RAA and IFR sharing Class G

[PlankBlender]

By popular demand in another thread.. enjoy the lively discussion ;)


On that charity tour around the country I did in May, we had a couple of well-meaning farmers with their Jabiru's as part of the contingent, and their antics made me soil my pants on more than one occasion :eek:

Now I'm not having a go at the chaps in question, they are bloody nice, very generous and all that, and the experiences I am sharing here are more than anything a reflection of their standards of training, which we should all know about to be able to factor them into our planning :suspect:

Firstly, the radio calls were what you would expect of a five hour PPL student, if that. I don't think I'd exaggerate if I said they probably simply wouldn't make any calls whatsoever going in and out of the rural strips they normally use. I guess most of the time they don't really need to as they're by themselves in the great outback, but they really couldn't make a call to save their lives, literally :sad:
By the end of the tour, I am happy to report, they could actually navigate controlled airspace with some degree of confidence, so we've saved at least a few souls :ok:

More worringly, they didn't have the foggiest clue about even the simplest circuit procedures, let alone other things every pilot should know: We had guys barreling down the wrong direction runway with traffic coming down final the other end, taxiing down cross-runways thinking they were taxiways after they made calls for the runway they didn't land on, taxiing down the active runway making calls for a backtrack on the inactive one, they'd be going round the circuit the wrong way, and these are just a few instances where I made a sharp turn and got the hell outta there..

Now, we'll probably be pushing this thread majorly off topic, but I would seriously question the training and testing standards of the RAA in some cases. According to their own publications, this is a known problem they're trying to address, but I am questioning why, in this over-regulated country of ours, these guys are sharing the majority of airfields with IFR traffic, often even RPT?! :=

Rant over :{

[Flying Binghi]

Ah, yes...comfy chair, six pack of beer... :cool:

[sprocket check]

So what's the REAL reason for this post Plank Blender?

sc

[PlankBlender]

SC, check out the IFR transponder code thread, and you'll see why..

[Flying Binghi]

check out the IFR transponder code thread, and you'll see why..

Yes, you'll get a more ...'compleate' understanding sprocket check ;)

[Jabawocky]

Plankie mate

Gotta agree with you here.

There is a huge....massive level of of training and profficiency difference in the RAA ranks. Yes its in GA also, but the difference is far greater than most would like to believe.

I am based out of YCAB and we have a GA IFR school and GA PPL/CPL school that are both tops, we also have two excellent RAA schools run by CPL and ex airline folk. They teach not to the RAA minimums and in fact could teach to PPL and CPL standards in RAA clobber if you wanted to. They never let a student out at the mins, no matter who the student is.

Now as for the many RAA folk who fly around these parts about 10-20% of them are full time QF/VB/JQ drivers during the week. Another 20-30% are pretty good operators, and the balance vary from good to dangerous with the last 30% being in the poor to dangerous. I am not just covering YCAB here but say SE Qld.

My observations at some events around the place suggests this is not just SEQ but the rest of the country.

My list of areas covers the following....... fuel management, radio, CTAF procedures, navigating around CTA, having a transponder, appropriate freq, what is an ERC:rolleyes:, charts & ERSA younger than 2004... not likely:ugh:, staying below 5000' especially without being on the correct freq and transponder equipped, some general flying skills, and basically grab a Bob Tait book and pick a topic!

Now I know we all stuff a few things from time to time but there is a definate problem here.

I know for a fact that some folk will visit a certain flying instructor for a BFR and by virtue of the fact you arrive he signs you out. These folk are not getting any remdial training. Now I do believe if you do nothing you are just as bad, so those I know around the place I urge and I have my RPT mates help urge better standards from these folk, however there are hundreds more.

I am not an instructor and I am far from being as experienced as many but I do try to emulate the standards I see from FTDK, Chimbu Chuck and a few other RPT mates, and I try to encourage others to do the same, but this can not be said to be happening elsewhere because the problems Plankie speaks of is just the tip of the ice berg.

OK flame suit on..... and FB, would you pass me a beer or three also!:ok:

VH - Jaba:ok:

[VH-XXX]

Man, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones as they say. It's just as bad in GA my friend! There will always be people out there with no idea. Luckily you had God on your side otherwise you would have been in trouble.


Interesting call from the weekend from Jump Aircraft:

"Cessna overflying airfield you have just transited an active drop zone, you have parachutes above AND below you"

[Capt Wally]

'XXX' where they IFR rated jumpers though?:E

Now this thread ought to be a real grunge match & entertaining:ok:


CW

[QSK?]

I don't wish to start a thread war between GA and RAA as I tend to agree with VH that there are good and bad pilots in both camps, despite the perceived higher standard of training in GA. However, as Jaba has alluded to, there are RAA guys who are flagrantly flouting the rules, which has caused me considerable concern as an IFR pilot.

Recently I flew a twin (IFR) around Eastern Oz and came across a group of 5 RAA-registered Jabiru pilots who were on the way to WA. As turbulence on this particular day was quite bumpy on occasions, I happened to remark to this Jabiru group that it must be quite fatiguing to be flying a Jabiru in this turbulence when restricted to no more than 5000ft. To my astonishment, this group just laughed and said that they had done most of their flying to date at between A070 and A100 (including IFR levels) and to cap it off only 1 of the aircraft was equipped with a radio!

As politely as I could myself and another pilot friend tried to convince these guys that what they were doing was not in their own safety interest nor was it positively contributing to the safety of IFR operations. Basically, these guys didn't give a "&*it" which is what I found most annoying. Unfortunately, as I didn't have the regos of the aircraft involved, I was unable to take it further.

[Flying Binghi]

I don't wish to start a thread war between GA and RAA as I tend to agree with VH that there are good and bad pilots in both camps, despite the perceived higher standard of training in GA. However, as Jaba has alluded to, there are RAA guys who are flagrantly flouting the rules, which has caused me considerable concern as an IFR pilot.

Recently I flew a twin (IFR) around Eastern Oz and came across a group of 5 RAA-registered Jabiru pilots who were on the way to WA. As turbulence on this particular day was quite bumpy on occasions, I happened to remark to this Jabiru group that it must be quite fatiguing to be flying a Jabiru in this turbulence when restricted to no more than 5000ft. To my astonishment, this group just laughed and said that they had done most of their flying to date at between A070 and A100 (including IFR levels) and to cap it off only 1 of the aircraft was equipped with a radio!

As politely as I could myself and another pilot friend tried to convince these guys that what they were doing was not in their own safety interest nor was it positively contributing to the safety of IFR operations. Basically, these guys didn't give a "&*it" which is what I found most annoying. Unfortunately, as I didn't have the regos of the aircraft involved, I was unable to take it further.

Wow!... QSK?, those "5 RAA-registered Jabiru pilots" must have had sore arms .....Jabawocky was'nt one of them, eh ;)

[QSK?]

Flying Binghi:

I can see clarification is required here: 5 pilots flying in a group of 5 Jabiru aircraft; one of which was radio equipped.

Is that better?

Cheers!

[Jabawocky]

Gooday QSK

I am surprised at your claim about only one with a radio. Perhaps you meant Transponder.

Every Jabiru be it factory or kit built is supplied with a radio. Do not know of any exceptions. I do know of folk ordering less radio so they could install a different make.

As for the rules and RAA, they can operate above 5000 if radio equipped and if need be i.e safe height above terrain and possibly turbulence but thats always been a mystery to me.

Like I have said already, quite a large number are RPT or retired RPT guys, and I do mean a lot, however there is the same number and more that are just so far at the other end of the spectrum it is a disgrace.

FB, are you trying to get a reaction out of me? You will have to try harder, a lot harder! :=

J:ok:

[VH-XXX]

It won't matter soon because the 5,000ft restriction is about to be lifted, prior to part 103 being implemented. That AND entry into CTA will be available for RA pilots. With oxygen expect to see someone in their Jab over 15k+ ft!

[Flying Binghi]

Flying Binghi:

I can see clarification is required here: 5 pilots flying in a group of 5 Jabiru aircraft; one of which was radio equipped.

Is that better?

Cheers!

Thanks for the clarification QSK?


FB, are you trying to get a reaction out of me? You will have to try harder, a lot harder! :=


Jaba, I was making a meal of it I guess. Though its much what I've got off you :E

[povopilot]

Ah this will be a good show hopefully. This topic bothers me particularly as i often fly in the vicinity of Barwon Heads and i have just made a post on the token Barwon Heads thread about sloppy R/T and dangerous driving within CTAF's - both in the air and on the ground.

