aplund

The issue that remains unclear to me is the PPL flight test will be much easier if your have an RPL. Is that something anyone here can quantify? I could imagine that after 3+ hours flying, with multiple steep turns, all types of stalls, PSAL, forced landings as well as navigation with diversions and a fine tooth comb put through all of your operational techniques would be rather confronting. But exactly what wouldn't be tested in a PPL flight test if you have the RPL? I think the rest of the costs/benefits have been spelt out to me fairly clearly.

Multiple instructors who I've flown with from AAA have contacted me suggesting that going the RPL route is not in my interests. Though I've also had a number of alternative views put to me. I thought I'd try posting my situation here to see if I could get any clarity in my own head.

I'm sure someone will set me straight on this if I'm wrong. But as far as I can see, I need another 0.9 hours of solo to meet the RPL minimum but if I want a RPL navigation endorsement (which I don't think I do if I'm aiming for PPL) then I need 5 hours of solo nav and another 0.7 hours IF in flight.

Do you mean CASR Part 61.115? When RQAC stopped I was booked for a training area solo. Instead, that has now been a dual exercise which I did on Saturday (9/4/16) at the new school. RQAC still wanted to do one more dual nav before potentially doing a solo nav. I was really looking forward to my first solo nav. The disruption has hugely dented my confidence.

As many of you probably know I'm a student tried up with the RQAC collapse. As I'm self sponsored, I have just transferred to another school at YBAF. The tricky part of moving to another school is the differing expectations. As I consider myself in no way knowledgeable or experienced in the flight training enterprise, I usually like to defer some complex decisions to the judgement of those who are more experienced. At RQAC I initially signed up to go for a PPL with the option to keep going if time/situation permits later on. Therefore they put me on a course which skipped many of the RPL endorsements and just go for the PPL requirements. However, moving to the new school, this is not a recommended pathway. They recommend doing a RPL flight test and continuing on to PPL and beyond after that. The issue for me is that I feel that if I complete some solo navigation exercises that I will have enough experience to proceed directly to a PPL flight test and exam. However, I'm concerned about pushing the envelope here as I do understand the motivation to be relaxed as possible during tests and having completed an RPL it makes sense that a flight examiner would be less likely to want to retest all the RPL requirements in a PPL flight test if the student has already passed the RPL. My logbook currently has in it 39.4 hours of aeronautical experience, comprising of 24.4 hours of dual training area and circuit work, 10.9 hours dual nav, 4.1 hours solo (training area only) with 3.3 hours IF experience with 0.3 of that in flight. I was studying for the PPL exam just before RQAC stopped. I'm currently getting about 80-90% on the Bob Tait practice questions. My question here is, what do others think? What would you do in my situation? Should I try and push for doing the PPL tests or do the RPL test then move straight on to the PPL tests.

Just a quick observation from a complete novice, these boundaries do seem to have some fuzz about them. If your map says C LL 8500, and you fly 8501' AMSL then your are technically within controlled air space. But given that QNH is quoted to the nearest whole hPa, there is no way you can believe that you have a precision better than about 30' on your altimeter. Listening to LiveATC on YBAF the other day, I did hear an airspace infringement, but from what I could make out on the radio, the aircraft was definitely in class C airspace. The altitude was way too high and the position was too far north of YBAF. But it did raise a question in my mind. Is there a hard cut-off for infringing airspace? (Not that you'd ever want to push that limit). Presumably the 500' rule from the boundary is due to this fuzz. Your altimeter would have to be off by more than 15 hPa to cause a conflict in vertical separation.

Well, it was not pretty, but effective. I called, emailed and generally just wouldn't go away. They told me that the administrators would be on site today. I couldn't make it so I asked someone from sthn skies to go there. He "played bad cop" and ended up walking out with a printout of my entire training history. Perhaps my harassing to get it done will help others as they have now gone through the process, then again, maybe not. The primary goal of what they do is to recovery enough money to pay creditors. Knowing and acting in accordance with the CASR is not on their to do list. All I can suggest is to get on the phone. They answered the operations phone when I called it. Figure out when they are on site, then go there and don't leave until you have what you need.

Well, I'm planning on continuing with Southern Skies. With only half my log book entries signed off on, this constitutes a problem. I rang the AAA operations number on Tuesday asking for my record. I also sent an email to AAA and the administrators. If I understand CASR 141.280 correctly, they have seven days to send the record. Presumably this still applies in this situation. We will see.

Is there any coverage on LiveATC.net for Class G FIS?

If that's is ex GST, and dual, then its about the same. (Landing fees etc excluded of course.)

Just to be clear, VFR reporting points are OK too, right? My examples are TVT, PKR, GON and TAR. These are on the VTC and used in the ERSA for YBAF. I guess you'd need some local knowledge to make the link between "Park Ridge water tower" as spoken on the radio and PKR.

Contacted them this morning. Turns out they don't take calls over Easter.

My HECS days are long over. I'm a self sponsored student. They'd get money from me each flight tho. No finance required.

That's a long way for me to travel (from Indooroopilly). I only had about 6 nav exercises left in the course schedule, plus the PPL written test. So I guess it would be possible.

