RickH

I voiced these very same sentiments a couple of years ago.And could not agree more. CTA and higher weight limits is all CASA need to wipe out RAA. More sophisticated acft more sophisticated regulations I totally agree be very careful what you wish for. But as I also stated previously the LearJet Set will not be happy until they have totally screwed things for everyone. And please someone be the first to object to my reference to the LearJet Set comment I would love to know who you are.

I know a few RAA pilots that make me wonder how their machines can carry them. and I know of one particular CFI who due to his weight I would not allow to even consider getting in my machine with me.

There a lot of nutters out there and whilst I'm not paranoid about it ya just never can tell

Only if you are Law abiding. And why do we call Criminals criminals oh yeah that's right they don't care about what the law says.

Yeah Yenn but at that time I had no tailwheel experience whatsoever. but the experience certainly answered my quetions.

This is the link to video of my ground loop experiment(surprise) I managed to edit it down a bit.

While doing taxi tests I decided to disconnect tailwheel steering just to see what happens. A friend was videoing the tests. I opened the throttle wide and did not go very far before loosing control. And hey presto ground loop. what looked very scary from the cockpit(thoughts like oh shit I've just wrecked my new plane), actually seemed fairly benign on the video. Needless to say I very quickly re-instated the steering controls. The machine was totally uncontrollable without it. I have tried to upload to youtube but the file is to big . I will try to edit it down and perhaps upload latter.

If you re- read my post You may note I stated Airfoil. And I would suggest you go and some research on basic aerodynamics so that you may avoid making a fool of yourself before continuing to argue any further on the matter.

In fact lift can be created with zero angle of attack or as aerodynamicists say zero alpha and in fact certain airfoils will generate positive lift with negative angle of attack. and any one who says it is not down to the various laws of physics such as Newton Bernoulli simply does not what he is talking about.

Why specifically the X-Air. The X-Air standard is basic three axis and a great little plane(I own one ). The X- Air Hanuman is a different configuration to the standard and has the addition of flaps. The Hanuman handles a little differently to the Standard( a good friend has one). I don't think it is any more or less difficult to handle just different. But surely any similar nose wheeler would fit the bill. Might I suggest however that you consider learning in a tail wheeler ( I also have one of these), if you can handle a t/wheeler you will most certainly be able to handle a nose wheeler and a tail dragger will help make you a better pilot. But this is only my opinion.

How do you arrive at this conclusion. I assume your aircraft does not meet the criteria for rego and therefore for RAA to grant rego would be illegal.I also agree with the principal of keeping the weight restrictions although 540kg has been with us for some time and I do not see any reason to change this limit. I may be out of touch with this one though as I believe there were moves afoot to raise the limit to 625kg and even higher but have not confirmed if this was done. As I see it the line has to be drawn somewhere or perhaps Mr Travolta might start claiming that he flies his 747 for recreational purposes.

I find it incredulous that Pilots can not tell you the empty and/or the mtow of their aircraft after all it is in the Acft Handbook, SHOULD be in the front of their Maintenance Logs. and has to be weighed and balanced, documented and placarded (mtow) in cockpit for Rego. Maybe they have ulterior motives for not saying.

What's the point of running a two stroke unmuffled. After all the exhaust system on most of them is part of the engine tuning or am I missing some thing.

I have allowed a couple to this albeit with a briefing and I think shoving the nose down on engine failure I imagine is the correct cause of action in any aircraft. And pardon my ignorance but in my limited experience I have never yet heard of an acft where you do the opposite. And may I add there some pilots I have met who claim all sorts of experience whom I would not allow with in 50 feet of an acft let alone fly one. Any I've said my peace so I'll let some one else have the last say. It will help their ego

A truck drivers license does allow you to drive an ordinary car. A licence for a manual car allows you to drive an automatic but not vice versa. And I fail to see why a PPL should not allow operation of RAA Acft the Low Inertia argument is a firfy I Have heard this argument many times and have yet to see some one actually quote a specific case. This is about empire building not furthering the sport. Any GA pilot would know to read the Flight manual of the acft in Question in order to familiarise themselves with the Handling characteristics of the machine. I also fail to see the relevance of the Type endorsement argument. After all what does this entail, Single engine or twin (not relevant to RAA), Nose or tail wheel etc. Like I say empire builders. I don't often read this forum. The reason being, every time I do It's the same old story. Some one starts a topic and you only have to look at who is posting a comment to know which way they are going to vote and it's the same Handlfull of people argueing for or against. Those who want to keep it simple and avoid further regulation and those who want to push regulations down our throats whilst trying to build their little corner of the empire. And guess what it never changes because to actually do something constructive would mean there is less to bitch and moan about. No doubt this post will give you plenty to jump on me for like the mis-spelt fourth word, I'm going to leave it that way just so I don't disappoint the inglish teachers out their. Although Kasper has hit the nail on the Head.

Good friend of mine is eighty two, flies almost every day. got his license when he was in his late sixties. I have flown with him on several occasions and would do so at any time. RickH

I know an awful lot of people who will disagree with you re training standards. By the way thanks for the maths and English lessons. I'm sure your ego feels much better. I'm also sure the rest of us got Dan's point.

Robb Judd I totally agree with your comments

I would like to hear comments from Ross Millard AKA Maj on this thread he seems to be fairly active on this forum and yet on this thread he has been strangely silent. I recently emailed him re this subject and my suggestion on the thread I started labled Can we fix it. I gathered from his reply to me that he was less than enthusiastic about my suggestion, mostly, I figured, because this would give too much control to the rank and file in the organisation. In fact his final comment to me was "talk is cheap and it costs money to buy whiskey" which left me wondering is that what our board does use our fees to buy whiskey to drink whilst talking about what they are giong to do to or for us. He also stated that the discussions on this site are either ill informed or months behind what is actually happening. He also accused me of not being willing to put my hand up to do anything to help the organisation. well Ross I'm putting up my hand to volunteer to do whatever is required to see my suggestion implemented and to help to hand control of RAA back to the members. RickH

John F Kennedy said " There are risks and costs to a program of action. But they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable inaction" Stay comfortable guys, I've got an aeroplane to fly and the weather outside is perfect. See you you when you're grounded and comfortable. And while you are grounded you will have plenty of time to ponder "Parmenides Fallacy" Then ball is in your court.

So has any one else sent e-mails to RAA or is that to much like trying to help.

I stand chastised Avocet..........................

Would if I could find it. I take it that you are perhaps one of those I describe above

It is a poor statement of a persons ambition/Ego when all they can do is to try to point scoreby knocking some one for the usage of grammer or spelling. These are obviously the people who have so little confidence in their own abilities that all they can do in order to cling to some feeling of self worth is to find fault with such trivial distinctions and who care not for the point being made provided that they get the chance to appear to themselves 'Intelligent'. Oh dear me I hope I got all the spelling and grammer correct

HITC got your point. Okay so I picked the wrong people to E-mail. So Isay cool lets just Email the bloody lot and perhaps then everyone will get the message and something may happen. Iwill definitely take your advise and make sure I forward a coppy of my email to as manyboard members and Reps as I can find and I guess A visti to the RAA site should get me their contact details