I am unsure if there is a solution for this and i am merely having a rant. I am only VFR and i do feel for IFR operators especially the RPT one's that have to operate in the vicinity of these muppets.

Here is a copy of my rant from last night - not that anyone probably cares but i just want to get it out of my system:

"It sure was a hive of activity on sunday, but more aircraft flying out of Barwon Heads means more pathetic R/T - and boy was it pathetic on sunday.

"Ahhhh all stations ah Barwon Heads, Alpha Bravo Charlie 5 miles ah west runway 35".

What the frig does this mean? Care to disclose a/c type, altitude and intentions?, Didn't the all stations call at a CTAF go out with MBZ's and Flightwatch?

It is great that this place can now prosper as an airfield, but someone needs to go down there and educate those that use the aerodrome and alert them to the fact that there are 2 CTAF's and a CTAF(R) / CTR in very close proximity, not to mention weekend warriors from MB/EN going down the coast.

I was up with a mate on sunday that has no idea about aviation at all and even he made a comment like "What the f**k are these guys trying to say?".

I am sure that they have lots of students and weekend warriors flying out of Barwon Heads but i think a CASA would have a bit to say if they were to listen in on a days flying out there."


povopilot. - Making a nomination for airfield with the worst R/T in oz.

P.s i realize that RAA are not all to blame as anyone who flies into Moorabbin will agree, but lining up on 17 at Barwon Heads and having a guy in something resembling a ride-on mower with rotor blades enter 35 and proceed to take off really makes you not want to be around radio-less RAA nutters.

[Jabawocky]

This is getting more interesting.

FB where are those beers you were getting? By the way I bet they (non equipped RAA's) do not show up on your Avidyne display do they?

J:cool:

[CitationJet]

Yes XXX, I was also on 124.2 and heard that exchange about the drop zone. By the sound of the offending pilot, he didn't have a clue what was going on.

For some reason, I can't help thinking he was on a dual nav too.

[Flying Binghi]

This is getting more interesting.

FB where are those beers you were getting? By the way I bet they (non equipped RAA's) do not show up on your Avidyne display do they?


Beers are for nights after the days work is done.

No need to 'electronicly' see VFR traffic. I look out the window - unlike some pilots in this country :hmm:

I do note though, that in the U.S. on a clear day, there was a mid-air collision of two aircraft, and one had a TAS and had identified the opposeing traffic in time to aviod. (the pilot lived) Unforetunatly, the other aircraft (fatal) had turned to a different heading just before impact. It appears to me that instead of looking at a screen and attempting to work out what to do next - somebody should have looked out the window.

If both aircraft had a TAS - would the accident have happened ? maybe we would have had a game of dodgems anyway. Sort of what you get when you walk down the footpath. Remember there is rarely a direct head-on situation in low level flight. i.e. the circuit area.

Jabawocky, I havnt seen the phone number yet ?

[QSK?]

Hi Jaba:I am surprised at your claim about only one with a radio. Perhaps you meant Transponder.Thanks for that, mate. Obviously, it looks as if I got that part wrong.

I wasn't aware, though, that RAA registered aircraft were allowed to operate above A050 under normal circumstances. For some reason, I thought RAA ops were restricted to below A050 and OCTA.

Learn something new every day.

[Flying Binghi]

...i have just made a post on the token Barwon Heads...

If this is going to turn into another Bar-one brawl, I'm out off this thread.

[Jabawocky]

I wasn't aware, though, that RAA registered aircraft were allowed to operate above A050 under normal circumstances. For some reason, I thought RAA ops were restricted to below A050 and OCTA.

Learn something new every day.

QSK

You are correct, the limit is 5000' however if radio equipped and due rising ground or if the PIC requires to for safety reasons. bit of a cop out there but basically they should be below 5000.

I can only assume this was to keep non pressurised IFR above and so forth..... not sure why the rule came in but I bet somebody here will know.

J:ok:

[VH-XXX]

I say again, this is only going to remain a limit for a short time. Approval is pending for operations any time above 5,000ft, so get use to it!

[Howard Hughes]

This is why I point towards the flight levels, close my eyes, block my ears and mumble la-la-la-la-la-la...;)

[povopilot]

Ahh Flying Binghi you must be a newspaper editor by trade, nothing like taking someone's quote, chopping it up and re-printing it completely out of context to make someone appear as if they are saying something that they actually are not.

Those Barwon Heads people have their own thread ( or 10 threads ) and i am content to let them keep it to themselves - unless i feel that safety is somehow compromised then i will let them know about it. I just felt that the one post i had made on their thread related slightly to the topic at hand and that i might share it here.

I think a lot of the Professional Pilots around here are in need of a funny bone transplant.

Jaba, curious as to which side of the fence you sit on?

Can you imagine a weekend warrior in a Jab requesting an airways clearance on a busy morning in Melbourne?

"Aaaahh All stations Melbourne ah Radar Jabiru 12345 is at ah overhead Point Cook at about one thousand, four hundred and sixty ah five feet tracking for XXX request clearance, oh yeah on climb ah four thousand. Oh and Robbo is behind me in a Gazelle and he wants to do the same ah thing ah all stations Melbourne Approach - i mean ah Melbourne Radar"

povopilot.

[Flying Binghi]

Ahh Flying Binghi you must be a newspaper editor by trade

povopilot, You obviously hav'nt read much of my barely literate writing :)

The comments re the Bar-one, bar room brawls were just me wanting to stay away from the subject of the fiasco that happened there. Sounds like it all worked out for the better :ok:

[Jabawocky]

Gooday HH

How's Jnr HH doing?

So you think I should send the Lycoming out for an upgrade to a TSIO540 and put some O2 in the RV10? Should have been TIO540)

Now that would stir up the Dr:cool:

J:ok:

[Deaf]

"Aaaahh All stations Melbourne ah Radar Jabiru 12345 is at ah overhead Point Cook at about one thousand, four hundred and sixty ah five feet tracking for XXX request clearance, oh yeah on climb ah four thousand. Oh and Robbo is behind me in a Gazelle and he wants to do the same ah thing ah all stations Melbourne Approach - i mean ah Melbourne Radar"

Probably a lot more understandable than the commercial students who have passed the language test or am I hearing static all the time.

[VH-XXX]

You are hearing static all the time because you are deaf.


Interesting comment regarding the Gazelle following. Quite often they do all fly around together as groups and it does make radio work and clearances complicated. If GA wasn't so expensive, the same would be happening there. It's called recreational flying!

Jaba sits on both sides of the fence as he is a former recreational aviator!

[Howard Hughes]

Hi Jaba, or is that ReVe now?

Jnr HH is good, what is a TSIO540? Is that a car engine or something...;)

[Jabawocky]

Deaf :D:D:D

I hope you were not serious!:ooh:

Povopilot
Which side of the fence do I sit on....? Well its definately GA. I do try my best to be as accurate and professional in my flying activities and if Forkie or Chuck or a couple of others on here who have flown with me wish to say otherwise I am all ears and willing to learn.

I do however have a very strong feeling that my comments posted last night are quite accurate and well founded. Some of the offenders are people I know and I try to encourage to higher standards. Some are from stories told and some observed so really it would not matter which side of the fence I sit. Facts are Facts.

A local area RAA instructor who is a well known croppie also has some similar and harsh views also. And he instructs for RAA and owns a flight school. Another one who like the two at YCAB does not let students loose with the bare mins.

I do have an RAA license for times when I have to fly a RAA registered machine, and I do believe they have a place in the industry, provided certain standards are maintained. I also believe that the R in RAA is meant to be recreational and thus should stay that way and look after its members at the grass roots level. All I see today is RAA folk wanting bigger and faster and CSU and Retract and CTA and as if it is a god given right almost. Why not do the GA thing and do it properly and leave the RAA to do what it does best.

I think a lot of the trouble is some old fella's who grew up on lawn mower powered craft not allowed nor capable of flight above 300' and about 5 miles still in the syetem with a 2 seat Jabby that does 100 knots and ranges up to 1000NM. they have never done radio and Navigation/Cross country endorsements and have not see a rule book in 20 years let alone NAS changes. A current ERSA is one printed in the last 5 years at best and as for charts and planning..............:ugh:.

