MattP

As someone who's had a kit on their bucket list for a long time - looking at prices over the last decade I woudn't say Vans (or a similar Glasair / Sling kit) = cheaper than something else. Its really the only way I see myself considering being able to pretend I can afford a new aircraft. Comparing an RV10 to a new build SR22, you're still coming out just over 1/2 price - although on the used market the SR22 will be considerably more valuable for longer (based on what I have seen of the 2nd hand kit prices). A Sling 4 TSI is about 60% of the cost of a new SR20, and the ability to spread your payments out over a longer time and have the experience (if you're into that) of building is also a plus in my book. I'm kicking myself I said no to a 172 SP for 100k about 10 years ago when we had near $ parity with the US, which would now be worth 300k based on a quick look at planesales. Bugger! I don't agree Vans is "too big to fail" etc. they're a business just like anything else, although I would like to think someone sees that its a viable business that is very capable of being profitable.

There’s 2, one on the firewall, one in the tail. tanks are integral to the wing. Exhaust is pretty standard, out the bottom. It’s tightly cowled and baffled. not sure exactly on the older g1 sr22 re the wing tank structure as they changed the wing g2 and up, different spar I think and made the wing so it was removable.

Note also that article posted was pre the cirrus owners and pilots association focus on caps training. Post that move they've claimed no fatalities from in envelope caps deployment. Issue was an attitude one of the customers a) thinking the chute was magic and a cure for poor skill / decision making and b) not wanting to use it. Once they trained it out the stat's improved to the point where it's got a great record now. Also why most places want you to have the csip certificate- ie have done their training. At the end of the day the 20 and 22 are just ga aircraft, one is relatively underpowered for its size but as per rf's post pretty good economically once it's going. The other is a fast x country tourer with the same caution needed as other big six powered singles. There's really no special / secret thing that makes them worse or better just different. I also find most people making the comments on them have never flown one. Tbh the 20 is a lot like the archer except everything is 15 kts faster.

Differences are mostly preference based. I used ozrunways initially so have kept it as my flying changed over time. Now the switching cost for me isn't worth it to avplan as they do pretty much the same thing. I'll admit not knowing about the sync feature on avplan though. Nice! I've also spent a bit of time making custom checklists for my ozrunways and don't feel like seeing if they're going to work on avplan. Like the apple vs Android debate realistically now days the features of both will suit most and its whatever you feel comfortable with price and use wise. There are some nuanced differences but tbh especially in the apple vs <insert product here> debate most people revert to some religious debate vs actually having a clear idea of the pros and cons of each. You're the customer, try before you buy with the efb and use whatever tablet works for you. Note with overheating any device using a CPU or electronics unless certified to the relevant ISO standard or milspec will be prone to overheat / shut down. Every consumer tablet you buy can overheat and shut down in the cockpit.

I used to use a tab a for my backup, primary is and ipad pro. It got to the point the tab a was too old and slow so upgraded to a tab a8. That works well enough as a backup. Had to use it a couple of weeks ago when I smashed the screen on the ipad pro at a fuel stop. Whipped out the galaxy tab and did the last leg fine. Did make me think that ozrunways needs a sync feature for your flightplans though. The tab also works fine with my stratux. Personally the ipad and pen are streets ahead of the galaxy for general use. I'm a devoted android phone user, but for tablet the Apple is far superior, including feature set for ozrunways.

You're all not seeing the upside, just eat enough domestic terminal fast food at major airports for the asic discount to pay back! I think you also get discounts on money transfers too depending where you go. Just ask next time you're at the airport about their asic discount. 😀

I'm also about 192, and about 93kg. Legs are quite long, so does pose some challenges in GA and LSA alike, but: Tecnam P92 and derivatives - ok, once you're in Jab (small and "big") - I find the dashboard cuts into my shins / knees in a way that I can live with for short spurts, but I generally don't feel comfortable for what that could mean in some kind of forced landing. I also find the seating position just doesn't work for me. ALPI Pioneer's - Ok, headroom / legroom ok. Tecnam Low wing (Sirerra) - headroom ok Texan - Headroom ok, legs ok. GA Pa28 - ok with the seat fully back against the stops and down its lowest setting, some challenges with using a kneeboard and the yoke. C172 - slightly better than the Pa28 C182 - no issues. Cirri - no issues.

I think their sales process is: Q. What's the range? A. Look, it's a jet! Q. What performance can I expect e.g. Stall speed, ceiling etc. A. Look it's a jet and you can build it to be aerobatic. Q. How much? A. Click. Ring back Shut up and take my money! Nobody is buying this for any practical reason whatsoever, and good on them!

~2000 FPM is about the ROD at best glide in a PA28 isn't it 😇 At least it makes forced landing practice easy. 76KIAS - look right down, we're not going anywhere else 🙂!

