SSCBD

SDQDI - yes its a problem - but what are RAA flying schools for - look at it this way - if a flying school only trains to a pilot cert and gets all the dual training money then tells the student to bugger off why go near RAA?

I expect as you would, that your RAA cert be recognised Australia wide - would you not? And to be able to hire a plane?(provided experience and ratings are current).

If you put yourself in this guys shoes would you expect RAA to get involved or not?

if he going to stay in the new work location - why does n't he do some dual flying with that flight school - that might reassure the flight school that 'new bloke' is competentits their aircraft so I guess they choose who fly's it ............... having said that they may be busy enough, the plane is fully utilised and they don't need new customers (........ a rare business that does n't need new business / customers)

The flying school stated to him - "they only want students for dual training" ( code for more money)

The story - A guy I have know for years, moved for work - he has done his training spent large amounts of money with the school and then flew every couple of weeks hiring the schools aircraft. As said has over 100 hours that was paid to the one flying school.

That said - he was refused from the new school, he had moved to the area due work.

The school stated that they only hired the aircraft to their own students, and that they only wanted students for training as its was more money to them.

This seems to me to be against the spirit and process of learning to fly RAA, for those who don't by an aircraft.

Should the RAA have some rule that if people pay membership to be a RAA pilot, that RAA schools should be forced to private hire to members or face being cancelled as a flying school.

Is this something RAA should look into and stop schools putting the dollar first - as credibility seems a bit shaky.

Anyone else any know of other schools that refuse private hire for pilots not trained by them?

P.S. Say a code of conduct by RAA flying schools?

Example - You have a RAA cert and say moved to another area and wanted to go for a fly.

Current RAA cert and say with a 100 hours PIC total, and are current on the same type, say flown 3 hours that month.

X country endorsed

Pax endorsed

Plane type has been flown before say over ten hours on that type.

Can a RAA flying school refuse to hire the aircraft to you - and yes you are prepared to do say a 20 min check ride anyway with the flying school.

With the glass cockpits on these RAA coffee machines these days, what happens IF the system fails or power shuts it down. Or the old steam ASI needle falls off. Just to cover the bases.

Can you be confident say in gusty weather (and say a 15kt crosswind to be sporty) to fly a circuit and land with NO reference to any instruments. (and no cheating by putting your thumb out the window - smile)

NOT suggesting anyone try this without an instructor whatsoever.

Had a fly with a RAA pilot doing a couple of touch and goes, and was kinda shocked at the way the airspeed was not maintained on base and finals. Got pretty slow.

Yes it was gusty but not that bad.

Just interested if others have set of times you look at ASI.

Hi Frank - You on the beach again!

Where are the crocs?

FYI - If a privately owned factory built aircraft eg, Sling - Tecnam - Factory Jab, etc - HAS always been, and is still maintained by a level two (even if the owner is a level two) - then that aircraft can be hired out by the owner.

It dose not have to be hired out via a flying school.

Now you just have to find a private owner that will let you fly it.

Yep sad fact;.

Sociology can be a fascinating subject to study at times; we often overrate ourselves, we often buy the opposite of what we preach etc.Being above average doesn't help you much when a catastrophic mechanical failure occurs, or when the accident is caused by negligence of a third party.

I have a friend who has been hit and rolled over in a marked police car in Melbourne's CBD - twice! On both occasions the approach and hit were behind the eyesight arc, so there was no warning before the hit.

 

In the 1980's, when we were tightening up safety in speedway in Victoria, four highly skilled speedway drivers were killed in accidents on the road, where their considerable skills, at legal speeds, were not able to make a difference. That sort of thing makes you ask some interesting questions about your own methods of staying safe of the roads.

Including the amount of people having these patches with morphine or fentanyl or tablets - The amount of elder drivers on these is alarming and still hold a drivers license.

I know two people that have crashed wearing these. Followed one I knew and they were all over the road like a drunk driver, clipping centre lines etc.

Why has this not been addressed. The numbers must be huge and dangerous.

Not look at the illegal drug drivers - get me off the road.

Yes, he has glorious jeans and a star buck.

Ummm ... as a gay pilot I’ve avoided wives and kids.Lived on 3 continents in 5 different countries, got pilots licences from 3, have designed and built two of my own designs, built 4 others in a factory and have 6 aircraft in the shed and container.

And I haven’t really tried that hard.

 

Apparently kids are expensive.

