wags

Mazda, let's make it simple and keep it simple. McCormick said radios will be mandatory for all aircraft and that all licenced airports will be CTAF® and radio will be required to operate into them. End of story... the application of that is unless you have a valid reason for operating into a licenced airport without a radio (eg exception to go in to get your radio fixed etc) you will not be able to fly into that airport legally. The question is will he include all airstrips (both licenced and unlicenced) in that context? My bet is he will. That only leaves Ozzies back paddock where we can operate legally without a working radio onboard.

Maj, to be honest I think he wants to see RAAus lift their performance just a little if we are going to get CTA etc. For instance, I came across a guy the other day who now holds a NAV ticket on his RAAus licence but hadn't even heard of or been told about the "VFR Guide". My comment to him was that it was like being a Christian without knowing there was a Bible in existence! There are some things that are purely and simply required knowledge and there appears to be a few shortcomings for one reason or another in our current system if this fails to be communicated (no radios?). I don't know the answer to this and it is probably readily available somewhere... like in the VFR Guide or on the RAAus website perhaps... but once an instructor with RAAus is given accreditation as an instructor, what follow up is there to see if he/she is performing their duties efficiently and/or correctly? I suspect none. In my day as an instructor we all had to fly with the CFI regularly and he got stuck into anyone who couldn't demonstrate a circuit almost precisely regardless of conditions and didn't know their "stuff" (like answers to questions about Air Legislation etc). If you had a student who was not sent solo by 10 hrs, it wasn't the student who had a problem, it was YOU... the instructor. Some of these old values are just as applicable today and I guess that is where McCormick is heading... maybe? If the CFI at your RAAus flying school is checked by CASA (or their designated person) the flow-on is going to ensure higher standards across the board. Perhaps this is what he was referring to when he mentioned instructors being up to speed when they check people. If you as a pilot are licensed and are doing regular flying you can obviously fly... so why have a 1 1/2 hr x-country just to prove that - for GA that is. Haven't done a bi-annual with RAAus yet, but I will very shortly and I believe these comments apply just as much to the RAAus scenario as they do to GA. Increased standards make for safer skies and if we want or expect CTA we will probably have to accept an increase in standards. But it will certainly cost us all.

Development for other than aviation services. Must have a bad memory. Thanks for reminding me again Turboplanner. John McCormick stated that the Rudd Government was most concerned at the shutdown of Hoxton Park and that they (the Gov't) were monitoring other sites very closely. Hope they keep an eye on Evans Head etc. He indicated the Federal Gov't would step in to stop development for developments sake as this was outside the charter entered into when the airfields were handed over to local Councils. The Federal Gov't can only enforce the agreement made under the Charter but can't stop individual runway closures etc. He also clarified the situation with respect to CASA involvement saying it was not considered a safety issue if a runway was closed - as they have at Bankstown. Without listening to the recording I made of his speech again I seem to remember him saying it was something that came under the State Governments now the airfields are owned by local Councils. Would someone correct me here if I am wrong in saying whose responsibility it now is?

Tomo... Danger areas are just that. They don't switch on and off like Restricted areas. They mark them to warn you that you can expect the unexpected when transiting through them. You can transit them at anytime, just keep a good lookout... and use that compulsory (soon to be ) radio!

One thing I forgot.... Turboplanner (in another thread on Gliders at Caboolture) just reminded me of one other thing covered last Saturday night and not reported here by me… shame. John McCormick said that the number of 6 in a circuit under one controller at GAAP was worked out by taking the average sized circuit (he also commented on some people doing x-country style circuits – just as well there’s not a fuel shortage) and working out the theoretical gap between each aircraft. Airservices arrived at the figure of 6 based on 1 mile separation between each aircraft. McCormick then told a story of an instructor relating to him the fact that he turned base at Bankstown one day and 7 aircraft were ahead of him… 5 for the circuit and runway he was on plus 2 who were slightly out in lining up for runway right! John McCormick commented… “See it works!’ He acknowledged they have to look closely at what is currently going on and review the situation. Maybe we will see a lot of this – put in place, see how it works and then refine it. At least they are attempting to find remedies and are willing to admit if it is wrong… most of the time.

