Thx1137

Right on. One situation I have heard of a few times is the aircraft cutting in because running a plane is expensive so the longer in the circuit, the more it costs... Talk about one of the all-time most useless excuses for endangering lives (you don't see the plane that hits you...) or at the very least, being rude.

In my department our non commerical in confidance spatial data is available online because the user has already paid. The taxpayers pay for the public service to exist. Maybe not all departments do it that way... Or does a private company produce the data that air services use?

I have a hard time learning through books and class environments are worse. I leasr great though if I actually _do_ (usually :-)). I self studied everything for my RA certificate using a PPL training kit so some of the stuff I studied wasn't required but thats ok, it was interesting enough :-) Human factors was the really hard one for me. I managed the minimum mark for that but everything else I did well in. I did go through the books literally 4 times though and that doesn't include revising bits and pieces! Speaking of which, I said to the other half just this weekend when I was prepping the plane that it was time to go through them again and see how much I remembered / brush up :-)

I read once (and unverified) that there was an airliner incident where they could not find a cause so it was thought that it might have been someones personal electronics device. So, it wasn't proven it was a "just to be safe". The devices do emit RF however they need to be approved for sale and part of that approval is limiting the possible interference. Another article I read some time ago said that phone off restrictions may be removed because there was no actuall evidence of aircraft system interference though voice calls were still to be banned. (thank god!) I really wouldn't have thought it would be that hard to verify once and for all.

I slot in behind any aircraft that is on downwind. I made a dead-side descending call yesterday and a cub piped up that he was on a (very) long downwind. Not a problem, I just made my descending turn a fair bit wider, found him, then slotted in behind. As an aside, I am glad he said something because no way would I have though he was on downwind! I have seen, on other occasions, people that have done a quick midfield join with a short downwind, base and final to cut in front but I reckon that is rude besides just being wrong.

Hi Con and welcome! I remember my TIF, awesome stuff. I had no preconceived notions about small aircraft though I got a little nervous during the first landing. I can't remember when I gave the instructor control, somewhere on final I think. Stick twiddling in turbulence and overcorrecting in crosswinds where other biggies for me. I found it hard to know when to leave it alone and when to correct. I guess it is just experience and practice. Flight simming helps in some ways but it is pretty bad in one key area, we generally have our eyes inside too much looking at instruments. The number of times I would be told to me to get my eyes outside cant be counted! One of my instructors often mentioned my death grip on the stick during manoeuvres where I was under pressure. That seemed nearly all the time for me, I wanted to do well too much :-) "just use your fingertips" he would say (which I would do for 5 seconds). :-) Safety hasn't been much of a worry for me. I figure I have been taught how to cope with the most likely scenarios (and how to mitigate getting into a situation and what to do if I got into one) and got the feeling our planes were well maintained. Some nerves are to be expected and is actually a good thing, as long as you control them and they not control you. :-) Steven.

I have been just reading the NFRM that was published today at Civil Aviation Safety Authority - NFRM 0908OS. I like how CASA responded to comments made by respondents and the writing seems clear enough. I haven't been through all of it yet but the rule changes seem ok to me.

Yup. Gotta get the weight on those wheels! Mind you,sometimes I think a bit of a headwind with full flaps would have offered more drag braking than the brakes on our aircraft!

I have done about 50 hours since getting my certificate. At the moment I go out to the training area and practice stalls, steep turns and a PFL every couple of months or so I guess. Crosswinds I get to do a fair bit of normally so I don't do any specific practice there. Thinking about one of the other forum messages about flap usage, flapless has been awhile though so I will do some of those on Sunday. So, do you guys practice these things regularly. Especially those things you don't get to use much in your normal flying. If so, how much? Steven.