At a MTOW of 472.5kg & with an empty weight of 297.5kg that only leaves a usable load of 175kg.Now they say a range of 10 hours at 14 litres per hour which translates to 140 litre tanks. 140 litres weighs 100kg round numbers. So that leaves 75kg for pilot, passenger and baggage. Alot of guys wouldn't even be able to fill the tanks flying on their own & no baggage. 2 decent size blokes and you can't take any fuel.

Blackwing Edge

Kit-built aerobatic model with 600 kg (1,323 lb) gross weight for the LSA category, retractable landing gear and a maximum level TAS of 376 km/h (234 mph)

MTOW = 472.5 kgEmpty weight = 297.5 kg

If those numbers are right, it Makes it look like a nice single seater.

 

Sorry, Mick. You beat me to it!

 

With two decent size blokes, you'd already be over mtow, so it would make for a very safe (but boring) day on the ground

MTOW = 472.5 kgEmpty weight = 297.5 kg

If those numbers are right, it Makes it look like a nice single seater.

 

Sorry, Mick. You beat me to it!

 

With two decent size blokes, you'd already be over mtow, so it would make for a very safe (but boring) day on the ground

Or - other answer is - who cares, fly overweight - it only a bit of paper that says 472kg - don't tell lthe RAA - big smile!

Where is this Utopia you speak of?SSCBD, Risen telephoned, apparently you have stopped taking their calls?

SSCBD some days I would be happy to sell mine for a jerrycan of fuel:whistling:But truthfully at the minute she has been visiting her folks with our kids for over a week and I would actually give a jerrycan of fuel to have her back:whisper:

Does she read this forum, SD?

BLACKWING is today's most advanced Ultralight. The Next Gen airframe combines convenient side by side (121cm wide!) seating with high-end tandem performance. No more compromises needed. The full prepreg carbon airframe is the lightest and strongest in it's class. As a pilot-owner, the BLACKWING ULTRA RG will give you the opportunity to grow your flying skills. From slow to fast to WARP SPEED, you are in full control. The green arc up to 302km/h demonstrates how advanced the ULTRA is. With an ultimate loading of +12/-8G and a spin recovery tailplane design, BLACKWING offers a lot of safety. Engine options from 80HP to 150HP depending local microlight legislation. If you want to push your flying skills, BLACKWING is for you.

BW 600 RG Specifications

ROTAX912iS

VNE 400 km/h (216 kts)

CRUISE SPEED 75% 278 km/h (150 kts)

STALL SPEED 65 km/h (35 kts)

FUEL CONSUMPTION 14 l/h (range 10h)

TAKEOFF DISTANCE 150 m (15 m obstacle)

LANDING DINSTANCE 300 m (15 m obstacle)

CLIMB RATE 7.6 m/s (1500 ft/min)

CABIN WIDTH 1.21 m (47.5")

MAX TOW 450 – 472.5 kg

EMPTY WEIGHT 297.5 kg (incl. BRS)

WINGSPAN / AREA 8.4 m / 9.4 m2

ULTIMATE LOADFACTOR +12 / -7.5G

BW 600 RG

BLACKWING is today's most advanced Ultralight. The Next Gen airframe combines convenient side by side (121cm wide!) seating with high-end tandem performance. No more compromises needed. The full prepreg carbon airframe is the lightest and strongest in it's class. As a pilot-owner, the BLACKWING ULTRA RG will give you the opportunity to grow your flying skills. From slow to fast to WARP SPEED, you are in full control. The green arc up to 302km/h demonstrates how advanced the ULTRA is. With an ultimate loading of +12/-8G and a spin recovery tailplane design, BLACKWING offers a lot of safety. Engine options from 80HP to 150HP depending local microlight legislation. If you want to push your flying skills, BLACKWING is for you.

BW 600 RG

BLACKWING is today's most advanced Ultralight. The Next Gen airframe combines convenient side by side (121cm wide!) seating with high-end tandem performance. No more compromises needed. The full prepreg carbon airframe is the lightest and strongest in it's class. As a pilot-owner, the BLACKWING ULTRA RG will give you the opportunity to grow your flying skills. From slow to fast to WARP SPEED, you are in full control. The green arc up to 302km/h demonstrates how advanced the ULTRA is. With an ultimate loading of +12/-8G and a spin recovery tailplane design, BLACKWING offers a lot of safety. Engine options from 80HP to 150HP depending local microlight legislation. If you want to push your flying skills, BLACKWING is for you.