Have Flight Test of BD-5. I have a Flight Test done by a guy in an Australian aircraft and published in an American magazine, but I can't post it 'cause it's 1.3 Mb in size. If anyone wants a copy send me a message with your home email and I'll get it off to you. Very interesting article.

Staff shortages. Qwerty... McCormick made it clear on Saturday night that Airservices had not only severe staff shortages but they are also short of time for training as they can't spare anyone to do the training. Catch 22 situation. I would bet they make it initially something like Maroochydore 0800L to 1900L or similar.

Appreciate the thanks Qwerty, but anyone keen to see safe skies would do the same... that's why we set up the night with McCormick. BUT.... WHAT ABOUT THE GLIDERS AT CABOOLTURE?

Qwerty... why do the glider operations at Caboolture always seem to be on a different runway to the active and more often than not in an opposing direction? That's one question we missed on Saturday but should have asked. We have a similar problem at Gympie... they set up for one runway then when the wind changes 180º they are now operating against the traffic pattern - generally without making radio calls too!

Other things set for review. On the night he made it very clear that he was only going to talk about GA and RAAus and not the airlines. He had a few comments in fact about that side of the industry (airlines) that got a few good laughs. The man has a good sense of humour. I’ll say here on this forum that since hearing the guy speak on Saturday my initial opinion of him has changed 180º. Reputations are easily made but very hard to loose. John McCormick really does appear on the face of it to have our well being at heart. He faces a very difficult job as not many things have been decided over the past 10 years with some matters lying in the CASA “In-tray” for 5 years or more. He is determined to get “his house in order”, but he is faced with a severe staff shortage and little or no extra finance coming their way in the foreseeable future. That is the main reason that both 760 kgs and CTA will lie around for a year or so before being addressed. But he promised they will be addressed - eventually. He said at one point that he has had an uphill battle and has fought to stop other Government Departments mandating and/or imposing charges on aviation and aviators… things like aircraft registration on a yearly basis, licencing fees other than the actual cost of issuing the licence etc. He is very much aware that the industry (GA and RAAus operators) runs on about a 3% profit margin (or less!). He gave examples of some of the fees and charges that outsiders wanted to impose and it wouldn’t take very long to eat up that small margin. Radio carriage is going to be mandatory very shortly - from memory he said April 2010, and most CTAF’s will become CTAF® when the regulations are changed. That will not stop people who fly basic aircraft (and I’m not trying to be rude) flying around their paddocks or property without their radio turned on. What it will do is ensure when they want to go to other places, such as Temora next Easter, they will be able to do so and have the equipment and knowledge of how to use it properly to make the skies safe for everybody. I can see the reasoning behind this regulation change and I have to say I agree with it 100%. He made it very clear that by reviewing regulations it would let everyone know where they stood. His intention is that if you walk into a CASA office in Darwin or Melbourne the decision or advice you receive will be exactly the same at both offices; and we all know that is not the case now. In short he is “cleaning the place up”. I certainly wouldn’t want the job. One important thing I almost forgot… he is also reviewing the bi-annual flight test requirement. There will be a test of some description but it will be more practical from what he said. “We already know you can fly or you wouldn’t be holding a Certificate”. Can’t elaborate more on that but from the way he is addressing other matters we can look forward to something very practical one would assume. Instructor relevance and competency to the aircraft they are checking you in was also on the agenda for future review. Think I’ve exhausted the details now.

