Matt Tomlinson

Thanks @SSCBD that's worth some thought too. No idea where I'll head to yet, only just started my planning. Recently finished my CPL and doing my FIR at the moment. Who knows where I will end up?

Cheers @facthunter

Hello all, Keen to get some information on whether it would be valuable to get some C206 time before heading 'up north' to look for my first CPL job? Do employers generally ask for 206 time prior to even being considered? If so, how many hours on type do they generally ask for? Thanks in advance, Matt.

Thanks all for your comments...great discussion and advise. Certainly the plan is not for hour-building though; I'm making the change to become a career instructor, and halve my salary in the process no doubt! My life has been spent in flying for fun (paragliders, microlights, GA) and my career has been in coaching, business and L&D. So let's just say it's a semi-retirement plan and I think I have a lot to give! Happy flying.

Hi fellow flyers, I am looking for a recommendation for a good personal tax accountant in the Sydney area who knows a thing or two about aviation! I am about to invest heavily in my personal flying development (from PPL to CPL with flying instructor rating) and need to ensure I am maximising my deductions. Can anyone provide a recommendation of someone they trust? Cheers, Matthew.

I haven't yet, but I suppose I should do. You're right in that if Airborne don't know about it, they won't be aware of what could be a wider issue.

Here's my set-up, Jacko. Roof-racks on the top, ladder racks on the front and back, and two lengths of timber underneath to give a flatter surface while on the road:

I thought I would share an experience that happened to me the last time I flew, in the hope it could help others. I rig and de-rig a Streak III on my XT-912 each time I fly, and I’ve probably done this about 100 times or so since buying the microlight. It’s a process I like to think I have down to a fine art these days, and although tedious does not take me too long to complete. So last weekend I rigged as usual, did my pre-flight checks, and headed-off for a cruise down the coast for a couple of hours. After heading back to my home airport to land and have a cup of tea (spot the POM…) I decided on a few more circuits before I finished for the day. So I head back to my aircraft and commence another pre-flight check, and take a moment to gaze up at the underside of my port wing. And something doesn’t look quite right… With the sunshine coming through the wing from above, I note that the shadow created by one of my under-wing (straight) battens looks like it is on an angle – i.e. not traversing straight from the leading to the trailing edge as it should be. I pull the wing down for a closer look, and my first thought is that the sleeve which contains the batten has split, allowing the end nearer the leading edge to protrude off at a strange angle. However, on inspection, this was not the case at all. In fact I had somehow managed, when rigging, to insert the batten into the hole in the under surface of the wing, BUT NOT INTO THE SLEEVE THAT HOLDS IT! The scarily thing is that when I did this it appeared totally normal, and felt exactly the same as the others which HAD made it into their sleeves. It slipped-in the same, it tucked-in at the end the same, and it even looked correct during my first pre-flight check of the day. It was only after flying, landing, and perhaps taxiing that it moved around inside the wing enough for me to spot it on the second pre-flight check. So what were the lessons? Well, for me a reinforcement of never being too confident about rigging your wing no matter how many times you have done it. It’s also interesting to ponder that without it being a sunny day, casting a shadow of where the batten lay in the wing, I may NOT have spotted it before my next flight. What is a certainty is that without that additional pre-flight check, before my second flight of the day, I would definitely not have spotted it. And there is a lesson in that for all.

Ian - you should add your contact details to the landing page. With so much white-space at the bottom, and with hundreds of Aussie pilots logging-on weekly, if I was looking for a place to advertise to the aviation community I would come knocking at your door! Could make fixing it up worthwhile perhaps?

This article would be powerful if handed out to students as a little 'discussion starter' during flight training. Thanks for your honest and candid report.

No problems Mark - glad you were successful. Happy flying, Matt.

I have my 912 insured for fire, theft, hangar damage & hull damage (i.e. flight risk) with the guy whose details I have copied below. It's insured for about $73,000 all-up, and costs me about $2,800 per year. He's a pleasure to deal with, too. Hope this helps. Matt Tomlinson Wollongong Airport Wayne G. Cottier ANZIIF (Assoc) CIP AVIATION RISK AND INSURANCE (ARI) Authorised Representative of: Risk Management & Insurance Broking Oceania Insurance Group Pty Ltd ARN: 398045 ABN: 37743649662 ACN: 14577110 ABN: 26145771106 M: +61(0)414 556 426 AFS Licence No: 391585 E: [email protected] W: www.oceaniainsurance.com W: www.aviationriskinsurance.com A: Lvl 14, 15 Castlereagh Street A: PO Box 687 Coorparoo QLD 4151 Sydney NSW 2000

Fantastic discussion; thanks to all who contributed. Clearly there are some 'anomalies' between what an RAAUS trike is permitted to do versus an HGFA registered one, and it looks like I picked the more 'restrictive' of the two bodies to learn under... Happy flying, Matt.

I obtained my trike certificate about two years ago with an HGFA instructor. One of the things that was drilled into me was "avoid built-up areas". I was even taught a definition; if there are street lights, then it should be considered as such. I have dutifully followed this advice ever since. Then, reading this month's CASA Flight Safety magazine, an article on "sharing the skies with trikes" quotes Lee Ungermann (CASA sports aviation specialist & former trike instructor) saying that "[trikes] are allowed to fly over built up areas". Which is the correct approach? Matt Tomlinson.