farri

A precautionary landing is completely different to an engine failure where you are forced to land, like it or not and it`s how you land that determines the final outcome. From experience, I just don`t agree or believe that instructing someone on engine failure in the latest, you beaut, high-performance LSA and pulling out at 500` agl is going to prepare them for an engine failure in a 95-10 Ultralight or any other high-drag, low-momentum Ultralight. I`m not suggesting engine failure training be carried out all the way to runway, at a busy public aerodrome, what I am suggesting is that training for high- drag, low-momentum Ultralights be carried out in a high-drag, low-momentum aircraft, where the training can be carried out, all the way to a full stop on the runway. Frank.

In case you missed it, I made the point in my above post #124 that I began instructing legally from my own property when we were only legal to 500`, agl. From memory, I retired from instructing around 15 years ago for several reasons, one of them being I didn`t agree with the direction Ultralight training was heading. As for my obligations to the regulations, that`s my business but I`m not going to agree on any regulation that I believe is not improving the safety of Ultralight pilots, just to appease the system...So there you have it, no more to be said. Frank.

Who said it was about my level of skill? Certainly not I! Again an assumption you have dreamed up.One thing you are absolutely correct about though is what this thread is about, so why not contribute something positive to it! I`ve simply tried to show that training for engine failure in an Ultralight and for Ultralight pilots, pulling out at 500` agl is a joke because as we all know, it`s only the last bit at the bottom that does the damage. Oh! By the way! why am I not surprised you reply to my question would be "no and no" Frank.

I`m not fueled by anyone and you`re entitled to your opinions, regardless of what they remind you of. Please tell me if you`ve ever instructed in an Ultralight aircraft and if you have had any engine failure in any Ultralight you`ve been flying and walked away from!...I talk from the experience of both scenarios. It`s a pity you don`t stick to the subject being discussed instead of giving some BS example, such as you have in your post I`ve quoted from, Frank.

I find it hard to agree to stop training for the accident you are trying to prevent because the very accident you are trying to prevent is occurring. What that says to me, is, " You can`t train to achieve the ability required to stop that accident occurring but hopefully, it won`t happen or if it does, you might be able to deal with it and survive". It also says to me, "The instructor is not capable of preventing the accident, in training". Forgetting GA aircraft. I had the advantage of beginning to instruct in the Drifter off my own property when we were only legal to 500` agl; Throughout the country, there had already been numerous fatal accidents resulting from engine failure and I believed this was unacceptable but I didn`t stop instructing on how to survive engine failure because I might get it wrong and cause the very accident I was trying to prevent, I put a lot of time and effort into instructing on how to get back onto the ground safely and that meant flying the aircraft all the way to landing back on the strip. What is the point in training for engine failure and pulling out at 500` agl.? Frank.

I did a couple of hours in the back seat of a Quicksilver GT 500 with the owner, a guy I instructed in the Drifter when he was doing nav with me. When I was instructing I went through 4 Rotax 582 grey head engines on my Drifter; with a student on board, I had 3 engine failures just after take-off, not all with the same student or engine, though. The first failure I was able to land back on the strip ahead of me; the second failure, up wind, past the end of the strip, I landed straight ahead in an adjoining paddock; the third failure, up wind, past the end of the strip, at around 250` agl, I had to do a 90 degree, right, descending turn and land in an adjoining paddock...The result of the 3 engine failures` was, no injuries to student or myself, aircraft damage; a broken tail wheel, due to the rough paddock... I eventually flew the Drifter out of that paddock. In the video, at approximately 7.50 the guy in the front seat pulls back on the control yoke and the aircraft lifts off. At approximately 8.03 the engine starts to lose power and begins to sink and the guy in the front seat is still holding back on the control yoke. At approximately 8.07 the guy in the front seat pulls back on the control yoke and the aircraft crashes on the runway. At this stage, I point out that`s how it appears to me and if I `m, correct, there was no attempt to lower the nose of the aircraft, causing it to stall, therefore, the accident was caused by the aircraft stalling and not the engine failure; I believe if the nose of the aircraft had been lowered as soon as the engine started to fail, a satisfactory landing could have been carried out. Frank, Ps, The guy who owned the Quicksilver I spoke about was fatally injured when he hit a powerline attempting to buzz his wife and children, driving on the highway.

Thank you Ron, that`s what I suspected, now I know. Thank you Turbo!... I`ve forgotten how many times I tried a different way but couldn`t get just video like you have..... Can`t know everything about everything. Frank.

