Roundsounds

15 hours ago, Keith Page said:

You are on to the RAA, actually a good con to get money out of people for a pie in the sky.

CTA access was a poorly handled situation and will be a major contributing factor in the demise of RAA. Allowing CTA access would have seen substantial growth of the organisation. As it stands now anyone who gains an RPC under the convoluted exemption at a Class D airport immediately obtains an RPL to allow continued access to CTA. Why would these pilots bother to maintain an RAA membership?

Glider pilots have always enjoyed CTA access, Camden has a very active gliding club as the result. There are a number of motor gliders based there who operate under the GFA - no PPL or medical certificates. This situation should have been cited as a precedent. The reason RAA had limitations placed on them operating in CTA was based on the very early AUF style aircraft.

20 minutes ago, ClintonB said:

Had the bejeezus scared out of me on final one day, I dropped an inside wing turning final from lack of airspeed.

only thing that saved me was a little voice screaming at me in my head don’t use the ailerons, full opposite rudder,

I saved it and landed on that go, I don’t think I would have made a circuit from nerves. I then went and grabbed an instructor, told them what happened, discussed the causes and had them com out with me for a confidence building flight.

it make you take notice.

Still no understanding of stalls?

it wasn’t a lack of airspeed, it was too high an angle of attack. Full opposite rudder, lucky it didn’t flick the other way. 
Sounds like luck was on your side, perhaps get some theory / practical instruction from a properly trained and qualified instructor in an aerobatic certified aeroplane. Ask the instructor to show how close you came to dying. 
 

ClintonB, have a read of Peter’s post, the post prior to yours. Adelaide Bipanes know what they’re doing. 

5 hours ago, Area-51 said:

There is just no "why" to this; so it will never get off the drafting table.

 

Anybody with a RA PC can go get themselves a GA RPL SEA rating tomorrow and CTA endorsement in a few days of studying and a flight review exam.

 

Add a NAV endorsement and task is done.

The CTA stuff has been going on for at least 8 years. The GFA and Balloon Federation have had CTA access from day 1, there’s the precedent. I haven’t seen any progress, just lots of excuses and it’ll happen soon.

52 minutes ago, RossK said:

I can't see them getting it by the end of this year.

CASA have to come up with the regs, and then RAA have to come up with a Syllabus - it's years away.

I gave up waiting and got my RPL.

 

I’ve gone back to GA, the cost of RAA outweighs the benefits for me. 

4 hours ago, Freizeitpilot said:

A class 5 medical requirement as opposed to an RAAus self- declared would seem overly beauracratic, if that were to eventuate.

Meanwhile GFA pilots simply self declare and access controlled airspace. Camden is a prime example. 

4 hours ago, BurnieM said:

I would like to see 'management' get this in place no later than the end of 2024.

 

While group G would have been a goer 2 years ago, with Basic 5 Med it is pretty much dead now.

ie stop the group G work and put the effort into CTA endorsement doco.

 

RAAus dropped the ball on this from day 1. 
The GFA have always had access to CTR / CTA, cannot see any reason RAAus aircraft couldn’t too and should have been the lever to gain access. Obviously appropriate training required with a suitable endorsement, copy and paste the GFA syllabus. 
I was a CASA delegated testing officer for many years and could deem a pilot as being competent to operate in all types of airspace. However in order to access controlled airspace exercising the privileges of an RPC I must maintain my GA medical / AFR. 
I go to a class G airfield to complete my AFR, zero assessment on my CTA procedures but I’m good to fly in CTR / CTA exercising my RPC. 
just dumb

8 hours ago, Area-51 said:

Class C will probably be limited to certified LSA factory built ADSB equiped aircraft only.

 

Class D will probably be any Ra aircraft with mode C transponder and radio

There’s no requirement for XPDR / ADSB in class D.

1 hour ago, KRviator said:

Wonder how they planned to do that in an aircraft with gullwing doors?

I've done the same thing from the RV with the tip-up canopy, but not from within the cabin, rather, from a pod bolted under the wing.

Through the window vent no doubt. 

Studying current AIP would likely result in a better outcome than asking for guidance here. 
The ERSA (Nowra) has a very clear description of the VFR Transit procedures. The Canberra VTC also provides clear guidance on the lane. 

30 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Looking back on what I did, I've realised that dog fighting, balloon and streamer cutting were a big part of learning limit flying, plus doing and teaching basic aerobatics where the student  would sometimes do things you never dreamed of doing yourself, that required  the rabbit out of a hat save. It is NOT in any syllabus.   I have tried to push "Unusual attitude recovery" at least for instructors. No one appears to be listening..  Nev

I have found as time goes on the majority of instructors are fearful of anything other than a wings level 1G stall. Even then they often recover at the sound of the stall warning and don’t actually stall. The there’s the “pick up the wing with rudder” thing! Rudder is only used to prevent further yaw until you’re no longer stalled. 

