DrZoos

What really stumps me is that an Orbit is such a common thing for ATC, why the hell isnt it taught and why on earth cant highly experience pilots even find a reference to it, or agree on its use or direction. Seems to me to be an accident waiting to happen.

No turns opposite are allowed once in the circuit area. Never had to orbit OCTA but reckon I would go around and join midfield any try it all again if I couldn't get it slowed up enoughhttp://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/download/caaps/ops/166-1.pdf

quote "The standard aerodrome traffic circuit facilitates the orderly flow of traffic, and is normally a left circuit pattern with all turns to the left [CAR 166A]."

Theres not a mention of this yet i have come across several people using it and teaching it. Stumps me.

And when i asked a few senior instructors and others, not one said you cant do it. Some said you shouldnt, others said not a problem. The main argument was about direction.

Hi all i know the risks of flying a left or right orbit in terms of collision with oncoming traffic.

And i know ATC is meant to tell you when and where to fly an orbit

But it seems there is complete disagreement by everyone you ask about an Orbit.

Technically or literally speaking a standard circuit at a non towered aerodrome should be left turns only unless stated otherwise.

So heres what i want to know.

IS there an actual document that explains orbits and when they should and should not be done and in what direction. It seems the people i know that do them at untowered aerodromes do so turning to the right.

It seems that the argument against them is collision risk, and the argument that a right turn in a left circuit is "not allowed".

I guess this might open a pandoras box, but i would love to know/see what the "Official line on orbits is"

Ive searched and the governign bodies of varios countries that do include orbits in thier documents dont mention direction. I cant find anything from CASA or RAAus on the topic that is instructional.

Wish i could my Pop flew in Cats during the war. He actually flew in the one hanging from the ceiling of the Powerhouse museum on several occasions. I went and saw the one Bob Hazelton flew from the USA about 5 or 6 years ago. It was pretty rough, I wouldnt have flown it , they have balls flying that as far as they did even though they can land on water. Shes a long paddle in a Catalina across the pacific.

Well the title says RAA but i gues it means RAA and RAAus

Good quality syllabus -

Fantastical helpful on the phone or email

Being able to have L2 maint

RPL is a cracker, i think its a great idea

Im too old to remember anything else at this time of night and too young to complain about everything

Here is one in a current exam.

An aircraft is climbing, how can you increase the rate of climb

1. some garbage

2. some other garbage

3. reduce takeoff weight

4. increase speed by 10 knots

Right o geniuses out there whats the answer. Personally i think throwing the passenger out the window after takeoff is not allowed by CASA or RAA. I tried ripping instruments out but the maintenance manager hit the roof. I threw out all the crap in the back luggage area and it made no difference. I tried dumping fuel, but we had no fuel dump switch. But apparently 3 is the answer. Stuffs me how a climbing aircraft reduces takeoff weight to improve climb????

You would be annoyed if that question made the difference between pass and fail.

Thanks guys. The one in question has no primer so it should be a bit easier "I think".

Now heres a real prickley question....

Is stripping and repainting the exact same colour maintenance or modification. Because the way i read it (which isnt the opinion that counts) is its maintenance if the paint type and colour are identical.

Hi just wondering if you dont mind saying what insurance costs people are paying for low wing trikes , low hour pilots and who is that with.

The SAAA claims far cheaper insurance ?? any idea how much cheaper. Can someone confirm this

Painting of Aluminium Aircraft

Anyone know how much an external strip of all paint, new primer and paint costs on an aluminium LSA aircraft roughly from experience. Please no guesses.

New paint is 95% white with some blue and grey highlights.

Hi Nev, just joking with Nose dragger, but yes we should cease it as the term might encourage some newb to think incorrect technique.

With regard to larger aerodromes, i still think it comes back to instructors. I have flown with 4 instructors and all 4 have been vigilant about use of the nose wheel and we have almost 2km to play with, not that we ever use even 1/3rd of that . Id almost say that the use of a fully weighted nose wheel is never used. But thats probably slight exaggeration, perhaps never desirable and hardly ever used is a better term. So again it comes back to the quality of instructors not the aircraft chosen. Im happy to say from my experience all 4 are teaching correct technique and there is probably 35years age differential, but i can only speak of my experience. Id be interested to hear from someone who can actually say they know of a case "today" being taught wrong. Sure there will be many examples going back in time, but hopefully we have evolved to better standards all round.

