Jump to content

David Taylor

Members
  • Posts

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by David Taylor

  1. Wise words Kasper, and ones that should be respected considering your experience. Those issues are ones that a 3 axis pilot must contend with and master every time you fly, which perhaps explains why a simple bloke like me has chosen to fly a PPC. I take your point about the complexity involved in getting my head around the coordination/mechanical control of the aircraft, luckily for me my PPC allows me to go up by increasing the throttle, reduce it I come down, push a foot control to go left or right. I think with practice I can accomplish that. Understanding the rules of the air, I can drive a car, motor bike, scuba dive and dance, I'm up for more learning, and how is my supervising CFI going to help me when I'm up in the air with my instructor ? Planning what's happening in the next 1 - 5 minutes half an hour, you must fly a lot faster than a PPC, from my limited experience sitting up there at 500 ft with an uninterrupted view of the world it is amost as if you are not moving, I'm not fast but if I can't think that quick I'll be sacked tomorrow. Understanding the weather and wind is a given for all of us. My judgement, that's another story. I made the judgement that the sport of PPC really should be enjoyed by thousands of people, not just the 261 that are currently involved, and that I wanted to be part of it. Unfortunately I am finding that it is being completely inhibited by a set of rules that have been developed for the 3 axis aircraft industry. For the sport to ever get off the ground it needs someone in RAA to have some vision and the guts to overcome the bias or complete misunderstanding of PPCs When I first walked into Divers Service dive shop in 1971 when I was 14 and bought my first scuba tank, they were fairly new, there was no instruction, no air gauges, no buoyancy control devises, I bought a book, read it and went diving. When instruction became available I was formerly trained in 1980 and became an instructor in 1982, diving was still a new sport, today there are 34,600 actively participating scuba divers. If everyone was spending their time regulating to make it harder to get into the sport to save them from themselves, instead of developing the training programs and systems that made an inherently dangerous sport accessible to people, Scuba diving would not be the sport enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of people all around the world. There are many people in the PPC community that really have a passion for flying PPCs as you have for your aircraft and as fellow flyers we should at least have empathy or our mutual desire to fly and enjoy our chosen adventure. It's just that our segment needs slightly different rules to survive and prosper. We can only hope that the senior management of RAA can see the opportunity that it has for the growth of aviation sport to the benefit of all members and change will come. Some support from our big brothers in 3 axis, understanding our different needs would help Best wishes David
  2. Thanks Kasper, I appreciate your taking the time to answer and I can see your point that having time working under a CFI would be beneficial and probably necessary in the training of pilots flying complex pieces of machinery like aeroplanes. The statistics prove it is a dangerous pastime. I just can't get over my belief that powered parachutes are not so complex, much safer and that the current system is not allowing the industry to grow and perhaps even survive. Perhaps that is what the RAA want, I agree with Kev, I suppose we will find out in May Cheers, I hope you all enjoy your flying and keep safe David
  3. Kasper the $7000 for training or as you have put it is for Aerochute training, the training that one day I hope to do has been quoted as between $4 & $5k. I think the reason the Aerochute training is so expensive is because they can, there is no competition. I guess if I was a CFI training in their organisation I wouldn't really want to make changes to the system that could provide more competition either. This is great for them but not in the long term interest of a sport that has I believe a lot of potential You are very protective of the current system and perhaps with your knowledge of it may have had something to do with the development of it. I certainly respect your position as someone who has been very much involved in the industry for many years and appreciate that you probably see me as a insolent 5 minute man who wants to change the system to suit me. You are right I suppose. The fact is as it stands to take your suggestion and go interstate to do my 20 hrs would cost many thousands over and above the normal cost of training, I would be better off doing 3 axis training an getting aPPC endorsement which demonstrates how the environment that PPC are expected to work under helps one company but not the sport. You have corrected me and pointed out that PPC is differentiated from 3 axis with differing syllabus etc. if that is the case can you please help me to understand why some additional changes can't be added to reflect where the training of PPC is carried out and have the requirement for properly trained PPC instructors to train with the supervision of a CFI as opposed to direct supervision, the change to only apply to pendulas aircraft acknowledging their difference in training requirement. It is unlikely that the current CFIs would support this change so is it possible within the RAA framework or would PPC need to become their own association similar to the HGFA ? I would appreciate your opinion Thanks David
