Aldo

Merv I don't want to argue with you, you're an instructor (and by all accounts a good one) and obviously have your patch to protect (I don't disagree with that at all) my initial post stated listen to your instructor, he/she won't let you crash. I wasn't the one who started quoting look at the lift/drag curves etc (they won't tell you shit) the aeroplane will tell you all you need to know at his/her level (in fact at most levels until you get into heavies), I did say yes you need to understand the theory. I would ask the question "how many people on this site or elsewhere apply the lift/drag theory to everyday flight" I would hesitate to say that most people couldn't explain it, how many people know what their V Ref speed should be based on weight and conditions etc (I'm sure Dutch, Nev and Bennyboy could) not that it is particularly relevant to light aircraft but theory all the same. I have been into Camden, Taree and Coffs in the last month (albeit IFR in a Navaho which makes it easier from my side and a tower for separation) no real problems, Roma is apparently the busiest regional airport in the country at the moment and Toowoomba can be pretty busy at times as well (the thing is these places are busy with fast aircraft 5 miles a minute stuff and Ctaf only, not tower controlled that makes it a little different), I'm sure Bankstown can be a real headache with all the training not much different to Archerfield though when it is busy. My main concern is that people don't know where they are at a particular point in time or where the other aircraft are at the same point in time (I know this comes with experience as I didn't at one time know either) but by reducing the training for people who share the same airspace in my opinion is not safe. Once again my opinion but don't confuse the new student on a website/blogsite with stuff that his/her instructor will no doubt be keeping them up to speed with. The poor guy asked about slow flight, simple keep it above the stall speed and fly the posted speeds in the POH no more difficult than that.

Merv Sorry for my late response I have been away for a few days, yes I did make a mistake, I quoted 5 hrs for the RAA navigation when it is I'm led to believe 10 hours. At no stage was I comparing current day PPL to RAA my comparisons were between RAA and the training I did when I learnt to fly (as that is what was relevant to me). Training requirements when I learnt to fly (1987) were as follows (part 40.1.2 section 7 ANO issue 8) Restricted Private Pilots Licence 30 hours including a minimum 15 solo 3 hours instrument (not applicable to RAA) Flight test approx 1.5 hours Removal of area restriction 22 hours of navigation training (including a minimum of 6 hours solo) - consisted of 7 navigation exercises 2 hours instrument (not applicable to RAA) Flight test approx 3.5 hours The CTA part of our training didn't add any additional hours to training we just planned Brisbane, Maroochydore or Oakey as part or our nav exercises With the above my opinion remains the same, I don't think the current RAA training is stringent enough 30 hours V's 52 hours. 22 hours is a lifetime when you are just learning to fly. As I have said my opinion - you don't have to agree with it, but I do in excess of 200 hours a year (both GA and RA - Jab 230 and I love it) and I see a lot of people who are not competent (once again my opinion) in both GA & RA. If you don't believe me go ask some of the GA charter operators operating in and out of places like Roma and Toowoomba what they think when they hear an RA call sign in the circuit area. That said I love what RA offers in terms of affordability and freedoms to aviation but it will eventually be taken away if the competency levels are not there.

Nev I agree with what you are saying, last week a friend of mine asked if I would investigate on his behalf getting a RAA pilot certificate with the intention of going on to PPL the times were min 20 for cert and 5 for cross country, if it took me 25 hrs to learn to navigate to a competent standard (VFR) clock, compass wiz wheel and map (no GPS or OzRunways) and I'm not a complete dummy how can someone be competent in 5 to the same VFR required standard. This is certainly the least expensive way to go and what I would recommend but I question the competency of a 25 hr pilot sharing the same cross country airspace as me and flying into somewhere like Roma these days.

Mine was an attempt at a little humour (and I own and like my Jab 230 engine and all) I just fly it like any other aeroplane knowing that the engine may stop one day and hopefully it is not on takeoff on 11 out of Toowoomba (in any aeroplane).

Nev We are on the same tram, no issues with having a logical discussion and getting to the bottom of it. The trouble with email/blog posts etc is that it can be difficult to get across your actual message without it being taken the wrong way in some cases.

