nong

A few instructors may be able to give me a pointers and tips.I’ve damaged my right elbow tendons fairly badly and being a jab driver it presents a few control issues if I hit a pain point so I’m looking at learning to fly left handed. What pointers would you suggest? It’s a 300 hour habit.

 

It’s been a bugger adapting to a more left handed orientation.

Interpretation: The cockpit is optimised for the pilot in command to sit on the left side. Their wording is very deliberate and carefully chosen. They have been at pains not to state that the pilot in command MUST occupy the left seat.

A few instructors may be able to give me a pointers and tips.I’ve damaged my right elbow tendons fairly badly and being a jab driver it presents a few control issues if I hit a pain point so I’m looking at learning to fly left handed. What pointers would you suggest? It’s a 300 hour habit.

 

It’s been a bugger adapting to a more left handed orientation.

However, there are considerations.

Regarding Jabs with manual flaps... sitting on the right side produces a less favourable mechanical angle for swinging the flap handle up and down but a better angle for moving into and out of detent position. If you have single stick and manual flaps, it will be hard to operate both at once from the right side and this could be significant, or even a show stopper.

If fitted with port facing fuel valve arm, it will likely not be directly visible, but you can lean to make it visual or do it by feel, taking your time to identify it's shape.

If you have Y stick and electric flaps it really is easy. As a precaution, I recommend you hire an instructor to oversee your practice run (s).

Cheers

Which accident was that? Was this confirmed? I am not doubting it due to "stuff" that happened locally with a Morgan aircraft that I heard about from my former instructor. Just curious to know that anyone has officially shown this to be the case.

You might like to find the ATSB report on the ferris wheel crash. It has photos of very shoddy construction.

Instructors must consider things that a student or low experience pilot, would likely never have had cause to consider.

Many will still have raw feelings about the much loved and respected CFI who was killed in a Morgan because the aircraft was not fit for flight.

It is established, documented fact, that there has been some appalling workmanship seen in the construction of some Morgan aircraft.

Private owners often do not appreciate that it can be difficult and involve elevated risk, to train in an aircraft not correctly fitted out for the job.

Instructors have every right to exercise choice.

Back in the 60s when there were lots more firearms about the country - there was an unusual story doing the rounds at Archerfield of a 'Cessna' being brought into a maintenance facility with a bullet hole in the tailplane. Not unusual you might say, given that many outback Cessnas were flown 'door off' while a firearm was being employed in 'culling' duties over the station. But this one was said to be very unusual - the bullet entered from the top and emerged from the lower surface! The pilot was said to have been 'beating up' a farm in some very hilly country down in the QLD/NSW border ranges, where it's not impossible to fly past lower than a house! Quite a good story - but completely unauthenticated.happy days,

Just looked up what "attitude flying is". Of course I was introduced to attitude flying. That's how I flew. But attitude flying will not tell you what 15 degrees is. And it will not tell you "Oh, I overbanked by five degrees". If you have an AH, you will be able to do better better attitude flying because you will see yourself overbank, look down and see how far you overbanked.How is someone doing pure attitude flying to know if they are flying base turn at 15 degrees or 20 degrees? and if they overbank, how are they to know if it was by 5 degrees or 10 degrees? It's like I said the first time: the issue is precision.

 

20 + 10 = 30. A 30 degree bank will increase the G-forces, and stall speed, a non-trivial amount. Stalls turning onto final are very rare. But they are a very common cause of fatal accidents.

 

I am still not an expert on attitude flying, so I am still all ears.

Maybe you could test your instructor by asking him/her to explain the practical limitations and deadly temptations of "turning flat".

That instructor was bloody useless! Full power, nose down for speed and bank right toward the runway was required, and pronto!

No way should the aircraft have been allowed to head for the trees!!

That bloke surely couldn't have been a real instructor.....could he? He was totally behind the aircraft.

Physical check lists have no place in the cockpit of a single pilot, simple, light aircraft.

The proven method is to read/study the manufacturers Pilots Notes (which may include lists) for the type. Then, sit in the cockpit and find everything, and then, fly it.

