K-man

What was running around the back of my mind was to have a bbq fly-in day, maybe with some agents, maybe with some instructors (paid) maybe some level 2s or lame or whatever. Piper actually had a partners programme giving non flying partners the opportunity to land the plane if the pilot was incapacitated. Just a range of activities that add to pilot knowledge and have a good day out. A reasonable charge would pay for those who needed to be paid. Maybe there would be a sponsor. Just putting it out there.

Rather than tag onto an existing thread I'll throw this one into a separate ring. Following on from the discussion on 29 deaths in 29 months, I saw this on the RAA website and had a quick look. https://www.raa.asn.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Policy-on-RA-Aus-Safety-Policy-effective-1-April-20151.pdf When we are discussing incidents and accidents it is always someone else's fault. We are all such great flyers that when something does go wrong it must be the fault of our instructor or maybe even the scope of the instruction was inadequate. Probably, deep down, it has to be RA's fault because they give out the certificates. So here is the RAA view on safety ... ... but is it realistic? RAA has to be seen to be doing something to make recreational flying safer but short of legislating us all out of the sky it is just not possible for an organisation to do that. We have to take responsibility for our own safety and our own training. Recently we had a Piper Proficiency Program run at Lilydale and it made me wonder why we couldn't have a similar sort of programme provided by RAA. It would be self funding so no additional charge to members and may even be eligible for government subsidy if promoted correctly. Does anyone know if it has been tried?

I think there are enough good people around to ensure that doesn't happen and I'm not sure that CASA would want to take over all the work of administering what is now being done at no charge to them. In fact I would suggest CASA might have preferred RAA took over responsibility for all aircraft under 1500kg flying for recreation. Obviously that wouldn't necessarily have been best for RAA and it came to nothing when John McCormack arrived. Now we have the RPL it's probably totally dead and buried.

Haven't been to Bedourie either. If you stop at Birdsville you can get Mogas at the nearby servo far cheaper than AvGas (assuming Rotax in the Nynja). From there if you choose that way, we flew along the French Line to Mt Dare, across to Finke and up the old rail line to Alice. Either way, have a ball! I'm quite envious already.

We have had numerous trips with a number of aircraft. Until a month ago I never had an ASIC. I hooked up with whoever had one whenever it was needed. The only disadvantage was that at some airports I couldn't wander freely but as part of a group, never an issue.

No, the RV12 isn't mine. I think that might be rgmwa in the beautiful aircraft pictured above my post. But FWIW, there was a nice RV7 flying out of Tooradin.

Bull, you have one good point. The guys flying aircraft like yours paved the way for what we have now. You see no need to change to bigger and better aircraft and that is fine. There are others here who fly a range of aircraft and others again have moved from rag and tube to plastic fantastic. The beauty of RA is it covers a huge slice of recreational flyers. I probably wouldn't even be flying if it wasn't for RA. The affordability of RA and the aircraft available was why I elected not to go GA. For me there was no need. If it wasn't for the affordability I wouldn't have flown all over Australia. RA has given me a most enjoyable retirement. Now you said that in your membership you are paying for people like me to fly into places like Tullamarine. Well, perhaps that's an exaggeration. I think the landing fee would preclude most of us from landing there. But CTA endorsement is very useful if you want to fly down the East coast. Sure you can avoid CTA but that entails flying over some pretty hairy terrain, especially in marginal weather. So now I am getting my endorsement to fly in CTA. By the time I finish it will have cost me about two Grand I'd reckon, with medical, ASIC and having to learn to fly a GA aircraft so I can fly it into controlled airspace to get the endorsement. Your contribution to my coffers as an RAA member ... big ZERO. But the real question is ... why? Why couldn't RAA have given me a CTA endorsement? The answer is simple. We would have had it years back. It was about to happen when John McCormack turned up and pulled the pin. I have my understanding of why and it pretty much relates to the unprofessional behaviour of a small number of our members. Privileges don't necessarily cost a lot of money to introduce and maintain, but lack of privileges or loss of privileges can be expensive. I hope you continue to enjoy flying your aircraft as much as I will continue to enjoy flying mine.