Gympie Aero Club had a good roll-up for the dinner with John McCormick, the CASA CEO. I promised I would report back to this forum and so here is a summary of what was discussed during the evening. Right from the beginning of his speech he made it very clear that he would answer any questions and also stay there until everyone had asked the questions they wanted answered. Listening to his speech it is very obvious that John McCormick is very much aware of the importance of RAAus and the part it plays in not only training pilots for the future needs of Australian aviation, but for providing affordable aviation for the average person. He stated that of the approx 2 million hours flown annually by Australian registered aircraft (that’s equivalent to about 12 days of hours flown in the USA) over 25% are directly related to training at the basic levels that RAAus/GA supports. He stated that Australia is far from setting world-wide standards when it comes to regulations. “We will not kill GA or RAAus or the aviation industry in this country will die and that will not be good for Australia and is not what people would want”. He further commented… “CASA is not in the business of putting people out of business. We are not here to stop people flying but we can’t get bogged down in consultation hoping to lead to a consensus. As safety regulators we will do what we have to do under the Civil Aviation Act to protect air safety. We’ll do what we should do, not what we’d like to do.” He spent last weekend at Bundaberg flying various variants of the Jabiru because… “You cannot make regulations unless you understand something about the subject you are intending to write regulations for”. What did he have to say about various subjects? “RAAus is not ready for CTA and 760 kgs just yet. Not that it won’t come eventually, but a lot of more important matters need to be attended to before CASA can look at these two things. CASA will be looking at them with duty of care in mind. We will not write regulations that some Judge down the track will say… CASA you wrote this but you really meant this. We will get the regulations right and to suit the situation.” 1. CTA. In a nutshell when RAAus pilots accept that all aircraft must be fitted with radios for the safety of other airspace users, regardless of where they operate, then the subject of CTA will eventually be revisited. Fitting of radios will be made compulsory in the very near future regardless of where or how you operate. He doesn’t accept the argument…. “It is too expensive to carry radios”, especially when you look at the money spent on communication technology in the average household. He mentioned… “100% of Trikes have a radio facility, even if it is just to talk to each other.” There is also no doubt that in the future if you want CTA access, then every aircraft that goes into CTA is going to need a transponder and I understood from what he said this will also become a regulation. This is already the case in NZ and some other countries. He also made it clear that if you are thinking of fitting a transponder in the near future then make it a “Mode S” transponder. He said… “This will not be for some time yet, but we will be looking at it – we have to!” Not only will we need transponders for CTA access but… “They will have to be checked for accuracy and certified or ATC will not accept you in CTA”. There is no doubt if you want these freedoms then we will have to comply or put very simply - they will be denied. 2. VFR Lanes. He understands the problems that occur with RAAus not being able to access VFR lanes, but… “How do we write that into regulations? When we do, it will be for all pilots, not just those currently fitted with radios. It is a big issue that will require some considerable time to sort out. In the meantime a PPL will get you through CTA if you really have the need.” 3. 760 kgs. “760 kgs just doesn’t fit the regulations and we can’t get it to fit in the current form!” It will be looked at again in due course and assessed in a “measured manner”. Duty of care is big problem here as he sees it. 4. ASIC Cards. It was made clear that this is not, and never has been a CASA responsibility. “ASIC’s were not in our plan, it came from Aviation Security. Hopefully the ASIC as we know it will die”. He stated that a good window of opportunity exists in the very near future (May 2010?) to revisit the whole question. He went on to say… “We are currently looking at other ways of achieving the same outcome within the existing framework of licencing”. 5. Alcohol testing. The question was asked… “Why can’t we have a beer fridge in our hangar without the threat of prosecution?” Again there is a window of opportunity to review the current regulations and program as it will shortly run out of funding by the Federal Government. His opinion… “You should be able to have a few beers around the B-B-Q at your hangar and not run the fear of prosecution because it is supposedly affecting safety or security!” Other matters discussed were – GAAP procedures, the closing of airports and airport facilities such as runways (not a direct CASA responsibility, but it is of great concern and the government is looking at these things very closely) and the ageing GA fleet. “These are all matters that need consideration and decisions to be made when time and man power allows.” This post is getting too long so I trust it has given you some answers to the things you all had doubts about or were unsure of the facts. Yes - CTA and 760 kgs are both “dead” - for the time being anyway. I’m planning on renewing my PPL early in the New Year ‘cause I don’t like flying over hostile terrain.

