Use them or lose them

If you are a pilot who flies regularly and consciously tries to improve your standards and skills there is usually not a problem, but if you are a pilot who flies infrequently you can be setting yourself up for an event.

Flying schools typically ask their members to undertake a 90-day check to see that there has been no decline in the flight standard and also to allow for the instructor to pass across new information. Some pilots will resist this 90-day checking with an attitude that ‘I am alright’ but history would show that this is not necessarily the case.

General aviation line pilots and airline pilots are also subject to regular flight checks, both for standardisation and to ensure that they have not lost their edge in an increasingly fast-moving and technical flying environment. Military pilots are also regularly checked, probably more so than civil pilots.

For civil pilots the biennial flight review ensures that a licence holder is vetted by an instructor to ensurethat he or she has in fact maintained those essential flight skills.

But don’t wait every two years to refresh your skills. For GA pilots it can pay to do a little regular flying instead of infrequent longer flights. Short flights can also cost less if money is an issue. A short flight could be as simple as doing a few circuits, perhaps less than an hour. Circuit work is more valuable than a training area flight, with more decisions and actions to be carried out in a short time.

This brings us to the pilot who is between jobs, has been let go or furloughed. It also applies to the pilot who has recently gained the commercial pilots’ licence and is looking for that first job. Rather than have big gaps between logbook entries a better way to fill the void would be to undertake a few short low-cost flights.

For the GA guy this could mean a few circuits or a local hop in an aircraft as simple as a Cessna 172. This also applies to the experienced GA commercial pilot. A future employer will look more favourably at a pilot who has been making entries in the logbook, small as they might be, rather than a big gap since the last flight. Those regular entries indicate interest and more particularly maintaining flight skills.

The motto here is to keep flying. Regular flying maintains flight skills even if the flight undertaken is short. For commercial guys it is essential to keep logging time even if between positions.

Keep flying. Regular flying maintains flight skills even if the flight undertaken is short.

Confusion over NTA CAAP

procedures The December 2013 release of the new CASA CAAP ‘Operations in the vicinity of non-controlled aerodromes’, issue 116-1(2) contains an anomaly that pilots need to be aware of.

For those flying into or out of non-tower airports (NTAs), or CTAFs as we still know them, the radio frequency to use is 126. 7 MHz unless the AIP, ERSA or ERC Low chart advises that the NTA has a different frequency.

If you go to page 16 of the December NTA CAAP, para. 6. 6. 2 reads: “Note: Feedback from the industry suggests there is some confusion about this procedure and many pilots are using the Multicom frequency 126. 7 MHz, at aerodromes without a CTAF. Pilots should use the relevant area frequency as described above, unlessthey are in the vicinity of a CTAF aerodrome or in a Broadcast Area. ” Now for a long time pilots have been told to use the Multicom Frequency 126. 7 MHz at (any/all) non-tower aerodromes and that we do. To now be told to use the area frequency can only create confusion. Should a pilot turn up on the area frequency to give all his inbound, joining overhead, crosswind, downwind, base, final and vacating the active runway calls will only result in Centre advising said pilot to vacate the frequency. “But Sir, I am only doing what CASA has told me to do”. Reports received by this column indicate this is already happening.

Another consideration is that of two aircraft in the same circuit, one on 126. 7 and the other on the area frequency! At a recent CASA AvSafety Seminar the facilitator stated simply that the CASA advice to use the area frequency was incorrect. It will be corrected in time.