Happyflyer

Essendon?

 

 

Interestingly, the official CASA document ( Classes of medical certificates | Civil Aviation Safety Authority ) does not prohibit aerobatics with the basic class 2 medical as far as I can see. The only restrictions were weight, pax and day VFR. Now is the time to lobby CASA so aeros can be done on this medical.

 

 

Looks like a small step in the right direction but the devil may well be in the detail.

 

 

But would not a printed copy of the email of your up to date certificate be the same thing?

I would think you would be right there. But I was just pointing out that when Kasper said "the ops manual with which I must comply does not require that I hold a card from RAAus" he was not quite right. Apparently he chooses not receive emails from them so I suppose to comply with the ops manual which he says he must comply with he would have to hold a card.

 

 

Thanks. On the basis they sent my election stuff three weeks after it was announced I should be expecting it in the post for Christmas then.And as the ops manual with which I must comply does not require that I hold a card from RAAus I’ve never given a thought to flying after my flight review was entered into my logbook. Only card I care about is the reg for the aircraft.

Not quite right. You are not required to carry it on you but must be able to produce it within 72 hours in some instances.

From the Ops Manual:

 

CARRIAGE AND PRODUCTION OF PILOT CERTIFICATE

 

21. On request from a RAAus official (including Operations and Technical Staff, CFI, PE or ROC), an officer of CASA or a Police Officer, pilots are required to produce their Pilot Certifcate within 72 hours.

 

 

And so are these findings being made available by other than contacting the Coroners Office. I know this has been discussed but the the whole sporting fraternity may have something to learn from this.

You can search the Qld Coroners findings on the courts web site. I searched but didn't find this accident. However this one http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/86786/cif-scholl-ph-20090127.pdf happened in 2005 and the findings took about four years to be released.

 

 

It's back on line. For now!

 

 

Watching their promo videos, plenty of low flying, lots of steep turns, emphasis of stall/spin resistance, ballistic chute. What could possibly go wrong?

 

 

Looks like system down. No new forecast, no old forecast, can't get thru to airservices on the phone. Oops!

 

 

So here I am with many more hours under the belt than anticipated, most of that has been great flying experience, but I am a bit over 'let's do another nav'.I am more interested and concerned with 'can you take off, cruise, land, and navigate and execute comms in CTA'

So to the point, after 3 too many navs wasting my time, and a curriculum note marked as 3 - 'needs further instruction', yet that same CFI was enthralled at my nav, diversion, PSL, short field landing and dead reckoning skills, I'm confused and a little frustrated.

 

I am suspecting my CFI and subsequently my flight test instructor will drag me out to a full 3-4hr PPL test including all the NAV basics plus CTA.

 

So back to my RA to PPL journey, if I have proven NAV at RA level, and then again through various NAVs with 2 X CFI's (with resounding success despite the 3 score*) do I really need to do a lengthy and laborious NAV all over again in a test scenario to complete my PPL test?

 

* noting here that all my navs have been 95-100% accurate, I really don't know why this CFI has recorded a 3. The flight comments are not at all in concordance with the numeric evaluation.

 

I think I'm being dragged unnecessarily along a 'standard' learning path ( ie more $ for CFI) via a standard ab initio to PPL without any respectful regard to my prior RA certification or demonstrable inflight experience.

 

Question: If I have demonstrated excellent nav and CTA skills in all practice navs AND ALREADY have an RA nav endorsement is it required that I demonstrate this all over again in a PPL flight test?

 

Frustrated..

 

Ramjet

To get a PPL you have to do a PPL theory test and a PPL flight test (including Nav and CTA elements). CASA has ensured you cannot get around that. The flight test has to be booked with CASA and they reserve the right to come along for the ride. The training to get to the standard is your issue. If you are up to standard then the test should come. Sounds like you need to have a sit down with the top dog and sort it out before you spend any more money. Put your cards on the table and get them to explain in detail where you are not good enough to do the test.

PS. I would have thought an instructor would normally inform the student of the process and not keep you in the dark.

 

 

Which accident was that? Was this confirmed? I am not doubting it due to "stuff" that happened locally with a Morgan aircraft that I heard about from my former instructor. Just curious to know that anyone has officially shown this to be the case.

