SDQDI

I am just posting this poll so we can get an idea on what everyone's thoughts are regarding bringing the off topic forums back to rec flying.

 

Please feel free to post your thoughts but keep them civil:buddies:

 

 

Maybe we should have a poll to see what everyone thinks? Least that gives a rough idea of spread of opinion. I might set one up.

 

At the end of the day though Ian it is your site so you should obviously do what you want to do!

 

 

Yes, originally I didn't like the idea of off topic going but I think it would be a step backwards to bring it back!

 

 

I can't believe Dazza got the old they're and their mixed up! Of all the people.

 

 

Hope you are keeping well @dazza 38 long time no see

I don't know enough about the VH system in regards to Learning in your own plane BUT I would say ask another mob, get at least one more opinion.

 

I don't see what they would need a lawyer for?

 

 

Did I really comma here for this?!

 

 

I disagree. Using a GPS only for gauging wind speed is not advisable. It's not just the speed of the wind a sock shows its direction and variations in wind strengths via the very nature of the sock moving about especially in gusting conditions. It would be fool hardy to make that judgement on indicated speed verses a GPS speed only.

I am not denying that windsocks are a valuable tool, but you can get enough info without them if you need to.

95% of my flying is done out of paddocks and off of roads that don't have any windsocks within a cooee and it is still quite easy to do safely. There shouldn't be any excuse for accidentally landing downwind (ignoring one way strips and gentle 5knot variable winds). Most of the time there is something to spot in the surrounding area (maybe a tractor ploughing dust or ripples on a dam or smoke from a chimney) but a gps is also a very useful tool for checking headwind/tailwind direction. Crosswind component should be very obvious when on finals in most of the stuff we fly as will gusts.

 

Keeping an eye out for ground level wind indicators should be as automatic as keeping your a lookout for suitable paddocks ect in case of a forced landing.

 

Yes again windsocks are an awesome tool but we shouldn't fall out of the sky without them.

 

 

Flying into a strip without a windsock shouldn't be too hard.

 

It is very easy if you have a gps so there is a groundspeed/airspeed comparison but even without that a 15 knot wind should be easy enough to notice.

 

I have noticed in my limited flying time it is quite common for winds at ground level to be at 180 degrees to winds at circuit height. A low level precautionary check pass at a place without a sock would be prudent.

 

While we always say you can always go around there comes a point at some strips when going around is a no go.

 

 

It is true that not everyone is cut out for flying but it is nearly impossible for a student pilot to be able to tell whether they can or not. We all know that 99% of people that learn to fly go through a time in their training where they feel like they are going nowhere and as a student it can feel like you will never progress any further but most with practice eventually get through this.

 

Instructors have the best chance of being able to tell if someone doesn't have it BUT there are a few things that can affect this one of which is the fact that if they turn a student away they no longer get paid. Second to this is the fact that some people just don't click and simple things can be missed. Changing instructors if progress has stopped can sometimes help, getting the same thing explained in a slightly different way can make a huge difference.

 

None of that takes into account people's psychological factors, imo it is unfair to expect instructors to be able to catorgorise people reliable as being mentally fit or unfit. For recreational flying I think testing for this would be way to expensive and could negatively impact too many middle ground people. For professional flyers I don't know enough about the systems to comment but flying with two pilots should negate most cases. (Obviously in recent history it has proved to not be a perfect fix)

 

 

Thanks and appreciated @Geoff13 ,

Interesting comments there, you were considering CFI to improve your own flying skills, so it might be your motivations were misdirected, but you recognised that.

I wonder how many long term PPL / CPL who never quite crack the big time commercial game (or make a choice not to) but after a 'semi career' of flying in smaller ops say, ah well I'll just get my CFI and be an instructor, theres a job.

I would suggest the RA and GA instructor endorsements should start with some sort of psychometric assessment on your ability to instruct, as a stage gate for continuance. Mind you I can get a teachers degree without any such assesment... and then teach all your precious little children.

Aptitude to pass knowledge is often an intangible.

 

Cheers

R

 

Geoff didn't say he considered becoming a CFI he said he considered getting his instructors rating. There is a fair difference between a simple instructor and a CFI.

I wouldn't criticise the accident itself but the flying off afterwards certainly raises the eyebrows!

 

 

G'day and welcome Benawen

 

Learning to fly is an awesome thing and I too have a passion for paddock flying, there is something nice about flying out of unprepared strips in a suitable plane!

 

Don't ever think you will get out of the student phase though! The best mindset when flying is to always be willing to learn never start thinking you have finished learning and that, even if it doesn't make you a better pilot, will make you a better airman. Corny but true.

 

If you are ever up towards YQDI just yell out, we try to be welcoming up here!

 

Regards Sam

 

 

And for those who keep saying things along the line of "RAA should just say no to casa" obviously don't remember just what casa can do. For example do we remember when the whole fleet was grounded?