And in terms of trikes copping incorrect instruction, i love watching AC land, and i have seen many many TD flyers who dont even worry about for aft balance of the aircraft they just smash the tail wheel in and let it drop, then try to glue 3 wheels to the ground. So it works both ways. Some sloppy sloppy landings indeed..but you see that with all aircraft

I am sure in your education and training skills you know the concept of primacy - the first way you learn something has a very strong effect, and is difficult to alter. Habits learned in a nosewheel aircraft are difficult to break.

Unfortunately what you say about primacy is only one tiny aspect of the subject. Primacy is a massive study area on its own and there are studys showing time and again that primacy "in the way you mention it" is not a big hurdle unless its teaching a skill that has to be totally removed and undone. In fact primacy introduces many reason why a nose dragger should be used first. Primacy would support what i have previously said about introducing certain skills and building upon them. The introduction of one skill to be later used in a different way is also primacy, as is building on a skill to include variations. In that case you are using primacy to accelerate later learning.

The only real argument where primacy would go against using a nose dragger first is if you "assume and are proven to be correct" that more then 50% of instructors are teaching incorrect techniques in trikes and thats certainly not the case. But thats not really about which should go first , thats a separate discussion about instructor ability to teach correct / incorrect techniques, and then if that was proven we have some big reasons to alter the current teaching recommendations.

In fact a much bigger use for primacy in learning to fly is to provide interruptions during flight lessons and flight training and use these interruptions and primacy to accelerate learning and memory, but thats a whole forum thread on its own. One example is that two half flights (assuming no time wasted taxing etc which isnt true) are far more effective seperated by say a 20min or 30 min break then a one hour session non stop. This has a strong effect on skill development /retention and both memory and muscle memory. This is primacy being used in a well proven beneficial way.

Aro - I for one have never been taught to relax once the gear is on the ground in fact i was vigilantly taught the complete opposite, that the gear on the ground does not mean your safe to relax, it only means that the gear has for the moment taken PART of the load from the wing, and that you must have active feet and hands at all times till you are at walking pace and even then, depending on conditions the wing can easily take much of the weight again and get you in strife. Similarly i have not been taught to land both wheels down in a cross wind, i have been taught to land my trike just like a dragger on one wheel and hold it on one wheel till it wont, then hold off hold off and gradually let the nose wheel down when your running out of force available to keep it up.

Yes there are some shockers of instructors out there but it is a HUGE assumption to assume more are teaching the wrong techniques in trikes, or that only trike instructors teach wrong techniques.

I dont know if RAA can do anything more then they are doing. In my opinion it seems to be beligerance by some "public servant" oops road block further up in CASA. And only a minister can do anything about that.

The entire situation is ridiculous, should never have happened . Let alone dragged on. CASA needs to be taken to task on this, and a minister is the only one that can do anything bout it.

My extremely limited understanding of e24 is its identical to 24 except you have something on the aircraft that does not conform to ASTM. I believe it does not affect where you can fly. But it does mean you cannot train in or rent the aircraft out.

A friend spoke with RRA today and i believe there might be a break through either just happened or about to happen. Me personally i wrote a letter to Warren Truss to inform him of the ridiculous situation and hoped he might step in and help Casa see some sense.

Flyable able to fly eg tail dragger

Airworthy - worthy to be flyable eg trike

Just kidding

Yes i must say i have browsed a few nearby clubs and was shocked to see rates almost double what we pay.

I was listening to LiveATC app on the weekend with my son, we tuned into, several atc including camden, and i got to say the random rubbish being jibber jabbered on that was ridiculous....they where trying to draw the atc op into their garbage , and he wasnt having a bar of it, but i was surprised he allowed it to go on.

Thats a cracker. Awesome effort. Whats the secret really short circuits. If you dont mind saying what sort of circuit is done?

