Roundsounds had the most liked content!
They're a great bunch of aeroplanes, don't forget to add the 55 to your list! Flown all bar the 9. The 52W and 52TW lose some of the charm being fitted with western instruments and toe brakes. I reckon a 52TD would be the best of the range.
I did the initial test flights after assembly when imported. Then "endorsed" David on the machine. The Yak 50 is a great machine and that is a particularly good example.
Is that David Lian's machine?
I suspect the accident rate will infact rise over the coming years. The addition of technology into the cockpit will further reduce the general handling skills of pilots and introduce unnecessary distractions. A pilot should be comfortable in getting into their aircraft and flying it without the aid of written checklists or by reference to any flight instruments. This includes all phases of VFR flight and manoeuvres. Im not saying technology makes flying dangerous, it's the lack of underlying handling skills and lack of training in prioritisation of tasks. The number of videos I've seen of pilots looking for traffic on their chosen EFB instead of looking outside, one memorable one was determined to find the traffic on their EFB while their non pilot pax looked outside and spotted the traffic immediately.
All of these pilots will hold at least level 4 English Language Proficiency. Why does CAsA not carry out random audits of the assessed candidates? This is a genuine Safety issue.
The training facilities are teaching their students to routinely make these unnecessary calls. Very poor and unprofessional instructional practice. If the training organisations were teaching correct radio procedures there wouldn't be the constant chatter on CTAF.
On the flip side, people routinely make broadcasts turning onto every leg of the circuit, inbound, over head, joining circuit and clear of runway, irrespective of the level of traffic. When there are half a dozen aircraft on CTAF (and throw in a handful of acknowlegdements to the broadcasts) this leads to: - radio congestion - reduced situational awareness (with each transmission you redraw the mental picture) I have no issues with additional broadcasts or aircraft to aircraft calls to coordinate separation, but routinely making unnecessary broadcasts based on the principle of "the more you talk the safer you'll be" is simply wrong. By limiting routine calls to those recommended, you are leaving RT space for critical calls.
The golden rule in any aircraft fitted with flash automation, if it's not doing as expected get rid of the automation. Once you've sorted things out and established in a safe state, then consider whether further use of automation is the best course of action. This applies to automated trim functions, the B737 has a published procedure to disable the automated trim function and revert to manual trim. The initial steps in this procedure are accomplished from memory. Boeing have not designed a system that will fly the aeroplane into the ground. "System" includes both aircraft systems and crew intervention.
The root of the problem with stalling skills sits squarely with instructor / examiner training and attitudes. Having had the opportunity to fly with a large number of instructors providing them with tailwheel endorsements, I find their level of knowledge and skill to be appalling. I always include upper air general handling as part of the type training before starting the takeoff / landing elements. Often the type used for the tailwheel training exhibits strong adverse yaw tendencies, much greater than the types they have previously flown. I have the trainee complete some coordination exercises to familiarise them with the control inputs required to maintain balance rolling into and out of turns. This often provides me with concern, then there's the stalling exercises. A large proportion of these instructors become anxious at the thought of straight and level stalling, let alone slipping, skidding or power on stalls. The simulated skidding turn into final is the eye opener for most. I like to think some of these instructors take away some improved knowledge and seek further training around stalling.
You are correct, if this is an MCAS related problem, the crew will need to be trained and competent in performing Boeing's published procedures. This is most likely an issue for the training providers, including recurrent training not just the initial type rating. It seems the second last crew to operate the aircraft involved in the Lion Air accident were able to deal with the problem. The problem appears to have been caused by a maintenance issue and not a manufacturers design issue. Whether the crew know what may have caused the fault will have no effect on how they deal with it. Boeing have a published procedure to deal with the Lion Air problem.
It's pretty hard trying to get tiedowns to stop the Cub blowing away at any location, let alone a beach!
I've got a Piper J3 Cub, happy with 400m with clear approaches.
You could very easily raise a valid argument that operating in CTR / CTA could be safer than Class G. Alternatively you could argue the authorities are saying it's more dangerous to operate in controlled airspace. Albury / Wagga are interesting cases. Albury has a tower due RPT ops. RPC holder cannot operate at Albury when the tower is active, yet they can when the tower closes. If the argument is about RPT movements being limited to tower hours consider Wagga. Wagga has RPT ops, no tower yet RPC operations permitted. Motor gliders can be flown in CTA / CTR by the holder of a GFA equivalent of an RPC with no limitations. It's all very inconsistent and not safety based.