turboplanner

32 minutes ago, Garfly said:

Fair enough, but if you're on mid-downwind, say, and your fear is about converging traffic on base (like the incident recounted by RFGuy a while back) then a more urgent exit might be called for: an early crosswind for an upwind rejoin, or a dive away or a climb?

We've had two near collisions in RA this year, and I spent a lot of hours coming up with circuit measurements types of aircraft, where the aircraft should be, how to navigate to the airfied, join the circuit, fit into the pattern with the other aircraft there, where to look etc. No one has made an effort to try a trial circuit and comment on it and the people who haven't been trained in PPL Nav should have.

If you're on mid-downwind as I have been on hundreds of occasions you will have been watching traffic in the circuit ahead of you and maybe one who went on an expedition and his base will be so long that you'll be turning final before he gets to base. At that point you're only looking at half the circuit (you've already made sure you've left a good margin in fron of the Baron that's coming behind you to allow for the jockying that's about to start. At mid downwind you pull on 1 stage of flap and 90 kts; your job now is to hang in the air behind the aircraft ahead of you until he clears the runway and you can land. If you're catching up, more flap, nose up, more power etc to slow down. Once on Final you watch every aircraft so you're actually seeing who's holding who up. On Final  you hang in there until you are sure you can touch down AFTER the aircraft in front of you vacates the circuit. I've landed with five aircraft in front of me on Final just be being patient; every second one had to ground. So the answer to your question is that in the case of congenstion you'll be going round, effectively starting a new circuit so you won't have to spear off somewhere. The case I've described is where there are normally 10 to 12 in the circuit and where the pilots are all experienced with the continuous loop of aircraft.

Where you're flying with two or three others in the circuit I accept it's hard to bring yourself up to speed, but you can still train yourself to follow the next one maintaining the same gap all the way down and be ready for the busy airport.

39 minutes ago, Garfly said:

I wonder if there's an agreed best-way to bug-out of a circuit if you suddenly sense you might collide with a nearby craft you've not got eyes on.  Obviously, it depends on what you do know but I suppose neither climbing nor descending nor turning - nor changing speed - is any guarantee that you won't actually cause the crash you're fearing.  Maybe breaking away in whatever direction you have best all-round sight of is the best one can do, no?

 

(Until universal ADSB becomes a thing.)

 

But even short of sensing imminent danger, what's the best way to gracefully bow out of a circuit when you become uncomfortable or situationally unaware?  What to do and what to say?

 

 

Just fly on the leg out to wherever........

A $450K Sling owner tossing it for a US FAR103? 

8 minutes ago, Blueadventures said:

I ask what the "Duty runway" is; That's a feedback matter for RAAus consideration.

The duty runway with a Towered/Manned strip is what they are calling, otherwise into wind, but as Skippy said there was virtually no wind. If the first one decides on a runway, nothing wrong with the followers all joining on. Usually an airfield is busy because of training, and a student in the circuit is probably setting the nil wind duty runway, but these were all arrivals.

14 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Did the Parkes thing yesterday. Arrived  about 11:30 ish. 

I started listening to YPKs at about 20 Nm out and was astonished at the confusion ref the ACTIVE  runway.

While its the PIC's prerogative to land on whichever runaway he/she deems appropriate, it is customary/considerate of others, to fit in with traffic already in the circuit.

Runway 22/04 seemed in favour, with pilots (I think there were 3-4 involved) declaring for both within seconds of each other.

It all worked out okay in the end, with all opting for 22.

Unsure of the legalities however I feel that the RAA's decision not to provide some sort of ground to air guidance to arriving aircraft lead to unnecessary confusion (reduced safety).

Was there nil wind, or did some of them prefer crooswind/downwind/anywind etc.?

10 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

What has happened to affordable aviating ???? - crazy purchase prices and thirsty engines.

Although this was a Recreational Aviation Australia event, the aircraft shown is a new  or near-new GA aircraft, so totally different pricing structure. The new low volume GA aircraft all have their quirks, such as specific engine management to prevent cooking the engine etc, ability to spiral out in the turn onto final, and high price. However, as we've seen in the past few days, when you hire GA aircraft as most in GA do, these expensive aircraft are at the top end, often have a hire cost profile based on long total investment, so the up front impact is not so visible, and right behind them in ever-diminishing hourly hire rates are the depreciated aircraft that are put on the hire line dropping down to some affordable hire rates below some RA hire rates.

I understand.

1 hour ago, jackc said:

Sorry people, we live in the WRONG country🤢 We can thank CASA for our snails pace acceptance of a Part 103 category in Australia.

