Jump to content

Roundsounds

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,054

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Roundsounds

  1. Roundsounds
    I've run successful GA charter and pilot training outfits as Chief Pilot/CFI/ATO/proprietor and now work for an airline as a trainer. I'm keen to give back to the industry and offered my services which were taken up for a while. Now it's don't call us, we'll call you. I've obviously ruffled some feathers, but nobody is prepared to talk to me about why I've been sidelined. The only way the safety record in this end of the aviation industry is going to improve is through targeted mass training. That isn't going to happen if the data analysis isn't done and delivery of training is limited to a few CFIs. Training material needs to be made available through FTFs and online resources.
  2. Roundsounds
    Keith, when you say Human Factors - I assume you are talking about what is now referred to as Non Technical Skills (NTS)? What particular NTS are related to recent incidents? Situational awareness, decision making, task prioritisation, communication or threat and error management? Again, a proper SMS will identify the precise problem areas and allow targeted training to improve safety. Simply saying accidents are the result of HF without identifying the factor of HF ain't going to fix anything. In my opinion RAAus don't understand what HF is all about, let alone be skilled to teach it.
  3. Roundsounds
    Yep, pretty sure that's how I described it? Not sure what step I'd missed?
  4. Roundsounds
    Ok, let's look at the points: 1. Good education: FTFs have been educating pilots for many years. If you are suggesting there are deficiencies in knowledge, what are the deficient areas? 2. Good training: FTFs have been training pilots for many years. If you are suggesting there are deficiencies in skills, what are these skills? 3. Minimising incidents: What are the common ncidents? Are they by manoeuvre, location, aircraft type, pilot demographic? No instructors of FTFs set out to educate/train poorly and no pilot goes flying with the intention of having an incident! The answers to these questions can only be effectively answered by gathering and reviewing data.
  5. Roundsounds
    A functioning safety management system gathers data, analyses the data to find trends. Based on the trends appropriate training packages are then developed and delivered. Continuing data review will determine how effective the training has been. Simply gathering data does not improve safety, neither does creating new regulations and penalties. If people are breaching reg's the reg's are wrong or the people not educated as to the purpose of the reg'. I work for an organisation with a mature and highly effective SMS.
  6. Roundsounds
    I see there are 17 Hangar talks listed on the portal, not one in/near a Capitol City. Why not put the material on the website for access to the general membership? I'm a Senior Instructor and only have access to the material if I'm associated with a FTF. Too much "knowledge is power" going on.
  7. Roundsounds
    So I've read, many times...
  8. Roundsounds
    Really? I haven't seen any education as the result of safety data rolled out. The safety month material has been sent to FTFs. It's likely the people who need this education only see an FTF rep when their BFR is completed. The list of hangar talks doesn't have any scheduled for the Sydney area. How about some online stuff?
  9. Roundsounds
    A bit more to that, if the ALA is marked on a chart use 126.7, if not in ERSA or on Charts use area. Extract from VFRG: "If you are operating at an aerodrome that is not published in ERSA or marked on charts, good airmanship implies that you should monitor and broadcast your intentions on the relevant area frequency (CAAP 166-1(3))." The hardest part of teaching pilots to fly is getting them to the point where they can safely and competently operate without supervision. This includes being able to obtain/interpret preflight briefings and understand rules/reg's and knowing where to find them! I find there are plenty who can push/pull reasonably well but have only been taught rules/reg's by rote.
  10. Roundsounds
    Maybe more effort in working with other industry groups and CASA developing the 149 reg's and less on internal administrative matters is called for?
  11. Roundsounds
    Agree, but RAAus may have missed the boat! The opportunity to have input, as taken up by the GFA, Balloon Federation etc, has been missed. It will be difficult to make any significant changes now, it would arrogant to expect so.
  12. Roundsounds
    I'd suggest RAAus must be involved in the development of the Part 149 MOS. - Firstly, has the organisation has experience in the field they can provide valuable input - secondly and more importantly, to influence the development t of the MOS so it doesn't contain any unreasonable requirements. It's too late to try and change the rules after they've been developed. I have experienced this in the Part 61 reg's, there are organisations who should have made subject matter experts available during the development of the various Part 61 MOS, instead we are now trying to repair things with exemptions and 61.040 approvals.
  13. Roundsounds
    It would be refreshing to have a choice as to whether ultra light aircraft operate under: - CASA or - a committee run/not for profit organisation or - a professionally run commercial organisation I have no knowledge of who/what ELAAA is, but if they fit into the 3rd category I reckon they'd get some followers.
  14. Roundsounds
    Maybe have the instructor demonstrate a couple now that you've done a few. Also helps to have the instructor "think aloud" telling where they're looking and what cues they're using. Never underestimate the value of a good demonstration.
  15. Roundsounds