And there are worse..... If someone from the RAA would want to pursue this in a constructive and non threatening manner I would gladly meet with them and guide them through the camo that some hide behind.

If the CTA endo gets through, it might be good, guys like the ATPL holders etc will get it automatically I expect, but the others may actually have to do some real current flight training again and not a dodgy BFR. Others I fear will just say .... who will ever know and be exactly like the quoted example above from povopilot. And do not laugh....... it will happen!

J:hmm:

[Jabawocky]

Jnr HH is good, what is a TSIO540? Is that a car engine or something...http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/wink2.gif

:D:D:D Well spotted.......actually its the new secretly developed TSO146 lycoming that has a built in GPS/ADSB/NAV/Comm..........

Ok so I was having a mental issue, too many acronyms for this simple boy!;) TSO, GNS, WAAS, NAV, ADF, DME, ADSB, IO.......pick a letter,

Would a TIO actually sound better:ok:.

J:ouch:

[Howard Hughes]

I think you were actually right the first time...:E

[Jabawocky]

Lycoming is a TIO as far as I knew, I did actually look at it on their website. I think the TSIO is a TCM.

Like I said........ too many letters and acro's for my simple mind.

Here ya go! http://www.lycoming.textron.com/engines/series/pdfs/540ci%20Engine%20Insert.pdf

J:ok:

[Horatio Leafblower]

I am a former RAAus CFI. Despite its shortcomings, I like the RAAus system... to a point.

That point will be passed when the system's shortcomings are overlooked for political expediency, and it will be passed very soon if VH-XXX's claims are correct.

I will probably get shot for this, but what the heck.

RAAus has a conflict of interest:
RAAus are in a position of needing to build membership in order to justify and increase their political muscle. The wider they can cast the net (high performance, increased TOW, CTA access, etc) the more members they can get and the wider they can cast the net, etc.

Safety regulation sparks calls of "curtailed freedoms" and "lost rights"... and RAAus cannot afford to lose members.

Safety staff (of 3) ruled by a political board:
RAAus is NOT set up to police these operations and a good look over the Rec Flying Forums will show you that strong action by the Ops Manager to pull pilot Certificates or School approvals could have political repercussions for the brave soul performing that function.

Unqualified Staff?
CASA specify strict experience requirements for people in VH- supervisory roles, and the greater your responsibility (eg: C&T or CFI of a ME IFR Instructor school) the higher the requirement and the tougher the grilling.

RAAus has one Operations Manager with a couple of helpers overseeing 5,000 pilots and well over 100 flying schools spread all over Australia. It is, arguably, the biggest "operator" in Australia and being responsible for some of those guys would be like herding cats.

What are the minimum qualifications for Ops Manager? Where is it published? What level of diligence does CASA apply to the appointment of the Ops Manager?
(Note: I am not attacking the current Ops Manager or his predecessors)

No effective oversight by the REAL regulator:
CASA wash their hands of RAAus operations and refer all matters back to RAAus. As a RAAus CFI I made several complaints to CASA which were not acted on (and could not be acted on). CASA need to remember that RAAus are a self-ADMINISTRATION body, not a self-regulating body. RAAus also need to remember this.

NO safety management system
...or if there is one, certainly no enforcement or policing that it is implemented. Accidents and near-misses are (certainly in my neighbourhood) covered up whenever possible and so there is a lack of information on the number and type of accidents and incidents. From a "safety system" point of view, this is the opposite to the culture that exisits (to varying degrees, I admit :rolleyes:) in VH aviation.

What are the REAL safety figures in RAAus Ops?

Ponder this:
The Australian aviation regulatory system is designed to ICAO standards. Part of that standard is ensuring that all participants in the system are fit (ie: have aviation medical certification) and are trained to a standard (ie: have a LICENCE), that the aircraft are designed maintained to a standard, and are subject to a system of active safety management.

Until now these UNLICENCED pilots have enjoyed a range of freedoms, subject to limitations. In relation to airspace, these limitations have included

not above 5000' AMSL unless forced by terrain (no other reason); and
Not in CTA unless licenced, medically certified, and in a certified aircraft design.


In removing these limitations what is CASA doing the layers of safety and redundancy we have built around the "regulated" aviation system in Australia? :suspect: :ugh:

I urge all of you to lodge incident reports when you observe these incidents. We all see them. When RAAus allows CTA on a rec pilot certificate there will be an increase in the number and seriousness of these incidents too.

RAAus responsible for C152s, anyone? Why don't we just up it to 4 seats?

[Jabawocky]

HR

Well said.:D Much more eloquently than my efforts I admit.:ok:

J:ok:

[Flying Binghi]

WOT... no ADS-B sales speil !!!.....I think I will put the six pack back into the fridge :(

[Jabawocky]

Sorry FB

I dont sell them, mind you with what I think is coming soon I wish I did:ooh:.

Have a beer on me! http://img2.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/party/party0016.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net/free-angel-smileys.php)

J:ok:

[Capt Wally]

If we can expect to see flying ''fiberglass'' in the flight levels they had better do some testing of fiberglass impacting large airframed flying metal machines, much like catapulting a frozen chook into the windscreen of an airliner!:E I used to feel fairly safe above 10000' but am begining to get sweaty palms thinking about nice sunny W/E's with all the RAA warriors out & about heading into my comfort zone:)

It's illegal to fly an R/C plane within 4 k's of a licenced airfield,if that where the case of the RAA contraptions then I'd feel a lot safer:E


CW:ok:

[Koizi]

This is my first "negative" post, so go easy on me, otherwise I may not do it again.

I have to agree with the general feel of this thread that there are some real skills/attitude issues in RaAus that are a concern.

I spent a few years working at a small airfield (south-east Melb) where both an RAA and GA school operated. During my time there the RAA school had two very different CFI's.

During the reign of the first, minimum hour targets were always acheived and between him and his deputy doolittle there was a deliberate promotion of anti-GA sentiment which extended to the odd dangerous in-flight discruption of GA charter flights (including a deliberate reduction of speed on base/final to force a PA31 to go-around. During his reign there was always incidents occuring: Transiting East Sale with a radio and chosing not to use it - the explanation given was "I didin't realise I needed a clearance", poeple getting lost, busting CTA, running low on fuel etc. Now I know this occurs in GA as well, but the rate of occurances was significantly higher.

I too also noticed when trying to assist some of the students/licence holders that they had never seen/been shown ERCs, PCA or NAIPS (and didn't have ERSAs). I remeber one student asking me how do get your frequencies once you leave the coverage of the VNC!!! :eek:

Anyway, once the new CFI came along, things did change quite a bit. He taught to high standards and was respectfull in sharing the airspace etc.
So I am not saying this is not possible.

I do also beleive from my time there that part of the problem can be the students as well. The demographics of RAA (at least at that airport) tended to be people who were looking to fly, but at the cheapest price and in the shortest time. No interest in theory or procedures, just wanted to be in the air. So how can you change that attitude?

That's more than enough I think.

I feel a bit dirty.

[Flying Binghi]

I dont sell them, mind you with what I think is coming soon I wish I did

Why, do you think there will be much of a market ?

Jaba, Me-thinks the airspace may become a little less 'trafficked' with a low level ADS-B

[PlankBlender]

I'm with the Leafblower on this one: if they're dangerous and you have their call sign, report them. The rules are there to keep everyone safe, and people ignore them at their peril, unfortunately also at others' peril.:ugh:

As for the dodgy RAA "ATO" who hands out BFR's for nothing, anyone who can identify this w:mad:ker, and for that matter anyone else with a similar modus operandi, please name and shame them here, or send me a PM and we'll see what we can do about it. :yuk: I think I would start with a friendly letter to RAA to investigate themselves, if there was no outcome, on to CASA :E

On the point of extending RAA privileges, I would think that CASA will make sure (if anything, to cover their own backside, they seem to be good at that) that licensing and training of such pilots is up to scratch.

Unfortunately methinks it will take an accident to bring about change to cowboy practices like the ones many people here have witnessed.

The stories of wayward RAA fibreglass bombers getting in the way of IFR traffic made me think (and sweat :mad:): does anyone know of any incidents/accidents that ended up on public record? Would be interesting to go through stuff, there may be learning points in such reports..

[Jabawocky]

Plankie

I do agree CASA will require strict training etc and I hope that is what will happen, and from some schools I expect it to be on par with a good GA school. there is no reason why not. All in all it should work.