Just look at what we are missing out on?

 

https://www.toprudderaircraft.com/

 

Time to dump the characters and get back to work.

.....foredeck [avref, Carrier] said Garry Twobottems, I'm gunna fly my Foxhit whether it's safe of not. How dangerous can it be compared to working on the wharves?

This was considered to be a good point but quite a large sector of the RBNF until Garry proved how silly it was by .....................................

5 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Fairly grim view of it's situation and prospects. Not like your normal outlook. .Funny that I did say "DON'T quote me with the Historic term". It LOOKS like ME saying something guarantees you will bag it . Have you put money into an airport to help preserve it.Turbs? I've also supported Pt Cook and I never have had money to spare. TALK is cheap.  Nev

What's all that attack about?

I just read this: "Ballarat Airfield has Historic  Classification. Should remain forever..  Nev" and thought I'd check the planning Register to see if it was being kept safe.  The result is alarming.

If you want me to buy it, sorry but no.

On 12/04/2024 at 1:00 PM, facthunter said:

Ballarat Airfield has Historic  Classification. Should remain forever..  Nev

It has a Heritage Overlay but bits of it have gone already; not a good look for tourism for a City the size and importance of Ballarat.

It looks as if everyone has been assuming everyone else is protecting it.

This list shows the Planning Applications on the airport since 2018 Planning Applications are not required for repairs to existing hangars such as fixing what's there now but are required for changes and proposed changes in Uses, (such as for boat sales etc)

If you go by the recent survey of City Airports which handle about the same aircraft movements per day as they did in the sixties, this list of major modifications to hangars is either showing a huge growth in aircraft use at Ballarat Airport or it's possible that most of the hangar applications spelt "Hanger" may not be for aircraft.  That still leaves a lot of unusual growth.

The list to me looks transformative - transforming from an Airport to an Industrial Use.  If a Use is Transformative, that's possibly a Ground for rejecting it by Council or in VCAT.

The newest application for a Solar Park, could be a concern because it could be a developed area where everyone has to use solar power in their factories or it could be a large array of Solar Panels in which case if you happen to make a forced landing you'll be shorting out a serious amount of current with sparks flying all over the place just s you start to crush fuel tanks etc.

What there wasn't time to do was find out the status of each Application (where objections were still open, whether anyone could appear at VCAT, whether the application had been approved, whether the Application had been built etc.)

However, if you want to fly at Ballarat I'd recommend getting out of the starting blocks.

Zoning:            SUZ     (Special Use Zone) SUZ6. SUZ14

                        HO       (Heritage Overlay) HO190

Abbreviated list of Applications (starting from 2018 to 2024)

·       Use and development for land as Solar Park.

·       Use of land for purpose of office, development of a new building, aircraft area and associated works.

·       Major promotion signage.

·       Use of land for a Transfer Station (Green Waste Interchange facility).

·       Development of an Industrial Building and dispensation of car parking requirements.

·       Development of a Store.

·       Development of aircraft hanger (sic).

·       Use and development of trade supplies, business identification sign, and reduction of car parking.

·       Development of Aircraft Hangar.

·       Development of an aircraft hanger (sic) and display of business signage.

·       Building & works to an existing airport hanger (sic).

·       Development of an aircraft hanger (sic) and display of business identification signage.

·       Development of an aircraft hanger (sic).

·       Use and development of an airport hanger (sic) used as a transport terminal.

·       Changes to colour scheme as per approved plans from Heritage Victoria.

·       Remove native vegetation for the extension of Liberator Drive as part of the Ballarat. West Employment Zone project.

·       Use and development of transport terminal and hangar.

47 minutes ago, facthunter said:

That's not surprising. The Previous SHELL recommended oil was done IN CONJUNCTION with Rotax. STATED as the ONLY one.. I'm surmising the OIL was difficult to meet the required performance in the more powerful engines coming Out. You can't do anything without spending money though. The earlier motors should be best with the oils that were suitable for them same as new oils don't suite older motors in old cars. It's not better just because it's priced higher.  It would be quite difficult to get an oilf or the Mini Cooper as an example were engine and gearbox oils are  common that's ideal for it because the additives that were used then are not compatible with the Catalytic converters required on road vehicles today. Nev

And that's because the design engineers of the manufacturer know what the issues are with THAT engine design whether deliberately in their design or by issues in the manufacturing process that can be solved by a special blend of oil, and that's why you refer to the manufacturer of the engine and use what the manufacturer specifies. As an example, if the manufacturer is specifying a specific oil or a specific oil change interval, and you decide to follow what someone you've never met says on social media, you could halve the life of your engine or worse.

