poteroo

Not wrong! Maybe they are planning a C310 fitted with 4 Rotax 915s of 135HP??

I think it was just an unfortunate choice of words. We need to remember that English is not the 1st language of most Asian pilots. They learn it well enough to get by in terms of ICAO and 1st world regulatory requirements - but when the proverbial hits-the-fan, their English fails them. I've heard some rather disjointed and garbled transmissions from 'genuine' Aussie pilots after they've had a real emergency. Cut them some slack.

Methinks there's a mistake here. C310s were fitted with Continental IO-470s in the early models (260HP), and then with Continental IO-520s, (285/300HP) in the final few models. As far as I know, the only 'older' Cessna model with a Lycoming 0-540 - was the C182RG, and of the later, (post 1997), Cessnas, only the C206H, and the C182S and T models with a Lycoming IO-540. happy days,

Refuelled with 98 PULP at both Nullarbor and Caiguna this week. I shutdown the engine before crossing the boundary between the servo block and the public access driveway. I then manually position the aircraft at the bowser. Then, after refuelling, manually shift it back onto the servos' block, and, being certain there are no gawking tourists, kids, dogs, camels, dingos,roos or wombats in the immediate vicinity - start up and move away asap. Of course, all bets are off if an overly officious Constable Plod has been having a bad day on the highway! happy days,

I think FH has identified a reason for the continued and, perhaps, the increasing incidence of pilots flying into non-VMC weather. Yes, it seems to me that, just because we have a 'full panel' of flight instruments, a very capable GPS and a TXP in a 100KTAS LSA: that it emboldens a VFR pilot to try to push through wx which they would have avoided in a less capable aircraft. And, there's no doubt that having more capable aircraft in RAAus allows us to undertake some expansive trips. I returned home to Albany yesterday in my Brumby high-wing and the trip from Cowra took me 21 hrs, for a 1708nm trip. The low (80kt) average was due to constant headwinds at every altitude, plus weather diversions,(3), and landings at unintended locations,(3). I had to contend with a troughline and showers, then overwater flight under a relatively low cloud base, then widespread early am fog, then blowing dust, then a stormline with heavy rain, and then a lower-than-I'm prepared-to-fly cloud base. But, I'm proof positive that a situationally sensitive coward can fly for many years without becoming a weather statistic. As the saying goes...... it's better to be on the ground looking up, (at the weather?), than in the air wishing you were down there.

I have certainly done that via an individual submission, via AOPA as well, and via taking CASA to task at local Safety Seminar. Our regulator should be corrected whenever they decide to change rules away from what is practical and commonsense. Lighten up - where CASA is concerned, the 'ass' joke becomes a statement of fact,something aviators such as Nev and myself have been dealing with for over 50 years.

the law is an ass, and this 'law' is an asses posterior

JB is a very experienced G1 instructor and will get you up to speed in the RV6. Before commencing formation, you need to, (have 30-40 hrs PIC), plus be able to 'wheel' the RV6 on with good directional control and no 'hops'. This will ensure that you can (safely) maintain your wingman position during landing. YSEN 05/23 is quite narrow so you should be right if you can stay on it with a wheeler in an RV6. Good luck with it all.

No such thing actually - unless it has a 'design feature' (eg, csu,t/w) that you have not yet been trained on. Caution: you'll catch the RV virus and never want to fly anything else! happy days,

Welcome Martin. When you have the RV6 flying - consider coming down to Albany and learning to formate it. We have around 16 RV's here, and an active formation group. We can train you for your formation endo: in fact, we can train you for your tailwheel endo, and train you to be really competent in your RV as well. cheers,

When you can cope with a 3 second 'delay' (to simulate the shock factor), before you are allowed to commence your vital actions - then you are getting closer to the real thing. Not so difficult if you are in cruise at >2000' agl - but very stressful in an EFATO situation. As other posters have said - EF rarely happens in a convenient spot, or a convenient time: it's likely to be when your hands are full with operational matters. Prioritisation is the thing, and you'll learn this from your instructor. happy days,