23 hours ago, Garfly said:

 

 

Yeah, Juan was asking the same question, that is, about a kill switch for pilots in case the seat starts moving forward while they're in it (un-commanded by the pilot's own seat switches on the console).  The design of the rocker switch on the seat-back presumably assumes that the cover is there to guard against inadvertent operation whenever the seat was occupied. But there ya go

 

In the confusion of having a meal tray plonked down on your moveable table and your sudden realisation that you're being moved forward relentlessly - and possibly being out of reach of the console switches (even assuming they countermand the rear switch) I can imagine the inevitable HF/WTF! pause could easily see you - or your dinner - jamming the yoke forward to no good effect.  Certainly would not have been trained for in the simulator.

 

The seat power on / off switches are located inboard at the base of the seat backs. 

On 16/3/2024 at 4:13 PM, derekliston said:

Do you actually believe that Nev? I find it a bit hard to credit! I would have thought that in cruise it would have been on autopilot, incredibly unusual to be hand flying, yes the seat moving forward could cause the pilot to push on the yoke, but hard enough to disconnect the autopilot??? 

The B787 autopilot has an over ride / disconnect function. ie if you provide a decent input the AP will disconnect.

1 hour ago, IanR said:

Are some people confusing QNH and QFE in this discussion ?

Ian, most pilots trained over the past 30 years probably couldn’t spell QFE, let alone define it and T hey’d need an APP to work it out.

6 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

In transit, I’ll give you an answer later. What QNH  do you enter at your local airfield?

The local QNH from ATIS or AWIS. 

9 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

You are correct Turbs - Camden circuit height is 1300 ft (1000 AGL).

 

Having flown there quite a few times. I draw your attention (once more) to how wide the aircraft has flown - well beyond any of my poor attempts at a professionally executed pattern. The pilot is so wide, it suggests to me that he must have had an issue, possibly as early as up or cross wind. having pointed this out I dont think it leads to any particular conclusion, other than the pilots possible loss of situational awareness. 

The ATSB report shows about a 1NM downwind spacing, doesn’t seem “so wide”. Having flown there a few times myself, I’d say the spacing was pretty normal for Camden operators. 

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

in a 1000' circuit?

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

This is the prelim. report so they will now be doing the detailed work item by item.

1400' downwind?

steady descent 130 kts?

 

The 1400’ is an ADSB return and is based on 1013Hpa, corrected for QNH comes in at around 1300’ AMSL. 

The descent speed of 130KTS is a ground speed, given it was descending at a rather steep angle the IAS would have been significantly higher. 

5 hours ago, Methusala said:

Mate of mine with a Tigermoth said,"Rubber is too expensive to land on bitumen."

A ground loop is more likely on a sealed runway, ground loops can be way more expensive than rubber. 

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

What engine is fitted to it? It makes a difference to how nice to fly they are and when the throttle is closed the elevator doesn't have a lot of ability to keep the tail low as the U/C is quite long and the brakes quite effective. The prop tips look bent back.  Nev

I believe a 275HP Jacobs with a CSU. 

39 minutes ago, onetrack said:

How else does a tail-dragger flip on its back, in line with the centreline of the runway, except for excessive braking? New owner, still learning how to fly it, only bought it this year, and only just registered it.

If it had ground looped and flipped, I wouldn't expect it to end up in line with the runway - and I saw no tyre skidmarks that would indicate a ground loop.

Agree, what I don’t agree with is the suggestion the aircraft landed with the “brakes locked on touchdown”. 

On 8/3/2024 at 9:54 PM, CT9000 said:

Re reading this story over a cuppa. I do not believe that the aircraft did actually stall. To stall you need to reach the "stall stick position" otherwise you cannot get to the critical angle of attack and therefore no stall. Yes it dropped a wing but that is not necessarily a stall just a response to a gust.   Stalls are not to be feared just need to be managed.

Stick position can correlate to exceeding the critical angle. The “stall stick position” seems to be gathering momentum at a similar rate to the Beggs Muller spin recovery technique, which I see as a dangerous trend. There are a number of factors where the critical angle can be exceeded without achieving the “SSP”. CofG and gusts being a couple. 
How would a pilot respond differently in the case described in this post given it had / had not stalled? 

2 hours ago, Methusala said:

Could this be a result of brakes locked on touchdown?

It could be, but highly unlikely. They can be a handful on sealed runways. The clowns running council airports see operations on the grass within the flight strip akin to hoons tearing up grass on their precious footy fields. They fail to understand these aircraft were designed to operate from grass / gravel fields and don’t comprehend the physics associated with tailwheel airplanes. I’ll guarantee this incident would not have happened had he been landing on the grass to the west of RWY 34. 

11 minutes ago, Blueadventures said:

Except; can't turn on strobe and landing lights🤪🙃

If you can’t see a Cub yellow Cub, you shouldn’t  be flying. 😆

1 hour ago, danny_galaga said:

No battery, right 😄

Yep! Avoids lots of issues. 

On 3/7/2023 at 10:58 AM, danny_galaga said:

I only ask because an LAME apprentice was in the hanger and we were talking about it. He was pretty confident you HAVE to have on in GA, but wasn't sure about 19 rego...

I’ve got a J3 Cub and don’t have any battery isolation devices.