NT5224

Hi folks I've just been looking at the L1 online course content. Doesn't seem unreasonable -but nowhere in the instructions does it tell you HOW the online learning system operates, and how long it will take. DingerPPC, (or anybody) can you let me know whether you can log in and out of the course as you do it ( i.e. complete it over a series of days, or weeks), and how long it took you to get through? Also, what reference materials did you need to refer to? The tech manual obviously, but what else? Also, I'm assuming that those who already have L1 stamped on their certificates need to do this .... can anybody tell me how long we've got before our current L1 status becomes invalid? I'm assuming its like when they introduced 'Human Factors' and we get a few months grace period to do the course... Cheers Alan

Folks I take it all back and must give credit where its due In response to my latest Email the RAA admin have immediately written back and told me that my membership has been renewed as of the 3oth June. They claim to have sent me an Email to this effect, but checking my Inbox, Trash and Spam boxes in my Email, I honestly can't find as that notification. So all is fine. My renewal only took five emails. Cheers Alan

I left a comment in a previous thread about this. For the last two months I have been trying to renew my RAA membership. 'Trying' because I'm still not a financial member, not entitled to fly and locked out of the RAA website. I have sent 5 emails to the office, given them my credit card details and received three automated responses and 2 actual messages. Because I'm overseas at present I can't easily just lift the phone and sort this out. Surely it shouldn't be this hard, especially now the systems have been upgraded? I'm honestly getting quite frustrated now and if nothing happens with my latest enquiry I will try contact the CEO directly. Has anybody else faced renewal problems recently? Or am I an isolated case? Cheers Alan

I'm delighted at the response my question has prompted, and impressed at the flights that have been flown. The Murphy is actually extremely comfortable in flight but what I've found does improve comfort after a few hours is taking my feet off the rudder pedals (I have full Cessna pedals), and flying with the stick. Obviously, if I get some turbulence, or a little yaw, they go straight back on to correct. Does any body else do this? Alan

Folks, I'm posting this question in a moment of idle curiosity. Our Recreational fleet is not known for comfort on long flights, and different aircraft have very different capabilities, but I know a few among us who have carried a pee bottle (metaphorically or otherwise) and flown quite long stages when going cross-country. So I'm interested to know whats been your longest flight in a RAA registered aircraft -both in terms of distance traversed and time aloft (endurance)? I'd be helpful to know the aircraft flown to put the flight in context... I'll kick this off and say my longest leg flying the Murphy would probably only be about 4 hours, which half empties the tanks. But its so slow that a plastic fantastic would probably have gone further in two hours!

Whats happening at RAA? About a month ago I used the 'new streamlined system' to renew my membership about a week before it expired and received an automatically generated email indicating it would take five days to process and renew. Then I heard nothing. Yesterday I tried to log onto the RAA website and found I wasn't able too. I 'm apparently no longer a Member: My renewal was not enacted. I've just written to the office and they claim no knowledge of my renewal request. To be honest, if I had not received the confirmation email I would have probably followed up sooner. Anybody else having problems under the new system? Can we get some comments back to the office to help sort out the problems? Cheers Alan

Oh, so here's where the real flyers post? :) Some of you folks from the Northern Rivers may recognise the wonderful machine I acquired from your district a few months back: Its kinda distinctive! But I've since flown it up to its new home on the real 'Northern Rivers' -up in the Top End. Although I hadn't tail-dragged since the very start of my flight training (some years ago), I found it incredibly forgiving to fly and land. Its not 'twitchy' -like some of the newer high performance aircraft. I'd make a great solid aircraft to learn to fly on -if only it was a 24 reg! Gonna rack up a hundred hours or so in it, get to understand how it flies and then consider whether I want to change the prop and possibly beef up the undercarriage for flying off my own bush strip. The Top End is your playground with one of these! Cheers Alan