1 minute ago, spacesailor said:

That ' fiasco ' of REGISTERED aircraft being removed from RaAus registration. BUT could be " grandfathered " to fly,

When never registered , ( only have to say " it has been flown previously " ).

Can I fly my 10-1103 , in Queensland . It was registered. 

I HAVE THOSE AUF PAPERS .

( and my weight is getting closer to flying maximum  weight ).

spacesailor

 

You had your opportunity and stood him up.

20 minutes ago, jackc said:

Word I get is that Qld is an unlicenced  pilots Mecca, and has been for years. Not enough resources to police it.  That costs money they won’t spend, besides IF someone crashes they probably don’t get to know, unless the pilot dies 🤢 What do they do?  Take his/her estate to Court?  RAA won’t investigate anything anyway.  It’s all under the radar unless someone gets caught red handed 

That's exactly what Brent was saying.

Yet it's on display here.

......soon the QUF membership blossomed from five to 8,000.

It was even rumoured (by a QUF official who remains anonymous because he is not allowed to speak on the record having been involved in one of the 35 attempted AUF coups, that bull (the model for parts of the Forest Gump movie) had beached his prawn trawler and headed for Queensland. Soon there were home made planes falling out of the sky from Cooktown [Cappy ref] to Eulo and the QUD breathed a sigh of relief; they were "free" as one new member from NSW said.

Epaulette, who had taught  many AUF members was outraged at the return to the dark ages and, throwing political caution to the winds, ripped into the hierarchy like Caesar at a BBQ.

"If they don't do their W&B they'll die!" Epaulette said using his favourite word which has driven thousands of students into compliance.

"I don't give a ............................................."

Dear Readers, 

Turbo was sorry to read the said news too, particularly since he had set up a sister company in Phuc Tay Province which mirrored that of Madam Truong's. His was the Phat Vanh Thin Holdings Group (PVTH) so he was in trouble too.

At the NatFly conference they'd had a private session where they discussed strategy to handle the situation.

Not many people know that when he was just 13 Turbo was thrown out on the street, and picked up by the  Painters & Dockers Union who used to feed him food scraps but promised him real money and a Valiant Charger for certain services. It might help to remind AUF members that compared to the Underbelly 13 executions, the Painters & Dockers through their young apprentice accounted for 42 with the old 12 gauge from over the office door.

Of course the Painters and Dockers had long been disbanded but they all carried, on a part of their bodies that rarely saw the light the initials RBNF (Retired But Not Forgotten) and Turbo had been called in many times for "services" .

Now they were about to regroup, head for Vietnam and return the favour.

On 11/04/2024 at 7:29 AM, Captain said:

..... his management of heavy issues of AUF politics, because he was convinced at an early age that these can adversely affect Weight and Balance, ...... as opposed to normal weight issues that just ......

Applied to people who drank VB and ate steak. One Emu Track has always said These things make you heavy and that makes your aeroplane (he was a stickler) heavy but politics stops it flying! 

And he was correct because the Queenslanders has just...

10 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Ye Gads! - It must be terrifying to be you. How do you get outside your front door, let alone drive/walk on the public thorougfare?

I was responsible for over 1,000 lives in a high risk sport.

10 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

My (not yours) reality is that we live in a litigious society (courtesy of the Yanks, whom we so slavishly follow).

Nothing to do with the Yanks, our Precedent is Scottish 1932. Read the cases.

10 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Seems ever few people, take responsibility for their actions, so look to blame someone else for every misstep, that they or others may make. 

Urbane scutlbut would have us belive, that we are all in danger of being sued for every sneeze, trip, decision that effects us or others. True or false, I choose to lead my life as a responsible adult, the decision I make are mine and for the most part are with due consideration to the law/regulation, moderated by a big dollop of common sense - I sleep well and my conscience is clear.

Not correct; the principles are easy to understand, which is why I posted the cases. 

10 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Contacting the manufacturers of your aircraft, to request a letter of authorisation, for a proposed modification/change (could be change of battery make or a replacement tyre, propeller, etc) is both normal, accepted and if granted, sufficient approval to carry out the mods - this has nothing to do with how its registered, or how it may be used.

What you base your responsibility on is up to you.

11 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Where do you get this stuff from?

PL Cases originally where being sued, and after I got smart and started to read cases, from the outcomes.

I already mentioned we have cases you can read on this site, and see for yourself that what you just posted is not really relative to your advice when it comes to PL.

If you read the cases you can see for yourself.

These days its your advice, your problem.

4 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

That is nonsense - a letter of approval, to install a modification,  from the factory, is a legitimate pathway - I have been there.