There are quite a few variants Ian. There is the BD-5B, the BD5-G and the BD-5 Microjet. Here are a couple of links to get you started www.alturair.com - / Home of the BD-5 Aircraft "Kitplanes" recently did a write up and test of one, I'll locate it and scan the article if I can find it.

Came from a friend in US Yes, I believe the authenticity of the document as it came from a friend in the US who knows Tim Cheney (the Captain) personally. There is a huge push in the US to try and get some sense into what has become a ridiculous situation. And yes the crew made a big mistake, but please put up your hands if you haven't ever made a mistake yourself. The outcome was that no safety regs were infringed and the aircraft and pax were never in any danger... other than being intercepted by fighters. But that also failed to happen and has been swept under the carpet probably to protect certain military people. Rostering invades the lives of airline pilots and you live your life around what roster you get each month - that's why they were so easily distracted. The worst part of the roster system is that what you get is based on seniority... the lower end guy gets all the crap most of the time and very rarely gets to choose how his life will pan out. Some operators have now addressed this problem by having a form of rotating seniority when it comes to certain parts of your employment. Back to subject... I posted the letter for a couple of reasons... 1. To show what a knee-jerk reaction the FAA had - and I believe the same reaction would happen here under CASA (seemed appropriate as we have been discussing CASA performance a lot in this forum of late). The FAA didn't even bother to find out the facts before acting to remove licences - a temporary suspension would have been in order before cancellation. I am told that in the US cancellation throws up all sorts of problems when it comes to re-instatement. 2. The situation can happen here even in an RAAus aircraft, albeit on a smaller scale and probably not as dramatic. One small bit of info was not passed on in both situations, the ground and in the air at very nearly the same time, setting the scene for what became a major scenario. It all revolves around that Human Factors stuff. 3. Also reminds us all not to trust our "aids to navigation" (GPS) without applying simple easily used mental cross-checks to ensure what we are seeing is indeed correct. Too many rely blindly on the electronics in front of them. This was a perfect example of just that when they became distracted and didn't revert to the use basic nav techniques, they would have twigged straight away that something was very wrong. I'm not making excuses for them, the Captain has taken full responsibility for what happened, but it is scenarios like this that everyone can learn a great deal from.

FAA is pro-active, CASA is reactive. Hit the nail on the head Maj. The problem is that the whole time I have been flying the CASA scenario has been reactive... bit like the boy with his finger in the dyke. Nobody has got it right and it doesn't look like this mob can or will either. Maybe because they simply don't want to listen, who knows why? In the US the system is proactive and they look for ways to iron out those bumps. Doesn't explain the FAA reaction to the overflight though which is disappointing. Maybe still got a case of 911 reactive impulses? Just imagine what would happen here in similar circumstances in the current environment. Maybe I'll take up something a little easier... like skateboarding with an engine. I'm getting too old and grumpy for much else!

Safety first one would think! It's an almost unbelievable situation Andy... and the powers that control the situation have simply stuck their heads up their...... (Maj used the term correctly I think) and seem to ignore the fact that they are forcing people into potentially dangerous situations on a daily/weekly basis. The answer is very simple... allow transit through established VFR lanes for suitably trained RAAus pilots who want to take advantage of the fact that they can reduce the risk factor. Usually the lanes are away from normal IFR traffic flow anyway. I don't want to pay the exorbitant landing fees at these places anyway... I'm more than happy to just pass the place by - safely! I've come across people in the past who think the way to getting what they want is to threaten their opponents with litigation in the belief that this will shut them up. There is a very simple answer - if the oven is too hot... get out. No doubt the position was applied for by the man in question in the first place. If he had been conscripted I'd probably feel sorry for him, but he wasn't!