  4. It seems to me that the reason that a sport that should be to the RAA, an opportunity to grow your numbers and therefore a benefit to all members is being restricted by a thinking that the sport of flying a PPC is far more dangerous than it is. Maybe there is an element of "if we keep more people out of his sport the more special we are " going on in a few of you No sport with an element of excitement doesn't have an element of risk, horse riding, snow skiing, scuba diving, motor bike sports and many more. I wasn't attracted to the sport of PPC for thrills. If I want trills I can night dive, cave dive, penetrate a wreck or dive with sharks I wanted to fly a PPC with my partner as a , relatively safe, enjoyable activity that we could enjoy together. The idea of the flyins, getting together with other people in the sport and exploring different areas of the country is was also attractive. Sadly I am learning that - I can't start training unless I travel interstate, or pay a company in my state $7000 to learn to fly a type of machine that I have chosen not to buy. The reason I can't be trained by my instructor who has many years of PPC experience is because the RAA who has the responsibility to look after this sport has taken the easy way out and lumped PPC with the training requirement of 3 axis aircraft which have no resemblance. I could have decided to learn to scuba dive, gained my open water scuba diving certificate gone on to gain open water experience and gained my advanced open water diver certificate since I decided I would like to take up this sport and I am still sitting here wondering when I can start or whether when my trailer is finished whether I just put the whole lot up for sale and leave it to the geniuses
  5. Thanks for your explanation Ferris, I wonder if it has to be that complicated, I don't believe that an over complicated system delivers better results, however they must know what they are doing. I think the issue is that they have PPCs which I still believe in my assesment of the information that I have seen, and read including that put up by Turbo, PPC is different to fixed wing 3 axis aircraft and they are not paragliders either. They should have a different classification to those aircraft, a training syllabus to suit and we then have a win for all, the 3 axis guys can have their current standards, The PPC sport can grow, RAA becomes a more financial organisation. All we need to understand is what stops this from happening ? Anyone know
  6. Turbo are you suggesting that adding a cert4 in training and assessment to the syllabus required to become an instructor would then allow them to instruct without direct supervision ?
  7. Nev, there are different points of view that have been expressed on this and the PPCa forum and many from people with a lot more experience in this sport than me, personally I don't have a problem with doing 20 hrs to get my certificate if that what it takes to learn all of the things I need to know to fly safe. When I was a diving instructor, it would take around 20 hrs of instruction to teach someone the theory and practice to dive safely. The issue critical to me because that is the issue preventing me from being able to start training, is the issue of a CFI having to be present to supervise my instructor. This requirement which may be fine if you are learning to fly a 3 axis from an airport, is not practicle for this sport. When and if I finally get airborne the ongoing requirement of having to coordinate the weather and 3 people to meet somewhere just to get a lesson is a barrier to entry to this sport that no one seems to be able to justify apart from, it's because that's the way it is for 3 axis Cheers David
  8. Turbo, I must write too slow, while I was responding to your first note, your other links came through, which identified some tragic fatalities. I can't tell what caused the first however that couple were very experienced, the second seemed to be influenced by modifications made to the chute. Whatever, they are accidents and we should all hope not to be involved in them. I occurs to me though that you have posted all the accidents over many years from all around the world, just have a look at the RAA site accidents for this year alone and I think the point is made 3 axis vs PPC safety record I still don't know why things can't change, the only reason seems to be because it is the way it is and it suits 3 axis so leave it as it is Cheers David
  9. Thanks Turbo for taking the time to send those links. I have seen most of them while searching for information on the sport. I have to admit that the people who are into paragliding are real thrill seekers, way too hard and dangerous for me. Of the powered parachute crashes, one was an experimental design pushing it to the limit, my machine is a well built and proven model and wing. One had the front wheel break on takeoff, one fell into the ocean, not sure why, nearly drowned but didn't die, one tried taking off with a cross wind and the other I am not sure what happened he just didn't seem to have enough power to complete the takeoff. I agree even flying a PPC requires adequate instruction and knowledge of the potential hazards along with a acute awareness of the weather conditions. I have been reading the RAA information on weather and turbulace, great information. Having said all of that I still believe that people should be able to be adequately instructed in this sport without third party supervision by a CFI. If I am missing something can someone explain why, apart from because it is a requirement for 3 axis fixed wing aircraft. Why is it not possible to have PPC correctly identified as a unique type of flying machine, acknowledging their ease of flight and that they are flown from paddocks etc and allow a training curriculum that suits it. Apart from giving some people employed within RAA a bit of work to do, why is it not possible ? Cheers David
