boingk

Bingo. The guys I fly with started with theory and flight planning was introduced later before any navs were made - either dual or solo. Every flight was planned from then on and the onus was on me to complete them or we didn't fly. By doing that I became a competant flight planner and versed with the CASA system. I can now plan a flight accurately, reliably and quickly thanks to my CFI and flight instructors - thanks Malcolm, Shannon and Andy! My advice is exactly that of poteroo - stay clear of mindlessness and become well versed in what you actually need to do to fly well. This amounts to being aware of the rules that apply to your flight, staying within them... and actually flying well! Cheers - boingk

Hell yeah mate, very nice indeed! Making me think twice about buying a trike... - boingk

Cheers robinsm! Progress so far is that I've gotten my tailwheel ticket, ordered new tyres and tubes, gotten an ELT (GME MT400) and just now received the Ark Tech propellor that I ordered a few weeks back: It looks pretty schmick to me and I can't wait to fit it to the Minicab... will be interesting to see if there is any improvement in performance, as well. Cheers all!

Hi there mate, I got my ELT - a GME MT400 - from a marine equipment seller on eBay. I chose the model because its Australian made, has a 6 year battery life, and was relatively inexpensive at around $265 posted. The Kannard ELT was a bit cheaper and had a 7 year battery life, but did not come with a mounting bracket and was somewhat bulkier and heavier. If thats not an issue I would suggest also looking at one of those. It is larger and heavier than a PLB but then again its a very useful 500g worth of equipment! I'd make the same decision again if I was in the same position. Cheers - boingk

I voted 'mainly in a good way' as for the most part what I've been able to see - both here and internationally - are things being made safer / more reliable / easier etc with introduction of new rules or new technology. Of course there is the 'dark side' of things going backwards, but then again I'm not terribly well informed about that and may well be late to the table. The other part of my vote would have to do with things like enormous beurocratisation and internal inconsistency of policy, to the point where dealing with CASA has become tedious and painful. I would much rather deal with RAA, as they are great to deal with on every level that I have done so thus far. - boingk

Thats ridiculous... did you make a call asking them WTF they were doing? Nothing worse than an incommunicative aircraft sitting right where you need to go. - boingk

Just make sure the thing is big enough - an average male bladder holds around 500~600ml when 'oh-crap-I-really-need-to-go' kind of full. Coincidentally, a pint glass holds 568ml. Last thing you want is a 250ml ziplock and a 600ml outflow of urine. - boingk

Have flown with myself (90kg) and my CFI (95kg) in my Minicab with 40L fuel. Performance wasn't astounding but the plane certainly coped just fine. I believe we would have been right on the MTOW for the aircraft. Balance was within limits but needed almost full forward (down) trim for takeoff, landing and flight. Main thing, I suppose, is that you become familiar with your aircraft and know what it is, and is not, capable of. This includes weight restrictions for all areas and not just the aircraft - eg my Minicab will not tolerate more than 15kg on the parcel shelf and anything else will have to either be on the passenger seat or, if carrying a passenger, in their lap. Another big thing is just learning to pack light - I used to be / still am an avid hiker and know that what you take you need to carry, so lightness is second nature. I can pack (good!) food, water, clothes, shelter, kitchen + toiletries for a few days away and still come in around 15kg. Take away the water and food and we'd be looking more like 10~12kg including the pack. Substitute that with a lightweight military duffel and you'd be thinking more around 9~10kg. Remember, it all adds up! Cheers all

Gatorade bottle. My brother and I were on a road trip back from the coast to Goulburn, and opted to take the back way which is single track and very mountainous. He was on the piss and I was driving. Halfway he needed to go. There wasn't anywhere to stop so I asked him if there was a bottle around. We had a laugh over the small openings on the stubbies he was drinking, then he found a Gatorade bottle - wide mouth, 600ml... perfect. He filled it and then wondered what he should do as he needed to go again - I answered that he simply tip it out of the window at arms length. He promptly did so and filled the darn thing again... thats over a litre of urine in one go! I was impressed / amazed / disgusted in that order hahaha.... Nowdays I would heartily reccommend a Gatorade bottle to anyone looking for a urination point. Make sure it has a lid though, hey? Ours didn't and I don't think the car behind was impressed. Cheers - boingk

4cyl engines are inherently not as well balanced as a flat six, which incidentally has almost perfect balance characteristics if set out properly. Flying in the rain with timber props is inherently dangerous as the prop is effectively being water blasted - this will at best mar the finish and at worst delaminate it and cause structural failure. Modern urethane treatments generally negate this but classic laquered / painted props are highly prone to damage. On wooden props, my Minicab has one on it and it performs well. It was also fitted in 1969... whilst 'on condition'! Since then its done 900 hours. If thats an endorsement for the long life and reliability of a wooden prop then feel free to take it. Cheers! PS: Although the current prop appears fine... I'm replacing it with a new 72" x 48" in laminated German Beech. I think 43 years and 900 hours is more than enough for one prop.