A fifteen minute flight to Tooradin for lunch hardly seems notable but a day with cloudless sky is hard to pass up.

Mmm! Yeah! I wouldn't rely on Queensland time. It seems to slow down over summer.

The AVID isn't much use if you want to fly into security controlled airports and seeing the only reason I got my RPL was to get the accompanying CTA and controlled airport endorsement to fly my RA aircraft into such places the AVID isn't an option unfortunately.

Quite true, but then you will have to pay the extra $50 dollars to renew it.

Of course you are perfectly entitled to do that. If you are not a member of RAA and you are not flying an RAA registered aircraft then technically you are nothing to do with RAA. I presume the clown flying his trike around the Lilydale, Ringwood, Mooroolbark area at low altitude is one of those people. However flying without a licence is an offence same as driving without a licence.

The other good thing there is that you would have already done your 2 hours of instrument flying. Converting from RA I had to do that as well. In hindsight I reckon everyone with cross country endorsement should have to do it but that is probably a topic for a new thread.

And if you cease to be an RA member you have to return your RA issued ASIC. It all comes down to 'operational need'.

I needed an ASIC for my RPL. RA had the application form and the charge, $160 on the RAA website. Thought that was fair seeing that CASA were asking $200 for theirs. A week later I get my application back asking for another $40 dollars. Then I had to wait for the ASIC to arrive before I could apply for the RPL. If I had gone to CASA in the first place I needn't have waited because the application itself is enough to start the processing and the cost was the same anyway. Not happy Jan! Here's the RAA form, still asking for $160. http://www.raa.asn.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Application-for-RA-Aus-issued-ASIC-180412.pdf

I think there is more need to burp the longer the motor has been unused if I recall correctly.Not a Rotax site but ... http://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/8662/why-rotax-912-burps-the-tank This one is more what I was getting at. I'd forgotten the term 'hydraulic lock'. Apparently not common but if there is oil or even fuel in the cylinder you will feel the resistance as you wind. http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=321023 If the oil level is on the flat to start I won't wind 'til it burps but I will still wind a few turns to feel everything is right.

Depends on definition. When cold I keep it just above the minimum. During standard operation the oil is warm and between the marks.If I put extra oil in it just comes out the breather and slowly drops to the lower mark where it stays stable.

I think the biggest difference is that one is spelt with a 'c' and the other is spelt with a 'k'.

Looking in OzRunways yesterday and they have plain English weather.

Nah. We got home by a bit of judicious welding but the next day it was consigned to land fill, replaced with a solid rod threaded at each end.

It was the the guy (level 2 and a mechanic) servicing the aircraft but I have had the advice confirmed by other Rotax owners. If it drops below the lower level I add sufficient to bring it back to that level, however I have probably only added oil on a handful of occasions over the 8 years or so we have had the aircraft. It just seems to stabilise at that level. I did have the gearbox changed by Floods at one point and again, that was the oil level. I can't remember if we actually discussed it but that was how much he put in. Give Floods a call.

OK, yes you need to burp the motor to return the oil to the reservoir and you need to burp twice if you want that to be accurate. But there is another really important reason for burping. If you don't burp and oil has seeped past the rings into the cylinder you can cause big damage. If I'm right, the burp is air that has been pushed past the piston taking any oil with it back into the system. Check out the manual.

I just got an email from AvMap offering to trade the EKP IV for the EPK V for 150 Euros. My question is, has anyone changed from the IV to the V? Does it fit the same cutout (the unit is smaller but there is a cradle available), is the remote aerial connection the same, can we transfer existing data and how similar is the operation?

I've recently got my RPL and am in the middle of getting my CTA and controlled airport endorsements. A lot of money spent on something that I think should have been available through RA. I couldn't be bothered going down the PPL track as I'm not likely to want to fly a bigger plane or IFR, but RA certificate with CTA is all that I need. I'm not sure whether the old RPPL is still recognised but if possible I wouldn't waste your previous training. I would go straight for the RPL and then apply for the RA certificate. That gives you more options down the track.

I run AvPlan and my wife runs OzRunways. Both do a great job as far as I can see.