Befuddled brain at 3:0 am. Shouldn't try to make sense at 3:00 am when I can't sleep.

AGM at NATFLY... yes please. Thanks for bringing all this to our attention John. For anyone who wants to read the blog... The Flying Tigers Recreational Aviation Club As is the case in most organizations, the members are pretty uninterested in what goes on at management level until it has gone sideway and is far outside what can be considered as "normal". Then they will scream like a stuck pig and ask why! Secrecy etc is a thing from the past and I applaud you for speaking up as you have. Can't get out of my mind that CASA is hell-bent on a path to destroy RAAus. They can't do it directly because we are the largest group of aviators in this country and that wouldn't sit easily with the public, but they can certainly "bleed us dry". Clandestine ways of achieving your desired outcome... maybe? Let's get the AGM to Nat-Fly, not in 2012 but in 2010. Change of venue can mean a change in schedule surely? It is the real "gathering of the clan" and at least we will get the numbers (hopefully) and hence input to ensure an eye is kept on matters that affect us all. At minimum we will all be better educated about our organizations business. Thanks again for your efforts and for enlightening us on this.

Tanks should vent. That's why they put vents on the tanks. Sometimes see aircraft sitting there with fuel dripping out the vent -either the aircraft is not too level or the tanks are over full.

Surely not 600 lbs? Hope 100 Gals doesn't weigh 600 lbs Bidgee .... or we are all flying around in excess of our Max All Up Weight. Think it might have been a slip... surely you meant 60 lbs!

Knee-jerk reaction by FAA I agree Dazza, but one of the really interesting things is the over-reaction by the FAA in taking the guys licences without first finding out all the facts. They could have easily just suspended them from flying duties for a period until the facts were fully investigated. It was very obvious that nothing that might compromise air safety happened. Appears the FAA are out to make a big point here, although the facts don't support their knee-jerk reaction and method of handling the whole scenario. A big worry here in this country is that with the cancellation of the Controlled Airspace approval for RAAus, whoa betide the first guy/gal who goes through controlled airspace without the correct licence in place (PPL or higher) or even infringes controlled airspace. Would not mind placing a bet that CASA under our "new man" might just react in a similar way to the FAA in the story above and make an example of them. There a few out there who "push the limits" and although they get away with it mostly, someday they will get caught and then.... wouldn't want to be in their shoes!!! At the Gympie Aero Club dinner on Saturday next, my question to the CASA CEO will be why can't RAAus pilots as a minimum get approval (with suitable competency based training on an individual basis) to be allowed to transit VFR lanes through controlled airspace? Case in point is anyone who lives North of the Gold Coast and wants to fly down the coast to (say) Evans Head for their fly-in during January (bad weather around then, thunderstorms etc over ranges) are forced to go over real tiger country purely because they can't fly through what is an established VFR lane through the Coolangatta CTA. This VFR lane is not over the hills to the west and is well away from any traffic into Coolangatta. Seems they (CASA) are intent on making it very hard for aviators who just want to fly cheaply and have fun, but they are guilty of perhaps forcing us to take risks that are very easily reduced to almost nothing. You can achieve anything with the right training with a good instructor. Don't understand their (CASA) thinking... maybe they are from Mars?