    As mentioned by someone earlier, entry into a side slip is normally effected by banking with aileron and preventing the turn with rudder - in that order. It looks like the reverse order was used here, yet no comment by the instructor? https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aircraft/airplane_handbook/media/faa-h-8083-3a-4of7.pdf Refer page 8-10 The radio call by the instructor following the simulated engine failure was of little value, "glide approach 28" - but from where? Base, overhead, mid downwind and was this for a full stop or touch and go? Also the habit of keying the mic to acknowledge the Bonanza's inbound call is annoying at best and proves nothing.
  16. Roundsounds
    The only comment I'd make about Dick's excellent hand starting article is in regards to #6. Pulling a prop backwards to clear oil from cylinders is not recommended, as it potentially moves the oil into the intake manifold. When the engine starts, this oil may be pulled back into the engine resulting in conrod damage.
  17. Roundsounds
    Like the CAAP says, if there's a risk of collision use the radio. However, the vast majority of airports in this country don't have the situation you described with regards to humps in runways. The starting point with reference to radio calls should be as recommended in the CAAP, supported by additional calls only if required to avoid a collision. I simply don't understand the proliferation of a continuous commentary of an aircraft's progress inbound and/or in the circuit. It's unnecessary and dangerous.
  18. Roundsounds
    Maybe read CAAP 166-1(3), page 22. Your version of "basic calls" seems to differ from those recommended and if there's a lot of traffic you suggest making more calls?
  19. Roundsounds
    CAAP 166 is a good start, the table on page 22 lists the recommended broadcasts. Page 22, para 7.3.6 effectively says other calls should be made to avoid the risk of a collision when one exists - this doesn't give permission for teaching verbal diarrhoea. I cannot see how a call clear of the runway serves to avoid a collision. My take on this poor RT use is most flight instructors are now trained at towered airports, so simply transfer those calls on top of the CAR 166 calls. The AIP Book is the primary source for when and what to say, whether that be Class C, D or G airports. if you're uncertain of the rules, it might be worth reviewing that info.
  20. Roundsounds
    Yes, the AIP and CAAP 166 provide direction on the required calls. There is a radio exam and practical assessments during flight training. The problem is flight training providers have decided they know better than the regulator and teach their own version of RT, the theme seems to be the more calls the better. The use of traffic displays on various EFB devices seems to be trendy, this worries me too. The attitude of no calls heard, no traffic displayed on EFB=no traffic is dangerous. Pilots of bug smashers need to maintain a proper look out as their primary means of collision avoidance, just take note of the lack of scanning for traffic in the plethora of video footage posted online - there's rarely any scanning happening.
  21. Roundsounds
    The purpose of the call once clear of the runway and runway strip is simply to establish comm's with SMC at a Towered airport. It's got nothing to do with advising ATC of you being clear of the runway, that is established visually (or ground radar at some airports). Therefore, this call has no purpose at a non-towered airport.
  22. Roundsounds
    Yep - I flew in from the north and made the following calls: - 5NM inbound, -joining downwind for touch and go (behind another aircraft already on downwind), - then base calls on subsequent circuits. Seemed to work ok and satisfied CAR 166. The most useless call that's appeared in recent years would be "clear of runway". Why make this call?
  23. Roundsounds
    Today did some circuits at Cessnock. A locally based aircraft made the following calls: -10NM inbound - 5NM inbound -3 NM inbound - descending on the dead side to join crosswind - joining crosswind - turning downwind - turning base - turning final - clear of runway - crossing runway. The only other traffic at the airport was us doing circuits, it would seem this was an aircraft on a training flight. To me this is not enhancing safety in any way. If you have 2 or three of aircraft inbound making these calls, plus a few in the circuit there's no room to make all of the calls and you lose track of who's where. Remember too, this CTAF frequency is shared by a nearby ALA where training also takes place. (Maitland).
  24. Roundsounds
    An interesting article from Avweb: It's Time To Raise The LSA Weight Limit - AVweb Insider Article
  25. Roundsounds
    Ben87r: Refer to CAAP 166(link below) Page 21 states the content of a broadcast, which includes intentions. A broadcast immediately before entering a runway (line-up call) would include intentions- ie for circuits, departure to the west etc, upwind departure for Dubbo etc. hence no need for a departure call. Page 22 contains a table of recommended broadcasts. https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/_assets/main/download/caaps/ops/166-1.pdf Uneccessary broadcasts can result in a safety issue when a non-towered airport gets busy. Put 4 or 5 aircraft into a circuit all making taxying, lineup, downwind, base, final, clear of runway calls there's no room for inbound traffic calls. It's also difficult to maintain situational awareness with constant radio chatter - there's a tendency to "tune out", a bit like a nagging partner or whinging child. It also promotes a mindset of reliance on radio for traffic awareness, remember radios are not compulsory at all airports, radios fail and errors result in incorrect frequencies/selections. Lookout is you primary means of traffic separation, radio only assists.
×
×
  • Create New...