  10. G'day Kasper, It was interesting to hear about the Drifter and Balerit aircraft and ease of flying them, they do look like real seat of the pants type of flying fun, just like a PPC, only they are nothing like a PPC. Luckily there doesn't seem to be a lot of people reading this forum otherwise I might bore them to death repeating my main issue, which is the powered parachute is a completely unique flying machine, very different from fixed wing aircraft in their design, risk of flight, ease of flight, inherent stability, can't stall or spin. Because of those differences they and their training requirements should be different from your style of aircraft. I learned today that there are 261 PPC pilots, what a pathetic result in the 23 years of this sport, that is an average of 11.3 pa. I can almost hear some of you guys very happy in 3 axis land as saying that is because PPC is no fun and you Kasper may say that proves there is no market for it. I would suggest the sport is being strangled by the ridiculous training requirements that require third party supervision in a sport that is not carried out, in fact is not allowed by your peers in most airports. Thanks again Kasper, if the RAA and their resistance to change and accept that one size doesn't always fit all approach doesn't keep me out of the sport forever and I finally get to fly, I would be happy to take you for a flight. Cheers David
  11. Thanks once again Kasper for your reply, however I don't agree with it. I think lumping the PPC which has a completely different design and flying characteristics and safety record to a 3 axis aircraft into the same training regime is perhaps an easy way of handling it from the RAA point of view, but it is killing this sport that should be growing far more strongly than it is. I look at the people I know who in the last few years have bought Jetskis and Harley's as they reach an age where they want fit a bit of excitement and recreation into their lives, the PPC should be taking a share of that market if the barriers to entry weren't so restrictive. As I have said other far more inherently dangerous sports don't have these restrictions. I agree with Turboplanner in his comment about weather, this should certainly be a big part of the training program, the same as divers have to learn about decompression, narcossis and baratrauma injuries. Bottom line is PPC do need to be treated as a different type of flying machine because they are. Hey the good news is I discovered that I could download Ops 7 and the Syllabus from the web site, I'll read it when I'm not reading about the the impacts of weather and perhaps won't have to ask so many questions. Cheers David
  12. Thanks Kasper and thanks again for your being involved in this debate and providing the information that you have to help my understanding. The question I have is that considering we are in agreement that becoming a pilot and instructor has been made more difficult with the new Ops manual, do you know 1 ) why the decision was made 2 ) who makes to decision 3 ) does the decision affect all potential pilots or just PPC Cheers
  13. Thanks Kasper, I wish I could cut and paste as well as you, that clarifies the changes. I looks pretty benign and as if whoever bought about the change didn't want it to appear as a significant change however I looked up in the Macquarie dictionary the word observe OBSERVE Verb ( served, - serving ) 1. To see or notice 2. To regard with attention 3. To comment. 4. To show regard for by some appropriate procedure, ceremony etc In Ops 6, going by that definition at least the way I read it could be taken as a CFI has to be involved but not physically there Inputting the word personally changed that, the macquarie says that PERSONAL 2a relating to a physical presence or involvement of a person I think Kev is correct in his interperatation of the changes. Wow now I find out that the requirement to become an instructor has been increased by 25% If this change was made to enable the confidence in an instructor so they could instruct without personal supervision I would think that is a step toward making this sport more accessible, however it seems it is a regressive step with two changes that lock it up tighter. I should have gotten into this industry many years ago and become a CFI with Aerochute I would be laughing now, my opposition has the barrier to entry being made harder by the regulators of the industry who should be working to create a growing industry open to competition. Cheers David
  14. Thanks Kev, I thought I had read that, I wonder why I was changed ? Apart from my opinion that this sport should ba able to develop instructors with enough competency to instruct by them selves with no supervision, at least with only supervision of my solo flight I could have at least started my instruction. As it stands with this new change I presently only have one option to be taught currently and that is to go to Aerochute and get trained, they must be loving it. My only problem is I have looked around and want to fly a Steelbreeze, I just think it is a safer, better built craft and this system is forcing me to Aerochute. It's got to change
  15. Kasper, I thought I had read that there had been a change to the wording of the Ops manual in the new version, perhaps I got this wrong, I don't have copies of the different ops manuals to compare. Thinking about it if it was easier in the past for people to be trained and instructors developed into SI and CFI then we wouldn't be having this debate now. It seems to me that if an instructor was allowed to provide the instruction without direct supervision of a CFI until the solo flight It would make it at least possible for someone to get off the ground. On the second issue I wasn't suggesting that a GA instructor could just teach me to fly PPC, perhaps I have misunderstood however I thought I had read that a GA SI or CFI could gain a PPC endorsement which would then allow them to train in PPC And yes I agree there are not enough PPC SI and CFI in the system to allow the sport to grow and I truely hope changes are made to allow the development of more FI, SI and CFI in this sport. Perhaps PPC being a different type of craft than