurately.

 

The fuel burn calculations start with the fuel tank contents before the flight, based on usable fuel. Although a fuel tank may have a total fuel capacity of a certain number of litres when filled by the pump, all tanks have part of the system inaccessible to the fuel pickup, and that will be common for every flight, so it is deducted from the full fuel figure and is known as Usable Fuel.

 

Convert from IAS to TAS and from QNH to Density Height

 

1.     Take Off – refer consumption chart for aircraft, calculate fuel consumed

 

2.     Climb – refer chart, calculate DH of cruise, calculate fuel used to climb to DH           

 

Calculate distance travelled on track during climb by time during climb, speed during climb, use flight computer.

 

3.     Cruise – Deduct climb on track from distance A to B.

 

Refer Chart, read off GPH/LPH for nominated RPM/TAS

 

Use computer to calculate duration from TAS/Distance

 

Use computer to calculate fuel consumed from duration/GPHorLPH

 

Ensure 45 minutes reserve fuel remains at end of flight.

 

4.     Calculate descent + Approach + landing

 

Calculate (a)  Time for trip (b) Fuel Consumed and including 45 min reserve.

 

 

[aro]

The safe and suitable clause in this regulation doesn't apply to certified or registered aerodromes, so if you put a wheel in a rabbit hole on a certified or registered aerodrome you have probably not contravened this regulation.

 

To correct myself:

 

I went and read the source regulation, and there was a formatting problem in the paste in this thread.

 

"the aircraft can land at, or take off from, the place safely having regard to all the circumstances of the proposed landing or take off (including the prevailing weather conditions)." isn't part of 2(a)(iv) it is a separate clause applying to all aerodromes.

 

2(a)(iv) authorizes anywhere that is suitable to land and take off an aircraft

 

2(b) says for certified, registered, defence aerodromes and places that are suitable (i.e. everywhere) you need to be able to do it safely.

 

In any case this shouldn't be controversial, and I don't think there have been recent changes (except perhaps to numbering).

 

 

[KRviator]

Just what are they coming too. Yep generates a smile.

 

I think - how can someone dream that up then write it, how can they be taken seriously?

 

KP

 

Unfortunately, this regulation already existed in the CASR's, the laughable point - to me anyway - was they simply copy-and-pasted it over to the 'new' Part 91 without thinking 1) Do we really need this? and B) IS it really necessary to make it a criminal offence? I'm sure there is not a road-based equivalent that says "If you roll your 4wd on a farm, you are guilty of an offence", though if you had no authority to be there (closed NP trail, driving like a muppet, etc), then an argument could be made in a few other areas . But if you were doing what was reasonable in the circumstances and fell foul of what a 'reasonable person' would consider an accident, so far as I'm aware, that'd be the end of it.

 

Till anything happens and then it clearly wasn't SUITABLE. . Combine airy fairy definitions Like "suitable" with  strict liability and you have the perfect Catch 22. If you have any incident or crash it you have no defence.. You MAY be right but I've dealt with them and seen what they do to others  too often to suddenly trust to a concept much different being there now from what it's always been. .Nev

 

And that's the problem...You can do all the assessments you want, and up until something happens, nothing will happen. But if you drop a wheel in an unseen rabbit hole, or a patch of soft ground pulls you to one side, or you nose over, you're instantly guilty of breaching this rule. And a vengeful regulator can use this particular rule as a blanket cover-all in the event of your screwing up. And as it's strict liability, all they have to say is "Ol' mate ran off the runway, therefore, the strip wasn't suitable in the prevailing conditions", and what defence do you have? IANAL, but from what I can see, the answer to that is "not much".

 

All light aircraft up to and including six place aircraft require accurate W&B calculations...

 

I'm not sure this is correct. ISTR, you don't need to do a W&B, if you have previously proven the aircraft is incapable of being loaded outside it's envelope. I'll double check my W&B notes from the MPC, but recall there was a question along those lines in the course...

 

 

[facthunter]

  With W&B a heavy weight has  a similar effect as a hot day or higher altitude. Change of C of G is a little more subtle and can change stall characteristics etc. If it's "in the allowable  range" it's safe of course But It's nice to know if you are near the extremes. A nose heavy plane is harder to stall but may not have full hold off capacity for a three point landing. Also the extra download required in flight does reduce performance as the wing has to provide extra lift, the same is if the plane is carrying actual extra weight.  For the max weight situation you do need to consider the Actual weight of "anything" put in the plane so max AUW structural isn't exceeded but other considerations may further reduce your allowable TOW such as density altitude slope and texture of the runway and obstacle clearance.. Your actual weight does affect your  stall speed and consequently your lift off,  climb and maneuvering speed and at the other end  of the flight approach and threshold speed. A two place aeroplane  has a far larger variation of possible in flight  weights.. Nev

 

 

[Garfly]

 

Weight and balance: A 15 kg tool box placed on the passenger side in a Morgan at one time took it out of control on takeoff and the pilot was only just able to wrestle it to the ground.

 

 

 

If this storied tool-kit is the same one I remember, it was actually moved from its usual place on the passenger seat

 

to the back parcel shelf to make way for an unexpected passenger. A scenario that makes more sense. 

 

Typically, you might get away with a tool kit weighing 80Kg on the passenger seat without balance problems.

