Bodie - I don't need convincing that it's real. Read my 2nd post above.
In this report, the ATSB has completely ignored the issues and illusions in turns at low level. Instead they've just given a vacuous paragraph saying that training is involved for low level flights and shouldn't otherwise be done and simply given an aeronautical outline of what a stall is under the "Additional Information" Chapter.
Now there is no 100% proof that any of the low levels illusions caught out this pilot. That can, sadly for obvious reasons, never be proven. But look at what he was doing and where he stalled. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck it should be at least discussed as a possible causal factor, not just swept under the carpet to ignore. And look at the temporary airspeed decrease during the turn from downwind to upwind. More evidence of being affected by the illusions in the turn.
Further to my FAA link above - have a good read of a similar accident from the Canadian TSB in nil wind. Look at the issues in 1.18.
https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-r...0/a15q0120.htm Compare and contrast the thoroughness of the report to the ATSB one.
Transport Canada devote 4 pages of its Flight Instructor Manual to the illusions of low level flight, including diagrams and lesson plans. It's the lesson before Prec Searches.
CASA's FIM, by contrast, has 1 paragraph on briefing the student on optical illusions in turns during a precautionary search and landing.
Finally, has anyone worked out how the additional risk in the accident was the overdue oil change?