others in the flying world ie suspended below the wing as opposed to attached to it and being a safer and easier type of flying to master, that they be treated differently in terms of their instruction regime to other aircraft As I have said before, scuba diving has as many if not more inherent dangers than flying a PPC albeit there are dangers involved still in this type of flying. However the diving industry 30 years ago realised that to grow their industry they needed more instructors and the sport has grown exponentially There needs to be for PPC a pathway for people to be introduced to the sport, learn to fly, gain experience and endorsements toward an examination to become an instructor that is deemed sufficient to allow confidence that that person can then instruct people to become PPC pilots. Without third party supervision which in this industry at least for this sport which is not carried out at an airport is a barrier to entry. In the diving industry the instructor can then become an instructor in different endorsements like advanced diving, night diving, cave diving, wreck diving etc until they become a master instructor There is a clear path to encourage people into the sport and to encourage them to go on and gain more experience and higher levels of competence cheers David
  16. G'day Facthunter, it looks like Kevs going to send you some information on the ease of flight of the powered parachute, for my own part I have had to flight I described and another one in a different machine, have read all I can get my hands on and everything points to these craft being the safest and due to the feature that differentiates powered parachutes from other types of flight ( the pendulum effect ) of being suspended below the wing as opposed attached to it makes them very stable. You are right that taking off in variable winds is potentially a problem for these craft and it is recommended they be flown in the appropriate wind conditions. Hitting trees would be a problem, I suppose that manoeuvre would also be a problem for your type of craft, I would just hit them slower.
  17. Crickey, I started this thread out of frustration, and quite frankly I'm still frustrated by your system, however at least I have a better understanding of it. Timing is everything they say, by the sound of it, if I was trying to enter the sport before the new Ops manual came out it would have been easier, I could have begun my instruction if my instructor had the sign off of a CFI without him actually having to be there until my final solo flight. That would have to make it easier. Why was this changed ? Thanks Kasper, for helping me understand the system even though it sounds like there is some confusion around the rules. I may still be confused on one issue, is it correct that the person I would like to teach me with many years of experience flying PPCs or a person like Kev who I believe also has many years of experience can't teach me, however theoretically if you were still teaching, in your capacity as a GA SI you could have done 5 hr crossover and taught me to fly a PPC ? I have no doubt you would have done a great job please excuse me for using you as an example ( I don't know of any other SI that I could use ) however if that is the case isnt that strange ? Kev, you really are a champion for the PPC community and I suppose I am biased but I agree with your thoughts, I have very little knowledge of this sport having only recently been introduced to it and from reading all I can about it whenever I can since then, but I do know this. In January I took a trial flight in a powered parachute, it was a 25 minute flight that was given to me as a present by my daughter for a Christmas present. I knew nothing of the machine or flying before sitting in it for the flight, as part of that trial I was allowed to take control, I landed it, ( touch down ) took off flew around and then finally landed it. Yes I had the instructor right there to take over if things didn't go right, but he didn't have to, quite frankly it wasnt that hard. The weather was perfect, so I don't think for a minute that I could safely go out and fly without instruction and a good understanding of weather, wind. Shear, rotors, thermals etc which I will come as part of my instruction. The reason I was so taken by this sport was the simplicity and safety record of this type of flying. I was bewildered to learn this has been around for 20 + years and virtually no one I have spoken to about my experience knows about it, how about this, of the people I have told of my experience there are a number that would like to try it Is it part of the charter of the RA Aus to promote safe flight ? I believe powered parachutes have a future, from what I can see, safer and more sophisticated PPCs are becoming available, making the safest sector of flying even safer. Given a chance and not killed off by restrictive regulations, this sport can be the vehicle for myself and many others to make a safe achievable entry to the world of flight Once again thanks for all of the people with enough passion for your sport to contribute, it demonstrates at least to me the power of these forums, I have learnt something and take some encouragement from Kevs passion of the sport and words that the new board of RA Aus may be more open to considering this sector as an opportunity and I along with many others can actually join you soon as flyers. Cheers David
  18. Kev, I hope that one day when I am finally flying I will get the opportunity to buy you a beer and say thanks for the passion that you have for the sport and the effort you are putting in to bring about change. I truely hope that your educated and considered recommendations will get the fair hearing they deserve and the leadership dispell the concern that they are not working in the best interests of a growing number of their members. Cheers David
  19. Thanks Nashy, I appreciate your offer. I hope one day I can do better and buy you a beer Cheers David