Physical check lists are a potentially fatal, head in the cockpit, distraction.

Why any pilot would want to ruin the fun of operating an aircraft by fiddling with endless lists, is, I admit, beyond me.

The use of check lists in the light aircraft environment promotes rigid unresponsive piloting.

It seems reasonable to me that an aircraft to be registered after a period of not being registered should be airworthy. If not airworthy why register it? As to how you prove to the registration authority (RAAus Ltd) that the aircraft is airworthy I'll leave to others better versed in the regs than I am.

Certainly, CASA will happily register a pile of damaged parts.

Condition reports were never about declaring a machine to be airworthy.

They are about providing some guidance to, a possibly aviation ignorant, new owner.

As docjell is not aviation ignorant, it is reasonable that the system should provide for him to waive the intended buyer protection, that was the original rationale for the ACR/UACR.

The C150 stall/spin has been a standard mustering accident over the years.

I have often thought lives would be saved if there was a way to mechanically limit rearward elevator travel during flight. Possibly a two-position travel stop.

The same might apply to the pedals.

C150s have nose-up elevator travel/authority that is excess to that required for normal ops. It is only useful for deliberate spin entry or max effort, short, "bang the tie down loop on the deck" type landings, or boggy strip ops.

Imagine if the pilot could select the extra travel, only when required. For the bulk of operations the travel limited, stall/spin protection, would be in place.

Anyway, food for thought in a new design.

In comparison,

I admire the way Jabiru have provided "only just enough" elevator authority on the J160. In other words, sufficient nose-down to cover full flap and full throttle go-around with rear limit C of G, and sufficient nose-up to cover a glide approach round-out at forward limit C of G.

This has a lot to do with the scarcity of J160 stall/spin accidents.

The prototype Koolhoven F.K.60 is alive and well at Holbrook. Similar layout to the F.K.58 but everyone calls it a Focke-Wulf.

Dutch constructed and RAAus registered.

On the subject of VH- reg. owners supposedly not paying registration.

'Rego' used to be known as Air Navigation Charges and was a heavy fixed impost for those many owners with low or sporadic utilisation.

Industry lobbied for a fuel tax, so as to better align utilisation with Air Nav fees incurred.

Every time you top up with aviation fuel, you pay 'rego' money.

This system has been very successful, to the point that many who post here don't even know that it exists.

Don't know why you wouldn't use Wagga but there are four others that are on the charts within 20 milesAldo

Post #144. JSF and pretty much every other multi role fighter won't be sent into contested airspace where the engagement described was possible. 

 

So change the comment from F-35 to F/A-18 F or even Su-25 vs Su-35 and the comments would still be valid.

 

 

 

Again, the F-22 is air-to-air, the F-35 is not. The point is and will always be "use the advantages and avoid the pitfalls" of the scenario.

 

 

 

And again, the only time an F-15 will out perform an F-35 in terms of "pure E-M" is when both are configured for AN AIRSHOW DISPLAY. Don't take my word for it, read up and be sure the people aren't feeding you their own special diet of BS.

 

 

 

Believe what you want to believe. The AESA radar is rubbish and will fail most days within 4 hours, required commonality between variants knobbled the F-35A which should have whipped the F-16 in every way from day one and so on it goes. Some of it will probably be true for a few years yet. Other issues are already fixed and work continues away from the scornful public gaze.

 

 

 

I'm really sorry for the eastern bloc fanbois and the sinophiles that their fave twin engine Neo-liability-fighter didn't get up. I'm really sorry the earliest an SU-35 would even be ready for export is stated by the manufacturer to be 2020. I'm really sorry that the scandal ridden Gripen is the same price as the F-35A once the features are taken into account and that purchasing Gripens risks damaging trade relations with USA. I'm really very sorry that purchasing Gripens would expose Australia to the same spares issues that dogged two other high profile European military airframe purchases.

 

 

 

These inconvenient facts aren't going away. Time to make do.

Nong, registering an aircraft that was not airworthy sounds like throwing good money after bad.

There are, in fact, thousands of registered, but non-airworthy, aircraft in Australia.

Many prefer to remain registered, so as to avoid the B S associated with placing a machine back on the register.

