Jump to content

walrus

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    521

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Everything posted by walrus

  1. walrus
    I'm afraid this proposal must be rejected because you can't trust AsA, let alone CASA. The devil is in the detail. We could be totally shut out of the Airspace concerned. For example access is allowed, in theory, to "appropriately equipped" VFR aircraft. What does that actually mean? Who decides what is appropriate? At present for example, the use of ADSB for separation, which AsA is keen on, requires at least a $4000 TSO'd GPS source. Skyecho cant do it.
  2. walrus
    We don't have WAAS in Australia.
  3. walrus
    I have a number of friends who are caught by this and similar catch 22"s. Workcover, transport, etc. legislation all have this get out ; " If you don't meet the standards or have a medical episode, you will have to be reviewed" ....and the result of that review is always a big fat "No". For example, the pass rate for drivers licence medical reviews after illness or injury is zero in Victoria.
  4. walrus
    The idea of using AGL as the floor of Class E is utter rubbish for one reason: Because that Class E Floor is by definition, not a smooth continuous surface. It mirrors that landscape. Think about that not from an RAA perspective but from an IFR, RPT or charter perspective - can you actually use the lower levels of such airspace? The answer is of course not because you need consistent altitudes or your navigation task is impossible. Can you imagine a controller saying: "Maintain 2000 AGL till Doncaster"?
  5. walrus
    it is absolutely NOT the same. The oz one requires the commercial diving standard which is quite strict and also requires the GP to sign that you unconditionally meet the standard. How many people over the age of say 50, don't have any medical conditions? If you actually read the CASA paperwork, and your GP also does the same, you will realise its a fake "relaxation" of standards.
  6. walrus
    The 2021 Birdsville races were on my "To Do" list until today. Now that the Shire Council has prohibited under wing camping, I won't be going. The project was just doable as it was, considering the cost involved and the ever present nuisance of CASA, but to be relegated to a tent city full of drunks instead of the airstrip is just too much. The Council thinks that running the event was too expensive, well, we can help them fix that problem; don't go.
  7. walrus
    I was saddened by the SAAA submission to the senate review. It could best be summarised as; "Misery loves company". They want everyone on the VH register with themselves and subject to CASAs tender ministrations.
  8. walrus
    Yenn, I am assuming that we will all be flying in class E with ADSB Sky Echo or better, and a radio. Once we decide that, then the floor of Class E can be fifteen inches for all I care. Needless to say, I already have most of the gear.
  9. walrus
    I'm glad that the new CEO of RAA is engaging with this process and I like the RAA response so far. Being an optimist, I think this discussion could end up in a win/win situation if we think about it. RAA: - wants access to controlled airspace and airports for suitably trained and equipped pilots and aircraft. The GA licence and BFR requirement is a PITA. - All RAA and GA aircraft want an end to these lethal roadblock airspaces on the East Coast, Sydney, WIlliamtown, Coffs, East Sale, Melbourne etc., etc. Airservices wants economies and safer skies through the employment of ADSB and that technology is getting cheaper. RPT wants shorter tracks and reduced fuel costs while maintaining safety. If the cost of a solution was fitting ADSB and radios in exchange for access to controlled airspace and more airports, at least in class D, and assuming all else is equal, then I think it would be worth it.
  10. walrus
    Flight over closely settled areas can apparently be authorised by designated persons. Is RAA able to authorise this under CAR 262AP?
  11. walrus
    Thank you for the advice, I guess that is the way I have to go.
  12. walrus
    RF guy, RAA and other organisations HAVE to reject this proposal out of hand or otherwise they are conceding Airservices the right to make arbitrary decisions. We are then reduced to just being supplicants pleading for a few crumbs from the table. AsA should not have done any of this, but now they have been stupid enough to raise the issue, we are within our rights to request a holistic and risk management derived National airspace strategy that reverses the *** sandwich they have been feeding Australian GA and RAA pilots for years. If you have ever flown into LAX and had a window seat you will know what I mean. Far too restrictive rules on access to controlled airspace and huge chunks reserved for the RAAF are just the beginning. The East coast of Australia is just a series of lethal and unnecessary road blocks to GA and RAA aircraft.
