Roundsounds

I’m sure those at the coal face want to produce quality goods, it’s the greedy minority decision makers ruining / have ruined the country. When these greedy individuals say the cost of labour is too high in Australia, they are really saying let’s get offshore slave labour with unsafe work practices to produce a substandard product. The people making these statements are those taking home 6 figure performance bonuses, bonuses paid to manage the destruction of Australian industries.

I would have to disagree, the country is very capable of building most things. The execs controlling the purse strings are too lazy to put together a case for funding projects, instead taking the easy bonus producing offshore options.

An 380 would burn around 200,000kg SYD / LAX, a B787 a bit under 80,000kg. a B-Double carries about 35,000kg. lots a road traffic to keep up supply.

Wow, maybe you could couple this to the autopilot and teach it how to land the aeroplane too. How about an autothrottle too?

You were concerned about speed being less than Vy, that’d be an IAS? Stalling has nothing to do with IAS, angle of attack dictates when a wing will stall.

Still hung on IAS? Exceeding the critical angle of attack causes the stall and uncoordinated flight at the stall causes the spin. There’s a lot going on for the typical PPL holder following an EFATO, which is why it’s often best to not turn back.

It depends on the airplane type. I first saw the reality of this in a Tiger Moth fitted with a vane style ASI on an interplane strut. This ASI has zero lag, starting at around 60KIAS on climb, close the throttle the ASI was still happily indicating 55, the vane just over 40. I won’t argue with you on the attitude, but I’ve used it in anger and am here to tell the story.

You do realise there’s quite a lag in the indications associated with the pitot / static system fitted to light airplanes? This leads to people wasting valuable time chasing IAS and I believe leads to LOCi accidents. If you practice learning and establishing glide attitudes for various types of flight, wings level, 30 degrees, 45 degrees angle of bank the IAS will follow.

IAS means very little as you load up in a turn. You need to be able to establish a known attitude to establish the glide. Given power + attitude = performance you only need to know the correct attitude given there’s no power.

GA schools haven’t caught onto the P in UPRT, ie Prevention. If a pilot has the skills to recover from an upset in the circuit area, they wouldn’t have allowed the situation to develop in the first place. Laser focus on IAS and minimising bank angles without enough attention to slip / skid and a continue mindset on approach rather than a go-around bias. If only pilots would spend money on quality UPRT and less on fancy bluetooth headsets, go-pros and EFBs the accident rate would reduce.

I couldn’t agree more with your comments around chances of recovery. Training of slow flight, stall and spin awareness, avoidance and recovery is poor to say the least.

Have you paid attention to Perdue’s lookout, specifically the lack of it. At 10:13 he actually points at his EFB and says it’s clear! What about the airplanes without ADSB out?

There is less risk involved in spinning a spin certified airplane at a safe height by an appropriately trained pilot than there is during the takeoff and landing phases of flight from capital city aerodromes. A fear of spinning is an indication of a gap in a pilot’s aeronautical knowledge.

The fans of the hands off spin recovery or Mueller / Beggs method take note.. The only spin recovery method to train and apply is that published in the type POH / AFM. Sad that two keen and experienced aviators likely lost their lives as the result of an incorrect recovery technique. https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/news-items/2022/spin-recovery/?fbclid=IwAR3p-ChBpKfeH2evZmTr6E07mXR95cyjOaw0zCAiCid-RIbRotd1c4UObcc

The concept of publishing all incidents is flawed. The organisation should be collating all incident reports, investigating and categorising them under headings such as phase of flight, level of experience, weather conditions and causal factors. The purpose of this method of reviewing incidents is to identify any trends, then focus on the most effective way of addressing these trends. Selected de-identified reports relating to the concerning incidents could then be published to help with any subsequent mitigation action. This action may include online training, videos, targeted flight training, mandated AFR training or roadshow type presentation to mention a few. The current method is simply ineffective.

It’s not in the ERSA, so not enforceable. In fact it goes against the CASA recommendations and it could be argued these requirements could reduce safety under certain circumstances. The “alerted see and avoid” procedures rely on only making the prescribed routine broadcast, thus leaving time for any calls to prevent potential conflicts.

Worth a read

Maybe so, what I’m trying to understand is what are we being protected against and how will ASICs do so?

An odd remark, I asked a couple of pretty straightforward questions. As stated I’ve been out of GA instructing during the introduction of ADSB and other traffic awareness devices and was curious as to what’s being trained around SA. I find the contrast in RT at Class G airports from the early 2000s and now to be quite marked. It got me thinking as to why, it seems pilots now don’t build a mental traffic model, they rely on constant broadcasts and more recently tech devices requiring head down attention for collision avoidance. The tech devices should enhance safety, but when used inappropriately may in fact reduce safety. I find the practice of a taxi, line up, rolling, airborne, turning crosswind, downwind, mid downwind, base, final, short final, clear of the runway (whilst still on the flight strip) to be common broadcasts with some pilots making all of them.

Exactly was is it the security experts are protecting the country from? Is it; - a 911 style event? - smuggling illegal items through freight / baggage areas? - a rouge Easter bunny? or is it to support the security / bureaucrats jobs? The last time I drove past a regional security controlled airport an access gate was wide open and unattended. ASICs are a wasted effort, it’s about time RAAus and AOPA made a decent effort to have a sensible alternative developed for GA / Sport Av ops.

I’m trying to gauge what people are taught and practice in regards to collision avoidance. I’ve been out of the GA instructing scene for quite a few years. I still fly GA and note a big increase in what I would consider unnecessary RT in class G. I still jot down call signs / type, it’s how I was trained and continue to practice. I find it helps me develop and maintain a mental picture of traffic. As you’ve mentioned, there are often comm’s between aircraft who do not pose any risk to each other and I hear routine broadcasts way in excess of those recommended, the majority of which do not increase safety. It seems the practice of developing any type of mental picture has been replaced by overuse of RT and some dubious traffic awareness devices. Technology is wonderful if used appropriately. Many of the posts on this and other forums makes me believe there’s simply no training or desire to gain knowledge around the appropriate use and limitations of traffic awareness technology. I started this discussion in an attempt gauge the current approach to traffic awareness / collision avoidance, particularly around airports. I don’t have an opinion on how it should be done.

Lots of comments about circuit entry, I’m keen to learn how people develop and maintain their situational awareness (SA) of other traffic? Or do you rely on updated SA when you make a broadcast and hope other traffic respond?

In this example you’re saying the first you knew of the traffic was when they broadcast their crosswind entry? Wouldn’t you have heard their 10 mile inbound call with an estimate for the circuit!

I’m looking to apply for an ASIC renewal, but note you need to demonstrate an operational need to hold one. As the holder of a pilot licence you should be operating on a regular basis from a security controlled airport. I see the last edition of Sport Pilot an article mentioned there’s going to be closer scrutiny around ASICs. Given I’m not regularly operating from a security controlled aerodrome I was considering an AVID. Has anyone else tried an AVID in lieu of an ASIC and arranging for the ARO to escort them on the occasions they fly into an aerodrome requiring an ASIC?