Garfly

It's got so bad it's come to this: (an end credit from the animated Xmas Special by the Stephen Colbert team.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkEy_IttHKE

I always thought it was saying "Think mate! Think mate!" Anyway, I reckon your skepticism is in order regarding this video. It has all the hallmarks of a hoax. Still, the prank points to real problems with aero/nautical language. I only discovered recently (on YouTube, as it happens) that navies introduced the term 'port' in place of 'larboard' in 1840 due to the danger of its sounding so much like its opposite. Likewise, later, airfarers dumped 'affirmative' in favour of 'affirm' for the very same reason.

It looks like that wouldn't be for at least 8 years. ADS-B Mandate Cross Agency Working Group Potential future expansion of Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) mandate in Australia Consultation Paper September 2025 potential-future-expansion-automatic-dependent-surveillance-broadcast-ads-b-mandate-in-australia-consultation-paper-september2025.pdf EXCERPT (p.9) : Potential model in brief Visual Flight Rules (VFR) ... Overall, the model proposes a staged introduction of ADS-B OUT capability for all aircraft operating under VFR, including the use of approved electronic conspicuity (EC) device in some circumstances. The model would see aircraft operating under VFR in class A, D, E and G airspace equipped with ADS-B OUT from 2028. For Class D, E or G airspace, operators could choose between approved ADS-B equipment or approved EC devices. This would be supplemented in 2033 by a requirement for all capable aircraft operating in Class B and C airspace to be equipped with approved ADS-B equipment. A transition to approved ADS-B equipment for all capable VFR aircraft in all airspace is envisaged in the long term, at a time to be determined beyond 2033. Equipment requirements under an ADS-B mandate would be in addition to existing requirements relating to carriage and use of transponders. The working group has proposed ADS-B IN capability using a suitable receiver be required from 2028 for all capable aircraft operating under VFR. This reflects the fact that much of the safety benefit of ADS-B technology is enabled only once both OUT and IN functionality is activated, and by the fact that approved EC devices in Australia can be capable of both OUT and IN functionality.

From the YT description: "The FAA's proposed rule for drone integration to the NAS includes the possibility that crewed aircraft that don't have ADS-B will have to give right of way to drones when flying below 400 feet. uAvionix has come up with a simple inexpensive solution that also has safety benefits for glider, paraglider and ultralight pilots that is also anonymous. uAvionix's Christian Ramsey tells us about the SkyEcho, a portable ADS-B Out/In device that can offer real utility at altitudes also occupied by drones."

After upgrading to more practical gear the old chap hasn't looked back.

This new feature is available to try out now: Settings >> Preferences >> Use new plan sheet (EXPERIMENTAL) To me one of the big advantages will be the ability to rearrange the columns of data (TAS TRK WIND HDG etc.) such that even when squeezed for screen space you'll be able to have the most useful numbers always in sight.

Premature parachute deployment involving Cessna 208, VH-DVS, over Tully Airport, Queensland, on 20 September 2025 | ATSB WWW.ATSB.GOV.AU

Tributes flow for respected farmer, pilot and family man | Deniliquin Pastoral Times WWW.DENIPT.COM.AU George Grimwade's impact was profound: 'Anyone who crossed paths with him had their life enriched.'

I came across this glitch today (apparently iOS specific) and emailed Support about it. I post the exchange here in case it saves others the bother. Subject: 'Set as Plan Origin' crashes app. Date: 28 October 2025 at 12:09:50 AEDT To: [email protected] Dear Support, this is a strange one. Today, I noticed [on iPhone 15 Pro Max (iOS 18.6.2)] that when selecting airports to ‘Set as Plan Origin’ the app crashes to the device’s home screen. This happens most of the time, though there seem to be a few (random?) airports that it accepts normally. And it seems to remember those few favourites on reboot. However, for most places, it quits as soon as they're selected as Plan Origins and continues to do so on subsequent tries. Have you come across this before? Has anything changed in the code that might have caused it? It doesn't seem to be happening with my iPad mini nor with my older standby iPhone. Of course, I've tried restarting the device, and altering any parameter I can think of but nothing seems to fix the problem. I've even tried in Simulator mode where position info is being supplied by X-Plane (in case it was a device gps glitch) but the same thing happens in the virtual universe. Any advice would be appreciated. ... BTW, a workaround I've found that seems to do the job is to make a new User Waypoint and move it to the location of the desired (but glitchy) airport and use that for the plan instead. All the best, Gary. From: OzRunways Support <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 'Set as Plan Origin' crashes app. Date: 28 October 2025 at 14:12:52 AEDT Reply-To: OzRunways Support <[email protected]> Hi Gary, We've fixed this up for the next app update which will be available soon, I expect in the next couple of weeks. A workaround in the meantime is to plan using Quick Plan instead of tapping on the map. The Quick Planner is covered in the first part of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPb1rHAgX6M - please excuse the old style layout, the Quick Planner still functions the same! Cheers Jake

A YT video on this issue just popped up in the feed which might be of interest. For the time-poor, a short version can be had between 05:50 and 07:50 (though it goes on to show the same technique applied to engine cooling strategies).

