kgwilson
-
Posts
4,894 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
142
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Store
Aircraft
Resources
Tutorials
Articles
Classifieds
Movies
Books
Community Map
Quizzes
Videos Directory
Posts posted by kgwilson
-
-
On 07/02/2021 at 10:57 AM, Old Koreelah said:
Many of we rec. pilots have little understanding of all the different types of equipment- transponders, Mode A,B,C,S, ADS-B, SE2...
Is this just the perfect way to confuse the flying fraternity and the wider public?
Perhaps some knowledgeable person can point me to an easy-to-understand outline of the different technologies, which ones are favoured by the authorities and their approximate cost.
An explanation of the different modes and what Transponders do is Here . As I mentioned elsewhere they were invested by the Poms in WW2 & originally called Parrot, hence when ATC ask you to squawk the code by pressing the Ident button it was originally called "squawk the parrot." This is a radar based technology and it enables interrogation by ATC.
ADSB stands for Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast which uses GPS technology to determine position & height and broadcasts the aircrafts encoded details to ATC and other aircraft. ADSB IN/OUT broadcasts your aircraft details and receives details from other ADSB equipped aircraft and details are then interfaced to and displayed on the moving map of Navigation software systems such as Oz Runways Av plan etc. Full details and explanations of how it works is HERE .
SE2 is just the acronym for the Uavionix Skyecho 2 the portable ADSB in/out unit approved for GA use by CASA.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I did my PPL in NZ and did a Nav to Auckland international. I had a 747 behind me & I was in a C152. Minimum approach speed was 90 knots which was flat out for the 152. I flew it right on to the ground, flapless & only slowed in the flare which took quite a while. Touched down & rolled a short way & then off. ATC were very accommodating.
-
Radials have to have an odd number of cylinders because of the single crank so the firing order is every other cylinder. If it is a 2 stroke it doesn't matter so you could have an even number of cylinders.
-
You will probably take an involuntary dump from the result.
-
The theory that a single bladed prop is more efficient is all well and good but they look stupid & seem to be heavier so what's the point.
-
3
-
-
We have been making propellors for well over 100 years including those used in water. You would think that the one perfect design would have been found by now. The problem is that it all depends on what you want from it, power, speed, reliability, efficiency etc or a combination of those things and more. It seems to me that's what is driving people to try and produce the best prop for them. Personally I am happy to accept what reputable manufacturers provide & if it fails to live up to their claims send it back.
The wooden prop I had on my aircraft worked OK and it looked good but wasn't that efficient and I was forever fixing stone chips to the leading edge and tips. The replacement Bolly Bos-5 is heaps better & being ground adjustable I was able to set it up for my sort of flying. It also has a torus on the trailing edge near the hub which is supposed to provide a bit more airflow into the cooling intake nacelles. Other than that it looks like a pretty ordinary propeller but flawlessly manufactured. I am a happy camper prop wise.
-
Everyone seems to forget that this is an Airservices proposal that CASA has not had any involvement with and replies to questions will state only current rules or fob you off. The 1500 feet AGL has to be expressed as height AMSL to be legal so that must be 1500 above the highest point in the so called "medium or high density traffic areas" and these have not been defined. I don't see it getting up at all as it will be unworkable and reduce safety.
-
6 hours ago, Thruster88 said:
For a VFR pilot it make zero difference if you are flying in class E or class G airspace. It is only the transponder requirement that would be the sticking point, allow the SkyEcho2 and every pilot will be safer.
Anyone want to explain why class E at 1500agl will be a problem for VFR pilots?
It will be a problem if Transponders continue to be mandatory. There are around 2300 RA aircraft without transponders, mine included. When gliders are operating, overhead rejoin at our airfield is 2000 feet. Oh well we'll lower it to 1500 and try and miss the glider just launched. The highest points along the J curve are over 5600 feet AMSL, the lowest sea level. Airservices have no idea where the so called medium and high traffic areas are as noted in their response to my question. All airspace is specified as height in feet above mean sea level not in AGL as their proposal says which is not workable or legal. Therefore the only way to implement it will be to set the height AMSL 1500 feet above the highest point in any of the mythical high or medium traffic density areas none of which has yet been defined..
Now they seem to be promoting Skyecho2 as a "change needed" in their presentation is "— Increase use of low powered non-TSO ADS-B transponders to maximise infrastructure investment" and that makes sense . Mind you they obviously have no idea that ADSB is not a Transponder. The requirement for a Transponder therefore has to disappear. At 1500 feet in rugged areas they won't even see the ping anyway.