I am not sure I have posted this in the correct area but I wanted other aviators to read this account. What follows is a report direct from the mouth of the Captain of that aircraft. The same, or similar thing can happen to all of us, even RAAus pilots. A number of small unrelated occurrences made it into a major drama. What is of real concern is the way they have been treated by the FAA (Federal Aviation Agency- same as CASA) and don't think it wouldn't happen here under the "new" CASA! Sorry about the length of the post, but I believe it is of some importance and perhaps has relevance to all of us who fly. Info on NW Flt 188 This was passed along to me and thought you all might find it very interesting reading considering the press stopped following this story once these guys lost their licenses. I had a one hour conversation very recently with the North West Airlines (NWA) Captain who overflew his destination - Minneapolis (MSP) USA yesterday and would like to shed some light on what happened re the over flight of their destination. Although there are many events that helped to cause this, the Capt takes full responsibility and places no blame on anyone but himself. He is very humbled by what has happened and fully understands that as Captain, he was responsible for the a/c, crew and passengers. That said, he wanted me to know how it all happened. On their flight from San Diego to Minneapolis, shortly after passing Denver, the flight attendant (f/a) called the cockpit to let them know the Capt's crew meal was ready. The Capt was the "flying pilot" on this leg, so he told his F/O that when the f/a brings the meal up, he will step back to use the restroom. When the Capt returned to the cockpit, the f/a left the cockpit and he began to eat his crew meal. When a pilot leaves to use the restroom, it is customary for the other pilot to brief him on his return on "any changes", such as altitude, heading, course changes or atc center frequency changes, etc. In this instance, nothing was said....even though the F/O had received a frequency change. The problem that occurred was that the F/O never got a response on the new frequency....it was not the correct frequency....it was a Winnipeg Canada Center Freq. Denver Center was trying to get a hold of them because they never checked in by radio on hand-over, because the F/O had dialed in the wrong freq...... that is who called them so many times.... in the middle of all this there was a shift change at Denver Center and no one briefed the new controller that there was a NORDO A/C (non communications) in their airspace....so, in actuality, ATC basically "lost" this a/c.....see Wall Street Journal article link below. The Captain told me he heard ATC chatter on the speaker and so never thought they were out of radio range..... but, of course, they were hearing pilots talk on Winnipeg Center. For non-pilots..... when we don’t hear anything for a long while... we ask ATC if they are still there.... sometimes they are and sometimes you are out of their area and need to find a new frequency. With this chatter going on, there was no concern that they were not being controlled. The Captain told the F/O that the new bidding (roster) system was horrible and that his November schedule was not what he hoped for. He mentioned that his son was going into the Army in Dec. and he wanted certain days off so he could see him off..... the F/O said he could help him, he knew more about the new roster system. The Captain got his lap-top out and put it on his left leg and showed the F/O how he entered his bid for what he wanted. He had his lap-top out for maybe 2 minutes. Then the F/O said that he would show him how to do it a better way using his lap-top. The F/O had his lap-top out a maximum of 5 minutes. A 100 kt tail wind was affecting them while they had this discussion and was not helping matters. The f/a's called the cockpit on the interphone (no they did not kick the door down, and no one was sleeping, and no one was fighting) and asked when they will get there. They looked at their nav screens and were directly over MSP. Because they had their screens set on the max, 320 kt setting, when the F/O called on the frequency, which of course was Winnipeg Center, he saw Eau Claire and Duluth on his screen. They asked where they were and the F/O told them over Eau Claire, which was not even close, but MSP had disappeared from the screen even though they were right over the top of the city. They were then radar vectored all over the sky to determine if they indeed had control of the a/c (ie no terrorists in cockpit) and the Capt kept telling the F/O to tell them they have control they want to land at MSP, etc. They landed with 11,000 pounds of fuel (no they did not come in on fumes, but had 2 hours in an A320) and only 15 minutes past schedule, even though they left San Diego 35 minutes late due to an ATC flow restriction. In the jet-way when they pulled up awaiting them were FBI and every other authority you can imagine. Aftermath and tidbits: Although these pilots filed an NASAP (dob-yourself-in) Report, which is designed to have pilots tell the truth about events (so the FAA can learn from them) they had their licenses revoked by the FAA (equivalent to CASA) even before they came out of their meeting with the NTSB (Safety Bureau). Has a somewhat familiar ring to it I think! The FAA is really big on a new regulation which will allow pilots to take a short nap in flight so they will be rested for the approach... the FAA guys insisted that they were sleeping. An MSP FAA representative, Vance (do not know last name) was the person who handed the Capt his revocation letter (which was leaked to the entire world by the FAA). The Capt said Vance had tears in his eyes and walked away, saying nothing. It was later learned that the entire MSP FAA office did not agree at all with revoking the pilot's licenses, but had no jurisdiction over the matter, since FAA had total control over the matter. The pilots have had several meetings with authorities. They met with the airlines chief pilot and the Capt said they could not have been nicer. They are working to resolve this, not to try and fire them. But of course, they will have to get their license back to consider allowing them to continue flying. An appeal has been filed with the FAA to reinstate their licenses or to settle on some form of punishment, etc. When the Capt and his wife were in MSP for a meeting with the NTSB, they happen to be staying at the same hotel as the NTSB officials were. The next morning in the lobby, the NTSB official came over to the Capt and said he did not know why they even called them in for this event. There was no safety issue. Also, MSP Center informed Delta that there never was a problem and no aircraft were near their plane. Even though no radio communications, they had been followed and separated. Yes, the company tried to contact them on ACARS (an intercompany call system), but the A320 does not have a chime to attract attention if called... it only has a 30 second light which then extinguishes. The Capt always ensures he has 121.5 tuned, but as we all know as pilots, it can get very noisy at times and we turn it down and sometimes forget to turn it back on. He told me this may have been the case. So there were so many factors which helped to cause this episode. Anyone would have likely prevented it..... properly checking in on the new frequency would have been the first one. A note about laptops.....in NWA's A.O.M (Airman's Operation Manual), it does not say they can't use a laptop in flight; soon all airliners will need lap-tops for the electronic charts to be introduced. These are the facts and again, the Capt said he feels very bad for the company and the pilots and is hoping for a positive outcome on their appeal. With 24 years at NWA, 21,000 blemish free hours, it would be a mistake to ruin his career over this in my opinion. F.A.A. Fails to brief new controller on duty (WSJ Article) FAA Reacted Slowly to Errant Jet - WSJ.com