The problem lies in a group of folk who just blast off regardless. That is very hard to control and educate. Nobody officially knows who they may be! This is the same as those who know of folk out west who would fly in to town, park at the pub, have 3 or 4 beers, fly back to the homestead, buzz the house and someone would turn on the car/tractor headlights so they could land. GA has had its fair share. And some became worm fodder for their efforts.

Just another example has come to mind. Nobody will officially come out and say this, but discussions I have been around suggest many others think the same way with respect to Transponders and ADSB. They dont want big brother watching over them. And the story goes on about skirting around CTA steps......or perhaps being 1000' into them.....but undetected. I am not saying that they go deliberately blasting thru CTA and on 126.7...... but it happens, and mostly through the lack of navigating and planning around CTA. If there are any ATC's watching from BRIS/SYD/MEL Radar, I would be interested to hear what they think they see.

J

Disclaimer: I am not ANTI RAA..... Just the % of cowboys needs reducing.

[Sunfish]

I've been sailing for many years, and every now and then we get a "Cowboy" - a new skipper with a new boat, who has never sailed before, and who not only "knows everything", they have new and far superior knowledge and technique involved in every aspect of the sport.

This generally translates into two or three spectacular accidents on the race course, Six or Seven tonnes of vessel moving at about Eight knots can cause considerable damage, broken bones and even on occasion amputations. Now once these people identify themselves by their actions, they are generally "spoken to" by the elders, and agree to receive advice and instruction.

Most of them calm down and recant, and become solid citizens. But a minority don't. One gentleman, a former motor racer, would not stop deliberately colliding with other vessels and eventually every club in the Bay refused his race entry paperwork. Another one, a dear man, when not on the water, was the least safe sailor I have ever seen, and by a stroke of total and complete irony, his death a few years ago by drowning in a yacht race was the catalyst for legislative changes requiring compulsory wearing of lifejackets in certain situations in Victoria.

Now I believe, perhaps wrongly, that these cowboys don't manage to become a VH licenced pilot, they would certainly be weeded out from where I fly from, and quickly. What concerns me is that if the RAA isn't careful, it's going to become a refuge for these types, if it hasn't become one already. There is a posting about activities at Barwon Heads (and my comment) that is perhaps indicative of this type of mindset in some people.

Let me simply observe that if you do not develop a process to either reform or weed these clowns out, you are going to have a fairly short but spectacular life as an organisation. Your demise will occur through a series of lawsuits following failure by the RAA to act against an individual who has repeatedly been involved in (documented and proven) incidents and accidents and has gone on to eventually take someone's life.

[xinhua2]

Threads like this serve little purpose, except to enable the bashing of certain groups by the self proclaimed elite intelligentsia and serve as a platform for more sales spiels about anti collision and surveillance devices by the agenda driven and rabid collaborators.

If you are concerned about non radio or non transponder equipped aircraft in class G airspace, don’t fly IFR there if you aren’t going to look out the window. Some of you would crash through a marked glider and parachute areas and complain about gliders and parachutes.

Fly IFR in class G airspace but remember it’s not mandatory for VFR traffic to fly with a radio or transponder, so if you are aware of this fact and accept you may run across a ‘cowboy’ in this flight regime, be aware and don’t expect what is an optional extra to be mandated because it makes you feel safe.

It’s easy to bag any pilot with poor radio procedure at a CTAF but remember it’s better than him not calling at all. In many cases he is not required to do so. Accept that alerted see and avoid is better than see and avoid.

Do you really believe that the entire RAA fleet of 3000 can be simultaneously airborne, flying at your altitude or in your immediate vicinity? Divide the total surface area of Australia by the RAA register and see how many aircraft per sq mile there are. Then think three dimensionally.

Ultralights don’t fly IFR and most can’t fly in the rain because of untreated fabric wooden propellers and so forth, many haven’t the grunt to get above 5,000ft.

It stands to reason that no VFR traffic would be airborne in IFR conditions.

In VFR conditions it is your responsibility to look out the window.

[PlankBlender]

xinhua2, I'll bite as a little reality check is in order methinks.

Threads like this can and do lead to change. More informed decisions will be made, more stories are told and told again to bigger audiences, as a result organisations may be lobbied to effect change, eventually some bad apples are sorted out and lives saved. It may be yours :eek:

don’t fly IFR there if you aren’t going to look out the window.

That's priceless, man :ugh: You may want to elaborate, that comment as such makes you look...

It comes out quite clearly from the posts here that especially IFR pilots are concerned with VFR pilots flying in conditions they shouldn't be in (i.e. low cloud base/visibility, incidentally this is one of the main killers for VFR pilots, see "The Killing Zone" by Paul Craig) around uncontrolled aerodromes, not making themselves heard. Put that together with an IFR pilot in IMC flying an approach nearby, and you have a very unsafe situation and no way of knowing about it. That's what IFR pilots are sh!t scared about, rightly so!

Your deliberations of how many planes are in how much space are non-sensical, again it's a fact of aviation that a large part of accidents happen in the vicinity of aerodromes as there is a concentration of movements around such places, and anyhow numbers doesn't matter because one plane crashing into another is all you need for things to end in tears.

[VH-XXX]

Make up your mind Sunfish! Last week you were complaining on here about all of the dodgey GA pilots at Moorabbin - now you've turned to the Ultralight fraternity!

[Jabawocky]

xinhua2
It’s easy to bag any pilot with poor radio procedure at a CTAF but remember it’s better than him not calling at all.

Ahhhhh I dont think so. I have had several incidents where I have received radio in that XYZ is at ABC, when they are in fact at DEF.

This is not how alerted see and avoid works. Its more dangerous as you are looking left for the guy who says he is somewhere and next thing you know he is zooming across in front of you from the opposite direction.

Two bad examples come to mind, the Friday afternoon at the last Bundy Airshow and this year at the Inglewood flyin.

Now some VH registered craft are just as guilty, its the total number and high % that concern me.

J

[PlankBlender]

XXX, be fair with Sunfish :} complaining about deaf mute cowboys barreling around in their plastic bombers at cloud base in IMC is hardly in the same league as voicing valid concerns about circuit discipline at one of the country's busiest GAAP aerodromes..

Ducking for cover :ouch:

[xinhua2]

Plankblender.

If you fly IFR in VMC in congested VFR areas and you fail to look out the window, you are more culpable than the inexperienced VFR pilot if a prang occurs.

If an IFR pilot in IMC is flying an approach there is no danger because VFR traffic is grounded by definition.

VFR pilots flying in IMC are breaking the law. Take that matter with the regulator, or if you believe everyone flying but you is a criminal, stay in bed.

Jabawocky.

Are you advocating it's best not to call at all in case you get confused. If you had two bad experiences at Bundy and Inglewood where the pilot was lost or something, why don't you do something about it. Such action may save their lives as well don't you think.

[Horatio Leafblower]

Xinhua

IFR twins generally have a greater speed, greater passenger load, more momentum, and poorer pilot visibility than much of the traffic we deal with around us.

Yes there are procedures and differing circuit heights etc etc but what strikes fear into the working IFR pilot - who is exposed to this 6 days/week in differing locations, traffic densities and weather conditions - is the sheer unpredictability of some light aircraft, VH or RAAus.

As someone else has pointed out, of course, there is an element amongst us who wish to fly at minimum cost, minimum effort, minimum training, and most of all, minimum risk of being found lacking (by medical examination or by imposition of strict pilot performance standards). There is a far higher proportion of these dreamers in RAAus.

There is insufficient control and discipline in the RAAus system to allow these changes in RAAus priviledges without a significant increase in risk.

[PlankBlender]

xinhua2, are your IFR trained? If not, your remarks are merely ignorant and dangerous, if yes, for your own sake stay on the ground and get some training from a reputable source! :ugh:

If an IFR pilot in IMC is flying an approach there is no danger because VFR traffic is grounded by definition.

Rubbish! The IFR pilot can be in IMC above the aerodrome with the VFR pilot in (marginal or otherwise) VMC below him. If the VFR guy ain't talking and has no transponder, he might be only feet away from the IFR guy breaking visual in the approach.

Remember at Class G aerodromes, there may not be a TAF and in the absence of more specific information, it's the PIC's responsibility to assess whether or not it's safe to fly, so you can't know as an IFR driver who may be out there VFR and why, hence the absolute importance of radio calls and airmanship. Bascially, if you haven't got a radio or don't know how to use it, it's criminal to scud-run around places where IFR traffic could be letting down.