Nev I agree the aircraft that we fly in RAA are more difficult to fly and more susceptible to the conditions than the GA ones we fly so my question would be why are the requirements less than the GA requirements?

Avocet That would be directed at me, Nev I wasn't bagging the pilot just questioning his currency, if as Avocet says it was very windy and gusty in SA the day before and therefore in Vic it probably would have been today then it is the responsibility of the PIC to determine if his currency is suitable to be flying. Yes I have also been caught and lucky in gusty conditions but I put this down to the currency I was carrying at the time, if you only fly once a fortnight or month then you are probably not going to be current enough to deal with difficult conditions, you Nev would surely understand this. Aldo

Merv I understand that but it is his instructor that should be ensuring that he is competent as far as the theory goes not this forum, that just confuses people. I learnt to fly in the eighties when the requirements were a whole lot more stringent than a 20 hour RAA pilot certificate requirement or 25 if you want a cross country endorsement back then (if I remember correctly) it was min 35 hrs to get a RPL (GFPT these days) and min 25 hrs to get your nav (PPL). My opinion I don't think the training requirements for RAA are stringent enough.

Might want to brush up on your asymetrics, looks pretty cool though.

Happy to see there are no injuries but once again we see a diversion on landing quote from the newspaper "he was an experienced pilot" (from the club president) but how current? If we are not able to keep control of our aircraft with a wind gust or change maybe we shouldn't be flying them. Always remember tail draggers are not landed until they are parked.

Yep, the fun police at it again

What Nev has said is absolutely correct don't confuse the issue. Really guys you are talking to someone here who probably has less than 10 hours - lift/drag curves, theory of aerodynamics, speed Vs angle of attack (just glance at your ASI it will tell you where you need to be), I know the theory is important but give the guy a chance. Recflyer Fly the aeroplane, listen to your instructor (he/she won't let you crash it), flying is all about feel, confidence and the picture you see out the front (VFR) enjoy the journey. Aldo

Fantastic, registration renewal submitted via web last Wednesday certificate received by email Friday. Aldo

Dan If mathematics and English have anything to do with it maybe you should give it away now, hole and whole have two totally different meanings. 1988 to now is 26 years and 15 + 26 = 41 so think you should have at least 20 to 30 years (so long as you are healthy) left in the flying game. Like everything else in this world aviation including sport/recreational changes with what the majority want, I for one am happy that I'm able to have a rec aircraft that is able to do 3 miles a minute if I choose, I'm also happy that I'm able to have a drifter that is able to do 1 mile a minute just depends on what turns your crank and what you are using it for. One thing that I think should be the same for all is training, we all share the same airspace and I don't think rec aviation training is up to the standard. Aldo

It is calculated automatically based on your location, you can select it to be visible on the toolbar across the top when you have a plan active, just hold your finger on the bar and wait until the options come up mag var is one of the optional displays

Kaz Yeah I'm a bit more fortunate than most I did 220 hrs last year 120 in my J230 and another 80 in the 182 so I get to remain pretty current in both. Aldo

No offence meant, I remember barefooting in another life and it was hard enough to hang on at 35+knots to do this at 50+ is insane, I can just imagine what a face plant must be like when you get it wrong and your toes dig in.

Kaz I did my last review (Aug 13) in a 182 RG and RAA accepted mine the stamp in your log book just has to cover all the relevant items CAR 5.81, 5.108 or 5.169, just sent a copy of my log book page this year when due and all good. I had previously questioned RAA on the BFR/AFR requirements for the low inertia aircraft their suggestion and it was only a suggestion not a requirement at the time that every second BFR (4 years) I do the BFR in both to cover the low inertia.

Makes no difference friction is friction and yes it does get hot, which is why you see them going from seat to feet on a regular basis. Normal speed for barefooting is between 32 - 38 knots can't imagine what it would be like at 50+ behind a Thruster or Drifter, these guys are good.

Think about it Deb If you have a situation where the aircraft is out of balance (due to design or lack thereof) in this case ball left of centre, the easiest way to counter it is to fly left wing low, it is a pain in the backside to fly all day with your foot on the rudder, I know as I have one, but I'm also very aware if I'm low on fuel this situation is very possible. The best remedy is to have a trim tab installed on the rudder all problems gone.

