Happyflyer

This one is a good read, and it’s free! http://airpower.airforce.gov.au/APDC/media/PDF-Files/Heritage%20Series/HTG22-The-Joys-and-Dangers-of-an-Aviation-Pilot.pdf

Yep. Could have had his Pilot Certificate and started x country endorsement and been authorised by the instructor to do a solo nav in his own single seater.

CASA would certainly pull the plug on that here!

A well know saying about engine failure in small twin engine aircraft. "The remaining engine will take you to the scene of the accident"

Do you have a reference for this statement?

Forever Flying. Bob Hoover. I could never be so lucky again. Gen. James Doolittle. Both brilliant reads.

Nev. I agree with your sentiments but the RPL is not ICAO recognised and RAAus aircraft can fly in CTA now, so you can’t really use those arguments. I agree RAAus should stick to its core instead of moving into GA areas. Lobby for class G corridors through CTA and military airspace instead.

That’s a bit of an over statement in my opinion. Plenty of argument in GA schools over the interpretation of part 61. Makes RAAus look pretty good in comparison. This would be a pretty rare issue. Not too many students have their own single seat aircraft. I’ll be interested in the detail if it ever comes out.

If you want to enter a spin. Just stall the wings and add a boot full of rudder ( yaw ) and get ready for spin recovery. No need to stall one wing only.

Royal Newcastle Aeroclub apparently still going at Maitland NSW. GA and RAAus. RNAC Fleet | Royal Newcastle Aero Club | Charter Planes & Joy Flights

An unusually detailed statement from the ATSB. ATSB executive director of transport safety Nat Nagy said the circumstances of what happened were not yet fully understood. "On Saturday in the afternoon, a Cessna 182 aircraft with two people on board departed Sheffield for a private airstrip near Tomahawk," he said. "Just prior to arriving, witness reports indicate that they conducted a number of orbits to the south-east of the field, and then went about a number of attempted approaches to land." Mr Nagy said the plane landed then half way down the strip. "It subsequently bounced, and following that the pilot did what's called a go-around, where they increase the power and attempt to climb out," he said. "As part of that climb out, the aircraft failed to climb above a tree towards the end, or rather past the end of the strip, and they did hit that tree, and subsequently came to rest on the side on the ground there." He said ATSB investigators would remain on site for two to three days.

Why not try it above 3000ft?

All very true. But specialists who do have not dealt with CASA before have a lot of trouble accepting that CASA don’t want their opinion, only the facts. I’ve had a bit of trouble getting specialists to write down more facts and less opinion!

It really deplaneds if you’re climbing or cruising. Why would you put your nose down immediately if you were doing 100 + knots in your J230 for example? Quicksilver or Drifter probably different, never flown one. All part of knowing your aircraft.

Wrong. Angle of attack stalls a wing, not airspeed.

A quick check n Google shows this RAAus Champ which appears to be on line. ADELAIDE BIPLANES

Below is a quote from the Plane Truths article. As every pilot knows, there is an inherent relationship between speed, angle of bank and the load factor the airframe can withstand. The tighter the turn, the greater the angle of bank has to be, the more stress on the structure, particularly the wings. But because the wings are no longer horizontal, the lift generated by the inner (lower) wing is reduced, and that wing may stall. 1. The tighter the turn the greater the bank angle has to be. Not true. I can tighten a turn by turning at a slower airspeed for the same bank angle. 2. Because the wings are no longer hotizontal, the lift generated by the lower wing is reduced. Not true. In a level, balanced turn both wings lift equally. I can stall in a level turn with no wing drop. Try the same out of balance and you may regret it.

Yep, those greedy, millionaire CFIs. I say rubbish. Name them!

Thanks. What it doesn’t say is that it has to be in a two seat aircraft.

I agree with you and wouldn’t dream of doing it but do you have a reference from the ops manual that specifically prohibits this. I’m looking but haven’t found it yet.

Yes, but can an instructor send a student solo in a single seat aircraft? By definition the student couldn’t have flown the type before with the instructor.

Looks like single seater, so would have to be a solo flight. Wonder if he was converting to type? Perhaps from GA.

That would be a game changer, for the same weight, four times the capacity, at about the same price!

There is an a LL endorsement form on the RAAus webpage. https://www.raa.asn.au/storage/1-low-level-endorsement-fillable.pdf It isn’t on the basic syllabus for RAAus or GA (RPL,PPL or CPL). Probably because widespread LL training by every instructor would result in more problems than it would solve.

I’m a VFR pilot. I would be against any change that brings in more cost. There is no doubt if E was lowered so all IFR aircraft were in controlled airspace down to 700ft agl, some in CASA and the IFR world would push for transponders for VFR aircraft. There is no justifiable safety case because the evidence is there in the US system that you don’t have to. However we seem to love over regulation so who knows. In the mean time I’ll continue to fly GA and RAAus, and love it.