Fact is VFR drivers overestimate their abilities and underestimate what weather can do to them. Read the book I mention, it's all there in numbers that are hard to dispute!

What we've heard here about training and operating standards of significant portions of the RAA community, is absolutely cause for grave concern :suspect:

[BrokenConrod]

Xinhua, are you ignorant, naive or just a bit of a f*ckwit, eh?

Under the Visual Flight Rules an aircraft in Class G airspace at or below 3000' (if VHF radio equipped) is required to be "Clear of cloud, in sight if the ground or water, with a flight visability of 5 km or better".

So Rastus in his VFR RAA registered Fudpucker 200 is perfectly legal sitting just under the cloud base at 1100' (or whatever), provided he has a VHF radio, is tuned to the correct frequency, and honours the world with a few well chosen words regarding his position - especially when he becomes aware of another aircraft that might be headed his way.

The IFR pilot letting down through IMC is equally perfectly legal to be doing so, provided he also makes the appropriate calls on the right frequency and separates himself from known conflicting traffic.

The average IFR pilot is more likely to be on the right frequency and doing the right thing than the bottom end of VFR GA or RAA.

IT IS THIS SENARIO THAT MAKES IFR PILOTS A LITTLE ANXIOUS!

We spin the cylinder in the game of russian roulette everytime we do this.

See and be seen is of no f*cking use in this situation!

BC :E

[Sunfish]

VH -XXX, the point I made about YMMB was about how well the Tower coped with students trying diligently to get up to standard, and of course they will.

The point I'm making about the RAA involves the possibility of a small portion of their membership being unresponsive to safety concerns, and from the little I've seen it's a relevant comment.

Lets take, for example, the well known brand of LSA that lost a few landing gear legs before it was discovered that the aircraft had been assembled with non AN fasteners. I still recall watching years ago (long before the RAA) a tandem trike owner trying to take off with a passenger from an impossibly small field in a mountain valley near Mansfield, only to hit powerlines.

To put it briefly, I don't care if these idiots kill themselves as long as they don't take passengers or me with them. And I will react immediately and very strongly if someone tries to be a smart @rse and prejudices my safety.

[Jabawocky]

So Sunfish....what was the Bugger thread all about mate? We are busting to know!

Jabawocky.

Are you advocating it's best not to call at all in case you get confused. If you had two bad experiences at Bundy and Inglewood where the pilot was lost or something, why don't you do something about it. Such action may save their lives as well don't you think.

xinhua2

Possibly better than not making a really bad one. Hard to say. As for ILW & BUD they are just two that spring to mind, Watts Bridge the other day with a VH registered Europa doing a missed approach against the traffic flow (and a 10knot down wind) when making the calls for the correct runway, and then flying straight towards 3 other aircraft in the circuit head on and making a teardrop return to land :mad:. Silly old fart! Now had I been able to find him I would have been offering a polite explanation as to why what he was doing was so dangerous.

As for the speaking to those concerned at ILW and BUD if I could have found them and if I did it would be a frank but polite discussion, with education not humiliation the aim. problem is these folk I think must know they have been lacking airmanship and seem to hide quite quickly. And a proper BFR would help.

I do a renewal every year..... and I fly a lot, probably up to 5 times but more likely 3 times the average for PPL's, yet I still do this to be as professional as I can be. Its a pity the 20 -30 hour a year RAA & PPL folk do not do the same.

J:*

PS.... And if the confused VFR guy is not sure of his location and he heard an IFR arrival he would be wise to start up a dialogue where the VFR guy just made sure he was well out of the way until the IFR guy was visual. This is not too much to expect, I do it even in VMC for any RPT Jets and T/props just so they know that my paint in their TCAS can be relied upon to stay 3-5 miles south or whatever until they are on short finals or landed. Manners and airmanship......its not Rocket Science.

[xinhua2]

Horatio Leafblower, I am well acquainted with IFR Twins, their performance and limitations. One could suggest they are as much a pest to Jet RPT near their environs. I feel there is more of a problem with ‘working IFR pilots’ to all VFR traffic and the bagging of RAA is convenient.

The proportion (%), of idiots is probably static over the entire GA spectrum. The RAA segment of GA is growing which, I would suggest shows a false summary.

We are all responsible for risk limitation. You as an ex RAA CFI has a unique opportunity to make changes by addressing the organization responsible for “this element’ and may I suggest you do so with a non confrontational précis that you could possibly share with us.

PlankBlender, Yes I am.

If it is IMC there is no VFR traffic. Scud running is usually synonymous with low cloud high terrain below IFR LSA. IFR pilots sometimes overestimate their abilities also. How many do you know that have gone below decision height? And don’t tell me that doesn’t happen, history is crammed with examples.

BrokenConrod, More elitist crap.

If Rastus in his Fudpucker 200 is radio equipped he is obliged to use it in a CTAF environment. Same goes for transponders. BTW, most Fudpuckers fly 500ft circuits.

Are all your approaches instrument letdowns?

Jabawocky, I think you are beginning to understand my involvement in this thread. If someone is going to moan about VFR in class G airspace, let them consider the whole spectrum, not simply pick a soft recreational non professional target. I have seen some real clowns in my long career and they include the professional sector. If RAA need a shakeup, tell them of your concerns, after all they are increasing in numbers and we all share the same sky.

[BrokenConrod]

are you ignorant, naive or just a bit of a f*ckwit, eh?

All three - so it would seem?

BC :E

[Jabawocky]

xinhua2

BTW, most Fudpuckers fly 500ft circuits.


With all due respect, you are clearly out of touch. Some do and not all. The Fudpucker MkII's however are all buzzing along at 80-100 knots at 1000 feet.

J:ok:

[Horatio Leafblower]

Xinhua

That's like arguing P-platers aren't a problem on the roads.

In my time as a RAAus CFI I found that talking to the lunatic fringe was akin to talking to a 17-year-old, too - excuses, blame shifting, anti-authority paranoia, plain disregard. (My apologies to the 17-year-olds I am slurring).

The lunatic fringe in RAAus is larger precisely because of the "freedoms" offered by the RAAus. The VH system weeds them out through more rigorous standards, starting with security screening (drug offences, violence offences) through medical screening (superficial psych assessment and now, drug testing) to the requirement to pass a government-administered examination.

I applied the same standards and syllabus to both VH and RAA studes. I did not judge or pidgeon-hole my clients but treated them all the same. The lunatic fringe either went elsewhere or, ultimately, revolted. Now the lunatics are running the asylum.

There are a lot of fantastic people and very dilligent pilots in the RAAus system, but the wierdos can't be controlled by anyone except Charles Darwin. :(

...and no, I won't be sharing my submissions to the RAAus board on this forum. :suspect:

[PlankBlender]

If it is IMC there is no VFR traffic.

:eek::mad::eek::mad::eek::mad:

Jeeze, you still don't get it, do you? Ever heard of a could base? IMC is the meteorological condition at the point where YOU are, not where SOMEONE ELSE is :ugh::ugh::ugh:

I'll give it to you in very simple terms:

Cloud base at class G YABC (elevation sea level, to make it even easier) is 1100 feet, visibility not an issue in this everyday scenario.

IFR flight on final approach track of NDB approach straight to the runway, 3nm from the threshold, 1300 feet up. In cloud, hence in IMC!

VFR flight in the circuit, about to turn final, 800 feet up, i.e. below the cloud base, hence in VMC! Legal!!!

If VFR is not talking, and IFR is faster as in most scenarios, he'll flatten the VFR pilot seconds after breaking visual with no time to react. People dead! :eek:

Now which part of that don't you understand? Maybe you just need to look up the meaning of VMC and IMC, and what VFR and IFR means.

Take a good hard look at yourself and make some changes, otherwise you could rid the gene pool of your contribution prematurely and possibly take innocent souls with you :eek:

Again, get some decent training, and post your intentions here should you ever fly Down Under, I'm sure some people will change their plans for that day and stay on the ground.

Whoever signed you off for a pilot's license should get their testing approval pulled :mad::mad::mad:

[xinhua2]

What part don't you get? If it's IMC, there is no legal VFR traffic. (full stop).

Of 7,617,930 square Kms of Australia, everytime you want to do an IFR letdown there must certainly be an ultralight beneath you on a vertical collision course. Learn to live with the odds 'petal'.

