Jump to content

X AIR Type Training


Recommended Posts

Hi All,

 

It has recently come to my attention that I need to be "type" trained in my XAIR Ultralight.

 

I trained in a JABIRU and have just purchased an XAir UL 618.

 

I was under the impression that I could now go and fly a Nose Weel, 3 Axis , RA Aircraft, but I was apparently mistaken and need to be signed off in any different aircraft I fly? Is that correct? Sorry for my naive approach, but my aircraft rego does state "Type" as 3 Axis and my licence states "group" as 3 axis, hence my confusion on "type" training.

 

I don't know where I can fly an X air like mine to be signed off. Mine is not insured for training purposes. Any help would be much appreciated!

 

Also, 2 Stroke Endorsement.

 

Where can I do that in Victoria? I presume if someone can "type" train me in an XAir they can also endorse me for 2S?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Insure your aircraft for type training for yourself, it shouldn't be much more (if any) if it is already insured. Then ring around for an instructor who has flown that type of aircraft and ask if they will endorse you in your aircraft. Surely someone in Victoria can do this? As you say this will give you the two stroke endorsement. If you read the ops manual you will see that this is what is required. Hopefully the rewrite of the ops manual will make this process easier.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Insure your aircraft for type training for yourself, it shouldn't be much more (if any) if it is already insured. Then ring around for an instructor who has flown that type of aircraft and ask if they will endorse you in your aircraft. Surely someone in Victoria can do this? As you say this will give you the two stroke endorsement. If you read the ops manual you will see that this is what is required. Hopefully the rewrite of the ops manual will make this process easier.

Yea that might be the way to go. But also, why could I not do my type training in a Thruster? I know of a bloke near Benalla in VIC that trains in one and that would give me my 2S as well and TW.

The only real difference between thruster and XAir is the landing config. They're both LP aircraft and really I would have thought Type training is that would cover me for XAir since I already have NW endorsement.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a great response direct from the Ops Manager. Seems like type training will soon be a Recommendation Only.

 

Quoted Below

 

Hi James

 

Thanks for your email and coming to Ops for a response, rather than relying on possibly misleading information or rumour. As Ops wrote the manual, we provide the best response about interpreting it.

 

The intent behind type training was to assist pilots in recognising the differences in aircraft characteristics, which go beyond whether they are high wing, nose wheel and high or low performance, which it appears you understand.

 

I am in the process of revising the current Operations Manual Issue 7 to improve the definitions and intent of type training, which was never intended to be onerous or a burden to members, but was based on analysis of accidents, serious and fatal, and noting trends. These trends included a high number of pilots in exactly your situation, relatively low hour pilots having been trained in one type and purchasing a quite different type for personal flying. (I am basing this on your database records, which show you with 33.4 hours at September 2015 when you were issued with your Pilot Certificate, so I apologise if you have more hours than are currently shown).

 

Below are some excerpts from the proposed draft of Issue 7.1, which will shortly be made available to all members for comment and consultation. Hopefully these revisions will assist you to understand what we are intending when type training is mentioned. As you will see, the definition has been broadened to include differences in systems, like fuel, ancillary controls like flaps or dive brakes and more. Thesuitably experienced pilot is an important addition as it addresses what you appear to have done already, which is become familiar with the aircraft by flying with the previous owner (who certainly should know the aircraft well, although this is not a given).

 

Aeroplane Type

 

Aeroplanes of similar undercarriage configuration, design features, wing design and camber, systems including fuel system, ancillary control inputs such as flaps, trim, dive brakes, cowl flaps, differing avionics, cockpit ergonomics, critical operating speeds including flight envelope (e.g. high drag/low drag with consideration of inertia), stall speeds and normal/emergency handling characteristics as noted by the manufacturer or RAAus. (Note. This definition applies to assessment of similar aeroplane types for the purposes of type training).

 

Suitably Experienced Pilot

 

is a pilot who holds more than 100 hours PIC time in the type of aircraft operated or more than 400 hours experience in a wide variety of recreational aircraft.

 

The first definition is intended to assist members understand what aircraft type characteristics are relevant for pilot awareness for safe operations. Two classic examples of this are:

 

Tecnam types. While the Sierra P2002 has two fuel taps next to each other on the centre console of the aircraft between the pilot and passenger foot wells, which work in an obvious and exactly the same manner for on/off configuration, the Tecnam P92 series has the one fuel tap on each of the door pillars, and the two taps operate in direct opposition to each other for on/off configuration. This has led to at least three accidents we are aware of resulting in precautionary landings and damage to aircraft, as a direct result of the low time pilot (or even the Instructor unfamiliar with the type), turning the wrong tap off, and starving the engine of fuel as a result.

 

Or, the newly issued Pilot Certificate holder who has trained on aircraft X, gained their Pilot Certificate and then subsequently purchases aircraft Y for personal flight. A number of loss of control accidents on take-off or landing has resulted from this change of type in early hours of the newly issued Pilot Certificate holders flying career.

 

There are many more examples of this unfamiliarity with types being a factor in an accident or incident, hence the intention to have pilots familiarise themselves with aircraft of a different type.

 

The suitably experienced pilot definition is in recognition of a point that has been recognised, that a pilot with sufficient experience on a wide variety of types may be able to assist newer pilots to become familiar with a new type, providing this sort of information for other pilots, rather than requiring an Instructor.

 

The additional text below from the draft Section 2.01 paragraph 13 shows Ops acknowledgement that a sufficiently experienced Instructor or pilot may also self-certify for a new type, although we would expect this flight to occur prior to them carrying passengers in the new type. I have also underlined a critical change, that Type Training is recommendedrather than mandatory.

 

13. In order to operate a recreational aeroplane as pilot in command it is recommended a Pilot Certificate holder demonstrate competency on the Aeroplane Type. Aeroplane Type Training should be undertaken with a RAAus Examiner orsuitably experienced pilot on the respective aeroplane group and type.

 

The RAAus Examiner or suitably experienced pilot is to make an entry into the pilot’s logbook detailing confirmation of the successful assessment undertaken in accordance with Section 2.02 of this manual.

 

For the purposes of flight operations for a first of type or type of aircraft not previously operated before, a suitably experienced pilot, Instructor or higher Approval holder may self-assess their competence to operate the aeroplane on familiarisation with the Pilot Operating Handbook or Flight Manual for the aircraft type.

 

Note: Logbook entries showing a minimum of 2 hours pilot in command of an aeroplane type recorded prior to Issue 7 of this manual will be accepted as evidence of appropriate type training for that aeroplane.

 

James, I trust this suitably addresses your concerns, and as it will shortly become a recommendation, rather than the current requirement, and you stated in your email you believe you are sufficiently competent on the aircraft to fly it, ultimately, this is a decision pilots make every day we fly.

 

Regards,

 

Jill Bailey

 

National Operations Manager

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
I am in the process of revising the current Operations Manual Issue 7 to improve the definitions and intent of type training, which was never intended to be onerous or a burden to members, but was based on analysis of accidents, serious and fatal, and noting trends.

Is there an ETA on this?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's as it should be. Even though I don't always agree with what raa do I must say the more I see of this new direction the board is taking the more I like it. Well done raa. Now if we can fix the communication issues we have things will really be looking up.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...