So get rid of the requirement for 75 year old technology (invented by the British during WW2 & called Parrot hence the term Squawk (your Parrot)) and embrace the (Now) and allow as proposed, non TSOed ADSB in/out so everyone so equipped can see you and you can see them.
The odd thing is they say a main benefit is
Delivery of the AMP will ensure closer alignment to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) system and proven United States practice of airspace management.
In the US neither a transponder or a radio is required in class E up to 10,000 feet.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I got a response to my question asking where are the medium and high traffic areas of the J Curve. Their answer copied from the response email
"Please see the charts outlining the extent of the airspace impacted by this proposal, that have now been added to the Engage page."
Total cop out and complete BS. This is the entire J Curve. What a waste of time. I don't think they have any idea at all.
-
2 hours ago, willedoo said:
Right up into the jet age the accident rates were confronting on some aircraft types. The USAF lost 889 F-100 Super Sabres to accidents, killing 324 pilots.
Well I suppose the precedent had been set with 15,000 lost in accidents on home soil in WW2 so the high rate continued into the 50s & was probably thought of as normal collateral damage until they really began to think about it.
-
In some places 1500AGL will be 6500AMSL but then this is the entire area not areas of medium and high density traffic which have yet to be defined. 6500 over the Gibraltar range on the way to Armidale from South Grafton is insane unless it is a clear calm day. At 6500 with a good South Westerly the down draft on the lee side will better than many aircraft can outclimb.
-
1
-
3
-
-
The feedback is not to CASA, it is to Airservices who are proposing this change. CASA will eventually have to approve the changes whatever they are and determine the lower levels for the areas presumably based on 1500 feet above the highest ground in each area.
-
1
-
-
During WW2 everything was done in earnest and training was very intense and short. Aircraft were being pumped off the production line at breakneck speed and testing was minimal if at all. The training here was probably a whole lot better than in the US and even though most Australian troops were withdrawn from North Africa there were many still attached to the RAF By 1945 some 37,000 Australians had been despatched to England to serve with the RAF. 6,500 died in all theatres with 5,400 of those in the European theatre and of those 3,486 died with Bomber Command. I have no statistics of deaths in training or non combat accidents but I am sure it is a heck of a lot less percentage wise than the US.
The Statistics for US Aviation fatalities were colossal and make sobering reading.
-
1
-
-
Another video of responsibility failure. What surprises me about this one is that the passenger being American took it in his stride and did not sue the pants of the pilot like any American would be expected to do.
-
1
-
-
I have blown this up to about 400% which even makes the blue line about 100km wide. This is just the general area and not the medium and high density traffic areas they state in their proposal which is why I have asked for the actual areas which I have yet to get a response about. They are probably frantically trying to work this out at present or maybe not.
When I get a response I will also want to know what they define as high and medium traffic density. They will be able to obtain RPT and GA & RA with transponders from the Flight data they have or even from FlightRadar 24 etc. Most of the traffic is likely to be RPT above 8500 feet anyway except when in climb or descent to major airports.
In the proposal they specify an "Assessed level of Risk" as a reason for lowering Class E. What evidence do they have to determine and support this assessment?
There is a multitude of issues and plenty of pilots pretty unhappy about this proposal & I encourage everyone to put in a submission. There are 13 days left to do so.
-
3
-
-
I also asked a question which is "Where are the high and medium density areas located and the boundaries that this proposed change affects". No response yet.
-
One of the benefits of Aluminium is it doesn't mind hot dry sun but give it a damp environment and airborne pollutants along with connection to other metals especially ferrous based ones and you have problems. That's why all the aircraft boneyards are in the desert. Fibreglass doesn't like either. Both need protective coatings.
-
2
-
-
Hi Lucas,
You started a thread on this subject in December with many posts and advice from various members. I assume this is more or less a continuation of the subject.
Basic rule of thumb. Aluminium sheet should be dimpled and Aluminium plate countersunk. I made my own dimpling tool and used large 120 deg drills with light pressure to countersink the plate substrate with results as good as those I'd seen when specialist countersink tools were used. It is just easier to stuff it up using my methods. All you need though is a bit of practice before you start on the real thing.
-
Something was posted here when the Pandemic was in full swing about this and the landing fee being somewhere North of $300.00.