The topic was about RAA flying mostly quiet legally in G airspace. and is being addressed intelligently by people such as Horatio Leafblower without the sarcasm and bull**** coming from some with possibly one renewal up their belt, but experts all the same.

There are idiots in all the GA spectrum, why target one aspect.

As for your educating me, bring it on junior. VFR is a fact of life. RAA is a fact of life. You don't own the sky. Do your own risk mitigation and work around it. Having a moan here won't change things.

What's your alternate suggestion? Ground everyone when you want to fly.

[j3pipercub]

This Thread is HUMMIN ALONG!!

I have heard some poorer radio work form the Qlink guys when they arrive into the circuit and then ask everyone to 'go ahead details'. How about get f*cked and pay more attention when you were at 30 miles like the rest of us, and yeah I monitor Centre as well!

However, from my experience into and out of Bundy (where they make the friggin Jab) generally, the RAA guys and girls have absolutely no clue, the radio work is shot if they use it at all and their overall Situational Awareness is incrdible lacking. Furthermore, the instructors have attitude and do not conduct themselves professionally or even safely in some cases.

IMHO anyway

j3

[BrokenConrod]

What's your alternate suggestion?

Here's one - let's kill a few birds with the one stone!

Given the soon-to-be (if not already) downturn in the airline industry, the chronic shortage of Air Traffic Controllers and the apparent incompatability of VFR and IFR aircraft, I propose the following:

VFR aircraft fly on odd days of the month, and
IFR aircraft fly on even days of the month

BC :E

[Jabawocky]

Interesting post j3pipercub.

Down the coast a little (YHBA) all the GA operators there bitch about the Qlink then JQ and then VB in that order, for bad circuit manners and the odd transmitting their arrival on the PAL frequency! The lights respond accordingly :}!

J:ok:

[Biggles_in_Oz]

What part don't you get? If it's IMC, there is no legal VFR traffic. (full stop).Reread the first 2/3's of PlankBlenders' post.
I agree., there shouldn't be VFR rated folk inside IMC, but there can still be legal VFR traffic underneath that IMC.
heck, even an overcast base at 4000' could have an IFR descend on top of a VFR who's inbound on descent from, or climbing to, just below that base.

[BrokenConrod]

heck, even an overcast base at 4000' could have an IFR descend on top of a VFR who's inbound on descent from, or climbing to, just below that base

Biggles the way I read the Visual Flight Rules, in Oz, VFR aircraft between 3000' and 10,000' should be 1500M horizontally and 1000' vertically from cloud.

....but of course, we all know that they are NOT !

BC :E

[Capt Wally]

gee there are some brave 'jaba' drivers out there, heard a guy crossing Bass Straight this arvo, ohhhh sends chivers up my spine:ooh:

This would have to be the best mud slinging thread to date, lets hope the Mods don't can it.:E
As long as they (RAA drivers) obey & KNOW the rules it's all fair in love & war!

CW

[Jabawocky]

Aeroplanes At or above 8,000M 1,500M horizontal
10,000FT 1,000FT vertical
AMSL
Below 5,000M 1,500M horizontal
10,000FT 1,000FT vertical
AMSL
At or Below 5,000M Clear of cloud and Carriage and use of radio
3,000FT in sight of ground is required when
AMSL or or water operating to these
1,000FT conditions for
AGL communications on the
whichever MBZ frequency or the
is the CTAF when within the
higher prescribed distance of an
aerodrome, or on the
area VHF whilst En Route


That sums it up pretty well I think. ignore the old MBZ thing please:rolleyes:

[Horatio Leafblower]

Just want to pick up on something you asserted on page 1 of this thread:

It won't matter soon because the 5,000ft restriction is about to be lifted, prior to part 103 being implemented. That AND entry into CTA will be available for RA pilots.

I have just read the DP proposing to allow RAAus to administer everything up to 760kg MTOW.

In the DP it is repeatedly stated (to assert the "low risk" of the reg change) that only RAAus registered aircraft operated by current PPL holders or better are permitted in CTA and only in certified aircraft.

From what you are telling us I can only infer that there is another agenda in play? :suspect:

Get all the C152s, Tommy-axes and C150s into RAAus and then remove ANOTHER layer of risk mitigation? :=

[Sunfish]

I know! Lets all go to the Pub , get P*ssed and have a punch up!

[Horatio Leafblower]

Fishy

I'll go along with the pub bit :ok:

Dunno if there is a punch-up required, this seems like quite a reasonable and moderate thread. :confused:

[Jabawocky]

HL

only in certified aircraft

is that bit accurate....... or does it really mean in aircraft with approved engines.

A kit built Glasair Jabiru or whatever is OK now in CTA with an approved engine, there by blocking the lawn mower conversion brigade. There is a difference between approved and a completely certified aircraft.

Where can I read this?

J

[John Walters]

povopilot your a bit hard accusing a BRS pilot of a poor radio call last weekend. Facts are the pilot was GA and visiting BRS NOT a BRS pilot.

As for this post there is a lot of biterness in some of the posts between GA and RAA connections. The fact is everyone is entitle to use the airspace, and yes a great deal of the problem comes back to training and the amount of times you fly and put into practice what is learnt.

It is about time the training syllabus were parrallel no matter what aircraft you are going to fly. You must pass the set BAK, Radio, Met, Crosscountry etc. units then get endorsement on the aircraft of your choice be it a tinny, a plastic, or a raggie.

Radio should be mandatory in ALL aircraft and should be used. It appears many don't use the radio, don't think before what they are going to say, don't do a radio check before taking off to ensure the radio is working, and as for the number of ethnics they should have clear english skills before being allowed in the air.

Lets hope something can be done before its too late considering the number of new aircraft and pilots taking to the air each month. Flying is meant to be enjoyable.

[VH-XXX]

Leaf Blower, you may not have heard however there is an amendment coming to allow CTA and above 5,000ft prior to 103 because 103 is going to be a long time away, potentially 1-2 years.

As for the "certified" bit with CTA, this is not correct and bad wording by way of the author. The article is referring to current operations only and not resultant of the 103 implementation. It is also incorrect if it says "certified" as we all know that you only require an "approved" engine, such as 4 stroke, dual ignition etc etc, but that's a whole other thread.

So yes, there is another agenda at play at the moment. There's been talk for quite some time about getting CTA pushed through before 103 but that may now include above 5,000ft.

Additionally for those that didn't realise PART 103 when approved will allow COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS in RA-Aus aircraft. Unfortunately there is no CPL as such for RA-Aus so the only pilots capable of legally performing a joy-flight will be RA-Aus instructors. For those that want some spare cash, if you want that to include CPL's, I URGE you to respond in favour to the discussion paper!

[Ultralights]

flying from YHOX 20 hrs a week, every close call and display of poor airmanship has been a VH registered aircraft from Bankstown, and almost every incident has been poor circuit procedure, eg, landing on the wrong runway direction, and never using the radio!
fortunately most of the cowboy RAA minority are to scared to come into YHOX, but the GA non radio, no circuit procedure causing immediate dangerous situations, has always been GA pilots

[Flying Binghi]

An interesting observation Ultralights.

Many years ago I regularly attended flyins and airshows. One thing I noted was the very poor attendance of fly-in aircraft on the days when the weather was poor. This suggests to me that the majority of VFR pilots (I include ultralight aircraft) dont fly in bad weather. Which, unforetunatly, contradicts the implied claims, that on a poor weather day, every VFR aircraft in the country will be found loittering just below the clouds hopeing to upset IFR pilots.

[Horatio Leafblower]

So Binghi - not having a go here just challenging the logic of your argument

... are you saying that your anecdotal evidence is better than my anecdotal evidence?

XXX/Jaba

You are of course both correct re: approved engine - my sloppy writing :{

[NOtimTAMs]

Interesting thread. I fly GA IFR and VFR and until recently also had an RAA craft and operate in the full range of airstrips/airspace. I've seen cowboys (and even a few cowgirls) across the spectrum.

The risk of descending on top of a no radio VFR ACFT (GA or RAA) under a low overcast on an approach or let-down to <3000' AGL can not be completely mitigated. It's a risk you take once out of primary radar coverage/control and always a risk in CTAF (non-R). Mudgee's a good example of being able to a GPS arrival to about 1500' AGL beneath which VFR ACFT can be legally tootling about without radios - and even if radio equipped, there are 3 surrounding FIA FRQ in addition to the CTAF to choose from or monitor.....

