Pearo

If you want to venture above 5000ft you need a serviceable VHF. Reason, you are in IFR altitudes. Exception is Gliders below FL FL200 AIP GEN 1.5 1.1 - its the 4th last entry in the table. https://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/aip/general.pdf

I know a bloke who owns an oil testing business. I dont know anything about it, but if you want me to direct specific questions to him let me know. Might even be able to convince him to become a member here.

Cessan 172/182 is the same. I am only new to the game though. Put a heavy on one side and a light on the other get the same problem. Do circuits get the same problem. Switch tanks no issues with fuel starvation. I am guessing this is not unique to the gazelle.

Just thought I would record this here also. Proof I am no longer a PPL student. Still student, currently CSU but not sure what will come next... Going to enjoy the PPL privileges for a couple of months first.

Let me add more. So I did the RPL endoresements for NAV, CTA and CTR. That paperwork went off the day AFTER the PPL paperwork (even though the test for the endorsements was done some 3 weeks prior, dont ask), somehow that is ALSO on the new licence. So I did the PPL test on the 4th. Went back Monday 7th to check the paperwork had been sent (it had not been, so I personally put it in the post box late Monday afternoon), CASA issued the licence on the Thursday 10th (or at least processed it on the 10th) and I received it in the mail today which is the 15th. So from test to PPL licence was 12 days. From posting test form to receiving licence was 9 days (including AusPost processing). BTW, I received an email on the 10th also, stating that CASA had billed my Credit Card for the new licence. So clearly if you have all the stuff they need to see in front of them when they receive the paperwork, stuff gets turned around reasonably quickly at the moment. My RPL took a bit longer (6 weeks) but I did not have CC details included. I only found out when I rang them to ask a question. WRT to my medical it came pretty quickly too, but I credit that to my DAME for knowing how CASA operates and making me do the additional tests prior to sending off the paperwork. For what its worth, my DAME was also a pilot, but is no longer able to qualify for a medical.

Just to add to the luck I have with CASA, PPL just turned up in the post, exactly 1 week after the test form was posted to them. I am truly amazed.

There is a time and place for everything, but some dont get that. As a new pilot with a thick skin, but entering into a failing industry this place never fails to amaze me.

I did a renewal about 3 weeks ago, no ASIC yet. Mine is still valid till the end of December, so not a problem yet.

That is an excellent video, well worth watching. At 23:00 there is a slide that sums it up perferctly, and shows why CASA (and FAA) have it so wrong. Bernoulli-versus-Newton "controversy" Some say only one or the other is right. Some say both are right Actually, each is party right but incomplete "Bernoulli" deals with flow speed and surface pressure "Newton deals with flow direction and momentum flux They're not contradictory The problem is, as an engineer, how can you explain this to a pilot? Its nonsense that the average pilot should have to understand it at the same level. Is there an easy way to take this information and explain it to a non engineering type person?

This is because they dont have people feeding them ADSB data yet. I am planning on building an ADSB receiver so I can see the local mil traffic. I think I might even send my data their way.

You are overthinking it, therein lies the problem with most pilots. BTW, I say wind because I am a sailor. Use air if you wish, the concept remains the same.

This is one topic that annoys me a lot as an engineer. First thing I want to say to pilots is "stop trying to understand how a plane generates lift at an engineering level". What you have been taught is bullshit, and its not necessary. Second, to the pilots who say there is no proof, well look at what you do for a hobby/living. I would say the fact that a plane is in the air, and can be put in the air repeatably is scientific proof that its possible. If you disagree with that proof, then please show me that planes do not fly. When I first started flying, I was told to read the book stick and rudder, and the author nails is perfectly. The reason a wing produces lift is because its deflecting the wind downward. Stick your hand out a car window at speed and you have the perfect example. That and a little Bernoulli WRT to stall characteristics of wings is all that is needed so you can understand how a stall horn works. I only watched a little bit of that video (its also laced with bullshit) but I think the author is pushing that same concept. I hate plagiarism, and the credit needs to go to the author of stick and rudder (just looked it up on Amazon, Author is Wolfgang Langewiesche) As for the engineering side, no one use Bernoulli or Newton exclusively, they use many different theories/models including many which most pilots would never even be privy to in ground school. Whilst I dont do aerodynamics (although I did touch on it at uni, and spent a lot of study time with an aeronautical engineer), I have spend countless hours with other engineers making instrumentation to measure various aspects of fluid dynamics. Engineers know how planes fly, thats how engineers design planes that fly. I read here a lot, but I remain silent because as a low hour (just recent) PPL I probably dont get the credit that a 20,000 hour CPL or ATPL would. But I do understand the basic physics of flight, and I often see those 20k hour pilots regurgutiating that same bullshit they were taught and its plain wrong. When I did my PPL theory, I wanted so bad to point out incorrect information that is taught and tested, but I cant, because I had to be tested on the same rubbish.