I can relate to the "falling" thing however as long as your smooth and not too fast with bringing the stick back for the flare full flaps works great for me. If you give it a yank it or a bit early though I find it bleeds speed off pretty quick and the plane feels like a brick. That was one of the big issues I had when first learning to fly the Jab. As for "flaps as required". Yes, but having a long runway does not "require" zero or one stage of flaps. It is an "option"! If the pilot wants to exercise the option and is comfortable with their ability to do so then who can complain!? We do have some flexibility as PIC! The POH gives us a 'standard' way to do things which, of course, must be modified based on conditions. For me, given the conditions where full flap is "optional" I will still usually (unless I want to practice using less) use full flap because personally I never plan to use more runway than I need and I like standards/consistancy. :-) Steven.

I was taught partial flap but find landing easier with full flap. It seems the majority say the POH is the bible so unless there is a reason to do something different then I use it's procedures as the standard.

Flying High, takes me back :-) their "blowing up the copilot" and "I lick my coffee black, like my men" scenes are right up there too :-)

At work, we use google maps for our applications as long as accuracy isn't a great concern because it is not as accurate as our internal datasets. 500-700 meters does not sound right though, I am talking 10-50 meters. I don't have numbers to back it up, this is the info I get from the guys who manage our spatial data. edit: I just saw some others talking about errors of up to an eighth of a mile.

No worries. I was a bit dissapointed with some aspects of the program but hard to argue when it is only $30.

?? Mine has maps. Not great but it does have them. Oz is split into quarters and the download is around 530mb per quater so download from WIFI! I wish it has a searchable place name database though. Steven.

I usually got a mild headache and needed a nap not long after I got home. It was probably for about the first 15 hours or so for me.

There are seven of us and it is fine for us as I think most are retired so they fly on weekdays leaving weekends for me and one or two of the other guys :-) We have rules about the maximum number of consecutive hours we can fly per quarter to help prevent any hogging. EG: no more than 3 bookings exceeding 5 hours and one booking exceeding 5 days (something like that anyway, I'll check our regs next time I want it for an extended period :-)) per quarter. Most of us fly only a two or three hours at a time so it gives plenty of opportunities to get time in. There is a sense of ownership too which is nice. It is probably always going to be a lucky dip as to the person who joins. Maybe they don't treat the aircraft well, pay bills on time, use the plane when they haven't booked it or use it outside the rules but I think they would be very much an exception. We fly for fun and I think most of us would find mucking everyone about to reduce the fun factor! (I should hope!) I don't have one negative I can say about the syndicate I am in. I have no idea if that is typical but I'll take it :-) Steven.

i think emoticons are pretty important in messaging. There is no body language or tone of voice in a forum! I have used them since the old bulletin board days :-) Steven.

Yeah, some people look for excuses for their bad behaviour. The marketing person that came up with "the customer is always right" has a lot to answer for. I have on more than a couple of occasions heard people being obnoxious and they said it was because they were a customer and "always right".

CoPilot is good though sometimes I have to add my own waypoints (I like to do navs that involve tiny towns or stations :-)). I actually don't use it for much, I should try its nav mode as I haven't tried that yet. Steven.

Rules, absolutely. Fuel, not in my plane :-) One pax and we would be overweight. We use a fuel card so fuel comes out of our monthly bill which is based on a set sum per hour.

There is 7 in the one I am in. It is great. I like to fly 2 or 3 hours most weekends and pay _way_ less than hiring! The time flexibility is great too. It would obviously depend on the people you are with but it is great for me. :-) Some of the guys only fly weekdays which means we don't all compete for the weekend. Steven.

G'day Catsy, There are a few of us from Adelaide around. I drive a J160 myself these days from Aldinga. Steven.

I couldn't handle the stress of air traffic control. I have a co worker who did it for a few years and decided it wasn't for him and he was at Adelaide! I couldn't imagine one of the big ones!

I am 100% behind you there Ian. There is nothing wrong with trying to increase the signal to noise ratio of a forum. I don't subscribe to the idea that we should never do anything unless we can be 100% accurate. We would never have oozed out of the primordial sludge! The main two caveats I have are: 1. People know that the information is "take it or leave it", ie. not gospel so they accept responsibility for taking or ignoring advice. 2. There is little aveneue to be sued for any information received. (there is never "no" aveneue, even if you say nothing at all!) Steven.