FFS - with a functioning engine and an obvious clear and usable grass airstrip, you don't do a normal approach, hold off as long as possible after the round-out, cut the engine at the last moment and grease it on? Vs. pulling the BRS and smacking down?This reminds me of the incident somewhere in NSW where a Ford Explorer ( IIRC) had its cruise control jam on a freeway, and the stupid driver had time to call up 000 and shout something on the lines of 'It's out of control, I can't stop it, help, help' instead of turning off the ignition...

 

Pulling the BRS in a situation that is easily controlled by a competent pilot, wrecks the aircraft because of stupidity. And as a result, all our insurance premiums go up, because Fwits throw away easily salvageable aircraft.

 

I don't consider this to be a 'critical' situation where competent piloting would have made the outcome anything more than 'interesting'. As a reason to install a BRS, it fails the 'pub test' of acknowledgement that it in ANY way was the saving factor of a serious incident. Competent pilots have landed heavies full of passengers with failed nosegear with little more than a trail of sparks.

However I see a place in the market for pilots with BRS installed.

For example.

1. Structural failure in flight.

2. For those game boys flying over tiger country (single engine)

3. Night VFR (engine failure)

4. Medical Problem - saves pax anyway if onboard

5. Possibly anyone doing constant flying over water sectors

and for those who go into cloud or push the limits in IMC.

Can anyone see any forward skid or sliding on the ground marks at all, as it looks its very flat spin with zero forward momentum? Weird to me.

You could do - a straight in approach - use radio calls on way in - lookout. If traffic is around (say more then 3 aircraft ) in circuit reconsider to overhead to join circuit

Damm good question Rob.

Before the AUF we had to fly GA or not at all. It was simple, do the training get the licence and fly, but of course you had the medical to get also. We did it and enjoyed it. Then along came AUF, so we could fly cheaper planes and not need a medical. Even build our own planes and do all the maintenance. That was great, much less red tape and cheaper. So good in fact that there are many hundred pilots who took that routeNow a group of pilots are not happy, they see GA pilots flying bigger, faster aircraft into controlled airspace and cry out "We want that, its not fair that GA can do so much more"

Personally I am happy to fly my ultralight, outside of controlled airspace with only one passenger allowed and I can't even do aerobatics.

 

Of course if I re register the ultralight as GA I can fly it much cheaper as I don't have to be a member of RAAus.

 

If you can't legally fly GA because you can't get a class 2 or a drivers licence medical, I really think you shouldn't be flying.

We did fly and build ultralights BEFORE the AUF came into existence. In fact many were flying out of paddocks and CASA then needed the AUF to be formed to control us.

Here endith the lesson.

And sorry I believe that all can be done within the RAA for all members just with different levels.

I would like to see more candid plan English, in depth reports on a monthly basis from our beloved RAA LEADERS OR, another name for it, monthly progress reports. Remember we pay for our leaders. And Not written in pollie speak.

Basic idea is.

I personally and logically see 3 to 4 categories to be used in the RAA.

1. Rag Wing OR machines under 550kg kg AND cruise under 80kts AND stay outside OCTA. LOW entry level RAA fees, with owner maintainer to be level one ish. And level 2 to inspect the aircraft every 12 months. Old auf exams and ground theory for these.

If you want more then.

2. Up to 600kg cruise above say 80 kts or 90 knots, kit or factory with Level two maintainer AND a real LAME check 12months. Pilots wanting control airspace clearance through major airports but not land, must do CTA endorsement. As same for towered secondary. Or keep away.

3. Anything that max cruises above 125kts and above and is usually RG as well, CTA endorsement (because that's why you bought the bloody Ferrari and you want to) and LAME airframe check every 12 months, pass a very high standard of flying ability.

4. 750 kg two seat with CTA endorsement (and say min 150 hours PIC before you can fly them by yourself ) GA ppl exams. No med 2 required just drivers license level 2 plus, AND a Lame inspection every 12 months.

5. Say 750kg RAA four seat category , full GA PPL required as you have more pax lives, and night vfr available . But that is my whish list!!. (like the sling four - jab 4 seat or the New ICP Ventura. No med 2.

Training standards to be lifted for number 2 and 3 and do some extra class times because they are mini GA.

The reason for a real LAME check is, the woefully shoddy stuff and repairs I have seen on some aircraft, including flying school aircraft with duct tape that hold covers on, as the screws had fallen out still being used, and people still training or hired out, and corrosion ? (Yes, Really).

Well get back up in the air and enjoy. Great place where you are. Almost ran out of runway in a twin many, many years ago at Port Macquarie.