-
1
-
-
Carbon monoxide levels of 200ppm will usually cause headaches, tiredness, dizzyness after 2-3 hours exposure at this level. The maximum they found in testing was 144ppm.
A 2 pack a day heavy smokers levels are about 8% to 9%, average smokers are from 2.1% to 4.2%. If an individuals levels are higher that may mean CO intoxication or poisoning. The pilot was therefore at the low end of the intoxication/poisoning level and probably due to continued exposure over a period of time.
This is a good reason to get an electronic CO monitor that is on all the time. The overpriced aviation CO monitors are overly sensitive when they start alarming at 8 or 9ppm when 50 ppm is OK in a working environment for 8 hours. All this will do is unnecessarily freak the pilot out.
Mine only starts to display the PPM at 30 and alarms at 50ppm after an hour, after 10 minutes at 100ppm and within 3 minutes at 300ppm
-
IMO anything that blocks the airflow will have a detrimental effect. The area directly behind the blocked area will not get any heat exchange quickly enough and the fins will be hotter. It is like this in an air conditioned room where an alcove remains warmer than the rest of the room due to air not circulating there and relying solely on thermal conductivity of air which is terrible. Look at what happens when water is flowing and there is a blocked area. The water going past creates eddies & then the water in the blocked area just goes round and round. The pressure drop won't make any appreciable difference. Sucking as much air past all of the heat sinks as possible will always work best
-
1
-
-
The concept is the same as the FAA allowing Boeing to certify itself which didn't end well. The 2 scenarios are vastly different in complexity and legallity. I wonder though how much oversight and evidence is required by RAA or does it just accept what a manufacturer says.
-
My quote is directly copied from Airservices proposal so of course they mention it. Yes they always fall back on existing regulations as that's all they have. They will never say "Well we are going to change this or that" as they could be held liable.
-
The person responding doesn't know. They are just quoting existing rules and applying them down to 1500 feet.
As per their own proposal they say this
" Increase use of low powered non-TSO ADS-B transponders to maximise infrastructure investment"
That can only mean a SE2 as it is the only one approved by CASA.
-
1
-
Lowering Class E between Melbourne and Cairns
in AUS/NZ General Discussion
Posted
So they are blaming TCAS. Why did they design a system that relies on 75 year old technology. Of course it is the world wide standard for commercial aircraft and ADSB wasn't around then. The cost is somewhere between US$25k and $US150k per aircraft & only has a range of about 40NM. They are now up to TCAS IV with interfacing bells and whistles & of course it predates ADSB which has far greater range is modern GPS based technology & cheap to install in RPT & even cheaper for GA & RA.
TCAS is prone to errors relies on Mode C and has at least 15 major limitations. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision_avoidance_system#Drawbacks_to_TCAS_and_ADS–B
Also TCAS can interpret ADSB but as it is an old technology it doesn't have the capacity to read all of the data ADSB can send.
Relationship to Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast (ADS–B)[edit]
Automatic dependent surveillance – broadcast (ADS–B) messages are transmitted from aircraft equipped with suitable transponders, containing information such as identity, location, and velocity. The signals are broadcast on the 1090 MHz radio frequency. ADS-B messages are also carried on a Universal Access Transceiver (UAT) in the 978 MHz band.[16]
TCAS equipment which is capable of processing ADS–B messages may use this information to enhance the performance of TCAS, using techniques known as "hybrid surveillance". As currently implemented, hybrid surveillance uses reception of ADS–B messages from an aircraft to reduce the rate at which the TCAS equipment interrogates that aircraft. This reduction in interrogations reduces the use of the 1030/1090 MHz radio channel, and will over time extend the operationally useful life of TCAS technology. The ADS–B messages will also allow low cost (for aircraft) technology to provide real time traffic in the cockpit for small aircraft.[17] Currently UAT based traffic uplinks are provided in Alaska and in regions of the East coast of the USA.
Hybrid surveillance does not make use of ADS–B's aircraft flight information in the TCAS conflict detection algorithms; ADS–B is used only to identify aircraft that can safely be interrogated at a lower rate.
In the future, prediction capabilities may be improved by using the state vector information present in ADS–B messages. Also, since ADS–B messages can be received at greater range than TCAS normally operates, aircraft can be acquired earlier by the TCAS tracking algorithms.
The identity information present in ADS–B messages can be used to label other aircraft on the cockpit display (where present), painting a picture similar to what an air traffic controller would see and improving situational awareness.[18][19]