The cropdusters have to be one of the most common GA ACFT that fly low, often fly non-standard circuits and will keep operating under a low overcast and be rather allergic to radio use. There are exceptions, I'm sure.

I have a particular b!tch about IFR ACFT, usu RPT, I'm afraid, proudly announcing that they're doing a "RNAV Approach with a November Charlie transition" or similar. IT MEANS NOTHING TO MOST VFR PILOTS. Make the effort to say that you are (say) tracking to a 15 mile straight in approach for runway (insert number), or link the waypoint to a geographic feature (e.g. a point 5 miles south of (insert town name here). Do this whether you're doing an RNAV/NDB/GPS procedure, fellas and girls.

There's room for improvement across the board.......

[FNG_WA]

Interesting to note that pilots licences are not issued to the RAA folk. Just pilot 'certificates'. Seems a deliberate choice of words........personally think most aviators who shy away from the 'hassles' of rules and such need to be 'certified'. By the way what do you call someone who flies without a licence? (interested passenger maybe?):\

[BrokenConrod]

The cropdusters have to be one of the most common GA ACFT that fly low, often fly non-standard circuits and will keep operating under a low overcast and be rather allergic to radio use

In my experience, the croppies generally fly so low as to not be an issue!

I recently sat on the ground with the prop turning, waiting for the cloud to lift off the tree tops and get somewhere near the 300' ceiling that would make my departure legal. While I waited, the local croppy departed and returned several times.

BC :E

[Flying Binghi]

not having a go here just challenging the logic of your argument
... are you saying that your anecdotal evidence is better than my anecdotal evidence?


No problemo Horatio Leafblower, I presented that Reductio ad Adsurdum type 'observation', because I think near all pilots, and even non-pilots, understand the attraction of fly-ins and airshows to many pilots. If the VFR pilots are not flying in...... ergo, most VFR pilots will not fly in the 'minimas' conditions some here present to back up their piont of view.

[Jabawocky]

FB

Its not most of any group we are talking about.

The old 80/20 rule will probably apply here too.

the averages may sugest 85/15 in GA and 25/75 in RAA, or they could be reversed, but I doubt it.

J

[xxgoldxx]

As was posted by someone earlier there is some classics from the IFR crew as well if you happen to monitor both frequencies..

"centre abc 2 min TOD xxx"
"abc NO REPORTED IFR TRAFFIC"

"all stations 126.7 xxx CTAF abc an IFR xxx is xx dme inbound on the xxx radial on decent passing FL xxx tracking direct NA for the runway xx rnav aproach estimate NA at time xx"

What the hell is billy bob in the drifter suposed to think !!!
If you have no reported traffic then who the hell are you talking to...???

should he pipe up and say "station inbound I have no idea what you are talking about but I am on a wide left base xx, on the ground in 10"

In reality you have made life so hard for them they will more likely shut up and say nothing...!

YOU are the visitor (most of the time), be friendly, courteous and speak english, you will get much further i reckon !!

[ahlocks]

Quite straight forward I'd have thought.

They call thirty miles. I tell 'em where I am and what I'm planning to do.

They say "got you on TCAS" and I stay clear until I've got them visual.

Courtesy and airmanship really. They're working and I'm not and it's no skin off my nose if I have to hold, change course or extend a leg of the circuit.

IMC? no thanks. I fly to enjoy it.

R/T procedure...Oh, it's terrible! you often hear things like "thanks for your help" and "have a good one..." Absolutely disgusting in a CTAF(R) :rolleyes:

Onya REX and Eastern into YSWG :ok: it's a pleasure to share the airspace with you.

[Koizi]

gee there are some brave 'jaba' drivers out there, heard a guy crossing Bass Straight this arvo, ohhhh sends chivers up my spine

I know of one "deputy CFI" who flew across the striaght at night in a Jab using the illumination of his studnet's mobile phone to see the instruments.:D
not to mention the time one nearly ran out of fuel attempting the crossing in a strong northerly......then another clever jab driver flew fuel to YLEG.

Makes you wonder.....

[james michael]

My own experience is that where GA and RA schools co-exist, there is a lift in the capability of both groups.

In terms of GA and RA Aus it all comes back to training and that post by Horatio was a corker. Not reasonable to blame the pilots if the training is inadequate. I have seen as many GA cowboys as I have RA Aus, and the GA ones have put me more at risk (including the RAAF when they used to come from PTCK to MB to train in traffic).

RPT - last two posters (before Koizi), good points. In my time I have had RPT try to bulldoze me out of the way and conversely let me get off before them. Again, comes back to the individual pilot, training and ATTITUDE. If you examine the NAS 2C PIR and some of the audits of airfields - those who know best are sometimes the worst "commercial expediency" the excuse.

Training, then attitude and discipline - affects all groups. No different to on the road.

Added - Koizi - fuel problems not unique to RA Aus - several incidents in past year with aircraft with two pilots up front, one at PTH ;)

[Jabawocky]

ahlocks

First post I see, and straight on the money!

Welcome!:ok:

J:ok:

[Flying Binghi]

Its not most of any group we are talking about.


I know Jaba. Just wanting to underline the point that there is not large numbers of VFR aircraft hanging around on final (or anywhere for that mater) when the cloud base is not much above MDA


the averages may sugest 85/15 in GA and 25/75 in RAA, or they could be reversed, but I doubt it.

Re percentages ? very few I would have thought. And of those few - whats to say they are'nt doing the right thing ?

I sometimes wonder if a lot of these so-called bad eggs storys posted arnt just a bit of a fib.....

[Jabawocky]

Gooday FB

No fibs in any of my stories at all. I wish I had time to write a few more, and recall the stories I have forgotten.

One springs to mind just now, pre NAS and straight in approaches, this guy based at YCAB in a Skyfox tail dragger would regularly do low and misaligned straight in approaches where ever he went, you know save 10c on MOGAS in his Rotax:hmm:. Yes he mad all the radio calls, joining crosswind, downwind and base. He was never there at all. And this was deliberate.

I found out who this guy was about 2 years after doing my training. Funny thing was At the same time I was describing how a guy who was according to his radio broadcast over the Bribie Island bridge at 2000' was within 1 minute almost at Caloundra......at 2000 feet direct opposite track of me and 45feet to my right and nearly hit me. Now its a D area and training area, I know, but he did not broadcast correctly then, and he was not obliged to. Then we started comparing notes and guess who?? Same bloke.

I am told that his idea of airframe repairs is to bend it back and paint over it......... now these I can not substaniate, but a lot of locals can.

Is this the kind of guy you want getting a CTA endo..... and perhaps on the sly?

Maybe I am worried about nothing, maybe Horatio Leafblower can tell some stories like this?

No fibs here FB. I have no need to expand the truth, the truth is entertaining enough as it is!

J:ok:

[VH-XXX]

Atleast RA-Aus instructors aren't stupid enough to get caught taking MDMA !

[Flying Binghi]

Atleast RA-Aus instructors aren't stupid enough to get caught taking MDMA !

LOL, yes, no hooning around repositioning for the into wind runway ;)

...but I suppose that dont happen much any more.


Edit - and heres me thinking MDMA was just a miss-print :D

[Flying Binghi]

No fibs in any of my stories at all.

Actually, I was'nt refering to you Jaba :ok:


Is this the kind of guy you want getting a CTA endo..... and perhaps on the sly?


Jaba, "perhaps on the sly" ? - more info please :confused:

[Jabawocky]

Perhaps on the sly........... well not to standard, just read back about BFR's being issued just based on the fact you flew in to the airfield in one piece.

Who knows. With standards like that..... you just do not know. Sure it could happen in GA with a slack ATO but very much less likely.

J

[FNG_WA]

Last I checked this was the 'professional' pilots rumour network.......not a sledging match for weekend warriors and RAAus pros. This kind of thread is why most professional pilots (you know the students, instructors and charter guys) give this place a wide berth. Mods must be on holiday. If I wasnt stuck at work on reserve bored out of my mind.....actually that still cant justify wasting time here. :(

[Jabawocky]

FNG

Last I looked a very high percentage of contributors here do this for a living. The others in GA are pretty serious about what we do when we take to the sky.

Of those posting that are flying PVT OPS most average 150-400 hours a year and not in drifters either. This is not an armchair quarterback sledging session.

I know for a fact this was not meant to be an anti-RAA thread, however when a few factual events are revealed it would possibly look that way.

