Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

CASA $1,000 Useless Compass Check

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

CASA $1,000 Useless Compass Check

Old 9th Jan 2015, 12:31
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: NSW
Posts: 427
Thunderbird Five didn't I just say that ??



Arnold E
until proven defective
I mean obvious defects like bubbles , I find they are lucky to last 4 years in a hot environment anyway.

Oracle1
Put the chopper on one of those specially constructed trailers that litter airstrips around the country and push it around on that.
Are you saying do a compass swing on a big lump of metal ??

Last edited by Hasherucf; 9th Jan 2015 at 12:35. Reason: added stuff
Hasherucf is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2015, 18:38
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: daworld
Posts: 607
Or..... Get the rules/AWB's changed so that a GPS system is mandatory. Then you don't need a compass.

Everyone is spouting off about how everyone carries a GPS these days and how they are much more accurate, and they are, but they are not MANDATORY in most circumstances. If you want to ditch the compass forever, get the GPS loaded on to your aircraft as basic equipment in the paperwork and use that as an alternative means of compliance for the compass compensation.

As far as cost for a compass swing, for a wheeled helo, it is only the pilot and mechanics time. As it is a maintenance run, it is not logged on the machine. Not where I come from anyway. Skids are different of course

You can also air swing a compass, flying on the cardinals and working out your errors. That is how a lot of the big aircraft do it. An extended circuit will do it. We used to do it during training with a mech on board to take the readings while the crew flew an extended circuit (long time ago of course!).
noooby is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2015, 21:11
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Arnold

If you planned your flight properly, and navigated properly, you'd know your heading and track, within a couple of degrees, and you'd know your groundspeed within a couple of knots, absent a compass and absent any GPSs.

If you checked the accuracy of your altimeter/s, in accordance with AIP, at the commencement of your flight, you'd have a good idea of the accuracy of the reading/s. If you have a transponder with Mode C, you can confirm the accuracy of the reading/s at altitude.

If you couldn't manage to do a few circuits in your RV7, without an airspeed indicator, you don't know your aircraft well enough.

I'll say it again: It's not about the desirability of serviceable and accurate instruments. It's about the presumption of innate incompetence and criminality of Australians, mixed with scaremongering that plays on the fears of ignorant punters, that has produced the regulatory Frankenstein destroying GA.

The experiment has been run in the USA and the results are in: The Australian approach is a complete overkill (literally).
Creampuff is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2015, 21:55
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: nosar
Posts: 1,170
It's about the presumption of innate incompetence and criminality of Australians, mixed with scaremongering that plays on the fears of ignorant punters, that has produced the regulatory Frankenstein destroying GA.
How articulate. Sums up the entire nation, not just aviation.
Aussie Bob is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2015, 22:37
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Queensland
Age: 36
Posts: 72
noooby:
Everyone is spouting off about how everyone carries a GPS these days and how they are much more accurate, and they are, but they are not MANDATORY in most circumstances.
Unfortunately GNSS units still are subject to RAIM outages so whilst this is the case I do not think that CASA will allow it to replace the magnetic compass no matter how much more accurate GNSS units are.

Creampuff:
If you have a transponder with Mode C, you can confirm the accuracy of the reading/s at altitude.
For this to be the case you would have to be certain that your altitude encoder, which gets its information from the same static source as your altimeter, is reading correctly. If there is an issue with the static pressure system both your altimeter and altitude encoder will be in error and the mode C readout to ATC isn't going tell you that. Whether or not a big enough discrepancy would result from this issue to cause any real dramas is another story if your altimeter was within tolerance prior to departure.
Check_Thrust is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2015, 23:11
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
So when I report to Departures, "Turning right, climbing to 7,500', passing 3,300'", the dudes in ATC aren't checking the accuracy of the Mode C info?

C'mon. This is like CASA Avmed arguing that CVD creates reals risks.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2015, 23:34
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Queensland
Age: 36
Posts: 72
They are checking that there is no discrepancy between what your seeing on your altimeter and what they are seeing from your altitude encoder. As I said before, if there is an issue with your static system this will affect both (quite possibly by the same value).

Talking about the static system when the topic is about instrument calibration is a bit of a thread drift and I apologise for that.

Last edited by Check_Thrust; 9th Jan 2015 at 23:36. Reason: Typo
Check_Thrust is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2015, 23:35
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arsetrailer
Posts: 265
Creampuff is talking a lot of sense on this thread. So long as flying is an outdoors activity these instruments really should just be confirming what you already know. I dont see why (for vfr at least) they cant be on condition items.

If your situational awareness is so suspect that you cant detect gross errors in a mag compass you really need to question your proficiency.

PS. Sorry about the nylocks Hasher, Dynon supplies em as standard!
Fred Gassit is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2015, 23:46
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 69
Posts: 1,320
If you have a transponder with Mode C, you can confirm the accuracy of the reading/s at altitude.
As I have posted earlier, the above statement may not necessarily be accurate. Remember I said I found a FACTORY BUILT aircraft with the encoder hooked up to the pitot line. This paticular aircraft had not flown in controlled airspace. In any case I have seen encoders many hundreds of feet out of cal. when tested.

Last edited by Arnold E; 10th Jan 2015 at 00:34.
Arnold E is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2015, 23:54
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 69
Posts: 1,320
If you couldn't manage to do a few circuits in your RV7, without an airspeed indicator, you don't know your aircraft well enough.
Correct, I have not got anywhere near enough hours on it yet to safely do circuits without an asi. (Actually not quite true coz I do have a reserve lift (AOA) indicator).
Arnold E is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2015, 00:31
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
I said I found a FACTORY BUILT aircraft with the encoder hooked up to the pitot line. This paticular aircraft had not flown in controlled airspace. In any case I have seen encoders my hundreds of feet out of cal. when tested.
Oh the humanity!