I got an update via email. Seems that the use of VET FEE-HELP is being raised as the primary culprit. I don't fully understand what was sent around, but it appears that this source of money is only settled at the end of the course. This would clearly cause a massive cashflow issue. (I only have a very fuzzy view of this, but makes sense if true.)

First page yes. It was complete. Second page was in progress. They have a full electronic record of all lessons and detailed notes. My guess is that I may be able to get a copy of this.

AAA only had one glass cockpit C172, iirc. They charged even more for that one. I have been paying $414/hour (dual, $304/hour solo) and $109/hour for briefings + landing fees + all my own equipment for the entirety of my PPL until now. All on basic 6 pack C172R. Seems I may be on the lookout for a new flying school in Brisbane to complete my PPL. Any suggestions? (I absolutely must have it done by August. I was hoping for end of April, but I don't think that's a possibility now).

Well, there are lots of possibilities. But it just seems unlikely this is a case of year on year operating losses, unless the level of liabilities taken on were far too high for some reason. I may be wrong and if I am, I cannot see myself owning a single engine GA plane if average operating costs exceed $300/hour.

I tried to figure that out very roughly a while ago. Let's say the instructors really do cost $100/hour, then it's just under $300/hour (ex GST) for flying the C172R. Clearly there are a lot of costs wrapped into that, but is that really an unprofitable and/or tight margin? Fuel will be around about $80/hour (maybe less more recently), and hopefully they have a reasonable arrangement for parking included in their lease for the office space. No idea about maintenance costs, but they also offer a student program for maintenance and perhaps things can be bundled together there. Lots of other expenses need to be included in this of course, but given that most planes were up to their 110 hourly after 4-6 weeks, that's a fairly rapid throughput which would cover a number of fixed costs like running the operations centre and other office staff.

I'm not Clif. That was the sender of the email. It all seems so strange! The flight school was booked out all the time. I had to book many days in advance for planes and they must have at least two dozen planes. I was hoping for a Nav on Saturday, but had to do a 1 hour area solo as the plane was otherwise booked out. And surely it's not the revenue that's the problem as they charge $414/hour for dual, plus $109/hour for briefings and you have to pay for your own landing fees, headsets, materials, photocopying, etc. They had lots of advertising around the city as well. Though I have noticed with companies in the past, they often give the impression of expansion just before they end. The RQAC has a very long history at Archerfield. It is indeed a very unfortunate situation.

I received the following email today. I'm not sure what it all means. I'm in the final stages of study for the PPL exam and have about half a dozen flights to go before the final test. There are many cases of companies trading under administration (Dick Smith?). The AAA, which I think is a subsidiary, seems to have _heaps_ of students and lots of staff. The carpark this year has been full of cars most days. There must be some debt or cash-flow back story that I'm totally unaware of. Today I booked a solo flight for Saturday, not sure if that will go ahead at this stage. Nobody has contacted me though. 24 March 2016 Note to Members – Appointment of Voluntary Administrator Dear Members I regret to advise that the Boards of Royal Queensland Aero Club Limited, Airline Academy of Australia Pty Ltd and ATAE Pty Ltd resolved earlier today to appoint a Voluntary Administrator to all entities within the Royal Queensland Aero Club structure. As a consequence of this appointment all entities ceased trading with effect from this afternoon. This outcome is particularly disappointing given the substantial progress recently made towards achieving increased scale and profitability. I would like to take this opportunity to record my and the Board’s appreciation of the wonderful efforts of Management and Staff, particularly through the many challenges that have arisen in recent months. The Voluntary Administrator, Nigel Markey of Pilot Partners, has commenced the process of reviewing the position of the RQAC group and will provide advice to Directors, Creditors and Members and Students in the coming weeks. Obviously this is an incredibly sad day for our proud and historic organisation. There will be a number of people working tirelessly in the coming days to explore all avenue and options to develop a proposal that will allow the entities to emerge from Voluntary Administration. Members will be kept informed throughout the process. Yours sincerely Clif Hefner

Here is another question that I get many and varied answers to, but first an anecdote: I was on a dual navigation exercise whilst the Amberley airspace was active and we needed to transit from the west to Goodna. So first step was to contact delivery and I knew that after telling the controller who I was, I needed to say where I was. We had departed YWCK and my first thought was to use that point to describe our position, but then I thought that we may actually be closer to YCFN and the student study guide does use it as an example. But my instructor said to use Maryvale and that worked fine. But when we got back I saw that this wasn't actually a listed point on the map. So my question is when reporting your position, what is an acceptable point of reference and what is not? Or perhaps more precisely, what points are clearest and most readily available to a controller? Should one aim to use airports and reporting points? Or are random towns on the VNC OK?

Well, I know it's probably bad form to reply to oneself, but here is the TAF 12 hours later: URRR 190800Z 1909/2009 35007G13MPS 0500 +SHSN BKN003 BKN020CB TEMPO 1909/1915 1200 SHSN BR BKN002 BKN020CB FM191500 36003G09MPS 3000 -SHSN BR SCT005 BKN020CB BECMG 2005/2007 34007G13MPS Wind doesn't seem to be a factor, but very very little visibility and snow storms and the like.

The holding must have been for more than just weather. If you look like you are holding for more than 1 hour, you go for your alternate, right? Do they have TAF and/or METAR out of Russian airports? What were the actual conditions?

What defines a sector? The areas shown on the vnc/vtc?