bushpilot Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Hi All, Wanted to let you know that we have just opened a new RA-Aus Training Facility in Bathurst, NSW. I have to say it was this Forum that assisted me in going down this path; I found answers and advice on just about every issue that I could think of in the homework phase. (Thanks to all and especially Ian!). In the latter stages, Ken Pidcock of Orange Ultraflight enabled it to happen by taking me from a pretty ordinary pilot and slapping me into a reasonably good pilot as part of his instructor training program. Finally, I got enormous support from the Bathurst Aero Club, which has not had 'in-house' instructors for several years. They could see that RA-Aus flying was the way of the future and gave me a lot of guidance and fantastic premises – the top floor of their clubhouse. They also introduced me to my new business partner, Stuart Park, who brings more than 1,000 hours of flying experience to the school. Stuart has instructed in GA aircraft for several years – singles and twins, VFR and IFR. You can check us out at www.centralwestflying.com - and note the webcam (on Nav bar) to see the view from our rooms! Call in to Bathurst (flying or driving) and visit us when you are in our area; the coffee is always happening and we have fuel on site and can arrange accommodation. Regards, Chris Stott [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomo Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Congratulations mate, looks good!:thumb_up: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Relfy Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Good work Chris and a great little web site to boot. What a great facility too! :thumb_up: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brett Campany Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Well done Chris!! Mate that's brilliant! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushpilot Posted October 10, 2009 Author Share Posted October 10, 2009 Good work Chris and a great little web site to boot. What a great facility too! :thumb_up: Thanks Relfy.. We did the website ourselves; in fact that's one of the things we do 'on the side'. So if anyone wants a new site done or existing one freshened up, at mates rates of course, let us know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brett Campany Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Thanks Relfy.. We did the website ourselves; in fact that's one of the things we do 'on the side'. So if anyone wants a new site done or existing one freshened up, at mates rates of course, let us know! Might hold you to that for near future reference! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simonflyer Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Congrats! When i have some spare time, Il pop up on a Nav.. Enjoy.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Smart move Chris...good luck with your new venture....................................................:thumb_up: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Hey Chris, where is the link to this site on yours ;) Well done Mate...about time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomo Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Hey Chris, where is the link to this site on yours ;) You talking about this one Ian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraemeK Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 this one[/url] Ian? Nuh - think Ian's talking about the reverse ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushpilot Posted October 10, 2009 Author Share Posted October 10, 2009 Hey Chris, where is the link to this site on yours ;)Well done Mate...about time! On its way! Simple oversight by my (IT literate) partner who is not a RF Junkie - yet.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 On its way! Simple oversight by my (IT literate) partner who is not a RF Junkie - yet.. :big_grin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushpilot Posted December 29, 2009 Author Share Posted December 29, 2009 Expanding the Fleet.... Well we are 3 months into operating our new school ( www.centralwestflying.com ) and have added a new J230 (24-7755) to support our 200 hour J160 (24-5555). See photo attached. Now we are thinking about a 3rd a/c. I am interested to get some forum feedback from either students or potential students or other schools on 3 options - and my view on respective Pros & Cons: 1. Another J160 (Pros: Good size; wing tanks. Cons: Same old, same old..) 2. A J120 (Pros: Cost; Performance in hot weather. Cons: Cabin tank; tight cabin) 3. A Cessna Skycatcher (Pros: Cessna brand; something different. Cons: Continental engine = expensive maintenance). Look forward to hearing any views out there.. Cheers, Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest burbles1 Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 I hear good things about the Foxbat - STOL capability, good cabin for photography - but there don't seem to be many available in NSW. The new LS version has MTOW of 600kg making it ideal for training and touring. Probably worth a look at. