turboplanner

TP - have sent in 2 sets of different photo's over the past 2 annual rego events and you could be right - my aeroplane does feel less prone to drop from the skyCome mid april if there is no rego renewal in the post - aeroplane definietly won't be able to drop from the sky

Yes, I can see the strategy now - already 400 safe pilots!

Well why not stand up then and help change it?

Making people take photos of their aircraft, while at the same time they are dropping out of the sky, photos or not does not look like Duty of Care to me.

Hopefully this thread will put paid to the cutting open the filter trick and providing the filings to prove it works.

Will he be a sort of Orange Boy?

...Or is he permanently locked on April 1 forever???????

Turbo, let's be clear, it's the combination of speed and angle of bank that does it. If you're flying fast enough, you could turn at 60 degrees safely. You would just need to have enough distance to slow down before landing.

Unfortunately Yenn came straight in with information about speeds.

Before we know it we'll be back to confusion with someone trotting out AOB/Speed/Weight charts again - which no pilot can carry in his head.

On speeds, while your rule of thumb speeds may work well on what you've flown, the manufacturer's preferences are found in the POH, and some flying schools/clubs may even add a slight margin to these.

The Angle of Bank does it Yenn, not the speed, that's why this subject is so important during training.

With more use of parallel runways where there is a separation problem, more emphasis on not going through the centreline might be expected. I think a 'square" circuit might be more likely to produce an overshoot than a racetrack one. The usual cause is a tailwind on base . Nev

Then I saw the post talking about round circuits ( which I'll assume was oval - I'd faint if they were circular).

I'm amazed that instructors haven't jumped in here to point out why we use rectangular circuits; apart from anything else it places each aircraft in the same part of the circuit, doing the same thing at the appropriate time, including radio calls.

If for some reason an instructor said it didn't matter, you can turn when you feel like it or do oval circuits, and you find that easy, as against learning how to do a 30 degree turn safely and correctly time after time, in various winds, then one day you are going to breeze into a major circuit with a lot of traffic and you are going to charge straight into the side of a 172 which was ahead of you in the circuit.

One of the benefits of a rectangular circuit, having placed your aircraft correctly, is that you have separate and important jobs to do on each leg (when the aircraft will be in different trim configurations on each of those legs)

The Military may have reasons for oval circuits but we aren't flying combat aircraft.

This thread was instigated by someone falling out of the sky with a turn angle of 60 degrees according to Compulsion, who I believe.

My point is that if you learn to turn at 15 degrees on to crosswind and 30 degrees on the other turns, you have a very safe margin if you are hit by a gust, lose your concentration, or mistakenly tighten up because of an overshoot. This was brought home to me even more today when I read about a Baron (twin) pilot who only makes straight in landings because he was scared of all the talk amongst his GA mates about falling out of a turn.

Yes, you need to be on the mark in a turn and not lose your concentration, which is a good reason not to get caught up in the last of your downwind checks, or your base descent setup, which you would be doing in an oval turn.

One of the reasons this thread has drifted into people trying to get around safe circuit procedure, I think, is the regular posts we read about someone going solo in ten hours, or even five, and it's these shooting stars who never get the instructor supervision on maintaining your circuit control in an adverse wind, adjusting your base leg to reach the correct 500 foot point etc. I certainly have difficulty doing this when I haven't been flying for a while, and I'm sure others do too, but at least I've been trained in the procedures to get the aircraft on a correct final under reasonably adverse conditions.

The crucial part of this thread is to concentrate on turning at the safest angle of bank, no matter how much you've screwed up the circuit - better to be yelled at by other aircraft than sitting with the nose pointed at the ground wondering was it rudder or aileron that gets you out of a spin.

I suppose it is April Fools Day Col

Don't tell me, the photos were all done in a studio and no one went to Natfly this year.

Well Captain, you've had a deep effect, not sure how deep, but deep......

I have heard more than one journalist say "never let the facts get in the way of a good story."

And a bit of scandal ............ slartibartsimpson is here riding a "Follow-me" Postie bike & he looks exactly like Marlon Brando

I've seen Slarti and he looks more like a Postie bike.

So Russ the media which recently publicised the plight of a mother whose daughter had contracted terminal cancer and mobilised a huge number of people who paid off and modified her house so her daughter could have a peaceful end - would they be leeches, and ego driven morons?

Think you're right Dazza.