A route like this is often used between Warwick and Redcliffe; threading a path between Amberley and YBBN. CLICK FOR FULL REZ.

Yes, same happened to me, I just noticed it working by accident and I was surprised that I hadn't heard about it (too bad I missed your post) so I went looking for more info. Apple does have its own Satellite SMS system for its more recent phones but I saw somewhere that Telstra's system with its access to the Starlink system should work even better. (However, Apple also has its own Sat SOS system which is something else again.) I believe, also, that other service providers - and other devices - will soon be joining in with sat messaging. And they say that sat voice comms on cell phones will eventually happen as well.

I guess this will be useful for anyone (with an eligible phone) flying remotely. Satellite texting and satellite messages now available from Telstra WWW.TELSTRA.COM.AU Telstra Satellite Messaging complements Telstra mobile services by supporting satellite text messaging in most parts of mainland Australia.

Which bit do you mean, Nev? The Great Australian Bight or the Moreton Island VFR crossing? Either way, I tend to agree. I'm pretty Hydrophobic myself. Which is why I'd be clinging to the red ring of confidence trying to decide between the 3,500 shorter route or the 4,500 longer one across to Bribie. My test flying, though, has been done in the safety of the simulator. LOL

There's an app to help with that too ;- ) The Glide Assistant - Real Time in OzRwys (and other EFBs) puts a red ring around your approximate glide range based on your aircraft's published glide ratio (at best airspeed), current position and height above ground, real time wind info and local topography.

As I understand it, that was the first enroute stop where he'd have been able to get the jet fuel he needed. (Though the fuel truck would have to be arranged ahead of time.)

Yes, agreed ... and he sort of accepts that when questioned about it in the discussion (in the Comments). Anyway, having access to his reasoning both aloft and afterwards, I found instructive, especially given that over-water legs are top of mind for us here lately.

Yes, good point MB. I thought the same. It's worthwhile reading the discussion in the Comments section where he answers several questions taking him to task on that choice. Fuel type was a factor, he required Jet-A1 which he apparently couldn't get at the time at the usual stops across the Nullabor. As you say, he had Forrest as an alternate. But even so, the coastal route, as he says himself, would have added just another 40nm to his total. And, as things turned out, he could have made it with legal reserves that way but I think on his original plan even that bit extra might have put him close to his legal limit (especially if the winds turned). Anyway, he discusses all that very openly and helpfully in the Comments. He was, of course, set up for ditching (as he explains). As it happened, he was always in VHF contact, and had the back up of talking to airliners on Guard. Of course, a lot of all that is out of the RAAus league and yet, not that far out. Some of the mid-flight surprises he faced - and shared - could happen to any of us and for me it was good to see how a professional pilot thinks through unexpected plan changes. And it's only in this kind of video that we get to see the pilot's problem solving in action. Heck, his videos about flying the Citation Mustang and the DA62 are even further beyond my aeronautical ken, but (call me a tragic) I find 'em fascinating. ;- )

I expect nothing of the sort. Obviously. But in the context of this thread the likelihood of a reader or two finding that particular video SPECIAL enough (even useful) goes up. I'd have thought. Clearly, a post's value does not necessarily relate to the amount of effort involved in posting it. Plus, anyone who merely posts an article or video expects to receive nothing of the prestige due its author - or, for that matter, the originator of any comment or post coming from their own (deep) knowledge. Master-chefs need harbour no resentment towards the waiting staff. Diners know where compliments are due. I don't think I take it personally. I hope not. But I'd like to think I step in whenever I see mistaken/unjust assertions/accusations against anyone. Of course, I'm paying more attention when I've been the poster. Maybe I feel particularly responsible to defend the honour of the authors/pilots whom I've exposed to unfair criticism by posting their work here. Yes, we share ideas here and we're all entitled to say what we want but that, thankfully, doesn't stop us holding each other to standards of discourse somewhat higher than that.

Sad indeed.

Really?

Who said anything about no stops? He stopped in Mildura and in Ceduna (and Esperance, of course). Crikey! Nobody has to watch the video but it is not reasonable at all to critique it (or the aviating it depicts) without watching it.