This link is the only way I`ve been able to find to post here...When the link opens the page, scroll down to the 6th video on the right; There is another video on the next line on the left but I don`t know if those without a facebook account will be able to view the video`s so for future reference can someone without a fb account please let me know if you can view the videos. 7 News Cairns Frank.

In my post #65 I said ANO 95-10 instead of CAO 95-10, typing error, Sorry. For those who are interested here`s CAO 95-10 Civil Aviation Order 95.10 Instrument 2017 Frank.

As I recall it, in the early days of the AUF, numerous fatal accidents occurred to pilots coming from GA high-performance aircraft, into low-performance, high drag, low momentum aircraft; Ultralight, flight training began with the Austflight Drifter and the Thruster Gemini, both low-performance, high drag, low momentum Ultralights` and anyone wanting to fly those types of aircraft had to do a certain amount training in them, regardless of their GA qualifications. These days most flying schools use high-performance LSA to instruct and it doesn`t seem to make much sense to me, instructing someone in the latest LSA, high-performance aircraft, who will then go and fly some low-performance 95-10 aircraft...I don`t agree with overcomplicating anything but is this the correct way to go? Frank

Yes! Well! maybe if the regs were written a bit easier to understand instead of having this bit referring to that bit which then refers back to another bit and on and on it goes. I started before the AUF Manual 1 was approved and now we`re up to RA-Aus manual 7.1; Regulations governing 95-10 registered aircraft don`t concern me at all anymore but in an attempt to assist others, I`ve spent a fair bit of time going through the current ANO 95-10, the RA-Aus Ops manual, the Syllabus of training and I`m still not sure exactly what the requirements are. Frank.

Richard, I`m not doubting what you have said but let`s be clear on this; Someone does His/Her training in a FoxBat, LightWing, Jabiru or any other type of AC that`s out there these days, they go solo in the particular aircraft, obtain a pilot certificate then go and legally fly any number of currently registered 95-10 aircraft...Is that correct? Does " Any solo flying" mean, while they are under instruction or any solo flight after obtaining a pilot certificate? Frank.

I`ve just had a look at the RA-Aus Ops Manual and copied and pasted from it; Take note it says may! PRIVILEGES OF A STUDENT OR CONVERTING PILOT CERTIFICATE HOLDER 3. A Student or Converting Pilot Certificate holder, or an applicant for a Student or Converting Pilot Certificate, may: (a) undergo dual flight training with an Instructor who is supervised by a Flight Training School or Satellite Flight Training School in accordance with the appropriate syllabus of training provided in the RAAus Syllabus of Flight Training. https://members.raa.asn.au/storage/1-syllabus-of-flight-training-issue-7-v2-single-pages.pdf PILOT CERTIFICATE - GROUP A or B REQUIREMENTS FOR ISSUE - GROUP A or B. (d) have undergone ground and flight training in accordance with the RAAus Syllabus of Flight Training (published separately), for the Aeroplane Group in which the Pilot Certificate is sought; In (d) I don`t see any mention of a particular type of aircraft other than; 'for the Aeroplane Group in which the Pilot Certificate is sought; If the pilot certificate is being sought for a 95-10 aircraft (Single Place) how can there be any dual training with the instructor in that aircraft. (g) satisfactorily completed a flight test with an approved RAAus CFI or on request by the CFI or the Operations Manager, a RAAus Pilot Examiner. In (g) I don`t see anything that specifically states the flight test must be in a two-place aircraft. Regardless of the wording of the Ops manual or the instruction given by an RA-Aus approved instructor, in a two-place aircraft, once someone goes flying in a 95-10 aircraft, they are on their own and the outcome of the flight depends entirely on how they handle the situation. Frank,

It appears you got my point! I wasn`t trying to work out the cause of the accident, I tried to show that if the take-off run had started from the beginning of 02 the result may have been a lot different. It`s smarter and safer to use all available runway! Frank.

Using Google Earth to measure the runway length, I get 1500 mts overall length, 1000 mts overall for the black surface and 920 mts from taxi entry point on 02. For that type of aircraft the way I see it is, assuming the take-off was from the entry point on 02, there should have been enough runway ahead to abort and land if a reasonable climb rate wasn`t being held and if the climb rate was acceptable, the AC should have had more than enough hight, at the end of the runway, to clear the surrounding obstacles` safely. Even allowing for wind sheer, I find it hard to see how the AC ended up where it did if the take-off was from the beginning of the runway. Frank.