Deb You're more of an expert than I originally thought!!! But maybe not as much as you think.

Think about this scenario for a minute and it could happen Enough fuel for flight plus reserves and for whatever reason 80% of the fuel is in the left tank. Most Jabs that I know fly about 1/2 a ball left of centre flight is conducted without compensation for the out of balance and or left wing low fuel in the right tank is exhausted after x minutes of the flight is completed flight continues until the left wing fuel pickup is unported (remaining fuel is outboard due to the unbalanced condition) flight continues on the header tank for a further x minutes engine stops fuel still in tank when inspected.

I never said Rotax owners were clowns, that is just your interpretation of what I said (go back and read the post), you HSE people are the same the world over as long as it suits your spreadsheets, TRIFR, LTI, hazards vs incidents vs LTI's vs fatalities you're happy, any idiot can make a spreadsheet say what you want it to say, what is actually required is that you present apples vs apples which never happens. In this case Jabiru engine hours vs all other types engine hrs (the apples being engine hrs) and as long as all are reported then you are able to get an accurate picture, until that happens all you get is people assuming (in this case) Jabiru engines are no good which is not an accurate assumption. What would be interesting is to know how many lives have been lost to Jabiru aircraft compared to other types.

Ladies/gents All reaction is related to the prior training you have had and all we are doing here is reacting to a particular situation (that none of us want to be in). Take for instance several sports (which is the most applicable for our discussion), psychology doesn't come into it once the situation has occurred, the psychology side of things is extremely relevant before and up to the event as this relates to how we prepare for the event. With sports such as martial arts, boxing, cricket, football and many others, the people who reach the top practice, practice and practice, the more they practice the more instinctive the reaction is, it is all about muscle & brain memory, all we are doing is manipulating a set of controls to achieve a certain outcome based on a particular set of circumstances (no rocket science involved and don't over complicate it). It is essentially no different from landing with a surprise thrown in and the result will be how you react to the surprise (no different from the bowler, bowling a short pitched delivery when the batsman isn't expecting it). Flying is quite simple when you get down to it, just simple mental, time and distance calculations. The difficulty comes from our own inhibitions and lack of self confidence, be careful though not to be overconfident. The following information should not be taken as fact and should not be tried by low time pilots or at low altitude (less than 2500 AGL). I did this afternoon go and try some different scenarios relating to EFATO and the turn back to the take off location, the aircraft I was using was a Jab 230 (BEW 339 kg, fuel 75 lts and pilot 80 kg) in nil wind conditions. I played with a number of different situations relating to the take off situation after 300 feet i.e. no flap and 70 kts . I found the best recovery for the least amount of altitude lost to the reciprocal track was to not worry about achieving the best glide speed prior to commencing turn back, but to just push the nose forward and commence a very steep balanced descending turn, the best result I achieved was a loss of 300 feet (actually a bit less) at about 70 deg of bank angle (no back pressure on the stick, nose attitude very low), the diameter of the turn was about 0.2 NM or 1200 feet (approximate measurement from my GPS), the one thing that did surprise me was the speed at which I came out of the turn (about 105 kts) this would have to be bled off prior to attempting a landing but the Jab is able to be slipped in all configurations so with full flap this shouldn't be an issue (other aircraft may be different). Notes to be taken into account: You only get one chance - not multiple attempts like I had today I knew when I was going to pull the power Largest altitude loss during testing 900 feet Average altitude loss during testing 500 feet Least altitude loss approx 270 feet There were no loud noises/surprises I would add a minimum of 100 feet because of notes 2 & 6 above I still would not try to turn back if I had not commenced my turn onto crosswind and then only if the conditions were in my favour unless I had absolutely no other options e.g. trees, houses or Toowoomba on 11 If I had a clear field in front of me I would take that option every time below 700 feet. You can't stall an unloaded wing Allan

Andy Sorry from me also I jumped a bit hard there didn't mean to do that, I do understand where you are coming from. Allan