  20. Thanks for the comments, it seems that it would be easier to to learn to fly in a 3 axis aircraft, I have over the years seen them and thought how cool are those guys/ girls and that and I would like to do it one day. It just worried me that if your motor went out you fall out of the sky, I can still free ascend from depth if I was stupid enough to run out of air diving. When I was introduced to the Powered parachute , I was attracted by the safety, ease of flight, ability to fly from basically a flat piece of ground in the country and the opportunity to enjoy this experience with like minded people when they get together, not to mention that where I live would provide great opportunities for flying along the coast. I have while waiting to get the instruction to fly been reading what I can get my hands on re flying these things and have gathered that alignment into the wind on takeoff and landing will assist not being dragged over by the wind the takeoff and landing phase which as I read is the most critical phase. I can only assume when I finally get instruction that as part of that that I will be trained on how to conduct the sport to help eliminate the need for broken arms and legs, I think the aircraft I have chosen will also assist. In the past few days I have been encouraged by some people in the sport who have a passion for it and are fighting to clear the obstructions preventing me from flying. I can't quite understand how the governing body of this sport has not identified that the safest, most accesable form of flying would be their greatest opportunity for growing the sport safely if that is their brief. Scuba diving is not without dangers, to dive a student has to understand and manage, currents, pressure ( every 10 metres depth = 1ATM+) Baratrauma of air spaces, ears and over expansion of lungs) excessive absorption of nitrogen into the blood stream leading to decompression sickness ( bends) and narcossis at depth ( rapture) blue orb syndrome, cold rough oceans, lots of critters and luckily not often some that could eat you All of these subjects are covered within the diving course, students are provided with information on what the dangers are, how to manage those issues, trained in a pool to demonstrate their ability & confidence in using the equipment and then taken out into the ocean to demonstrate again their understanding and proficiency of the lessons they have been taught. They are then certified as divers. The instructor who trains them would have demonstrated his compentency for training people along with his competency of his craft ie diving or perhaps flying before a board of examiners and then been given the instructors rating to go forth and introduce new people to enjoy the sport, no third party, the instructor has been signed of as competent Why can't flying a powered parachute be as easy ? I hope one day I can actually do it instead of just writing about my desire to do it (PS I'm a bloody potential customer ?? ) David
  21. G'day and happy Easter, I am not yet a pilot and as I have only recently become a member of your association and therefore possibly not in a strong position to be able to raise criticisms of your system, however the fact that I am not at least on my way to joining your ranks has in my frustration required me to make this post In January I was given the opportunity to experience a trial flight in a powered parachute, being a relatively safe and easy form of flight at a level that while not exactly cheap but within the scope of someone with the passion to chase it. I decided to chase it. It is now April and after researching the spor via the net. I have decide on the aircraft to fly, found an instructor with many years of experience to teach me, refinanced my house to secure my aircraft, designed and commissioned a trailer, commuted to the training, but still sitting here months after with out having started my training. The problem seems to be that my instructor with many years of experience in the industry can't start to teach me unless he has another instructor (CFI) oversee his instruction ? In 1982 after a comprehensive examination process I was certified as the 80th PADI open water scuba diver instructor in Australia. That meant I can teach and sign off as competent students that I had taught to be open water scuba divers What I currently face as a new entrant to the sport powered parachutes ( which is apparently the safest easiest form of flight ) is that I have to have the weather to be pretty much perfect, I have to be ready to fly at that time ( I live in Corinella) my instructor has to be ready to fly ( he is in Pakenham ) but to really complicate the proceeds and create a huge barrier to entry is that we have to have a third party, in my case I'm hoping a CFI who lives about 80kms from the instructor can be available, other wise I can't have my lesson. To do my 20hrs to get my pilot certificate we will have to get these logistics aligned every time Who thought up this level of complexity ? Has this been devised to only allow an elitist few to enter this sport ? Thirty years ago the diving industry realised that to grow the industry and bring people into the sport they needed instructors to encourage and teach people safely inthe sport of scuba diving. Look at the number of sport divers now, enjoying every weekend a sport that has a least the inherent dangers if not many more than the sport of powered parachutes Well for what it is worth, they are my thoughts, I'm bloody frustrated after becoming excited about becoming involved I this sport ( crikey I'm a customer ) and being blocked by rules that don't allow experienced instructors get on with the job of encouraging people into the sport Thanks for the opportunity to at least vent my frustration, I hope that I get the chance to learn to fly before I write off my losses and give it up David
×
×
  • Create New...