RAA and IFR sharing Class G
Guest
Posts: n/a
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.
As for the dodgy RAA "ATO" who hands out BFR's for nothing, anyone who can identify this w
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. 
I think I would start with a friendly letter to RAA to investigate themselves, if there was no outcome, on to CASA 
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): 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..
As for the dodgy RAA "ATO" who hands out BFR's for nothing, anyone who can identify this w
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. I think I would start with a friendly letter to RAA to investigate themselves, if there was no outcome, on to CASA 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
): 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..
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
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.
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.
Weed Out The Cowboys Please.
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.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: HK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Guest
Posts: n/a
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
That's priceless, man 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.
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
don’t fly IFR there if you aren’t going to look out the window.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
xinhua2
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
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.
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
Guest
Posts: n/a
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
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
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: HK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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.
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.
Guest
Posts: n/a
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!
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
If an IFR pilot in IMC is flying an approach there is no danger because VFR traffic is grounded by definition.
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
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Paradise
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
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.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
So Sunfish....what was the Bugger thread all about mate? We are busting to know!
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. 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.
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.
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.
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
. 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.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: HK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Last edited by xinhua2; 9th Oct 2008 at 05:19.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
xinhua2
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
BTW, most Fudpuckers fly 500ft circuits.
J
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.
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.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Xinhua2, Get Help!
If it is IMC there is no VFR traffic.
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
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!
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
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
Last edited by PlankBlender; 9th Oct 2008 at 05:47. Reason: bolding and title
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: HK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.