Thanks for the clear explanation Don! But a couple of things I still don't get regarding RAAs intention to achieve flying priviledges equivalent with CASA's RPL. Apart from MTOW, several other things are requirement for RA registration, including stall speeds and of course the 1 passenger limit. If RAA is seeking equivalence with aircraft flown on a RPL, and our MTOW rises significantly, how will that effect those other limitations on RAA registered aircraft? For example, can you envision RAA certified pilots flying with more than one passenger? If so, I'm now wondering how two parallel administrative frameworks advances the cause of recreational aviation? Perhaps the two pathways are intended to ultimately merge? Or, regardless of MTOW, will RAA aircraft always be restricted in some respects compared GA registered (RPL) ? Cheers Alan

G'Day folks ! I have heard that RAA may have submitted a request to CASA to allow RAA registered aircraft types that are design and manufacturer certified for operation at above 600Kg to be registered at a higher MTOW. I have a couple of questions about this because so far I have only come across very general references to it. First, if the request is successful, anybody know what the new RAA MTOW is likely to be, (i.e what is being requested by RAA) ? Second, will the increase only apply to new aircraft coming onto the register that meet the criteria and specifications, or would there be a mechanism for revising the MTOW of aircraft already on the register, e.g by having a new weight and balance done? Does anybody know anything or could direct me to more information? Cheers Alan

Hi folks I'm following this discussion with interest -and occasional chuckles. Let me cast my own two cents in the ring: When I first signed up we were AUF, so I've been around a couple years, but not as long as some. I have never taken a interest in the political wranglings of the organization as for me it was always about the flying, and the privileges that membership of our organization conferred. Having said that, I always enjoyed and appreciated the magazine, which I'm sure we all agree improved a lot before hard copy circulation ended. Some great work was done upgrading the magazine -and those efforts should be recognized. Its a shame that the hard copy was withdrawn as a free publication, after such great work. I still pay extra to receive it.... Having stated the above I will go on to say that I engaged in the politics of RAA (for the first ever!) to participate in the vote earlier this month. I felt the issues under consideration were tremendously important, and that to some extent their significance was being downplayed in simplified summaries circulated to us members. It also appeared to me that only one point of view was being articulated in the spin. I cast my vote (by proxy as I am overseas) and have observed the outcome. To be honest, the outcome doesn't surprise me, given the way that one position was so forcefully advocated to the membership. Clearly lots of resources went into securing the 'yes' vote. So we are no longer a sporting association but now a limited company with paid directors. The change in the structure of the board means that never again will a fellow Territorian sit at the board table and input into decisions: Even if he has PhD in aeronautical engineering and a string of business degrees! Realistically, the board will now be dominated 'skills-based' Canberrans who are part of the inner clique, and if positions are salaried, it will change the altruism of serving the organisation, and the competition for positions. Vested interests will doubtless become yet more vested, now that money is involved. Clearly I'm personally disappointed with how things have gone for our association, but will respect the democratic process, and the decision of my peers. Now I'm really hoping these blokes prove my concerns unfounded. Our association (or is it a company now?) is an amazing thing: It grants us the privilege of flight without the costs or over-regulation of flying GA. So I reckon we should get behind the new board structure and give it a chance. As many have pointed out, there is a need for dramatic change if RAA is going to turn around the current state of affairs (dwindling funds, dwindling membership and by extension, dwindling influence with The Regulator). If this switch to a corporate entity was what was required to fix the problems and maintain our flying privileges, then I reckon its a small price to pay. And if the new board can win a MTOW increase to somewhere north of 700kg, all will be forgiven.... :) Hell, I might be even be able to wet my fuel tanks with two up... ;) Alan

Pylon500: OZFLY, I like it..... Scott: I completely appreciate your point, and agree. However, the logical conclusion would be to make radio mandatory for all aircraft -since dangerously high traffic densities may potentially occur at any time, any location. I'm not sure why radios are not mandatory, but until they are, I reckon we should find a way to make it work and allow non radio equipped aircraft to attend. For myself, I wouldn't fly without a radio.