I learned a long time ago, longevity flying Ultralights requires knowing when not to fly and basically, that comes with experience, unfortunately, experience comes from doing and some don`t get a chance to learn from their mistakes, their first is their last. After 35 years of flying Ultralights, so that I maintain my ability, I will fly in wind conditions unsuitable and dangerous to a novice pilot but I`ve learned when not to fly and will not fly just to find out if I can. Frank.

Fortunately, I`ve never had to see the inside of a courtroom and hopefully, I never will; the couple of very small issues I`ve had in my life, I`ve been able to sort out myself. I realised a long time ago it would be very difficult, if not impossible, for anyone to defend themselves against a claim of 'Trauma', anyone who isn`t prepared to accept the concequences of what could result in taking a passenger flying should fly solo. Frank.

Fortunately, I`ve never had to see the inside of a courtroom and hopefully, I never will; the couple of very small issues I`ve had in my life, I`ve been able to sort out myself. I realised a long time ago it would be very difficult, if not impossible, for anyone to defend themselves against a claim of 'Trauma', anyone who isn`t prepared to accept the concequences of what could result in taking a passenger flying should fly solo. Frank.

Hi Andy, I can`t view the video, I have to create a channel but I`m told: " No Video Were Found" ......Cheers. Frank.

I`ve probably taken more people flying than anyone else, here in Australia, I`m still prepared to do so and I`m fully aware of the consequences; I take it as a privilege that those I take flying are prepared to put their lives` in my hands. Before we go flying, I brief everyone on the fact that the aircraft is an Ultralight aircraft, it is a real aircraft and things can and do something go wrong; I finish briefing by adding, that all I can guarantee is that I will give them the best of my ability, if they can`t accept that ( from memory, only 2 did not ) I won`t take them; For anyone under 18 years of age, I want their parents permission (always granted), therefore, those I take up have made an informed concious decision to fly with me; In the past, things have gone wrong! I`ve had several engine failures but never so much as scratched myself or someone with me and I have never even had the slightest hint of a lawsuit...Could it happen??? I`m old school, I believe in personal responsibility, I also believe that we are not creating a better society if we all hide under a rock (figure of speech) because we might be sued: All those I take flying come to me, I don`t go looking for them and as far as I`m concerned, we need to go back to personal responsibility, lawsuits, mostly make the Lawers rich! By the way! I was at the first meeting, where we discussed if we were prepared to pay a bit more for A.U.F.now RA-Aus membership fees to have insurance for all members...We voted YES! Initially it was only third party insurance. Frank......... A.U.F/RA-Aus member, 993.

I`ve probably taken more people flying than anyone else, here in Australia, I`m still prepared to do so and I`m fully aware of the consequences; I take it as a privilege that those I take flying are prepared to put their lives` in my hands. Before we go flying, I brief everyone on the fact that the aircraft is an Ultralight aircraft, it is a real aircraft and things can and do something go wrong; I finish briefing by adding, that all I can guarantee is that I will give them the best of my ability, if they can`t accept that ( from memory, only 2 did not ) I won`t take them; For anyone under 18 years of age, I want their parents permission (always granted), therefore, those I take up have made an informed concious decision to fly with me; In the past, things have gone wrong! I`ve had several engine failures but never so much as scratched myself or someone with me and I have never even had the slightest hint of a lawsuit...Could it happen??? I`m old school, I believe in personal responsibility, I also believe that we are not creating a better society if we all hide under a rock (figure of speech) because we might be sued: All those I take flying come to me, I don`t go looking for them and as far as I`m concerned, we need to go back to personal responsibility, lawsuits, mostly make the Lawers rich! By the way! I was at the first meeting, where we discussed if we were prepared to pay a bit more for A.U.F.now RA-Aus membership fees to have insurance for all members...We voted YES! Initially it was only third party insurance. Frank......... A.U.F/RA-Aus member, 993.

Geezus Bex! Can`t slow down! Gotta take advantage of the good flying weather we`re getting here while it lasts....... This is Steve Handel; Steve did his flight training, in a FoxBat, with The Recreational Flying Co and has achieved his RA-Aus pilot certificate. Steve came to see me a couple of weeks ago so I offered to introduce him to the Drifter; After a couple of flights with me, I reckon he`s hooked on the Drifter...This afternoon I recommended he join us here on the Forum and so he did. Frank.

G`Day Steve, . Frank.