Some schools have aircraft they will set aside for rentals, ie day rental. There are also places around that will just do private hire, say a week or so but those I know of are ga only. you can always also ring a school and ask about a long term rental. Be prepared to pay a rate that compensates for their loss of useage, they are businesses after all. if you’re looking for regular longer term use though yeah it’s syndicate or ownership.

Hate to disappoint, but that bird has my name on it people. Hands off, you'll ruin the paint! 😀

Yep expecting cover without paying isn't realistic, but the insurance exists and is available. As I mentioned, for those still working also check what your employer offers as they may offer their own specific policies as part of their super plan offering or a specific tailored policy that covers various things. I had this with my previous employer who's health and life / TPD insurances were custom products that I found out the hard way weren't available on the open market once leaving their employ.

You need to ring them and check if its not specifically listed. In the past I've had life / trauma insurance with various methods applied to limit their exposure / extract cash based on private flying being declared: 1. Premium increase (100% increase in premium for one policy I had) 2. Limits on hours (less than x hours = no increase, more than y hours = no increase). I was in the middle, so premium increased 3. Higher cost in premium than other policies but no exclusion on the activities (Some may exclude specific types of flying - e.g. competition aerobatics.) Note, not all policies provided by the same company are the same either. E.g. some employers have policies as part of their employment offering that beat what you can get on the open market, others do not. You really need to do your homework. Also note, this means you're unlikely to find the cover you want cheaply compared to other policies, so as the saying goes, you get what you pay for. Same for things like travel insurance, which generally (and most people don't check) doesn't cover pre-existing conditions without declaration.

To be fair to them, I nearly fell off my chair when the processing of my AFR came through within 1 day of completing it. I think like any big faceless Gov agency, it depends which department you're dealing with. Something like the weight increase isn't standard business operations either.

I’ve said it before on here but I’ll say it again, the chute and the training Cirrus provide isn’t about it being pull caps the minute a problem arises. The pilot followed exactly what the type training says, which is pitch for best glide, carry out your memory items, identify a suitable landing area. Where the Cirrus training differs is that you also nominate and call out a minimum caps decision height. Should you not be happy with your options, sure that you can carry out a successful off field landing or any other reason, you pull caps. This is actually the nightmare scenario and he was lucky he had a completely failed deployment as you wouldn’t want that chute streaming behind you, then you’ve lost both your forward speed and ability to glide but don’t get the “gentle” descent rate. it’s also worth noting the 20 and 22 aren’t back country stol machines, so you’re at 97 knots best glide and about 75 over the numbers. That’s a fair bit of energy with small tyres and brakes to dissipate. Much of the argument here always comes down to being able to get it into a field etc, which happens successfully from time to time, just that most pilots use all the systems available to them, and the cirrus happens to have caps to fall back on. As with anything in aviation you don’t get anything for free, the down side of the slippery body and fast cruise is fast landing and glide speeds compared to most 100 series cessna and Cherokee variants. so in most cases it comes down to a question of what’s the best option, chute and lower energy vs higher energy and off field? There was a guy not so long ago that landed his 22 in a field in the us as he decided it was better than caps for him and he walked away fine. it’s also worth noting most newer sr2xs have airbags, crash impact seats and the side stick is designed to get the foreign bodies like yokes out of the way in a crash. It’s light years ahead of most other singles.

I haven't really looked in a while, but was actively looking during Covid and if I use Planesales as a reference, there were on average about 120 aircraft for sale around that time, and from a quick look for SEP, it looks to be about 188 now. Of those for sale I can see quite a few that were there previously and are still listed, some for around the same price, some for more. There is one specific example I looked at closely at the time that has almost doubled in list price, and it doesn't look from the ad to be different in terms of equipment / condition, although I have no idea if the owner piled money into it to make it more viable for sale (and needed to raise the price). Other than the usual newish Cirri / dealer listings most of the GA stuff is 5+ decades old. One thing I did find, however was the seemingly decent aircraft that got listed got snapped up quicky, often even as the ad listed. I know I got beaten to it a few times to the point where I gave up on the idea and went with plan B (syndicate and build later), which TBH worked out far better for my actual flying use / mission profile. I look at building as a way to get into a new aircraft and scratch an itch I've had to build forever vs. thinking I'll ever be able to convince myself $1M plus for a new Cirrus is value for me. I also had multiple offers on my wife's SUV from the dealer at over what she paid retail nearly 4 years ago during Covid, but the caveat was that you wait 12+ months for a car and give your car up now. I think this shenanigans will end soon given the supply is back up and the backlog is already clearing. Good luck to those who took advantage of this, but I wouldn't be planning on buying a car low / selling high as a viable long term strategy. Having also been recently involved in the house search / auction cycle I have noticed the listing of properties with price guides as averages for auction, only to be passed in and re-listed for 2-400k more post auction, which is a sign of people being slightly more sensible at auctions but also inflated vendor price expectations. With more supply coming onto the market as rates rise, it will be interesting to see the impact this has on house prices, as well as luxury items such as cars / planes given these are often the first to go in a pinch. This being said, given the average age of most GA / RA pilots putting them into the baby boomer / older gen-X range where mortgage payments aren't as much of an issue anymore and wealth has been built, this may also not happen for the rec aircraft market. Who knows?