If we are speaking about which is easiest to purely convert then undoubtedly from the harder to easier

If we are talking about which is easiest to learn and then convert then it flips in the favour of easier to harder.

Personally i hold a different opinion to some of the above, but its only my opinion, thats because Im a specialist in education and training (not typing ). And that theory has been proven over and over and over including in aviation, when learning a difficult skill (and landing an aircraft is definitely a very difficult skill to learn properly) then always start with the easiest most straight forward way and easiest aircraft and then ad complications and higher order skills once the basics are mastered. Adding complications earlier then necesary has been proven in study after study to slow the learning process and in almost all cases cause the learner to have poorer outcomes and levels of achievement. This applies to both theory and motor unit development. In my 15 years as a specialist educator in several fields i have never seen a more clear example of a skill that should be taught one way first.

Its why we start in foxbats, its why we fly 747 much later, its why we do a TIFF first , its why we teach local flight first then navs then ...... and the lsit goes on. Im not sure why some people think a tail dragger is immune to the basics of teaching.

Because its been proven time and again that starting simple , allows the learner to reinforce the correct things to memory, consciousness and motor unit development(ie muscle memory) .

I dont think anyone in here would say that a tail-dragger is easier or easy to land for a novice. And that is the reason why it should be taught after a pilot can get the other basics right first.

Make your own choice, but if you really want a hairy chest then you should fly a taildragger first. You might take longer , you might find it harder, but at least you will be able to join that exclusive club of tail dragger first pilots, who have no bad habbits and far superior skills. LOL

Which is funny becasue in my club i never have heard a word of one being better then the other , but in here it seems to be more prevalent. Most say it in jest and it is funny.

In the end your not going to be a bad pilot in either, but you should take on board some of whats said .

PErhaps you should even think about skipping trainers altogether and go learn in a real plane like a retired Mig

Our plane we are buying was shifted from 24 to e24 because even with the ASTM rules allowing IFA props. RAA wouldnt continue to rego it in 24. CASA is still saying, ok new installs will be ok, but installs put on 5 or 6 or 3 years ago do not comply, even if they use the exact same IFA prop today.

So no luck here.

It would be great if someone who knows enough could draft a letter we could all print off and send to Warren Truss or other relevant politicians, as it seems on this issue CASA really is behaving badly, and the only people it seems who have the power to change this is the minister and other politicians.

I asked my cousin this exact questions on FB, he is ex Qlink Dash8 and Small Jets for Qantas

His answer is they can only get us on TCAS if we have a transponder and its switched on , and they usually know we are there before TCAS is in range as ATC for the area who are also monitoring traffic let them know, even for un towered airports. aparently ATC will say QLink ### please be aware you have traffic at Y### at alt ____ and alt ____ , call signs ___ and ____. They are not using radar at all, only TCAS thats looking for transponders. He said even with a tansponder its a bit sketchy sometimes as smaller aircraft tend to be pretty unpredictable in heading and alt. Where as they are always trying to manage passenger comfort and safety (no sudden or sharp changes in heading or alt) by following set paths and by making slow manoeuvres.

Geez, after reading that I'm amazed anyone since WW1 ever managed to get off the ground ,let alone land a plane, I guess all the pilots up until about the early 60's were just lucky ,unless of course no one told them tail draggers would ruin their self confidence and the fun factor would go through the floor,Matty

He asked whats best. A trike is best. Yes tail draggers blah blah blah make real men, put hairs on your chest, mean your ##$% or @#@#$@# must be bigger etc. But for teaching and learning in early skill development phase the easiest aircraft possible is best and thats not a tail dragger, unless you have a hairy chest, hairy back or some other macho and apparently better thing.

The guy has already had one attempt at learning to fly and not finished so a learning environment where he can learn in the easiest, best and fastest way possible is probably best. And thats not a tail dragger.

Train in whats easiest first (trike) so you can practice the right skills over and over and over , then learn the harder one (tail dragger) unless you have a specific reason. The only hard part of normal flying is matching the aircraft to the ground. Any monkey can take off, fly and approach, the hard part is matching that 5 or 6 dimensional moving object to the ground. Not so hard in good conditions, but anything else for a learner is difficult.