My point stands.

Struck off? Well a few were incorrectly registered as factory built. Casa eventually agreed to allow them on as 19. Plenty of owners retired their aircraft and I believe this was mainly due to them in states of disrepair in the back of the garage. I'm not sure many were struck off. If the owners chose not to provide requested documents then they were not re-registered. Pretty much the same as car rego. If your asked to provide a roadworthy and proof of ownership then you either do that or you car is not registered.Wrong.

 

An aircraft need not be airworthy to be registered.

I hope that the next time we are called upon to vote, we can simply log on to the RAAus site, just as we do with our banking.

In my case, I didn't trust that the chairman would not 'misplace' my proxy.

It is clear that RAAus Tech has gone draconian.

The level of complaints being run past me, by members, has escalated from occasional, to regular, under the current regime.

If I were to guess, I would think the Tech Manager might have escaped from a military or airline environment, and possibly, might be a true believer that there is no better way to conduct aviation.

In the past, we had been blessed with Tech Managers who were able to adapt to our futuristic, low doc, method of aviation.

The new regime is hell bent on creating a 1960's style, centralised reporting system, and micro-managing the maintenance of every aircraft (left) in the fleet.

This will enable RAAus Corp. Pty Ltd to build a decent size Tech bureaucracy, headed by a manager who ought to be worth, say, at least $300k per annum.

Our members often find it confronting to be, out of the blue, slapped with some bizarre demand from RAAus Tech. A typical example might be where rego falls due, the money is paid, and then Tech spears the transaction with a demand for something described as a "weight and balance." "Huh, I just wanted to register the plane." The member, quite reasonably, has no interest in such matters. Aircraft drops off the register and continues to fly safely, just as it always did. Another outlaw.....courtesy of RAAus Tech.

There is no excuse for the working draft of our latest Tech manual, not to be a living document posted on the RAAus web-site.

Does anyone out there, smell a rat?

Does hour building for CPL have to be done in VH registered aircraft?FWIW, the hour building part is cheap, the dual instruction is where it gets expensive!

OK - I am stopping all posts on this website until further notice.Today - after a 16 month battle with RAAus tech on the registration markings display on my 95.10 trike - RAAus president writes to me cancelling my aircrafts registration and saying it has to be re-registered under 95.32 because I was wrong on the Tech Manual requirements because apparently RAAus has no power to register 95.10 trikes ... despite having registered trikes under 95.10 since 1988!!

 

This feels like a complete piss take and close to persecution - where the f&&& to they get off redefining the RAAus power to register to cancel my aircraft reg - and they do not even provide any LEGAL ADVICE setting out why they come to this conclusion.

 

So until tomorrow when I can find out what the hell they are up to I am signing off because I FEEL that my posts on here are influencing operations of RAAus to me as a member.

Assuming your trike is, as you say, a 95.10 trike, RAAus MUST register it. CAO 95.10 Instrument 2014 provides for your trike to be registered.

It's a lonely feeling, eh, when you are fighting a one man battle against CASA or RAAus. Believe me, I know.

If your aircraft complies with the simple requirements of 95.10, I think you have the makings of a winning hand. However....you must play with skill, cunning and targeted aggression.

Oh, and yes. There is one paid employee of RAAus who is way overdue to be taken down. But, of course, you already know that.

Cheers.

I recently flew one after a ten year break. I'd forgotten the fast approach speed (70+kts) and the tiny rudder, which had me over correcting on approach. Nice aircraft, but get altitude before you get the feel of the controls.

Some pilots have personality or physical defects that are likely to make their flying high risk.

For this reason, I have been known to delay or refuse to issue the endorsement.

What about a Bravo with metal caps manufactured a little too large in diameter?

A few minutes work with a flat file fixed each one.

I appreciate having local manufacture and use only locally built aircraft in our school.

Our Microair gear has given good service.

It is good to have manufacturer service available and I have, to date, found their service to be quite satisfactory.

Lets call it, one vote on the positive side.

Lets remember... Bureaucracies only push change, when it entrenches the position of, or enwealthens, it's officers.