Bandit12

http://www.recreationalflying.com/posts/291412/

Experimental? Or if Kits are there, Plan Built as well?

Really it is just semantics. "Young" people can have plenty to offer, but "older" people will have as well, and not always the same things. What is needed is "fresh" blood, without as many "old" ties and networks (and that is nothing to do with age either!). I've read of plenty of people who obviously have been putting their heart and soul into improving things, but it seems that there is a lot of skeletons to be unearthed, and a lot of inertia to fight against to really get change happening. In all honesty it is so much easier to stay with GA than become embroiled in RA-Aus at the moment, as long as you can stretch the coin far enough to do so.

...insurance salesman (or saleswoman, gender yet to be verified by a reliable source) and might even listen to my cryptic, foreboding comments! Bandit12 pondered this state of affairs, and noticed the tumbleweeds blowing past the unmoving corpse of the NES. "I wonder if this is truely the end?" he thought to himself. "Maybe it is time to poke the Lox and see if he is still.....

The SPSS Survival Guide by Julie Pallant has an interesting section on missing data, including several ways to estimate it. As long as it is less than 5 percent of cases and you are justified (small sample size), you will get away with it. Caution is advised with missing data but sometimes the rest of it is too good to leave out.

It did sound a little like that. CrayonBox, are you HGFA or RA-Aus? And I'm wondering what the instructor was testing for in the "low pass"? A precautionary landing/low pass for inspection (perhaps due to inclement weather) is one thing, but not normally practiced at the home airport as far as I know.

Dammit....I hate suspense.....

Physiological - get plenty of sleep, stay away from the caffeine and other stimulants, or alcohol and other depressants. Get some fresh air and exercise, it is remarkable how much difference it makes for concentration. Psychological - visualise and practice your routines, checks etc. And stop thinking of it as a test, try using checkride or other terminology that doesn't induce as much anxiety. Remind yourself that you will be doing similar checkrides every two years now for the rest of your flying time. Best of luck with it!

When I was first learning to fly, I used to go home after each lesson and refly it as near as I could remember on Microsoft Flight Sim 95. Effects of controls, straight and level etc etc. Even these days I sometimes pull out a more modern version to practice some things, particlarly instrument flight. However, it never replaces the real thing and really is just a bit of educational fun. A friend of mine built a B737 sim cockpit in his garage and that is a different experience altogether. Still no "feel" but visually it looks fantastic and we "flew" IFR across the USA, complete with traffic and live ATC, as well as did the Sydney to Melbourne route a few times. Good fun, great experience, just don't get too caught up in thinking that it is real.

iSelect was the broker, and the insurer is AMP (Elevate policy). St Andrews was previously but they didn't cover me. They went through a large number of statements where you had to declare whether you had this problem, or undertake that activity. One was flying, but not as a fare paying passenger in a commercial aircraft (from memory). I said that I did, and they then went on to ask more questions about licencing and number of hours each year etc. In the end it was cheaper than St Andrews.

Interesting because my life insurance covers me, as long as I am not doing more than 75 hours a year. I could do more than that but would have to declare it and suspect that my premium might go up. Maybe your friend should just contact his insurer and ask the question.

Done. If you haven't already done so, talk to your supervisor about putting in an amendment to your ethics application to provide general feedback regarding results in the places that you have listed the survey. A little feedback keeps your participants happy and makes them far more likely to participate in research next time. Just really general information so that it won't harm any chances you have of publication. Best of luck with it!

Our Loxy knew just what the stick was for, and proceeded to wield it with great delight against the slightly hairy derriere of the Turbo, shouting "What do think about this prevention technique, you mother trucker!". Turbo knew just how to deal with this......

Would you look at that! Thanks mods, it was fun to see what everyone was coming up with. I think special congrats to Flyerme too for putting so many ideas together, my imagination couldn't stretch past one!

Unrestrained load heading aft after rotating and starting to climb? Edit: just read what HITC said in the first post. That would have been a very terrible few moments at the controls.

I've given you a "Creative" because I love how you've brought the conversation back into aviation

Is there any cognitive testing currently for getting a drivers license over a certain age? Or are those sorts of things more of a judgement call by the medico? I would be very concerned to see cognitive testing introduced. For it to mean anything at all, there would have to be considerable research which identifies which areas of cognition are important, more research into whether areas of deficit can be compensated for in other ways, and a strong correlational link demonstrated between cognitive deficits and a significantly higher level of risk (because you can't get causal links in this sort of research). As Poteroo pointed out, there would probably be some sort of arbitrary level set which would turn out completely inappropriate. You just have to look at the full scale IQ cutoff of 70 for intellectual disability funding to see how they already use such nonsense. At this time it is pretty much impossible to measure cognitive abilities with a less than +/- 3 point accuracy anyway, and it is expensive (~$600 for a bare bones assessment, up to triple that for a comprehensive one) and is unable to be repeated at less than 2 yearly intervals. And lets not forget that some people who may have a lower ability in a certain area may not have so due to age related decline - they may always have had a low ability in that area and learned to compensate.

Damn, now I want a Drifter and a Greyhound! Best of luck with the big day

Not helpful FT. Sue's car data is probably indicative of the most useful data we are likely to be able to get in Australia. Our aviation industry here is generally too small, and the numbers of accidents/incidents too small for statistical analysis without using decades of data, and that is not likely to be applicable anyway because aviation today is not the same as 20 years ago. So the best you can do is look for data that might be somewhat comparable. Even the US accident data is only somewhat comparable, unless you can prove that aviation here is the same as over there.

Agreed, Mods this topic would be much better by itself. I'll dig a little deeper into cognitive decline due to ageing (most of my recent cognitive work has been at the other end with young uns) and see if there is any interesting information to add.

Well done - it's amazing how an empty seat turns the aircraft into a rocket on first solo!

As a couple of people have pointed out, risk perceptions and behaviours will vary between those who do aerobatics and those who don't. If you don't know (haven't asked the question) who they are, you can't control for the differences and end up with statistical noise. You may want to acknowledge it as a limitation in your write up at least - good luck with the project though!

.....the tail of Snoopy and the Red Baron. "One day, high over Flanders fields, soared a graceful dog kennel. In tight formation with his wingmen, Woodstock and Captain Ratenbacker, Snoopy was keeping a watchful eye over the lines when he spotted a glint....

Careful, Snoopy has taken on the Red Baron and lived to tell of the tale....