First, I completely agree with those questioning the name 'Ozkosh'. Totally irrelevant to us. Doesn't the location of the planned Aussie event have a name? Why can't we use that? Actually, I quite liked 'Natfly'. That meant something to me. Second, if it's legal to fly without a radio then I don't see why it should be any different at a particular event. Personally I don't understand why anybody would want to fly without one, and I'd like to think most aviators were sufficiently responsible to see the benefits to themselves and their fellow pilots. But I say no to additional regulation at the event. Alan

In considering the cost benefits of Sport Pilot hard copy vs digital, its not just the print costs which has bearing on the final margins. What about the revenues the printed version was generating? I'm thinking corporate advertising and also aviation classifieds. I wonder how the reduced hard copy circulation may have effected advertising and the overall margins of the magazine? I still don't see much difference myself but wonder if anybody knows..? Alan

Yeah, I'm just renewing now, and fees are up. So much for being shareholders of the new company, it seems to me like we're the customers to be fleeced :(

Guys It wasn't my intention to hijack this thread about Sport Pilot magazine and steer it over the contentious terrain of electronic navigation. It was just an observation of how people have moved from paper paps to GPS and tablets (I read in sport pilot somewhere that upward of 80% of rec pilots now use them -I certainly do), and yet we are on the whole reluctant to swap our paper magazines for e-readers. But on the issue of electronic navigation aids, I always carry paper maps as back up, rather than additional electronic devices. So cross country I fly with Tablet (OzRunways), my cockpit mounted GPS and paper maps. Flight planning I plot my routes onto the maps prior to departure -and I'm pretty good at reading the terrain or flying to a bearing if I had failure of systems one and two. So I reckon map and whirly wheel training still relevant and essential, but agree with SDQDI that perhaps some elements of electronic navigation could be introduced into the syllabus ( if they aren't already there). Alan

Interesting discussion. Like many members here, I very much prefer a paper magazine, just for the feel of the feel of the thing and to get me away from a screen when we seem to spend all day looking at them. So I paid my subscription and took the hit, although I might defect to a rival publication that i consider of superior quality before signing up again. But here's an observation. Many of us on here wail about the transition from paper magazine to online, but how many of us have happily transited from paper maps to OzRunways and Avplan or the equivalent as a primary navigation aid? (Of course with paper backups). So we've made the choice to squint at iPad screens anyway....

I always wanted to fly. My Dad is a lifelong aviation enthusiast and he is my inspiration. Dad would tell me about a relo of ours who was one of the early pioneers of flight in UK and well known for founding an aviation company and some classic aircraft. As a radio/ avionics engineer Dad himself flew into Berlin during the airlift, and would tell me of his youthful adventures in Lancasters and Mosquitos. I read WE Johns avidly as a lad, but learning to fly remained an unacheived dream: Life went in a very different direction. Then one day about 13 years ago we were visiting down south on Melbourne cup day. My wife and I were sat in a park and a little plane was sky writing overhead. My wife saw me looking up and said, "just do it. Learn to fly, don't wait, do it now". The next day made a few phone calls and discovered the AUF, and that flying doesn't have to break the bank. So a big thanks to the AUF for making a dream come true.

Ok So 807 of registered members vote in support of the resolution and 8000+ do not. So we adopt the resolution. Makes sense to me

Hi folks, I reckon this vote was very important for the organisation and although currently overseas I cast mine by proxy, as I expect most members would have needed to. I wasn't straightforward. I had to download the form print it out, sign it and scan it and send it back... No wonder participation was low! Maybe if the board had considered that most members don't live in Canberra, and made voting simpler there might have been greater participation and a better sense of what the membership want from their organisation Alan

