robinsm

Obviously politics, apathy, and ex ceo's have a lot to answer for. I attended all except the last one (in hospital for an operation). Camped under wing at each of them. Each one was, for me, great, lots of aircraft, hanger talk, exhibitions (the spitfire and the aerobatics were phenominal.) When Carol was organising it, she did a marvelous job and should be applauded for her efforts (talk about going the extra mile...!!), pity the Raa experts, in their wisdom, played the person and not what they are paid to do, look after and promote the sport. Funny we have not seen a cost accounting for natfly.

 

 

If only RAA pilots and owners had an advocacy organisation looking out for their rights and privileges.

I thought it was called Raa-Aus?

 

 

[ATTACH=full]32517[/ATTACH]Fisher Sport MK1

looks good sonny...

 

 

same thing OME, one minor event (not heart) (7 years ago), cleared by doctors etc, no effect on my road licences but DAME want me to jump through some very expensive hoops to get even an RPL. Guess I stick with my Raa Aus cert. Sometimes the inmates really do run the asylum...

 

 

awesome and inspirational. Hats off to him.

 

 

Age has nothing to do with it, I turn 65 next year. When I feel I am no longer safe for myself or my passengers, then I will stop. I have asked my instructor and friends to let me know if they think I cant cut it any more and then I will consider it.

 

Chap I know was stopped by CASA in his 80s. (they wanted a check pilot in with him. )( This a man who held world aerobatic championship records.) He is no longer with us (passed on through cancer) but he used to sneak out in the evening and do a few quick circuits comprising loops, barrell rolls, inverted flying etc in his tiger moth or Stompe aircraft. (note in hos 80s he was a safer and better pilot than some half his age.) Its how you are physically not age. I know some 40 years old that make me shudder when I see them climbing into the cockpit...lol

 

 

waiting.....waiting.....must get a copy....waiting...

 

 

Ahhh M61. I see you have twigged. Thanks for your comments.The first part of my purpose was to explain clearly that what may people think is correct is in fact nonsense and hopefully be of help. The second part was to see what sort of response I got.

 

The vociferous arguments based on fallacies are exactly what we in the industry need to fix. An authority figure (instructor or captain) using the cockpit or classroom power gradient consciously or unconsciously can teach new pilots or F/Os all kinds of bad habits or suppress their correct views and the junior pilot will often accept this just to 'get along'.

 

This is the 'Authority from Eminence' logical fallacy I mentioned earlier. (I am currently writing a book on this)

 

One of the posters said just this thing "it's just a hoop you have to jump through to get to the next stage". That is dangerous unprofessional thinking.

 

(As for being one of my students, I had the highest Student Satisfaction scores ever recorded in the department. Students still call me for advice and mentoring because they know I genuinely care about them knowing the right information and how to use it in the real world, not just the lecture room.

 

As for inconsistent- can you point it out please? The only thing I would ask is that you view the comments in context and start by reading my first post on Page 1.

 

It was concise, referenced and provided resources. If you are jumping in the middle no doubt it would look fragmented but you have to look at the whole subject in context.

 

Providing information with references that are unimpeachable and then watching people make emotional and inflammatory comments without having read them is quite interesting.

 

It is the kind of mentality that says 'I have always operated this way and I haven't had any problems in 30 years and you are not going to convince me otherwise' and then next thing you read about them in an ATSB report.

 

See Mr Turboplanner' comments. He is comprehensively wrong but will not see it. This is called 'Confirmation Bias' where someone only accepts information that fits with their pre-existing view. This has been a significant causal factor is quite a number of airline accidents.

 

The unwillingness to revise opinions or practices on the basis of new information is extremely dangerous and one of the contributing factors for the number of GA/RA accidents.

 

And no. Most of my facilitation has been in the corporate world-Airline and business and a corporate speaker here and overseas in Aviation where if you are crap, they don't ask you back.

 

No captive audiences there.

 

I hope that has made some sense to you.

 

Cheers.

So have they asked you back after your arrogant, rude and downright"holier than thou" attitude...?

 

 

to much for me, I just fly the damn thing and it stays in the air. Why is fairly irrelevant to the average pilot. Accept the fact that if lift didn't happen we wouldn't be flying. Now how does a flapping wing on a duck create lift as well as staying in the sky. I don't care whether some one went to Uni or not, who they were taught by or what degree they had. Thats your business and not the subject for a p..ssing comp. Posulate all the theories you like, I am more concerned about fuel usage, navigation and keeping the thing flying so I dont hit the ground. I dont think you will ever agree, and frankly, who cares...!!!

 

 

yep 14 days for me to. Stoked...!!!

 

 

Jeez mate, dont shout. We hear you. Remember others dont have the fantastic academic and aviation theoretical background you obviously have. Most of us backwoods members of the idiots union just want to fly. Why it flies in an interesting argument, but thank goodness they do. Given that there have been a number of theories over the years as to why things fly, (referred to as the suck it up, or, blow it up theories,) it is refreshing to hear that we were all wrong. Please publish your insights in the scientific journals as I am sure the experts would love to be informed.

