bilby54

I have done several instrument checks on aircraft and really it takes very little effort to check the sense lines during a 100 hrly. I have found that problems due to faulty instruments show up long before any testing is done - water in the pitot can give wild speed indications as well. The Tulsa instruments are rugged and almost bomb proof but can only be overhauled by an approved instrument shop whereas the RAA type are throw away items especially if the aircraft spends its life on grass runways. I agree that the manometer is the best way to calibrate, or at least, check instruments but there is no harm in doing a speed reference check in flight with the GPS

Would you mind explaining that in more detail as I would have thought it to about the most critical instrument for normal operations

I am fairly jealous of all of the above. Maranoa Regional Council is hell bent on getting every dollar from everyone that they can due to the fifo workforce and large movements of passengers. They would prefer that the aero club just cease to exist and any spirit of co-operation has long gone. I dropped into my old club where I learned to fly at Alice Springs yesterday and they have a similar similar problem with the airport owner. If you have a reasonable council then do everything you can to work with them to achieve a good result

Now that is interesting that you knew that it was a Tecnam that was giving trouble Bruce:cheezy grin: That aircraft used to launch and could fly a circuit without leaving the airfield perimeter but now not the same. The interesting thing is that if it was a new motor vehicle, the supplier would have been all over it like a rash. My greatest concern was the aircraft had to be flown away while the engine was in a very suspect state putting the pilot/owner at some risk. On a positive note, the P92 Eaglet is one of the best products made.... might have to come and talk to you about one

I had a look in the first AUF Ops Manual and the syllabus refered only to stalls with a wing drop. In the 2006 version it has the same reference but has incipient spin in brackets while the latest publication has dropped all reference to 'wing drops'. It may have been done by some well meaning attempt to keep up with the times but in reality has set future training on a path to destruction as the recoveries from each situation (wing drop versus incipient spin) is very different as has been outlined. Every ultralight Flight Manual or POH that I have read has the words 'No intentional spinning' but the Ops Manual is telling us to teach it??? As an aside, the Ops Manual also refers to 'miss' approach for 'missed approach' training and on more than one occaision. I fully agree with you David in that all reference to incipient spin recovery should be removed and a bulletin issued to emphasis the correct recovery technique to be used in these aircraft.

The rail line is older than 5 years and like you, I advised the appropriate authorities but to no avail. Good point about about having the latest WAC that is more out of date than the previous 5 or so editions

These faults are so new that the engine supplier has not caught up with them yet. As you say, very difficult to diagnose anywhere especially when the diagnostic tool is not recognising any faults. Rotax has bit of doo doo to sort out

Matt, you do not have to remove the engine from a gazelle to replace the water pump. It probably looks daunting but it is really easy once you have done it a couple of times

There is a Tecnam with less than 100 out here with the exact same symptoms. EMS is saying everything is fine but has had the same fuel pump / filter / plugs replacement. Bert Floods have been very helpful trying to find the problem but cannot say the same for the agent

Or in the case out this way, driving a mine dump truck or loading drill pipe on a rig. The family farm is becoming a thing of the past as there are easier things to do in life for better money. LAME's are copping a very hard time from CASA at the moment for all of the usual reasons with most of them leaving the industry for better pay, less liability issues and less threat of legal action by the regulator. Big shame. CASA is slowly getting its 100% safety record by getting rid of Aussie pilots, LAME's and aircraft

Thanks BP. I know of several Tecnams that have had to change to fixed pitch props for registration because CASA does not accept a particular certification. They can fly in Europe and New Zealand but somehow become non compliant in Australian airspace because the prop does not conform to the American ATSM. Funny thing is the same flying school can use it on line to give IFA propellor endorsements, BFR's or whatever?? Trying hard to understand but it is clear as pea soup.

I don't understand how an aircraft can be certified under a European standard and accepted by CASA but the IFA prop has to be certified to ATSM standard. I was under the impression that the manufacturer had to approve changes to the LSA aircraft for it to remain in that category. If CASA requirement is to fit a fixed pitch prop then how does sit with the original certificate from the manufacturer? The recent spiel from the ops manager says inter alia that manufacturers cannot "cherry pick" provisions from various standards but isn't what CASA is now doing? Australia is so bogged down in rules in procedures that I am sure we are oozing to a stop

So we could fix the middle east by getting them to all buy an ASIC!! Might have a few problems with the photo though:laugh:

Taf, your contribution to this thread should not have you considering it to be a blunder, it is about student pilots and further learning. Maybe it may have been better stated to say "I was always taught to......" The big problem with statements (not from you) saying that competent pilots should not accidentally enter a stall / spin is great in theory but I personally feel that it is not backed up by the amount of accidents caused directly by that situation occurring. It is partly to do with training, partly aircraft cockpit design, partly lack of self discipline and a dose of self preservation when things go wrong. There really is not a lot of emphasis during training placed on slow flight, stall recognition and just plain getting the stick forward to keep the aircraft flying. I could say more but you get the idea but please keep contributing because we were all students at one time and the clever ones still are.