Thanks for your concern all the same.

J:ok:

[james michael]

Jabba

Spot on :ok:

I think FNG was so intent on displaying his high status he forgot the title of this area D & G General Aviation & Questions (http://www.pprune.org/d-g-general-aviation-questions-91/)

I put my feelings above about the problem existing through all levels - even to the 'professionals' - if any one of any of the three groups reflects on their own airmanship and lifts their game, this thread has served a useful purpose.

It's like the safety seminars - the ones there aren't the ones who need to be there - it's the ones who know it all who should take their places :D

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

'professional' pilots rumour network

Ohhhh - I thought it was the network that was purporting to be professional - not the pilots!

Dr :8

[Horatio Leafblower]

Atleast RA-Aus instructors aren't stupid enough to get caught taking MDMA !

No. Not yet.

I've seen two RAAus instructors flying after drinking and there is at least one RAAus pilot at my local aeroclub who smokes dope "theraputically" for pain relief (must be ina lot of pain :hmm: ) .

You just stay smug there, XXX. :=

[Ultralights]

good ole GA cowboys at it again, 3 aircraft joining circuit on base at Hoxton.. so much for the 4 legs of the circuit requirement, but at least this time they used the radio.

[VH-XXX]

If this was a professional network only, it would be quiet here indeed!

I'm with the Doctor, this is a professionally run computer network that many amateurs use.

[PlankBlender]

Question: If you're doing a straight in approach, are you seen to be entering the circuit at all, or could you still do a straight in approach at an aerodrome like HOX where ERSA stipulates that you must join the circuit on crosswind?

[poteroo]

It's our good fortune to have an RAA and GA flight school working together here. Both CFI's are GA + RAA rated, both are also high hours GA Gr 1's. There's a good awareness of what's happening in both camps, and that seems to help lots.

The fact that GA and RAA students are meeting up at the school seems to also be good for our airport. People get invites to events, they hear about the aeroclub, the local SAAA chapter,and who's building what on the airport. We expect that this will increase of conversions from RAA into GA, and vice versa. Currently it looks like the elderly are going GA to RAA, and the young are going RAA to GA.

All students, (RAA & GA), get the same training here in respect of CTAF(R) ops. The training focuses on co-operation with the IFR/RPT group, by way of not baulking a straight in approach, land & hold short if necessary, and by holding in orbits or longer circuit legs....amongst other stuff. Students are also taught how to operate with the frequent RAAF ops here by 2FTS Pearce.

Sure, we have some difficulties, but it's not a case of the pilots being GA or RAA - it's more whether they have an 'attitude', or they are from out in the sticks and just don't have a clue. Overuse of the radio seems more a problem here. Since getting our own frequency, (127.85) , students are finding it easier to comprehend traffic...126.7 was just not user friendly.

We have found that RPT do appreciate the courtesies, so do the RAAF - but a very few IFR GA people seem to regard a straight in approach as a right, rather than an option dependant on traffic.

We don't encourage anyone wanting a BFR to even think about coming here unless they have a serviceable radio and know the procedures - GA or RAA. That can sometimes mean the instructor flying 'out' to do the BFR elsewhere...but it seems more prudent.

We're not excited about CTA endorsements. Frankly, most RAA pilots would rather dodge 'real' CTA. For the higher performance aircraft, usually with GPS fitted, it's getting easier. The rag & tubers would usually try to avoid CTAF(R) as well...not a bad thing, really.

Just a few comments from someone with feet on both sides....

happy days,

[Capt Wally]

How about we have one training system, RAA, GA or even DD (Donald Duck) it ought to be the same intro for ALL pilots whether they are flying those toy planes or the real ones. EVERYBODY starts out learning the same procedures, flying in the same airspace performing the same skills at a basic level. Then when yr done to a level that suits you you get off the learning ladder & fly at that level & not stray from it flying as you where taught, not makng it up as you go. Those that want to go on & fly real planes can continue being taught higher skills where needed but when the two levels in the case above meet at say a CTAF they are BOTH "reading" from the same page! Having RAA & GA training 'reading' from different "books" obviously means that the two will meet somewhere with hassels as these pages attest to & it won't be in some quite "library" either! The stories here show that we ALL aren't on the same "page"


CW

[POQL]

Capt Wally

Your comments are very positive and along the same lines as a thread a couple of days ago by John Walters.

One training system for all then off to fly what you want.:ok:

[Horatio Leafblower]

Thanks for your input

If I can take your contributions to Recreational Flying (http://www.recreationalflying.com.au) as any guide, you have nailed your colours to the mast.

You're in no position to impugn the professionalism of any contributor to this thread or indeed, this BB. :suspect:

I am not saying there are no rogues in VH... I just believe there is more backbone in the VH system (such as drug testing programs, to take the case in point) to change them or weed them out.

[mostlytossas]

Putting the differences between GA and RAA pilots aside both groups have there cowboys and also it is amazing the amount of RPT pilots that do not know the current rules either. I remember well once departing YWHA VFR for YWGA back in the days of Kendall airlines when this Metro driver berated me for not making a departure call, which is /was not required if VFR. After a frosty exchange over the radio I offered to drop in and see Don when I got home as he would not have liked to know one of his drivers was not up to speed on the current rules. Boy did the wizz kid shutup fast. And no I didn't see Don about him either.
However looking back it was not surprising then as it is today when the regulator under a host of changing names keep changing the rules we all fly under. Not so long ago VFR was encouraged to stay off the radio as much as possible and putting a plan in to enter CTA discouraged in favour of calling up for it unannounced at the boundary. Now in Adelaide they insist on a plan to fly down the coast at 500'. Little wonder anyone who flys for fun gets problems staying current. But then maybe I'm becoming a grumpy old fart!

[Deaf]

Regarding RAA instructors - suggest that options may be better there than GA. With my wife the choice appeared to be:

250 hr kid in a fancy psuedo uniform

Well regarded oldy with CFI RAAF on the CV

There are good people in the GA instructional scene but (generalising) they are not doing basic instruction.

[VH-XXX]

Ok, so this came up on the 'other' forum. Who's going to fess up to this?


1.A GA school aircraft (I beleave with nav student) took of in wind/dust/rain storm which I watched develop for over one hour. I think wind would have been over 40kt with vis under 2000m. I watched it in the rain as I thought it was an accident just waiting for a place to happen. The storm was over 15 min later!;

2.A V tail Bonanza took off and did a 90deg RH turn at about 150ft over gum trees about 900m down 1600m long strip. Its a normal LH circuit!

Common sense is just not common!!!

(Somewhere near Warrick)

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

2.A V tail Bonanza took off and did a 90deg RH turn at about 150ft over gum trees about 900m down 1600m long strip. Its a normal LH circuit!

OK, OK! Before anyone jumps to conclusions - this was not THE FTDK!

I have departed Warwick twice only in the FTDK - on the weekend of 20/21 Sept.

Departure #1 was with a left turn off Rwy 27 and back over the top.

For Departure #2, after a conversation with the PA25 glider tug with glider which was climbing to the south of the strip, I held the Rwy 27 heading to 5 nm from the aerodrome datum and then turned right to YTWB. Anyone who suggests otherwise needs to have their eyes tested!

Dr :8

[j3pipercub]

VH-XXX,

If you really want to start flinging incidents around, I've got a diary full, and guess what, 95% of them are Jabiru postcodes out of Bundaberg!

j3

[Flopt]

Don't know who he is [we've never met...except on r/t], but he and his students at YKRY are to be commended for their awareness,sensible position reporting and courteous sharing of the CTAF.

This old f**t arrives in imc often enough that a conflict could arise ,but never has whether on an RNAV, NDB app, GPS arrival, because he obviously drills into his students sensible basic use of radio, and his students know where they are in the circuit.

Those Jabs are bloody hard to see from 1-2nm behind on final though ! And the C210,FTDK[ "the one and only!"] or M20J , which have all interacted with him,are all a bit quicker.

Can't say the same for the gliding instructor who met me head on in the B55 "demonstrating a non-standard right hand circuit to his student " with the radio turned down.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Solid overcast,8.30am,and I'd made two inbound calls while in imc and a circuit call.

Flopt

[Jabawocky]

FLOPT

:ok: the Kingaroy school seems to do a good job! Have arrived there with their a/c doing circuits and the young lady (inst/student) was also very well sorted in R/T and SA. Good work up there!:ok:

J:)