Just received this quoted comment supposedly made by the CASA CEO from a person who will be attending the Gympie Aero Club dinner with the CEO on the 5th December at Noosa. I am interested to see what RAAus aviators make of this because I intend to ask for an explanation from the man himself at the dinner... "Aviation is expensive, if you can't afford the expense you shouldn't be doing it!" This was in relation to the costs being experienced, and expected to be experienced by GA, but the comment equally applies to our operations. 10 airports have just recently had fuel facilities withdrawn by Shell and other airports are being shut-down permanently eg Hoxton Park. Is it because of CASA policy under the direction of this person? Should be an interesting dinner!

Good basic techniques. I'll say it once more... good basic techniques will follow you to any aircraft type you wish to fly and allow you to fly safely and competently. Poor technique will soon sort the pilots who know what they are doing from those who do not.

I'm incorrect. Sorry guys... said the engine was less powerful than a Rotax. Not correct. When I looked up my old pilot notes I found they used (basically) a 130HP Gypsy Major. Empty weight of Tiger was 500 kgs, Auster 475 kgs and Chippie 647 kgs. Yes they were bulky motors but on approach you had reasonable good visibility due to the approach attitude, but just like any tailwheel aircraft on the ground taxying was a place "S" turns were in great demand.

Big engines? Hey TOMO... have a look at the Auster and Tiger... not much heavier than a lot of our RAAus aircraft and the engine is far less powerful than the Rotax 912... but if you couldn't slip one on final you certainly learnt how to do a go-around! As for opening my mind to this maneuver Maj... that was a technique you had to use with Austers, Tigers and Chipmunks and with time in all 3 types as well as instructing in them I think I know a little bit about side slipping. Guess i had to "open my mind" or I'd still be up there - somewhere!