At 2.5 hrs you'd be happy just to touch down on the strip. A smart tradie would talk to his insyructor or get another instructor rather than take advice from us space shuttle pilots.

The aircraft is not mine but I have been the care and maintenance man since it was grounded and looking after a 'dead' aircraft has issues for me and the owner.The aircraft is being 're-registered' as it does tick all the boxes as required..... the registration process does not ask for a copy of the approved C of A.

To the best of my knowledge there has been no contact from the tech Manager and it would be sort of another legal minefield to deny registration even though it cannot legally fly.

The unfortunate, recent crash in Lismore, has several reports saying that "Because the plane was not an ultra-light or a fixed wing aircraft, no investigation will be conducted by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau."Last time I checked, RV-12's were fixed wings!

 

Tom

Think of a journalist as a PC - he/she is a processor, and it's garbage in - garbage out.

A journalist deal with thousands of different walks of life, and cannot be expected to be an expert in any one - for instance what is your Country's foreign policy strategy in Nigeria - lt's see you write a 150 word story and get it right, oh and by the way the deadline for the story is 45 minutes.

That's the background, so whoever the journalist interviews provides the backbone to the story, and you've read enough posts here to know that some terrible porkies come from people here who are right in the middle of the recreational aviation business and should know better - recent examples being turning an aircraft with the rudder (apparently from a sailor), and using speed to prevent stalling.

I've been interviewed hundreds of times and quoted accurately about 98% of the time, but I've always tried to keep my words very simple, and usually gone over the same words two or three times to make sure the journalist understood. Where I've taken a shortcut and just made it conversational, the story is usually wrong - which I accept is my fault.

Some of the criticism of journalists on this site has been appalingly uninformed.

This has drifted into theoreticals rather than what has been happening.

We've heard very little of people colliding with trees and rocks in so-called "tiger" country.

What we have seen is 8 or so spear in verically after losing control of their aircraft above 500 feet - spearing in and killing themselves in eminently landable paddocks.

If you took those fatalities out of the equation the record would look much better.

So rather than come up with a theory on something which has not been happening it would be better to get to the heart of why people are losing control of flyable aircraft.

And the part I forgot which confirms Facthunter's generational comment, was that not only were these pilots mostly ex RAAF, and knew the reasons behind precise and consistent calls, but so were the ATC staff, and while they lasted up until the seventies, and their students knew the reasons having been forcefully trained, that era has died out now, and that knowledge is lost.

It only took a hundred years for the Egyptians to lose the skill of building pyramids which lasted thousands of years, and start building structures which collapsed into heaps of rubble, and this is a little bit the same. We don't know we don't know why.

I think your "generational" comment is the foundation FH.

By the end of WW2 a huge number of pilots had been produced who knew the lifesaving benefit of keeping radio traffic free for that quick "Bandit at 12" which could save their lives, and as they drifted into post war aviation they created a formal and very safe culture, with the new phonetic codes we used today, containing consonants which came though, even with marginal radios.

Radio procedures were strict too with the two key circuit calls "ABC Base for full stop" and "ABC" final on a poor quality radio still coming across as *** * ** vs *** **

There seems to be an assumption (incorrect) these days that radios never fail and transmissions are always clear, and the couldn't care less procedures add considerably to work load and risk.

This is an area overdue for a clean up by CASA, which would be cost neutral and painless to pilots

For the RPT guys - to a private pilot transmitting that you are at 2000 12 miles dme on the 123 radial is not safe because the poor guy doesn't have radials embedded in his subconscious yet and it's more likely to panic him and have him in your lap.

Very strange wording- I send a confidential report in that Ahlot is revving the ring out of the Rotax at 50 feet over houses, and conducting barrel rolls through the clothes lines, and ATSB take no action to prevent Ahlot doing it tomorrow, just issues a general warning to take your washing in if a low flying aircraft is seen nearby?????

Probably best to stick to your yachts rather that trolling Sunfish.

To suggest that RAA attracts the shallow end of the gene pool is offensive, but given that you wrote it people shouldn't take offense.

Doesn't take long does it, you'd think no one was losing their lives.

(Thread edited by moderator. Off topic material removed.....)

It's the 5+ miles a minute that's the hard part. If you are in the slow aircraft, unless you know exactly where you are spatially, and youi know exactly where to look for the incoming 5 miles per minute missile, it's Mayor of Hiroshima territory for a while.