This applies in GA with reliable engines for ferry purposes.

RA is founded on the acceptance that engine failures will be a common occurrance.

We have a thread on Public Liability with real cases shown.

4 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Another thought  - Contact the factory & request the approval  to install a ferry tank.  Nothing radical about ferry tanks, they are an established method of extending the flight duration in all sorts of aircraft.

 

The approval may or may not be given  and at this speculative stage (no aircraft) I don't know what factory aircraft you may end up with,  however some production aircraft manufacturers' are more flexible than  others when it comes to modifying their design.

Public liability issue from that advice.

30 minutes ago, Freizeitpilot said:

From what I understand, you can carry up to 250L of fuel in compliant Jerry cans, but they should not be carried on the outside of a vehicle in an area that may be exposed to collision risk.

 

Are NSW regs unique ? What if the airfield was in another State ?

The Regulations are State Regulations (as agains a common Commonwealth Regulation) so you need to check the States you are travelling to/in.

That doesn't mean they won't be identical or almost identical, but you only have to do the checks once.

In GA Flying where cross country flying is part of flying there isn't an issue because (a) you have about 6 hours range on board and (b) for most trips there will be several suppiers at the airport en route with the correct fuel and with earth clamps.

RA was intended for local flying, and people have stretched the boundaries without really thinking it through, using all sorts of solutions including dangerous containers, and dangerous refuelling and transport procedures.

The baggage trolly above is a good solution for walking distance provided the container is designed for fuel.

When you read the regulations there are also possibilities for transporting it, just not in the boot of a car.

For example it's illegal to refuel the portable tanks that sit on the floor or a boat with an outboard motor. That's because as the nozzle is pouring the fuel in, vapour is being created and is leaking out of the tank filler; on a hot day you can see it; you can certainly smell it. It's heavier than air so it flows down over the side of the tank and settles on the floor of the boat. When the vapour reaches 1.3% of the surrounding atmosphere it becomes explosive.  That's why you read about several boat fires every year.

That's why taxis won't carry your jerry can in the boot of a car - there's no escape for the vapour.

A ute is a different story; the jerry can can be tied to cargo ties and utes have a slot at the tailgate to let heavier than air capours out. You only need to go with your jerry can to the local pub where on weekends there may be 20 utes lined up and hold up a ten dollar bill.

KR's on the money about the crossover point for DG, but do your State checking so you are safe rather than just pick up any BS on SM.

34 minutes ago, Freizeitpilot said:

We’re all perpetual students aren’t we ? But, no, in this hypothetical, it is not a training flight.

I also understand that a 7kg beach trolley weighs about 6.5kg too much. So I’m still interested what ideas the RF Illuminati can come up with to resolve the dilemma in the scenario.

Research the NSW regulations for transporting fuel; that will put you on the safe track.

21 minutes ago, Captain said:

...... didn't get around too much as she just stood on one leg and gazed off into the distance ........ when she wasn't falling over.

 

OET was the inspiration for the identifying monika of a well-known aviation expert from WA, who is a friend and a big help to all members of the Wreck Frying 4Rum and he often gives lectures, invited to or not, on how best to keep the sand out of your engine during an oil change.

 

These are worthwhile lectures for all 3 of the WA AUF membership, but are a yawn for everyone east of the WA/SA border, where the eastern states membership mainly just want to know about .......

 

PS - In Melbournistan, the big question, is what size umbrella is needed for an oil change, whereas in Tasmania the dominant topic over recent days has been "What is all this white stuff?

.........Why Cessna 172s are so expensive, what sun cream is the best for flying, are Boings any good to fly in,  where you can get a replacement plug for a hole in the instrument panel of a Cessna 208,

how many V Tail Bonanzas were built and what were their serial numbers and stuff.

All of this was hard going for the friend who was not the sharpest tool in the drawer on the big stuff; but on the other hand his Quicksilver was known around the world for its precision build, and colour scheme designed to scare off thieves and roos. He was so meticulous that he not only put rubber plugs in the exhaust pipes after shut down, but wheeled the QS over to the milking shed and gave it 10 minutes in a bay to suck out any dust or spiders before startup.

He was also meticulous in ...........................

........the bone pointed at her by the Kaiditcha man, CharlieTwoFeet, a Malinger Man.

Charlie had bought a new pair of Nike Feathersoles and was looking for an excuse to use them.

Sure enough Missy broke a Sacred law by showing the Womens Business to One Emu Track who had always been a snitch, and the job was done and no one talked of Missy again on pain of a similar fate.

OET .................