Those older 40 degree 152 / 172 / 182 were fun, as a student doing practice forced landings they came in very handy if you’d ended up high on your approach. Also really demonstrated the need for good go around discipline as on a 152 or 172 at least you’re not going anywhere but down or maybe straight ahead with 40 deg regardless of power setting. I don’t know what piper were thinking with the doors on their aircraft, especially for the tri pacer’s successor, let’s delete another door and leave just one for the whole plane. At least they added the back door for the Cherokee 6. Someone must have gotten a talking to about that oversight 😉

Looking at the situation I’d be hard pressed to find a better summary of this guys behaviour. As for risk, it’s not just the media. Insurance companies, the regulator etc. The truth is that statistically there is an increased risk and whilst the mitigations each person takes vary, it’s still there. Your example of the same aircraft under different rules (assuming you’re asking charter vs pvt ops) does illustrate this to some point as there is a requirement / expectation of different levels of licensing and maintenance if it’s a commercial charter op vs private flight.

I don't see what the debate is here if I'm being honest. If the pilot wasn't licensed, I can think of three scenarios: 1. Never got a license but somehow "learned"to fly, be it having lessons but never doing a test or some other way 2. Once had a valid PPL but lapsed medical / AFR 3. Did not have a valid Aus PPL to demonstrate competence to part 61 MOS for the aircraft type he was flying (e.g. held an RPC / foreign license). In all of these cases, the pilot certainly knew they weren't licensed correctly and made a choice to conduct the flight. Arguably 2 and 3 are "worse" in that the pilot would have known the regs to some extent and chosen to violate them, in point 1 they could possibly argue they didn't know the rules, but that won't wash. In all these cases the statement that holds true is that the pilot was not in a position to legally operate the aircraft for that flight. As for the aircraft, even if its VH - Experimental there is a minimum set of obligations on the owner / maintainer (assuming again the best case scenario that the "pilot" who owned the aircraft could maintain it). Finally, is it reasonable to expect that as a passenger, even on reading the experimental placard and warning, that before flying: a) your pilot is licensed and able to undertake the flight b) the aircraft is maintained to the standard required for its operation (even if thats experimental) I'd argue yes to both those, and that this guy made a conscious choice to fly un-licensed and in an un-maintained aircraft. Its a shame that he also decided to take a mate along. Doing this by yourself is bad enough, but roping someone else in to it is even worse. Strict liability offences and our interesting wording of the rules don't remove the stink from this and if I'm applying the pub test, most reasonable people would agree this guy did the wrong thing and deserves to be held accountable for it.

Yeah it's in only. It's useful if the aircraft you're flying has adsb out but not in. That's the situation I'm in and it's great to get situational awareness given in telling everyone else where I am.

I use the stratux as well and awesome for adsb and not sucking the iPad battery for gps. Be aware though post Covid raspberry pi’s are unobtainium and selling well above rrp, so one of the retail solutions might actually be better value now days.

I wasn't suggesting that the student be given the exact format, but there is really only so much surprise you can build in. My point was that the test shouldn't be a mystery or stressful because you're asked to do things you don't know. The idea is to demonstrate competence in the basics that are required for issue of the certificate. From there you go and learn on your own. If you're not aware of the areas you need to be competent in and the demonstrated standard for those manoeuvres I can't see why or how you could be ready for a test as you wouldn't know what you're being tested on. With the access to planes thing, sometimes that's more insurance than the school taking you for a ride. It's not unusual to see 90 day checks required before hiring even if you have time in type. What will set the reputable places out from the others is common sense approach to the check where if you demonstrate a level of control / competency the check shouldn't take much at all. No need to have you do 90mins of manoeuvres when the instructor checking will have worked out your ability within the first 5 mins. It's unfortunate that there's people out there looking to take advantage l, but also re enforces that the lowest hourly rate isn't always the best deal and that it pays to shop around. What annoys me is that nobody tells you this and those people walking in off the street wanting to learn how to fly get ripped off and end up lost to aviation. That being said, there also are people out there who can't seem to get the hang of things/ don't take instruction or don't prep and then complain the school didn't do the right thing by them. Sometimes it's also just the instructor doesn't gel with the student.

I got mine all at once but it was ga to raa so all the relevant endorsements got added once I did the test and submitted the paperwork. Does the raa not have a similar doc to the part 61 mos for rpl tests? Also would the instructor not brief this before hand or as part of the pre test check flight?

Agree, they're not clever either. I do like the retro liveries and would have loved to see the old t jet or chock block TAA livery on a 717 or the Australian blue green yellow on an a330 for the 100th but AJ's gotta get a bonus I guess. At least ba did some cool stuff with their 747s before scrapping them.

Yeah lucky it wasn't red and white, I'd have no chance.