 

(Assuming you don't bring the plumber as well. ?

 

From Sport Pilot Aug. 2012:

 

 

 

[Garfly]

Re-reading that short report I now understand that the 7Kg tool kit more or less lived behind the seats and it was the 7.5Kg flight bag that was thrown over onto the back-shelf making a total of around 15Kg in the rear station which brought the situation to its tipping point.

 

 

[facthunter]

 It's pretty easy to recognize the warning signs for planes with  potential C of G issues. Some examples are fuel tanks  or lockers located in front of or behind the C of G range as represented on the mean  aerodynamic chord of the wing. A safe range is stipulated in the POH and is usually around  a point 1/3rd of the distance from the front towards the rear. of the  effective wing chord..

 

       A side by side two seater that has the fuel in the wing  is usually the least sensitive  to errors as fuel and load are near the centre of gravity, in the main. .We are looking at. "couples" where  force and distance are the factors so a small mass at a long distance can equal a large mass at a smaller distance in terms of it's turning effect about a  (pivot) point usually considered to be  the C of G for our purposes.  Your plane must balance in the allowable range with the fuel as loaded and also at landing weight and Zero fuel weight (empty). Aircraft that have a big change in CofG with fuel  load are  probably the most difficult to deal with and I find the use of graphs in the load assessment to be the most obvious to use and check the logic of. Others use  datums that may be in front of the actual plane or a convenient place on it's fore and aft axis and fixed designated distances for various Load areas like the Cof G of the pilots seat and same for fuel tanks or a locker or storage area.. Some people over time have devised some rough and ready methods  that would show an out of range condition, and that's at least recognizing there is a problem. Errors still occur in Big stuff as well so a "She'll be right"  is not appropriate. Fuel management and W&B are usually a required 100%pass for good reasons. Secure your load as well. Loads moving has killed plenty. Your plane is not airworthy when out of balance or overloaded. Nev

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

The different standards applied to aircraft and the rest of our lives is jumping out at me from those regulations. For example, it is twice as dangerous to be 5kg overweight as it is to fly our type of plane.

 

So, to be consistent, overweight people should be prosecuted. All the arguments about dangers apparent to trained and competent people needing to do  the prudent thing apply even more to our weights as they do to our flying.

 

Why the difference? My theory is that our arboreal ape ancestors frequently died from falling out their trees, and to this day, we are irrational with respect to flying. As if wrecking your plane wasn't punishment enough, we have the forces of darkness seeking to prosecute survivors.

 

 

[facthunter]

 No each one only died once (not frequently) and since they thereby ceased to procreate, the effect of the experience  will NOT be passed on genetically. Perhaps seeing  others  fall to their death, might have done the trick, but this is idle speculation.

 

   It used to be said that that CASA considers ALL pilots are criminals and the ones still flying just haven't been caught yet..  That seems like a more logical explanation

 

  and IF God had wanted you to fly he wouldn't have created  the CASA.. Planes are only safe when they are on the ground. There's  nothing holding them up either. No wonder they plunge out of the sky.. Nev

 

 

[Garfly]

They plummet more often than they plunge.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Not often I disagree with facthunter, but evolution works by culling genes before they have a chance to pass on. So an overconfident young ape who fell from the tree would remove his genes from the tribe and a fearful ape would survive to pass this fearfulness trait on. Of course this only works with young apes, not with old ones who have ceased to procreate.

 

A bad trait of our species   is our fear of authority. A great many young apes and then people must have been removed from the gene pool to make us what we are today. We are so obedient to foolish authority that we surpass any other animal.

 

 

[facthunter]

The sleekiest  Most bossy BIGGEST  monkey is the one to procreate most successfully, so we should all want to be  gorgeous BOSSES, not obey rules easily. Nev

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

There is something in that, Facthunter. I have read that hoon drivers get more sex than their mates.

 

 

[Garfly]

We come for the flying tips but we stay for the evolutionary science.  ?

 

 

[M61A1]

A bad trait of our species   is our fear of authority.

 

Not sure why you would say that. A distrust of authority I would say is a good thing. Authority tends toward tyranny.

 

You only have to have a look at the way CASA operates to see the truth in that.

 

It just occurred to me that when you said "fear" you were talking of those who will blindly obey without question. I don't think it's about the species, it's the form of government we have had since things started here. 

 

It is quite prevalent in this country. Our whole system revolves around the idea that you can't do anything unless you are told you allowed. Some other countries have a system that works around doing what you want unless told it isn't allowed. We are a nation of sheep.

 

We come for the flying tips but we stay for the evolutionary science.  ?

 

If you like that sort of thing I recommend listening to some of Gad Saad's work.

 

 

[facthunter]

 Hoon drivers get more sex ? Are you sure it's with other people? Wouldn't most people be afraid of the risk of driving with idiots. Nev

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Yep its sex with girls Nev. My wife denies that it would ever have been girls like she was, but there are plenty of the other sort.

 

The reason is that in stone-age times, the hoon driver sort of guy would have been in the gang that brought home the mammoth carcass.

 

That's why girls say how he was awful, but the chemistry was there. The girl's subconscious was aware of that mammoth, which would enable the hoon and his mates to survive the winter.

 

 

[Garfly]

Gad Saad's got nothin' on these lads!