SDQDI

If something horrific is horrible why isn't something terrific terrible?

The only time the word "incorrectly" is not spelt incorrectly is when it is spelt incorrectly!

For me personally I do eventually intend to get my ppl (not for CTA but so I can take my whole family on recreational trips) but not until I have finished my LL endo (so certainly could still be a few years away knowing my pace) and yes no doubt I could change over to VH rego BUT I don't want to do that as I prefer paying rego and membership fees rather than jumping through medical hoops every two years. Telling people like me to just go GA and clear out is imo very short sighted. Rag and tube numbers from what I have seen are certainly not going ahead like the fancier machines. I guess, other than home building and the second hand market, there are not a lot of new r&t machines to be had cheaply and at the same time you have secondhand machines like jab and foxbats ect for reasonable dollars and the majority of people while still liking the idea of wind in the hair will choose a bit of comfort just because that is how we are wired. Similar to cars and motorcycles, for sure you will always have people who love their bikes but the population in general will cling to their comfort and a fair few bike riders will have a car at home too. So what happens to RAA if all the people like me go full GA? The RAA financials would take a huge hit. Why is it that some think only rag and tube are recreational? How does having metal skins and a door (sometimes) make me unultralighty? I have mentioned getting my ppl so I can take my family, which I must add I accept and don't expect it to change BUT in my perfect world I think it would be nice if that was considered recreational, also I think the current RAA medical requirements should be all that is required for ALL non commercial flights with a MTOW of 5700kgs or less Anyway I am up past my bedtime again and rambling again.

Some people have too much flow when they press the button! But that is a whole nuther argument. I only have around 300 hours and I still find myself saying things wrong. I find the best thing to do is to say aloud the call to yourself before transmitting it, I find that way I often pick up on missing things or incorrect terms but it does have to be out loud. Obviously wasting time on urgent replies is not advisable but for your standard inbound/departure calls it is well worth the extra ten seconds to get it right. The main thing to remember is you are only talking to other pilots, you are not doing a public speech so don't wind yourself up too much about it. At the end of the day all you are doing is letting likeminded people know where you are and where you are heading.

Nev I don't think the aircraft standards required for CTA should change (unless someone with better knowledge could show that it would be beneficial without added risk), that is why I don't expect to go there in my 19 reg plane. I would however like the option to fly a suitable RAA plane into CTA on just my certificate without needing to get a ppl. I would also expect to have to do the same training to get the endo though as if I did one day upgrade to a ppl (time and money but I will get there eventually!) I would like it to roll over with just a short check.

And just before someone who knows me comments! Yes I am a backwoods cowboy who rarely knows his exact location but I see lots of pretty scenery!

Also just a note, I am very low hours and Nev and turbs have many more hours than me so I definitely am not trying to defend myself but more so RAA cert holders as a whole. Ironically even though I have flown into and out of tamworth a fair bit in training and once under my own steam since, I wouldn't be comfortable getting a cta endo without a lot more experience. It's just I don't see how getting my ppl and a cta endo would be better than just getting a cta endo with Raa. Also note, even though I like the idea of a cta endo (tamworth is only 20 minutes away in my slow plane!) it wouldn't really benefit me too much as I fly a 19 reg. I don't think the requirements for planes needs too much adjustment but I do think it makes sense to have a level playing field when it comes to pilots.

Well we had better ban all private pilots from cta then. It seems those people with a ppl or RPL are just as dangerous as us dodgy Raa types. It is my opinion that if an RPC holder is given the appropriate training (to the same standard for a cta endo as a ppl/rpl holder) then here is no logical reason against it. Insinuating that people that only hold an RPC are incapable of flying in cta because they are all backwoods Cowboys with no idea about tower thingys and hopeless at knowing where they are is very offensive and IMO comes across as a holier than thou attitude. I don't mean any offence to Nev or turbs but it certainly comes across that way. For sure cta endos shouldn't be given out willy nilly but if the training standard is the same it won't be any different to a ppl getting a cta endo. I have always said that there are just as many Cowboys in Ga and categorising either camp as inadequately trained as a whole is not really constructive.

What person in their right mind would ask Casa to screw them over?! Are you all crazy!