Clearly Australia needs more mandatory maintenance. More mandatory maintenance must mean more safety.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2015, 00:37
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 69
Posts: 1,320
Clearly Australia needs more mandatory maintenance. More mandatory maintenance must mean more safety.
Yeah, Ok you win. Lets not have any mandatory instrument maintenance at all and save ourselves $$$$$.

As I have said, I personally believe that the 100.5 checks which does not include a compass swing to be one of the few sensible checks that CASA has introduced,
especially for aircraft being flown by multiple people who may be unfamiliar with that particular aircraft. I concede that privately owned and flown only
by one pilot, not so much necessarily,......maybe. I have however found some right dogs whilst doing these test on aircraft of the latter category.
However,as I said, you win.

Last edited by Arnold E; 10th Jan 2015 at 00:50.
Arnold E is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2015, 00:53
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: The Last Resort
Age: 48
Posts: 154
Trailers

Are you saying do a compass swing on a big lump of metal ??

Not that hard to make something non ferrous if you are doing lots of chopper compass swings. My point is the chopper should be able to be manipulated without running the engine.
Oracle1 is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2015, 04:54
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 495
AWB 34-008 details the compass calibration requirements of aircraft with a certificate of airworthiness.
I note that it stipulates engine(s) running and all systems operational.

How does that compare with doing it on a non ferrous trolley and engines off?

Of interest to Dick Smith is the paragraph that allows you to have a system of maintenance that stipulates a different elapsed time for compass swing.

I note Arnold E has carried put the "new' 100.5 requirements on light aircraft, the price your compatriots are charging is outrageous, especially out here in the bush. Nearly $6000 all up to get two light helis done, took less than a day.
Eddie Dean is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2015, 06:42
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Lets not have any mandatory instrument maintenance at all and save ourselves $$$$$.
I didn't say that there shouldn't be any mandatory instrument maintenance.

This is why the GA community in Australia is such easy pickings for the regulator. Very few people in it are able to have a rational discussion, based on facts and data.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2015, 07:04
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: The Last Resort
Age: 48
Posts: 154
In Context

Read my original post and put it context. I don't care about how you arrive at a compass swing the instrument is an inaccurate relic. Do we need to alter engine RPM and allow for changing alternator fields? Do you want to take it to that level? The fact that all these factors need to be considered confirm its unsuitability compared to modern electronics. Modern electronics cross calibrate, expending any energy on compasses is just pissing money against the wall.

Ask yourself honestly, when was the last time you actually used the compass as a primary means of navigation?

Given today's technology the avionics should self calibrate.
Oracle1 is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2015, 07:28
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Perth
Posts: 130
CAO 100.5

Dick,

By less prescriptive I guess you are referring to the NZ allowance for acceptable means of compliance and the following exemption from Canada:

"(b) The annual calibration requirement of (a) does not apply to an aircraft operating under an air operator certificate, or to any large or turbine-powered pressurized aircraft, where:

(i) the aircraft is equipped with two independent stabilized magnetic direction indicators in addition to the non-stabilized direct reading magnetic direction indicator; and"

(ii) a procedure for monitoring and recording the performance of the magnetic direction-indicators is detailed in the flight training unit's, or in the air operator's approved maintenance control manual approved pursuant to CAR 406 and CAR 706 respectively."



I fail to see how this is less prescriptive than the exemption requirements of CAO100.5:

"exempted aircraft:
means an aircraft with an approved system of maintenance
(SOM) under regulation 42M of CAR 1988, or with a maintenance schedule under regulation 41 of CAR 1988, but only if the SOM or the schedule incorporates instructions for the continuing airworthiness of instruments and instrument systems fitted to the aircraft that would otherwise be subject to the additional maintenance requirements set out in clauses 2 to 6 of this Appendix."



Do I work for CASA? NO.
Have I ever worked for CASA? NO.
Can you say the same?


Surely a well supported industry petition (there are plenty of people here who would submit) with evidence (costs you are claiming) to have the wording a CAO100.5 amended to require the checks at the first Maintenance Release issue after the date of expiry (much like weight and balance checks) would be a more valuable use of your considerable financial and political clout than complaining on a public forum.

This would ensure the checks were only done during times when a LAME(and in the case of helicopters a pilot) was required anyway and a safety case should not be too hard to build for this.
Progressive is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2015, 07:37
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 495
Yes indeed Oracle, you can certify for the compass swing no matter how it is done, or whether it is correct or not, or conforms to the AWB or not. It's your licence.
Eddie Dean is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2015, 08:28
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 69
Posts: 1,320
Very few people in it are able to have a rational discussion, based on facts and data.
I don't believe that I have been irrational. I agreed with you that I could not fly my RV7 in circuits without an asi and gave the reason, ie not enough hours on the aircraft to be confident without an asi. My old Cessna, however is a different story, I had heaps of hours in that and rarely had to refer to the asi on final. Take the case of a recently tested aircraft, again factory produced that was used for training and had an asi that read 7 knots FAST at 70 knots.....7 knots. Now clearly this was not a problem for the owner who was very familiar with the aircraft, but he was using it for training new guys/gals. now the trainee is inexperienced and gets his licence and at about, say 30-40 hrs goes and flys his mates plane of the same type. He does as he is told and flys by the numbers. do you not see, at least, a potential problem here. If you dont then I give up, its become clear to me that at 30-40 hrs total time you were capable of flying the Space Shuttle by feel alone, but let me tell you, the skys are filled with people not as skilled as you.
Arnold E is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2015, 09:47
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: NSW
Posts: 427
Eddie Dean
Nearly $6000 all up to get two light helis done, took less than a day.
God Damn. I will do it for 5K
Hasherucf is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.