Jump to content

Garfly

First Class Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,149

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Garfly

  1. Garfly
    I'm a bit surprised that you would - or even could - be required to undergo such a demanding, costly and wrongheaded BFR. In my opinion, their insistence on your having to use way-out-of-date, and demonstrably less reliable, less safe nav methods seems weird. Some kind of confirmation rite of yore. That's no way to test for competence and safe airmanship in today's complex aviation environment. (Even if there's still a case to be made for ab initio training in the old ways.) I'd be interested to know which arm of CASA did the deciding on this - and on what basis. Is this normal? In any case, AFAIK, you'd not be required to do any nav test as part of your conversion to RAAus. So I guess you'd be trading in your Mooney, then, for something more on the ultra end of things. ;- )
  2. Garfly
    Philster, As soon as I turn my unit on, the middle green "ADS-B" light starts flashing - even before it gets networked to the iPad/OzRwys. So that suggests to me a problem with your SE2, itself. (There are tech savvy folks on-site who'll know more.) In any case, OzRwys does have an indicator on its main map page (upper right corner) confirming the traffic IN/OUT status (both of its own [cell-tower based] system and any integrated ADSB device.) So if you're not seeing the green radio-wave symbol (see pic) together with your ID 1234 and '1200') then you know your SE2 is not transmitting. More info here: OzRunways Knowledge Base - SkyEcho 2 ADS-B IN/OUT SUPPORT.OZRUNWAYS.COM
  3. Garfly
    Yes, Skippy the Ping gives you the same info as the SE2 and in the same format (at least within reasonable range of your own ship). But anyway, not all Mode S transponders transmit ADS-B so if yours does not send the "extended squitter" bit, as I understand it, you'd be good to go with using an SE2 to its fullest. That way you would have both the poor man's ADS-B IN/OUT solution as well as the rich man's proper transponder. That means you could continue to operate in Class-E, you would have the benefit of surveillance by Centre, you will be more likely to be detectable by TCAS and you will probably, when the time comes, be entitled to request clearance to transit controlled airspace, even in an RAAus craft on an RAAus ticket. (If I have anything wrong, I trust I will be corrected.)
  4. Garfly
    Further to the above, F10, maybe I missed the drift of your question. By "just" Sky Echo, did you mean without it even being paired to an iPad (or similar)? In that case, the answer to your question would be yes, as long as the other aircraft had IN as well as OUT (and was set to show "conspicuity" type targets). But pretty much everyone who uses a SkyEcho2 links it to an EFB (which they likely have anyway) so that they can "lookout" for all the ADSB traffic within Cooee. Nowadays, of course, all IFR aircraft show on screen plus an ever growing percentage of the rest. The more the merrier, and safer.
  5. Garfly
    Negative, re that SkyEcho question, F10. Heaps of discussion/information on the topic here on the forum. But, yeah, I reckon your old RAF mate was damn right to be paranoid. Heck, anyone who goes out of their way to get a SkyEcho is paranoid too. (Especially the ones who've learned not to fully trust their lying, limited eyes. )
  6. Garfly
    By a disease analogy ADSB is, to me, not about treating symptoms nor causes; it's a prophylactic. (And a pretty cheap and effective one, too.)
  7. Garfly
    F10, would you care to expand on that "knee-jerk" comment (especially in light of the frequency issues we're hearing about)?
  8. Garfly
  9. Garfly
    I believe that "Affirmative" is never correct (due to its sound being too close to "Negative"). And whereas "Affirm" is only ever used as an answer, "Confirm" is only ever part of a question.
  10. Garfly
    From ABC News yesterday: "An inquiry into a helicopter crash off the north Queensland coast heard the ADF ignored safety concerns from Major Ian Wilson and two other test pilots about high-tech helmets before four aviators died in July 2023. // Major Wilson said in testing of the upgraded technology to the helmet-mounted visor used by pilots, he had found serious inconsistencies between the pitch, roll, bank ... information that the TopOwl 5.10 provided ..." https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-10-18/taipan-crash-inquiry-test-pilot-apologises-to-families/104489668?utm_source=abc_news_web&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_campaign=abc_news_web&utm_content=mail From 9 News yesterday: The background from 60 Minutes 2 months back:
  11. Garfly
    Backcountry Larry has uploaded some videos explaining his AoA indicator and how he uses it.
  12. Garfly
  13. Garfly
  14. Garfly
    Nev, could it be that both pilots neglected to set QNH on approach?
  15. Garfly
    Yeah, well Area QNH is often an approximation of local QNH at a given time and place. The main aim being that all aircraft are on the same pressure datum to keep clear of each other vertically whilst enroute. But, of course, the Area QNH can't be too far out because we need to avoid terrain as much as each other (below the transition level). So the Area QNH changes regularly to track the changing atmospheric pressure. And yes, you do get the accurate Local QNH by dialling up your known field elevation but that's just for that exact time and that local area. I guess it's good to keep in mind that arriving or overflying aircraft are likely to be on Area QNH (at uncontrolled fields).
  16. Garfly
    Brendan, this is the extent of your local QNH Area as shown in OzRunways (if that's what you were asking about): CLICK FOR FULL REZ:
  17. Garfly
    Another thing I took away was just how much time there was - a good 5 mins - between Centre's first traffic advisory and the collision. Time enough for all the 'taps and glances' needed to track on a moving map the icon of a pre-alerted threat. (But then, there must have been some pretty full-on instruction going on at the time, in both cockpits.)
  18. Garfly
    Mike, when you said, a few posts up, that: "I’m not naming names or locations etc." I think something went awry with the forum's Quote feature such that it looks like Thruster is replying to my question to you. In any case, on that issue, I don't see a problem, per se, with the opinion (that is, that a cockpit traffic display would NOT likely have prevented Mangalore). For all I know, the argument might have made a point - or turned something up - we could've learned from. When all's said and done, we're all of the same Safety-First faith (just as, I guess, we'd all claim to be doggedly anti-dogma ;- )
  19. Garfly
    Juan's take on Bathurst (the second part of this vid.)
  20. Garfly
    Where did you hear that, Mike?
  21. Garfly
    Oh, yeah? That's not what the ATSB Mangalore report suggests; concluding that the use of even basic traffic display devices (had they been available) could have provided the situational awareness needed to save the day (after all traditional methods had failed). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWt57chwc8U
  22. Garfly
    Yes, in its Closest Points page OzRunways shows BRG (from) any waypoint (not only airports/VORs) as R-XXX degrees which needs to be translated to the nearest quarter quadrant for CTAF comms. Anyway, for that precision, a glance at the Map Page is enough to show distance/bearing from the runway.
  23. Garfly
    Well, Nev, there's no excuse for anyone here with an EFB being unable to do it. A quick tap and glance gives instant distance and bearing from ALL nearby points. In this example: "32.4 NM on the 201 radial (or SSW) from YPMQ." would be the quick reply. (Or, the displayed position from any other place on the list.)
  24. Garfly
    Yeah, when it comes to that, this ATSB video on the Mangalore accident is worth another look: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWt57chwc8U
  25. Garfly
×
×
  • Create New...