 

 

Just for reference I got my helmet with ANR because I used to use Zulus with it and absolutely loved it, I would never by another headset without it so I got it with the helmet BUT in hindsight I don't see as much benefit with it in the helmet.

 

I think it is Mainly due to the fact the helmet has much better passive noise reduction which means the ANR has less to do. It makes a slight difference but if I was to buy again I wouldn't worry about it in a good helmet.

 

 

I use this:Aircraft Tiedown Kit (The Claw) Aircraft Anchoring System. The harder you pull' date=' the more it grips the earth. The only tie down with a mechanical advantage. [claw'] - $224.95 : The Aviator Store: Your Online Pilot Shop for Local Pilot Supplies

I use those too Dsam and have never had any hassles.I have had my plane tied down in the open when measured 100km/h storm came through and they held. I was certainly worried at the time that the plane would be across the paddock somewhere but the only damage was a slightly bent rudder which was a bit more proof to just how strong the winds were! The storm came from behind the plane though so harder on the rudder but not as hard on the tie downs as a front on wind would have been.

 

 

One has to wonder who collated precisely, the total of all the hours flown? - and how did they acquire the complete information from every single RA owner?Seems to me like a job that the ABS would struggle to get a handle on, with a plethora of staff - let alone a small, no doubt, understaffed, RA-Aus organisation.

Well I would assume the number of hours flown now would be collated automatically by a computer?

Doesn't everyone fill in their hours and landings every time your plane rego is due? Or am I the only one dumb enough to supply this info?

 

Having said that a year or so ago when the electronic records were just starting up my aircrafts hours were out by a fair bit which required an email or two to the tech office to fix. I wouldn't be surprised if the odd numbers were a result of that paper to electronic transition with people correcting the totals giving a false boost to the numbers.

 

 

I would have thought for an experienced instructor that an hour or two would be more than enough, a couple of stalls and a couple of circuits and I wouldn't be surprised if that was more than enough.

 

Obviously if you want someone more experienced on type you are well within your rights to shop around but I would prefer a 10 thousand hour instructor with 1hour on type over a 250hr instructor with 250hrs on type obviously as long as the multi k instructor had been flying similar style planes before.

 

 

SDQDI, Where did you find your helmet?. It is something I have thought about for when Bushbaby is ready for same reasons ( too many bars close to ones head).Cheers

ClintonB

Clinton I got mine through Flight helmets Australia Flight Helmets Australia | Authorised Distributor for MSA

I found them very friendly and easy to deal with. Expensive but a worthwhile long term investment imho.

 

 

I have changed over to a helmet and love it. I haven’t noticed any reduction in visibility. Actually I spent a bit extra and got a good one with a flip down tinted visor and find now I can comfortably land and takeoff into the early morning sun or the late afternoon sun without any discomfort at all which is something I couldn’t do easily before so really it has helped my visibility.

 

I think they are a good thing, am I more likely to do stupid things? I hope not.

 

Why did I get it? I enjoy LL flying and intend to do more of it so being closer to the ground more often would have to increase risk as far as I can tell so I figure a helmet can’t be a bad thing, also I have those steel bars around my head as well and as thick as my head may be I don’t think it can compete with chrome moly.

 

So I think helmets are a good option, IMO they have more good points than bad. I certainly don’t intend to crash but who does!

 

Look at helmet stats with people on push bikes or motor bikes in prangs, done right they DO help.

 

 

Well I finally have myself sorted to a satisfactory level.

 

To start with I put the open air foam one over the top of the standard foam one that came with my helmet but that didn’t help at all so I removed it and put the leather one over the standard foam one and that was marginally better but still horrible so I put the open air foam one over the leather one which was still over the standard foam one and that has made it perfect for me.

 

In normal flight I get no unwanted mic opening UNLESS I put my head out in the breeze. The gentle airflow inside even with the doors off doesn’t seem to affect it at all so I am now happy:thumb up:

 

 

That's not taking into account frequency stuffups or volume stuffups.

 

Radios are a wonderful help but don't ever rely on everyone having one.

 

 

But you said you knew of 3 incidents specifically caused by L1 maintenance Turbs.

 

 

I know one which not only took out the pilot/owner but his instructor, and another one who took out the tester, and another clown who put another instructor through the fence at the end of the strip, and that’s what I can remember in the time it took to write this. Then there are the engine failures, one doozy being the spark plug falling out of a Rotax. It would be more helpful if RAA presented the reasons along with a list of the failures that led to them.

Were they specifically L1 maintenance issues or just maintenance in general?

 

 

But if there isn't planes falling out of the sky because of dodgy L1 maintenance why put everyone through a costly course?

 

 

Your local airstrip is generally a good starting point or any airstrip in towns you may travel through.

 

Talk to anyone you find hanging around hangars there. Offer to help do odd jobs in return for flying favours. If you are willing to sweep hangars or wash planes you may be lucky enough to find someone who is able to help fund your lessons and on top of that they will have the most practical knowledge of the best way to progress through the system.

 

Some people will turn you down but keep at it, it will be worth it.