Hiya folks I started this thread about a month ago and was pleased at the responses and discussion it stimulated. Anyway I am now back home, having flown across Australia without an ASIC card and wanted to feed back on my experiences in case anybody else finds themselves in a similar situation. Ok, just to start this I want to say I have no gripe with ASIC in principal, If I could just hand over the dollars and get one I would. But I have some very legitimate reasons why I can't get one -nothing illegal I hasten to add! I'm just a guy who falls through the cracks. So obviously I made the flight Ok. I never hid the fact that I didn't have an ASIC, and nobody I intacted with had a problem with that. Obviously ASIC is something that people on working airfields around the country have imposed upon them from above, and there is no real passion to enforce it. I was told that a lot of private outback flyers don't have an ASIC, but as a stranger travelling cross country it would have been more comfortable to have had one. So folks if you can get one, please do, but for all those who helped me along the way, a big thanks. Actually a bigger challenge I faced was some airfields being locked for the weekend. Quite by chance I was flying over a weekend and so learned this. Nobody mentions this in flight training, ( although I did my training before the whole ASIC thing, when the fences went up). It was bloody hot in Central Australia when I flew into one airfield to refuel and found that there was no drinking water airside. Why don't all airfields in hot climates have drinking water for pilots airside? I was that thirsty I had to fly to another airfield simply to get a drink of water and fill my water bottles. It was a pretty miserable experience. So my conclusion it's obviously better to travel with ASIC, but if you don't it's better to go during the week, when there are people around and airfields are unlocked during working hours. Cheers Alan

About a month ago there was a thead in another international forum about what aviation activity was on peoples' bucket lists. I immediately responded 'fly the Morning Glory'. Most of the other forum members (in the states) didn't know what I was writing about. I posted some links to pictures and it aroused some stateside/Canadian interest. I lived down south in that Gulf country for a couple of years and saw several Morning Glories. It is really spectatcular. The wave fronts can extend hundreds of kilometres. I vowed to go back one day and examine from the air. So that's the big trip. Down to the Gulf, up Cape York and hopping through the Torres Strait, taking in the Morning Glory along the way if we can. Alan

Bexrbetter is right. Many of the current RA fleet come up against the MTOW when fully loaded and fuelled. Some types on the RA register are manufacturer rated well above 600 MTOW. The Jab 430 is rated to about 700kg I believe, so the 230 could potentially be similar. My own Murphy Rebel is rated to 750 kg MTOW, although my RA registration limits me to take off at less than 600kg. So if RAA MTOW was revised upwards to 750 kg it would make flying my plane much easier and much safer. Capping operations at 600 kg means that people may need to reduce the amount of fuel they carry on a cross country flight to comply with regs.

My own experience is that the wet season weather is often less unpredictable than it seems. A common pattern is for a clear morning and then build up leading to an afternoon storm. Heavy cloud formations and low pressure fronts are usually observable in the met data, so it's imperative to check weather conditions, but local flights are possible- you can see some amazing things even on short flight in the Top End. Some of our best flying can be had at this time of year. As facthunter says, fewer thermals and often quite still conditions. Dry season tends to be windier. Another early Dry season hazard (which is much less of an issue down south) is smoke. I have abandoned several flights because I couldn't see the ground! Having said all the above, not sure what to make of the 'wet' this year. It's not really happened yet, only one brief monsoon before Christmas. Cheers Alan

A fascinating thread with many insightful observations and suggestions. As many here have already said, rising costs in housing, energy and change in the postwar (baby boom) culture of financed retirement may have big implications for future aircraft ownership and participation in recreational flying. Also the growing regulation of recreational flying and aircraft maintenance. Some commentators here have alluded to a possible decline in flying clubs, -but what about the prospect of clubs being strengthened? One thing I notice about younger folks today is they have an positive attitude to 'sharing', be it sharing music files, movies, information, couch surfing, car pooling and the like. I guess a few years back 'ownership' was seen as a yardstick of success ( eg home ownership, or that first car), but I wonder if those values are still as entrenched? I hear it is increasingly common for urban folks to rent cars when they need them, rather than own them and carry all annual costs. Sadly some of these changes are driven because it is getting costlier and more competitive to get homes, jobs etc... So assuming that people still want to fly, I would imagine that syndicates and clubs would become important avenues for access to aircraft and flying. Many flying clubs already use Goboko online bookings, how long until somebody dreams up a flight/ aircraft sharing system similar to Uber or Rideshare? So ladies and gents, we should enjoy the privilege of owning our personal Jabirus, Thrusters, Drifters, Tecnams etc... I wonder if this may become harder for future generations, but on the plus side this change may strengthen some of the social and institutional aspects of recreational flying. Just some thoughts Cheers Alan