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushpilot Posted December 29, 2009 Author Share Posted December 29, 2009 I hear good things about the Foxbat - STOL capability, good cabin for photography - but there don't seem to be many available in NSW. The new LS version has MTOW of 600kg making it ideal for training and touring. Probably worth a look at.Dave Thought about FB. But a school near us has one and it is rarely used; most training there is in J160. Maybe some people see them as being more of a U/L than the 'heavier' looking a/c(?) So our shortlist is as shown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest burbles1 Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Well, if it's a Skycatcher then, you'll need to up the cost of hire/training to cover maintenance - could be close to $200/hr? Would that scare off students? Is that still affordable recreational flying? I note that Airborne Aviation will be getting one - perhaps see how demand for their Skycatcher goes before taking the plunge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 We have been through the same thing over the last year. The aircraft you use is critical when attracting new students. Remember, they will want to hire the acft once they obtain a licence. Have you considered going a bit more top end./ Like a sportstar or similar. Something that looks flash, and can be seen as a step UP for the students/ pilots to move onto. Our sportstar had great utilisation this year for the above reason's. Don't know how I feel about the skycatcher yet. Im of the thinking, let someone else operate it for a year or two and see how it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mechfx Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 How about a Taildragger ? better to diversify than just get another version of the service you offer already ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest burbles1 Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 Just noticed the Alpi Pioneer 300 looks nice - low wing, fast cruise, nice finish, retractable u/c (possible endorsement there), option of constant speed prop (another endo?). Mmm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 Continental Costs. High cost per hour of Continental O-200? Just where does this come from? Just because people keep repeating it doesn't mean that it is correct. The engine has a 2400 hour life (TBO) and generally makes it. Doesn't cost much more than a Rotax 912 to buy and has reliability second to none with a fuel cons around 20 Ltr/Hr or less. The per hour maintenance cost could be quite low, when you take the trouble to get the facts. The plane is a bit heavy. Trainers need to be heavy because heavy = stronger. Don't forget that the C-150's that everybody is running scared of structurally, are around 45 + years old, and have been having a hard time of it doing training most of the time, often sitting in the open.. I can't remember one coming apart in the air in all that time, unless something hit it. Wonder what some of the popular U/Ls of today will be worth when they are over 20 years of hard work old. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vorticity Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 You can go online to the lycoming thunderbolt site and get an instant quote. I was quite surprised at the cost in comparison to the 912, and this was for a very high performance variant. As for running cost, everytime I have ordered parts from rotax i have a lingering feeling that someone has ravaged my bank account! Any comments on comparable items between the 912/lycoming/contenental etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest burbles1 Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 High cost per hour of Continental O-200? Just where does this come from? That was a guesstimate based on what similar-sized C152s are hiring for now. I'd like to see what Airborne charges for theirs though. Maybe the Skycatcher doesn't offer much besides being a basic trainer - has a whiz-bang glass cockpit (many RA a/c do too) but the performance may be similar to other trainers 'closer to home'. Would some people see this as 'same old, same old'? You have more engine and panel options with other makes, more powerful a/c for those who want to step up to higher performance once they have their Certificate, and arguably better support for parts and service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 Strength. My main concern is with strength. Particularly with nosewheel assembly, rudder pedals, doors etc.The Whitney Boomerang has it but it is too heavy for our present weight limit. Re the engine. the Cont 0-200 D is a lot lighter than the Lycoming 0-233, and may be cheaper to service/ rebuild. IF you threw the engine away at overhaul tme the cost would be less than $15/ Hr. I don't think that trainers have to be high cruise speed aircraft. 90 to 105 kts is enough. The Brumby is another plane to consider, also. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 In fact as a commercial organisation for training a faster cruise speed means:- 1) The hire time is less. If you can have higher utilisation rates then that probably wont matter 2) X country workloads for a student who is probably close to info overload as it is, will be higher, same with circuit work 3) If during X country training you are wanting to show the effects of winds etc then the faster the machine the less impact the wind will have. 20kts of cross wind for a 60kt machine (33% of cruise) is much different to 20Kts of cross wind for a 120kt cruise (16.6% of cruise) 4) faster machines by their nature are more slippery and in general dont slow down easily, that is something else to have to concern yourself with during training. Andy 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