Not sure I agree with withdrawing this as it is a learning page and Taf was probably only going over how he was taught - or possibly taught. We can all learn from mistakes made on a forum

The diver thing always sticks in my neck when teaching it as there are so many things more apropriate and I really wonder why RAA has to have so many knee jerk reactions and make things so complicated. I remember reviewing an SMS from a major gas company that had amongst other wonderous things in the definitions section "PO Box", that's when I lost interest! We should ignore the trivial rubbish that is in the SMS template and concentrate on what affects safety at our own little patch of dirt as a starting point.

And now you have just entered the world of the test pilot with the exception that they have extensive aeronautical knowledge and flying skill. Have a defined routine for the test sequence, have a safety plan for when things go wrong, a spin recovery shute and a parachute for when everything goes pear shaped. There is no such thing in RAA registered aircraft so do as DJP has suggested. There is a lot of dodgy info being presented here and the topic is STALLS which are recovered by pushing forward on the stick. If one wing drops or yaws because it has stalled before the other wing then the recovery is the same - push the stick forward to unstall the wing. The biggest mistake that people make is thinking that because they practiced at high altitude then "if they get into trouble and accidentally enter a spin" they will be able to get out of it. Do not ever think along that path because at low level you will die. A spin entry at low level is fatal - a Drifter will lose around 400' in one rotation in controlled circumstances, metal skinned aircraft just spin quicker so how is anyone going to survive when they have had an engine failure at low level? Trying to stretch the glide and spin in at 100'? Take a wander through Youtube just to clarify that. Have a look at the safety statistics (RAAus excluded) and see how many people have died as a result. The RAA syllabus covers Stalls with 'wing drop'. If the aircraft is held in the stalled configuration it will spin so why do it?? Schools should teach stall recognition and how to avoid getting into that situation in the first place because the average garden variety pilot will die if they enter one. I have had more than enough experience with that side of things thanks. There is not enough emphasis placed on slow flight and stall recognition as a certain element seem to think that students are not real pilots until they have recovered from a spin at 5000' in an aircraft that is not approved and quite willing to put YOUR life in real danger. It does not matter where the stall occurs, just remember to get the stick forward to unstall the wing and continue flying and if it is because of a forced landing then you will most likely survive. If you stall and then spin........

I think that there is a misunderstanding here as we are talking about stall recovery - wing dropping, yawing or whatever - not recovery from a spin. The recovery from a stall is to rapidly get the stick forward to unstall the wing and get the aircraft flying. Most accidents occur because pilots try to stretch the glide during an engine failure and spin in. If you are below 500' agl then you should not buggerise around trying to pick up wings with rudder; shove the stick forward, roll the wings level and adopt best glide speed. If you are holding the stick back and the aircraft is stalled then you will never recover and yes you will spin and it happens very fast to unsuspecting pilots and if you are close to the ground you will die. If you stall an aircraft shove the stick forward and maintain control

GF, you are not allowed to do Ab-initio training in an aircraft that you did not build or was not factory built due to the liability issues with the 51% rule. If you have a current Pilot Certificate then you are able to do endorsement training on whatever aircraft as it is not teaching you how to fly - talk to the ops manager or get legal opinion but it is quite legal. Most problems arise because people do not understand or accept the ops manual and want to over complicate everything. We could not get 'endorsed' on every aircraft because most of the fleet is homebuilt or non certified