I've always thought that attempting a more difficult flight activity, or aircraft type will usually improve you as a pilot. Sometimes it can be a very chastening experience: About 3 months after completing my PPL in August 1963, and with a TT = 66hrs, I was in Port Moresby for 3 months. Looking to fly something....anything if truth be known, I joined the Aero Club of Papua, (later to be the South Pacific Aero Club). The choice between aircraft was simple: I could have a Cessna 180 - or - a Cessna 180! With a feeling of trepidation, I fronted up to the CFI and asked to be endorsed on it. Well, the preflight briefing lasted all of 15 mins, and, with the assurance that I would 'learn it better on the job' - we walked out to VH-KER, a 1958 C180A. For a start, I found it difficult to see much - but was assured 'this was normal' Then, as we began to taxy, KER decided that it would prefer to meander anywhere that took its' fancy. It was a really sweaty period, (as Port Moresby can be in December about 11.00am). Again, I was assured ' everyone has these tribulations' Then, on clearance, we lined up on 32, and I was instructed to 'ease the power on....slowly' Being used to 100 Continental ponies - I slid into those 230HP and soon we were off between the lights on onto the grass. Luckily, we'd used flaps -10 and so were soon flying, but heading towards the tower building. This we missed, but by the time I'd done all the necessary engine adjustments, we were through 1000' and heading out of the circuit. After some truly amazing 'stunt' flying, we landed back on terra firma. And the TWR controllers unstrapped their parachutes! To cut a long ordeal short, I did 2 hrs circuits, then a 2 hr short navex out to some of the old WW2 strips at Daugo, Rogers and Aroa for some practice. To my amazement, the CFI eventually talked me into using just the runway, and limited the kangaroo hops to about 10 ft. Incredibly strong undercarriage on Clydes' C180! There was no way that I could have flown that monster solo, and thus ended my early tailwheel exposure. It would have helped immensely had I actually learned the theory of tailwheel flying, and the CFI might have spent a bit longer in the brief - but that was the way things happened back then. I finally completed my t/w endorsement on a Maule M4-210, but by then I had flown over 290TT with 70 hrs on C182. The moral of my experiences, and which I trust has made me both a better pilot and a safer instructor: thorough briefing and understanding before we turn a prop. Happy days,

Auster J3(?) at RQAC Archerfield in late 1962, then moved onto brand new Cessna 150's at Air Academy, (the 'new' school), at Archerfield in early 1963. AF was an 'allover' grass paddock at that time on which you followed the aircraft ahead, looked for a green light in the tower, then landed to one side of that aircraft. On stopping, you turned left and taxyd clear. Then - we were fitted with new-fangled VHF COM sets and our flying lives were never so simple again! Sigh!

Not really the case. We do not know the pilots experience levels in any form of flying: other than he's reportedly been flying for several decades. We also do not know the details of the aircrafts' airworthiness. We also do not know what in-flight manoeuvring occurred prior to the accident. Until ATSB piece it all together - it's just speculation and we shouldn't be in this space, given the fact it's a public forum and who knows whether what's written here might well end up being quoted elsewhere. RIP and condolences to the pilots family and friends.

Another accident with an A5 occurred on 2nd April, 2017. NTSB GAA17CA213. Aircraft was reported as having a heavy openwater landing. Two in a row!

Well done. Moral of this story is: after maintenance, always 'test' fly your aircraft for at least 10 minutes - keeping it within gliding range/altitude of the strip. happy days,

Disagree with this. It really depends on the flying school ensuring all the competencies are met. I personally don't instruct any differently in RAA or GA, and the student has to meet the same in either category. After all - flying is flying, and the numbers on the aircraft should not mean a completing pilot is better or worse than another. Disagree. There is a worldwide problem with RV pilots not being trained to fly them safely though. I believe it goes back to the instructors themselves not being really competent to train other pilots on more advanced types. CASR 61.385 applies. GA instructors really do need to have reasonable time-on-type before actually instructing. Unfortunately, only 61.385 spells out anything to guide you. As an example - would I conduct competency training in a Lancair or Glassair? Hell no - I don't have any PIC time on them, and despite being legally able to, I don't. Another example that comes to mind is with instructors conducting tailwheel endos, and formation endos, - when they have bugga all PIC time on/doing them. RVs are generally being flown too fast on approach, and too slow on initial climb. More on this in previous post. Agree. In principle, over-engineering should never be an alternative to training in good technique. But it seems, from the published accident reports, that poor handling is the major causal factor. I also get to hear of other RV 'incidents' which can be traced back to poor technique. No surprises with the ATSB report though. Runway Loss-of-Control accidents will continue to unfairly dog the RV series aircraft for so long as owners and pilots fail to fly them competently. And that puts pressure on insurers to raise the rates for the rest of us.

