– Steve Hitchen
When you are flying an RAAus aircraft on an RPC, you are privileged to be able to do that without the need for a medical examination. That's part of the attraction of recreational aviation, especially for the older types who are having trouble maintaining the medical standards. However, recreational pilots also adopt a corresponding obligation: to not abuse the privilege. That means genuinely assessing whether or not you're medically fit to fly and sometimes grounding yourself when the compulsion to fly could be at its stongest. It's a self-assessment standard, and you have to make sure you're up to the standard. CASA is in the process at the moment of maybe(?) extending the privilege to PPLs, which in turn will extend the obligation as well. Currently, although a PPL may have passed their medical examination, they are required to inform CASA of any medical condition arising that may negate their fitness to fly. In effect, they already have the obligation of maintaining their own medical standard imposed on them. In early March, the FAA in the USA reported to congress that the introduction of BasicMed did not impact aviation safety. Could that be because PPLs have been monitoring their own medical conditions regularly, a much better system than relying on one medical check done every two or five years? I suspect if CASA is able to wrestle into law similar regulation removing medical checks from PPLs, they'd probably find the same thing.
I find it concerning that the ATSB elected not to determine the reason the engine failed in VH-OBK, but focused instead on the actions of the pilot. It feels too much like a philosophy of playing the man and not the ball. I sort of get what they're saying that the O-360 engine has been around since dinosaurs were lizards, and they think there's nothing to learn from finding out why this one failed, but does that mean they won't be investigating any future failures in all those O-360s that power fixed-wing aircraft as well? Most telling, is that I believe the ATSB has actually failed in their aim of examining the pilot's actions. What they have said in their report is little more than a statement of facts and really provides no new lessons. The pilot didn't identify the engine failure straight away (MB frequencies are congested. Is that a new lesson?), the instrument panel obscured an obvious landing field (that probably happens every time, you should try a forced landing in a low-wing aeroplane!) and that the autorotation was done properly, but the helicopter didn't make the selected field. The safety message really contains nothing we didn't already know. What this incident did do was release the mainstream media to trot out the sensational epithet "pilot error", even though the bloke did little contrary to his training. And that will happen, it would seem, with every accident or incident in the future that involves an O-360 engine. This is the position the ATSB is in, and we don't really have to dig too deep to see that it's more about inadequate funding than anything else. Therein lies the real lesson.
Rotax has always been able to squeeze lots of power out of a small package, so the new 160-hp 916 engine shouldn't really surprise anyone. But the message coming from Rotax. Whilst emphasising that it's designed for four-seat aeroplanes, they are simultaneously talking up the short-field capabilities and debuted the engine in a two-seat back-country taildragger. That gives the impression that a 916, whilst saving weight over an O-320, is really aimed at owners looking for performance in the critical phases of flight. Also, the 916 is only a slim margin above Rotax's own 915 iS engine. Look at the maximum continuous power: 137 hp for the 916 verses 135 for the 915. Two ponies the difference in cruise. So the 916 advantage comes in take-off, where, admittedly, you would have the extra power if you were given a choice. But the 915 is 4 kg lighter, which applies at all phases of flight, not just take-off. I suppose we really won't be able to evaluate this engine until one is installed in something like a Sling 4. Where would I like to see this engine? Alhough it's a big leap in design terms, one on each wing of a Tecnam P2006T. Come on, Tecnam ... you know you want to.
Easter is only a week away, and that means special deals on Australian Flying through Great Magazines. This year, the boss has cut the price of a one-year subscription by 30%, which lands you six issues of the magazine plus the digital version for only $40.00. Better than chocolate (nearly)! And whilst you're in there, have a look around and see if you can bag bargins on our sister publications like Great Walks, Australian Photography, Bicycling Australia, Sporting Shooter and Fishing World. It's like all your Christmases have come at Easter. Get onto the Great Magazine website straight up.
May your gauges always be in the green,
Hitch