The ATSB were not very complimentary about the Morgan aircraft that hit the ferris wheel at Old Bar. It wasn't amateur build but i think it resulted in all '24' registered aircraft of that type becoming '19'.

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/4888846/ao2011126_final.pdf

 

 

Angel Flight is an organisation that brings together people wanting a seat and pilots wanting to help. It's a bit like Wingly for sick people but it's free for the passenger and pilots get free fuel. It will be interesting to see what happens to this model when the ATSB brings out the report for the Mt Gambier fatalities. Im guessing CASA won't be able to resist making more regulations.

 

 

That is a rather interesting new business model. What is even more interesting, is that all flights are backed by insurance, covered by Allianz. Can't see it happening here, though, what with CASA interference, and local insurance companies backing away holding out a cross, whenever insurance for pax on private flights is mentioned.

 

I don't know what the insurance payouts would have been on the fatalities in the recent CareFlight crashes - or if there were any?

It won't happen here because CASA expressly forbids any form of public notice advertising for cost share private flights, as does the FAA.

 

 

this has changed over the years, the current RAA interpretation is that a #19 can't be used for training.

Always check your facts before offering advice.

CAO 95.55

 

6.2 In spite of sub-subparagraph 6.1 (a) (ii), if a person has wholly built or assembled an aeroplane to which this Order applies, or a group of persons has wholly built or assembled such an aeroplane, then that person, or each of those persons, may use the aeroplane for their personal flying training.

 

 

Do your instructors give a reason for not flying in your aircraft?

 

 

I think the bars on his shoulders were leftovers of his Asian leg to get the locals to help. When I read his story I didn't get the impression he thought he could fly IFR. He just pushed on a tad too far and it almost cost him his life. I for one thank him for sharing his story and showing how it happened so we can all learn from his mistake.

 

 

The wind forecasts are upside down. Reads from bottom to top going up in alt.I assume that is in concurrence with the theme of Graphical.

I would have thought that's the right way up. The low altitude is at the bottom, just like the atmosphere!

 

 

Angel Corp Angel 44

 

Angel Aircraft Corporation Home

 

 

Not any more. It's common for people to make a claim hoping to get a smaller payout by the defendant to avoid going to court. They know they may not get far if it gets to court but the cost to the defendant is so high that it's cheaper and easier to just make a smaller offer for an out of court settlement.

It's not common in my world. Don't know any one who has been affected, ever. Perhaps in America?

 

 

Just saying, Just to be clear this is the other aircraft VH BWZ not VH JMW

Yes.

 

 

Might it have an effect on the plain english converter?

Yep, you won't need it anymore!

 

 

That appears to be US dollars! Over half a million AU dollars to get it here. What a joke. I don't expect the company to last.

 

 

Perhaps of the greatest concern is that the ATSB investigators were totally unable to pinpoint a cause for Tony Mangans crash.

Investigation: AO-2015-129 - Collision with terrain involving Cessna 310, VH-BWZ, near Mildura Airport, Victoria on 6 November 2015

The report stated one engine was not producing power and had no fuel in its fuel line. That prop was not feathered and the flaps and undercarriage were down and in that configuration they say the aircraft would have become uncontrollable very quickly on one engine. So I don't think the cause is a total mystery, what they couldn't tell is why the fuel ran out for that engine, either through lack of fuel, tank selection or other cause such as a blockage.

 

 

Looks like CASA are listening at last.

 

Proposed rules - Frequency use at low level in Class G airspace - Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Citizen Space

 

 

Google Map itSearch Johns River NSW, then look for the sealed runway on the Nth side of Stewarts River. (Nth of Johns River town & East of the Hwy.

 

There's not much room for a downwind leg between the strip and the steep rising Middle Brother Mountain, Western Side.

 

I know nothing regarding the incident, but if it were a go around, then the approaching mountain on crosswind would be coming at you faster than you could calculate

 

angles of bank & stall speeds

Why would you assume anyone would turn crosswind to high ground? All circuits to the east there. http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/ersa/FAC_YLKS_17-Aug-2017.pdf