Don I don't mind the idea of having a "guide" form with info on it BUT if changing our standards to more align with a drivers license standards (isn't that what our declaration already is?) has us ending up with anything similar to the rpl one it will be a disaster. Is there evidence of this being a problem?

Yes at the end of the day it doesn't matter what is or isn't an ultralight, what matters is your insurance companies definition of an ultralight as that will be what is in the fine print. You wouldn't want to find out after an incident in a c172 that the insurance company classed all sub 5700kg aircraft as ultralights and you weren't covered. A simple email to them will give you their definition in writing so there can be no misunderstanding.

That hasn't always been my experience Bill. A few times now I have found myself in worse weather than what was forecast on Naips. Keeping an ear open for amended forecasts on the relevant area frequency is a must IMO. I am no expert by any means but just wanted to point out that they can get it wrong both ways.

I had a nice flight this morning, Dad took our truck up to a property north of warialda and I flew up to ferry him home. (Sorry for not buzzing you @rankamateur , maybe next time!) So dad had to leave early and I got an extra 2 hours (4 hour trip for a truck but only 2 for a slow plane!) so I spent the first one sleeping in and the second one lazily getting the plane ready. It was a bonza trip both ways and the farm had a beautiful grass strip so no challenge at all but still enjoyable.

Very helpful HITC. Although to be nit picky no twin Beech pilot would be listening for 20 minutes before arriving, they would still be northwest of Alice at that time!

Pictures or it didn't happen David

Poteroo is there something that the rest of us can do to help your proposals? Should we pen a letter to the Ops mgr or someone else in the office?

Aww I only got 10 out of 14 Time for me to polish up on my history knowledge

Spot on Nev. It is one endorsement that should be strongly encouraged. I am lucky inasmuch as I live on a property so I can fulfill the 'genuine reason' part but I think it is something that should be available to all pilots. As cliched as it is we all do some LL flight at least twice per flight and not being aloud to learn skills about it is foolish IMO

You are right Aldo, and the majority of times that is what we do but it doesn't take much for us to slip up especially if under a little extra mental load.

True true true BUT In general we don't spend a lot of time at low level and for most of us we need to be consciously aware that our visual cues of the ground will automatically override if allowed, especially at low level and especially with any decent amount of wind. I know I have mentioned it heaps and heaps of time but I really think LL training should be strongly encouraged, I still haven't completed my LL training but the little that I have done has really opened my eyes to just how much our outside picture can dictate our actions overriding otherwise good piloting skills and turning a good balanced pilot into one who pins the skid ball to the edge. IMO a good basic understanding (with practical experience) of low level ops would be extremely beneficial for the majority of us. Actually if we look at most low level stall spin accidents I wonder how many of them are caused by a pilot (generally under pressure) ignoring basic things (speed-balance) and taking their cues from what the ground is doing? Simply calling those sort of prangs human factors doesn't really help us stop them. (I am not saying this prang was a stall spin one, I am just generalising like one does when it is time to go to sleep!) Disclaimer: I am definitely not saying reckless or illegal low flying is a good idea and I disagree with those that think teaching LL will encourage more LL 'hoons' IMO that is a bit like saying taking advanced driving training in a car will increase the chances of you becoming a wild driver?!

Yes if the wind dropped on a downwind takeoff that would be a nice thing giving you extra airspeed. Of course if the wind picked up once you got above ground affect that will be annoying but you can have the same experience whe taking of into wind and the gust does off, the only difference is your speed over the ground. As Kg said it is all about airspeed once airborne.

That response was 2 months ago, sadly the rumours while maybe not true at that time have since become so.

I would've thought if it was at 100feet and you were not taking off or landing or going around or abiding by the conditions of your LL endorsement that it would be clearly illegal? Having said that I do enjoy watching low passes unless of course they endanger others recklessly

This might help explain it all a bit clearer Yenn, Don explains it pretty well.

I don't quite see it that way Yenn. I have said before that I disagree with Kasper's resolutions but I support his right to put them up BUT after reading the relevant part of the constitution it appears that RAA has the correct interpretation this time so I can understand him being refused. Having said that a LOT of people are saying the constitution needs refining so I think the best thing for everyone involved would be for those who are dissatisfied to put together a list of amendments and ensure they are put in in time for the next meeting. I was going to go on but David has summed it up a lot better while I was typing.