If you want best value for money, best enjoyment then go the trike so that you develop confidence and ability from the get go. Then move to the dragger later. See the other thread in the general discussion section. You dont teach a difficult skill by deliberately making it harder and thats exactly what the choice to go in a tail dragger does. It makes the most difficult part of flying even harder.

Similarly you may hear comments indicating learning in a tail dragger will make you a better pilot. Thats a firfy. No one becomes better by learning in a sub optimal environment..its like teaching a surgeon to do his first difficult operations in the dark. It wont make him better at all, he will just be better if the lights go out, and even that is highly questionable.

Compare learning to kick a ball properly for the first time. If the coach breaks it down and gives you the correct technique a few steps at a time and allows you to practice that over and over correctly then you are immediately beginning to commit the right skills to memory and muscle memory. If he over complicates it and makes it more difficult then it needs to be then some times you might be committing correct skills to memory and other times you are committing the wrong skills to memory.... Its a sub optimal learning environment to pick a WELL KNOWN more difficult aircraft to land in.

A good trainer should behave predictably and respond to inputs of the controls conventionally. It should not have any identifiable VICES, or bad characteristics. It also needs to be somewhat robust, by nature of the job it is performing and have a fair bit of control authority.No plane should be difficult to fly as such. A tailwheel plane is the same as any other till the ground becomes a factor. Rolling along the ground the plane is directionally UNSTABLE. This means a turn tends to exaggerate itself, because the wheels are forward of the centre of gravity. The T/W v/s tricycle is a bit of a no brainer as most pilots don't want it and they are in short supply in any case. Nev

Learning to fly in something hard to fly does not make you a better pilot in any way shape or form. All it does is make you a better pilot in that particular type of aircraft, and even then, maybe not as good as someone who learned with better teaching and learning procedures..

In addition it delays the learning process, increases frustration and fatigue, reduces enjoyment and in some cases forces people to walk away.

Proper teaching and instructions is about building confidence and enjoyment first and foremost, so that a person wants to continue learning and then its about reptition of the correct technique, not repetition of the wrong techniques. To develop muscle memory takes time and it takes a taxing toll on a persons concentration.

Flying like any skill is best taught by breaking the skill down into manageable tasks and teaching one task repetatively after the other.

In football aka soccer its easy to break it down to just one part of one skill at a time because we can just stick a pile of balls next to the learner. Unfortunately in flying the most difficult part (landing) has about 40 things going on at once. But a good trainer knows how to isolate those skills into manageable tasks for the learner.

Sorry but as an educator in my field and with a masters in education and training in my field, trying to teach anyone using the most difficult method eg a tail dragger is just far far far from best practice. It might have been used years ago and it still might be used in isolated cases but it is not the way anyone should choose to teach something as complex as flying. In my limited flying experience i have been in the cockpit with several pilots and several trainers. After a lesson with one that wanted to "challenge me" and give me tasks that where too hard , i came home frustrated, angry, with a total waste of money and my flying skills went backwards, not to mention my enjoyment and confidence was destroyed. Another instructor broke things down properly, even flying the aircraft half the length of the runway at low level so that i could practice feet only during the critical moment of matching aircraft to ground in a crosswind. IT was brilliant brilliant brilliant. He broke the most difficult part of flying, and the most difficult part of that part of flying into a manageable skill that allowed me to practice it within my limits , and repeat repeat repeat. Thats what teaching flying is about.

There in my experience are far far tooo many old school ex this an that pilots that can fly the pants of a kangaroo, but my god some of them can not teach flying because they dont know how to break it down and make it easy, fun and manageable. And in my opinion putting them in a difficult aircraft is mistake number 1.There is a reason they call an aircraft a trainer and thats because its supposed to be good for training.

Putting someone in a tail dragger to learn to fly is like handing a trainee surgeon a knife , tying one hand behind his back and asking him to perfrom a tripple bypass in the dark, but saying dont worry i will be here if you are about to have an accident. It might work and that student will be fully preped to operate in difficult conditions, but its the wrong way to help that student learn properly and its unfair to that student to expect that much so soon. And it doesnt make that student a good foot surgeon, just because he learnt the hardest operation first.