To be fair, its not exactly rocket science!

I was lucky, ATO was a practical pilot, he said the main aim of the test is to make sure you are not going to kill yourself or someone else. As long as I dont bust CTA or stuff up the CTA procedures, or as long as I dont do any thing dangerous I should be fine. I though for sure I would have failed at Toowoomba, off centre and a pretty hard landing!. But I never got lost, diversions were acceptable although definitely not the best I have done. Airwork was all fine. My estimates were all within 2 minutes and my worst track error was about 2nm. Alt holding was not to flash either. At no stage was I a danger to myself or the testing officer, so I guess that scores points. The wind did not help either. Departed at 0700 (local) so all my planning was using an older forecast. The wind was a long stronger, 25G30 in places, and I have never been up in those kinds of winds before. Everywhere I landed had strong gusting crosswinds. In hindsight, being a sailor I knew the winds would be up today, I probably should have delayed again, but its done now and the lesson has be learned. I guess the next step for me is to go out and do some short cross country trips by myself, gain more confidence with that. Also going to do a CSU endorsement (will start that next week if I can secure an instructor) so I can fly the 182. Next year I will get stuck into tail wheel endorsement and start my IFR training. I also want to get skilled up on flying with the G1000. It seem silly to have such a useful tool in the cockpit and not use it.

After 3 failed attempts due to weather, finally got another go this morning. After some pretty scrappy flying due to lack of confidence I managed scrape through. No longer a PPL student. I should be excited, but I am pissed of at how bad my flying was when I know I am much more capable. I am my own hardest instructor.

Lol. Does CASA even have an office in Brisbane? Last time I worked for government I bailed at the 4 month mark, the guys I worked with were ok, but the management was woeful. I was subcontracted in there from my then employer (Microsoft) so I had to quit a job with fairly reasonable amount of future potential.

I must be the only person who has never had an issue with CASA... Everytime I have had to call them they have been extremely helpful.

This was the point I was trying to make earlier. Being a typical engineer sometimes I lack the ability to convey my point. Thankyou.

Well it wasn't meant to be. Weather put a stop to the flight, thunderstorms forecast at the time we are flying, plus the cloud came in at 1800' which means we cant get over the mountains. ATO is booked all next week but he is going to try make something happen. I did pass the ground theory part though, so kinda half done

Yup, been over that form! One of my instructors printed it out and I went out and practiced every single maneuver. Was actually practicing short field landings yesterday when I hit the bird, which put an end to my flying for the day. Got an aircraft booked tomorrow for 2 hours, so the plan is to practice prec search and land. Will also go do forced landings (which are fine, I just keep forgetting to do my checks). Written 3 pages of stuff on my KDR's (was only 5 questions, got 88% on the PPL test). RAC wont let you sit the test unless you have addressed your KDR's. Yup, I would easily qualify for that. I am going for the PPL because I know I want to chase the CPL. I keep telling everyone I am not going to do a CPL, but I think its inevitable for me.

Well Friday is the day folks. Totaled up the log books, got just over 150hrs with about 60 as PIC (been hammering the RPL). PPL flight test is booked and I am nervous as hell. Flight plan is YRED, YBAF, YTWB, YKRY, YBSU, YRED. So Archerfield Class D, Amberly MIL (if I can get clearance). Given the timeframes, I reckon that I will be put under the hood and lost after Toowoomba, and either a diversion back to Redcliffe or perhaps to Sunshine Coast. I think the Toowoomba, Kingaroy,Sunshine coast part is just to check that I dont plan the Oakey RA2 airspace. Trying not to over think it. Pretty confident about the ground part, my theory is sound because I read so many books on flying! The air part not so confident, I can fly the aircraft fine, but if it gets rough I struggle doing the nav stuff. Anyway, time will tell. Hopefully I can report back Friday with good news (although the weather may also put a stop to that).

I think that quote should go to the Author of Stick and Rudder.

It dived on me and missed the prop altogether. We did look closely at the prop, but no blood or feathers or any indication that it struck the prop.

Except we don't use the dry adiabatic rate, we use the ICAO defined standard atmosphere, which equated to about 2 degrees C per 1000ft. 15degC at MSL, -56.5degC at 36000ft. Temp difference is 71.5 from MSL to 36000ft, so that equates to about 0.00199 degrees/ft or 1.99degrees/1000ft. If you look at the ICAO docs, you will probably find a published environmental lapse rate, but I think you have to pay for those docs.

Yeah, its been reported. Technically you only have to report it at certified and registered aerodromes, but its club policy to report it.