Not quite sure I agree there. All of the schools (read CFI) have been issued a draft SMS and there is no reference to it in the current ops manual. Givent that there about 200 CFI's and ??? 10,000 members it is unfair of CASA and RAA to require the minority to change for the benefit of the majority. Most CFI's are great at teaching people to fly but have very little idea of how to write an SMS. As CFI's we are bound to follow the ops manual and relevant Acts pertaining to civil aviation but nowhere does it talk about SMS's. As was also mentioned, if CASA wants additional requirements, then why do I as a CFI have to wear hours of unpaid labour, research and writing to fullfil it and then cop a barrage of abuse and lack of business when my rates go through the roof for NO benefit to members. If we could operate as per the operations manual and the relevant CAO's then everyone would fly safe but that does not happen now so why does anyone think that things will change with having an SMS on board? Until we ALL get together and change the culture towards safety in flying then none of this will benefit anyone

Hi Eric, During a side slip the aircraft is flying unbalanced as you have stated which purely means that more of the fuselage, vertical fin and rudder are exposed to the airflow. This being the case, the aircraft will want to slow down so to counteract this the stick is pushed forward and airspeed (however it is presented to the airspeed indicator) will increase. A sideslip is a manouvre that the aircraft is not really happy doing because if you understand stability and release the controls then the aircraft will fly directly into the relative airflow. A sideslip is a forced action on behalf of the pilot and the aircraft will not spin as the critical angle of attack has not been exceeded and the aircraft has not stalled. If you are on approach and need to sideslip, the aircraft will literally go wherever the stick is pointed and I doubt that will be into your lap. Don't be worried about sideslips and if you want confirmation about this, then look up Tony Hayes advice on this forum

Hi GF, Not quite sure what you mean by type endorsement as RAA does not have them only tailwheel, nosewheel, etc. It is quite legal to do cross country training in a 19 registered aircraft if you have a current pilot certificate and a performance endorsement suitable for that aircraft. You can quite legally get a tailwheel endorsement in a Drifter and then fly what ever tailwheeler takes your fancy. The principles are still the same and if the instructor was up to scratch with how he teaches you then it should not be a big problem but my advice would be to go up with someone who has a bit of time in them first. Do not be afraid of tailwheelers but be very respectful of them!

Not quite sure what the problem is here. The Operations Manual, which has been approved by CASA, has all of the requirements to meet whatever agreement they have asked for. Yes, I also have asked RAA to get the argreement on the web site but if every CFI, PE and Ops Manager are doing their job correctly, then what is the problem? RTFM. I doubt very much that CASA is beyond reproach in safety matters and given the current state of political affairs, is it any wonder?

Never a more true statement than that John! A fellow GA CFI had a student fatality when he was on his way home from an AFR..... no safety officer, procedure or documentation could help, it was just up to the pilot. As far as help for schools and all of the pilots in RAA goes, we do not know what accidents are causing the problems or what is trending as RAA does not publish anything about accidents. Alll of a sudden out of the blue we are emailed some half baked safety management plan that as CFI's we have to complete and somehow..... somehow, that is going to fix our safety problems - get real

Three and a half months to get a 95.10 re-registered. I knew what the story was so did the photograph of everything thing including two placards already in the aircraft saying that the aircraft will kill you if you fly it. Weight and balance plus an updated spec sheet. First call from RAA was that I needed to supply the photo's....hmm, so I asked if they would mind checking the file to which I was told that they had them and all was ok. Weeks passed and the second call I received was to say that I needed to put a placard on the panel saying that if anyone flys the aircraft they will die to which I politely replied that there already two installed and they were both photographed. Weeks later another call to say that I needed to supply a full set of time stamped photos... what?? I was then told that the file on this aircraft was very big! I'm not surprised says I and Australia Post just about lays out a red carpet for me because of all the info I have posted and emailed. More weeks go by and then another call to say that the form for transfer of ownership is out of date and could I please use the appropriate form in future...... In future...... I'll be bloody dead before this thing is registered says I and you can bury me in the paperwork! They didn't budge on that one so of I go tracking down the previous owner in some backwater around Australia caravan park and send it in. More weeks pass waiting, waiting waiting. I get pissed off and contact the Tech Manager who by the way seems to be a decent bloke and did a bunch to sort this out. Another phone call and it seems that the tranfer fee had not been paid so fixed that immediately but still no rego. Another phone call to say that ........ I was not interested by this time and I was always very polite to the office staff but I had to explain that if someone down there could possibly look at the file then they would see that everything was in order and everything was paid and it was all done on the latest and environmentally friendly forms so please just register the flamin thing..... please. More weeks pass and the owner rang me last week to say that he had a rego cert in the mail. It took me less than two hours to register a new trailer so even when you go out of your way to help these people it is still a nightmare - Basil Fawlty could do better