It doesn't have to be an A380 either! We fly quite a bit of formation in RVs here, and we never have any vortice induced upsets when there is even a 2-3 kt x/w on the runway and on its' approach and departure ends. But when it's a beautiful winters late afternoon, and the surface inversion has commenced, beware the uncommanded roll when entering the vortices from a preceding RV. We have had some quite attention grabbing events coming down final. The last element has sometimes gone round due to an upset - yet we are not close in terms of spacing between elements. Not that we are flying fast either - 70KIAS down final Because we breakup into elements of 2, with sometimes 4 elements landing in formation but at 300m intervals, it has become a point of debate as to how best to manage it. Do the leading elements fly low, but then extend their float to touchdown well into the runway? Or, do we fly a slightly 'diagonal' path to touchdown? This probably isn't of concern in a PC9 because of the wing loading and speed, but it certainly is a situation we brief for in certain weather. happy days,

Tragic! Has me wondering whether the flying school has a policy of reducing volume on the COM or Intercom while they are out in the training area? Very easy to forget to increase the volume again before joining the home circuit. Another possibility is that the students inadvertently cutoff the audio by adjusting the intercom squelch too far. Mea culpa - I've done both the above, and while it was chastening, we were in a low traffic area and it all ended well.

Have been several mishaps at Bunbury over the years. 2 x (firespotter), Piper Cubs some 10-12 years ago, and a C182 which went inverted probably 20 years ago. I'll bet there have been more. When there is a moderate gusty E/SE wind blowing, runway 07 suffers quite a deal of shear and it can trap the unwary or the less skilled.

Plan on some rugged wx. It will be blowing 20-30 kts from the NW above 4000ft most days, and stronger in the frontal wx. E to W.....fly low, and inland winds are usually lighter than near the coast. W to E - usually fly above 5000 for strong W/NW winds but if you are close to the coast at that time of year, expect VFR to be difficult due the layers of cloud. Unsealed strips can become very slippery after rain, and it pays to call the roadhouses - but speak to whoever does the refuelling there. happy days,

Back in the early 70's, a Baron endorsement at Jandakot , required you to identify, feather and secure one at blueline, then fly the circuit and land on the live engine. The engine was 'failed' using a mixture cut to ico with the mixture levers hidden by a newspaper held by the instructing pilot. So, you had no idea which one died and had to correctly id it. Very exciting! Luckily, in those days JT was way out in the bush so the only danger was to yourself or a few kangaroos. The Baron below was one of the many I flew at the time. It wasn't considered particularly dangerous in a Baron, but I'd be hesitant to try it on anything of much less performance. Those were the days!

An unfortunately frequent comment! FWIW - unless you are very young, and have the money or loans to go all the way @ full speed - then you'll have to graft your way to higher quals. There are ways to minimise costs,(PM me) - but the best is to take your time, study hard, and PAYG. Do a tertiary qual, or trade, on your way because you may/will need a fallback position during your career. Good luck.

March - April - May is generally considered the 'best' time to fly along the Southern Australian coast. The small amount of 'frontal' wx is usually moderate intensity, fast moving, not extending far north from the coast, and gone in a few hours. Troughlines with TS can be anticipated though - so watch the WA weather moving through from NW to SE. Troughlines initially shown inland of Perth-Geraldton-Carnarvon tend to extend southwards, but miss the far SW of WA - usually affecting the southern coast east of Ravensthorpe/Hopetoun. Does this help?

CASR Part 61, CASR Part 141 for sure. Trying to understand and comply with Part 61 has proven a headache for flying schools over the 4 years since it was announced. Despite CASA having allocated a 'task force' to deal with issues arising from a poorly thought out, over-the-top document - they still cannot give a clear answer to many questions. It has cost us heaps in lost time. The other costly CASA decisions have been where CASA, in its' wisdom, decides to change the rules, eg the current saga of frequency use in Class G airspace. These thought bubbles end up costing industry huge amounts in time and effort because we can't just sit on our hands and hope the CASA group will see 'sense'. We know from hard experience that unless we respond, and respond both vigorously and promptly, quite ridiculous rules become established by default. This isn't any new CASA activity. They have been fiddling with regulation for so many years that we'd laugh if it wasn't so serious. AOPA has been doing a great job and my 54 years of membership is finally paying off. Ben Morgan deserves praise from all the aviation industry for his public performances in explaining the issues. Great job! happy days,