 

 

my main headset is a bog standard david clarke. 13.4. I have worn this for extended pewriods with no problems. A lot cheaper than ANR and just as good. Put the money you save into flying lessons, or get one from Ian at the clear prop shop and use more money for lessons. If you want to spend the money on all the bells and whistles later, then ok. Throw your money into learning to fly first then buy the expensive bits later. Just my opinion.

 

 

Is wade still in business? I thought he closed down a couple of years ago? Be great if he is still going.

 

 

Vaiable heights make sense when I circuit at 55 knots, the plastics circuit at 90 to 120 kts and the twin engine turbos circuit at 150 plus knots all at the same airfeild. No way am I going to race a twin turbo and make him wait in the circuit for me to maintain my right of way.

 

 

I have used Caltex exclusively after being warned away from BP and Shell about 9 years ago when I built my aircraft. I test the fuel (95 and 98) all the time and have not had any problems. I use flexible fuel lines and have not had any degrading in that time (haven't changed them either and they are still flexible. (one of the "experts " at Natfly a couple of years ago gave me the benefit of his vast experience and told me I should change the fuel lines every 2 years or ..."you will be sorry one day"...) The fuel lines are blue plastic and mostly mounted externally. I have fibreglass tanks. I use oil injection in the 2 stroke motor and use a mineral oil. I was told that if the aircraft is going to be sitting for extended periods then the mineral oil sticks to the upper cylinders better than the synthetic types. So far no problems. Just my 0.2c worth...

 

 

Opal? Just looked it up. I was aware of why it was introduced but knew nothing of its fuel properties. Just looked it up and only 91 RON and therefore unsuitable for my Rotax. There might not be much call for high octane (95/98) fuels in the bush.

Don, 95 and 98 are readily available fuel in the bush. I have bought mogas for my aircraft in outback towns and roadhouses and most are 95 or 98.

 

 

You may need a gasohol type fuel tester. Add water to the prescribed level, then add fuel to prescribed level. Shake, and let contents settle. If "water" level has increased, then you know there is alcohol in the fuel as it has now mixed with the water. Hope this helps.

Instead of a Gasohol type fuel terster, a jar (clear plastic, pour some water in it - about 1/4, mark the water level with a texta/sharpy pen, and then fill with fuel. Shake the container and any ethanol will be absorbed into the water and show an increase in the water level. Any increase in water level negates the fuel as far as I'm concerned. Works for me..

 

 

nope, just water and ethanol (ethanol testing is simple, and should be done by all people using mogas before any fuel goes into the tank.)

 

 

always used from the local Caltex. Tested every time, never a problem with 98. I did pick up fuel from (mogas) from Packsaddle roadhouse and Cameron corner last year. Both tested free of ethanol (again 98 octane) (I am running a rotax 582 2 stroke with oil injection).

 

 

if its to close to your crotch, put a bend the stick away from you...

 

 

Interesting article, how does the cht apply to water cooled heads on 2 stroke engines. Why do engine manufacturers specify max egt temps? Why do they specify optimal temp operating ranges etc?..This article raises more questions than it answers... My 2 stroke has no temp or mixture control that can be operated from the cabin yet I regularly fly over 5000 ft. This subject of chasing figures does my head in.

 

 

I may be a little slow, but does this mean that if I give a proper passenger briefing then I can still carry normal passengers, I don't have to make sure they are a pilot or have a ministerial exemption? (this is a genuine query, not a leg pull..)

 

 

You should do your PPL and be done with it. Flying to and from work will be a problem with weather, as they say" Time to spare travel by air "

Camel, there area some of us who have the ppl exams under our belt, have the wherewithal to pay for the lessons, but have been dealt a blow by the stringent medical requirements of a ppl. One incident of a minor problem 5 years ago (not life threatening), has stopped me from getting a medical clearance so my 6 years, and 400hrs of Raa Aus flying doesn't count. No wonder the RPL sounds attractive to people like me when all that is required is a stiff drivers licence medical.

 

 

Russ, no point blaming the hard working staff when the top management is responsible for the stuff ups we have been having. You comments are a little like shooting the horse because the rider gets saddle sore. Outsourcing wont solve the problem of procedures, change in policy and management attitudes will. The workers (remember that word) at the office have been nothing but helpful and attitudes like yours don't help anyone.

 

 

Stewy, have you tried adding gel earpads to your headset, I wear glasses and they have been a lifesaver for me. I run David Clarks standard headset bought second hand and have used them for 7 years. Initially had the classes problem but fitted the gel earpieces and Voila...no more sore head/ears. Also add a softer pad that sits on your head. Noise cancelling sound good but I like to hear what the engine is doing, and the noise level (in Xair with a 2 stroke just in front of me) is not excessive.