Sounds like a non issue to me... especially in a zone that is not - and unlikely to ever be - zoned purely residential. I mean, come on, I don't have a (full) law degree, but I reckon even I could stand this one up in court: Objective standard: The 'reasonable person' considers airports at least potentially noisy. Well established fact - airport in vincinity *cue photo showing view of airport from house and main road* It would therefore stand to reason that a normal person would not consider building their house in close proximity to an operating airport... unless of course they took measures against the unwanted noise, were involved in some beneficial way with the airport, or otherwise has a love of aviation. Please orally apply suction to my anatomy, case closed.

Weight and balance... yeah this is a good one for sure. The ideals are as such because it makes it easier and a lot more practical to fly a plane with 100+ passengers, as regularly happens thousands of times a day all round the world. For us, I'd expect to do it on an individual basis also. Standard weights might be fine for fuel and oil, but not for people in this case. I'm a 'strapping young lad' of 6'2"/90kg and am probably on the limit of practicality in most aircraft - a Skyfox Gazelle might be roomy for most but I find it cramped on legroom, and even a Cessna 150 is sub par on shoulder room. My girlfriend is also rather tall, only 2" or so shorter than me, and being polite I haven't asked her for her weight... so assume its equal to mine! Probably a bit harsh but I think its a good rule of thumb - better to overestimate than underestimate in this case! Nev - Interesting on the expectancies; nowdays the average Australian is 79 for males and 84 for females. I believe we're joint 4th highest in the world with only Japan, Iceland and Hong Kong having higher expectancies. A whole lot of factors play into it including lifestyle, diet and genetics. Mostly males live shorter because of risk taking tendancies, high suicide rates (15~25 and then 70+ age brackets particularly), more dangerous work conditions and poorer self-care skills if living alone. EDIT: Weigh/bagge allowances on commercial flights might seem harsh to the lighter people, but if there were no 'light' passengers (light took heavy bags) then there would have to be no heavy passengers either! The plane would most likely also end up with a rear-of-optimal CG condition due to all the useless clothes/souvenirs/junk in peoples heavy bags in the hold/tail.

Don't worry, Nev, its been a habit since I've been taught to fly - any decent or lower than cruise power situation sees carby heat put on. The above mentioned incident has imprinted it indellibly into my brain, though, for sure!

I've learnt a lot, and not only doing basic flight and emergency procedures. The other day I had a real one! It was an engine failure on takeoff, the result of my CFI's and my own preoccupation with setting and understanding flap speeds and throttle settings on a new aircraft (my Minicab) on final; we forgot the carby heat. On takeoff (touch 'n' go landing) I felt/heard a dramatic reduction in engine rpm and power. I immediately set idle power and lowered the nose, bringing up down rather swiftly for a landing. No damage was done and we were able to stop easily before the end of the strip. My CFI and I were a little bit shaken and agreed to not go up again until I'd made sure it was icing and not a binding linkage or blockage. Static throttling tests and inspection confirmed the icing theory. The above is one experience I won't sorget in a hurry, and definitely a showcase of training/learning - do not forget your basic training and always make sure you are doing the right things, in the right order, at the right time! - boingk

Thats the way guys, and yeah the aux tank is documented at the home site here: http://www.thatchercx4.com/advisories.htm Its a 3gal tank, which works out around 12 litres - assuming US gallons. This really does look like a great aircraft.. although my homebuilding eyes have been firmly set on the Steen 'Knight Twister': http://www.steenaero.com/KnightTwister/ Looks the good for sure, would be good to fly a CX4 and a KT back to back I reckon. Cheers all - boingk

Definitely looks the goods! Endurance with the 10.5gal / 40L tank at a 'standard' VW burn of 14~15 litres an hour would be around 160min, or 536km / 289nm. All that is, of course, dependant on the engine fitted and tank size - they're offering an auxillary tank on the site even. - boingk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCY--b6dm3A Love it. Also the 'Pyramid' album from The Alan Parson's Project. Both awesome and awe-inspiring albums. Cheers - Enoch

Thanks for the reply, av8vfr! To be honest the only reason I could see it named 'Bob' would be because its quite sensetive in pitch. Otherwise, its mainly because I haven't gotten around to taking the decals off The batteries will be a soldered job but the cells themselves have spot-welded tabs already in place, so I'll merely be soldering the tabs together and heatshrinking to cover the join. The battery pack is located on the parcel shelf, anyway, and should be fine as far as I can see. Charging is a bit different to an SLA, but in crude terms its very similar - C/10 charge rates and nominal voltage of 12v for the battery. Only thing you're missing out on is the weight and hydrogen gas of an SLA. High current draw for the system is managed by an inline 10A fuse, replacements kept in the 'precautionary pack' on the parcel shelf along with spare intercom battery and other odds and ends. These are the cells I'm ordering for the NiMH pack: Cheap eBay specials but then again I've had good results with other batteries from the same vendor, and 6000mAh from a sub-C is realistic nowdays. Cheers - Enoch

Did circuits, got tailwheel certificate, and had a few interesting moments in the new aircraft along the way. THe 'most interesting' was an aborted takeoff due to suspected carburettor icing - I was increasing power for takeoff and lifted off, then the engine choked. I immediately set idle power and landed again. Repeated throttling refused to recreate the choke so the CFI and I blamed suspected carby icing. Inspection also failed to find any binding in the l;inkages. Apart from that it was a relatively normal flight with a few good circuits and a ticket at the end of it. Shes sitting in the hangar now, awaiting the next flight and some upgrades I have planned for her: The upgrades consist of the aforementioned new prop and tyres as well as upgraded batteries for the radio and intercom; the Conti A65 doesn't have a generator fitted. The 7Ah lead-acid that runs the radio is getting ditched in favour of an NiMH pack that I'm soldering together - 6Ah, 12v and only 500g! This saves around 1750g over the lead-acid pack, and should also provide better capacity and more reliable current storage. The intercom is getting rechargable lithium-ion (A123) 9v packs and the flight radio is getting a 500mAh Lithium-Polymer backup pack instead of its 8-cell NiCD pack. Total cost? A mere $50 :D Thats all for now - Enoch

Ah, no arguement there at all. Was in a similar situation myself in the flight schools Gazelle which I think I've previously mentioned. Regardless... you *do* need to end up back on the ground at some point. - boingk

I dont understand the arguement - you should be flying as you need to, not flying as numbers in your head say you should. Surely a pilot is more concerned about landing safely and holding the craft in the right attitude on descent, for the conditions, than what they think they ought to be doing based on an arbitrary number? The angle and power you need to hold in the crosswind is the main thing - disregard everything else. Either I'm missing the point or this is a storm in a teacup. - boingk

Speaking as a guy with a degree that covered a fair bit of this type of thing, I congratulate the OP in not letting the GAD hold him back in his flying ambitions, and also for undergoing professional treatment for the GAD - I know of a few people who simply carry on every day, relying heavily on people around them to assist them for many things. While it might seem nice to have friends help out, it only makes things gradually worse. On 'Mental Illness', yes GAD is exactly that - it is a condition defined by a group of symptoms which adversely affects the life of the person it afflicts, and often those around them. That is the definition of a mental illness. You may indeed look up the DSMIV and see that you have symptom after symptom... but unless something is objectively affecting you and/or those around you negatively then no, its not a mental illness. For example, I have many of the criteria indicating I have a Schizotypal Personality Disorder, and a mate family history and psychological indicators which say he is very likely to be a Psychopath... but neither of us are adversely affected - nor anyone else - by these characteristics. I am the last one to label people as this or that, but some mental illnesses are obviously not condusive to flying and aeroplane. YOur psychologist or doctor will be able to tell you what these are, and yes the list is a long one. Essentially, be honest and if you can drive a car then dont fret as you'll most likely be able to fly RAA. CHeers all - Enoch

Landed the flying schools Gazelle in a 20kt+ crosswind a few weeks ago while I was logging time for my RAA pilot certificate. I was very glad to be back on the ground, and my best advice would be: Don't panic - treat it as any other landing. Don't be afraid to use power to hold yourself into the wind, the throttle is as much a useful control as anything else. Do flare to the windward side of the centreline - straightening up and coming down you'll drift with the wind onto it. As an aside, we can't always predict the weather 100%, but make sure you check the advisory before takeoff and again before any other flights that day. It'll forewarn you at the very least. Cheers - boingk

The girlfriend has been up with me in the flying schools C150 twice now, and absolutely loves it! Shes a more adventurous type and I kind've guessed she wouldn't have a problem, just didn't know how much she'd like it haha. Now I've got my own plane she's dead keen for a fly away somewhere... and once I've got my TW endorsement and some reasonable experience in it then I'll be more than happy to do so with her. Cheers - boingk

I was wondering if anyone from the site was there in the group of onlookers, and though the X-Air looked familiar. Good to hear she looks the goods from the ground, thanks Maynard! I'll get a few more photos and perhaps a video of the next flight up when I can. It is bright and sunny here today and only 3kt wind but the CFI is on his day off so I'll have to wait until tomorrow, when we're doing circuits. Cheers - Enoch