  13. walrus
    RAA.....Bravo!
  14. walrus
    you need it in your jacket pocket when flying.
  15. walrus
    I have a question regarding the use of Dynon Skyview equipment for ADSB. The Skyview transponder is certified, so that is OK. The Dynon GPS it uses for full ADSB (SIl =2, SDA = 3) is not certified but the combination is accepted by the FAA as meeting their ADSB standards (CFR whatever) - the Dynon manuals specifically state this, as does their software setup screen. CAO 20.18 requires that GPS position sources meets clause 3 of Part B of Appendix XI - Transmitting Equipment. This says that the GPS must be an IFR capable unit covered by one of TSO's 145, 146 or 196. Folks, these are very expensive. Think $3000+++. BUT. CASA appears to have a let out clause for RAA type aircraft (described as certain light sport, etc.): This inclines me to believe that he Dynon statement is a "statement of conformance (however described)" as specified in 9B.12 (b) because it is stated in the installation manual that the installation complies with U.S. 14CFR 91.227. and the GPS meets TSO166b performance specs. If this is correct, then it should be legal to use the Dynon equipment to provide a full ADSB out system (SIL=2 ,SDA=3) as accepted by the FAA. What do you think? Is it kosher?
  16. walrus
    The whole proposal is a waste of time.
  17. walrus
    But wait! There's more costs! If AsA mandates transponders AND ADSB then add another $4000++ to the costs. AsA requires that any transponder outputting ADSB signals MUST have a TSO'd GNSS position source (SIL=2). The cheapest of those is over $2000. You are legally not allowed to use anything with SIL = 1 on a transponder, I currently output SIL = 0 which means ASA ignores it. I can't see AsA making a Sky echo mandatory either.
  18. walrus
    It's not going to be obsolete for another twenty to thirty years because it is built in to all commercial jetliners for at least forty years. You are talking of tens of thousands of jetliners. For them to add another unit will require fully certified installations to be designed for each, depending on original configurations including interfacing with existing equipment. As Dick Smith found out, you are talking billions and billions of dollars. Furthermore the system is not stand alone like TCAS but relies on the GPS system.
  19. walrus
    Just discovered that I configured my transponder to output ADSB with SIL = 0. My aircraft shows up on Sky Echo units and also FR24.
  20. walrus
    What I think people need to consider here are the questions of standards and reliability. I went into these in some detail a while ago in an effort to convince myself that a certain GPS was capable of meeting the necessary TSO's. I failed. The simple fact is that as long as Airservices or CASA's backside points to the ground, they are NOT going to allow you to tool around anywhere near an RPT jet aircraft from B737 on up, without a TSO'd transponder and GNSS position source (NOT TSO C199) because they have to GUARANTEE separation. To put that another way, they are not going to risk you becoming engine fodder for an A380 because your Sky Echo battery went flat, or it's two dollar multi layer PCB cracked. Folks, it's consumer electronics, not something to risk 300+ lives on. That is why I call it a toy. One that may give you a false sense of security. For example, how do you positively KNOW there is no traffic? Are you sure its position is correct? What if the Antenna has failed? Yes transponders are old technology, so is the internal combustion engine. Yes ADS-B might be better but the cost of doing a certified installation in RPT aircraft is stratospheric. The aviation industry is super conservative for good reason.
  21. walrus
    .....and further reading of CAO 20..18 indicates No use of ADSB - Out from a mode S transponder unless it is connected to a $2000++ certified GNSS unit. Then of course space based ADSB is coming which requires at least extra aerials. Then supposedly there is an Australian SBAS system which may require a different GPS. And then we find that Sky Echo is just a toy as far as CASA and Airservices are concerned, and anyway airliners don't do ADSB, they do TCAS. The entire ADSB thing is just a useless circus.
  22. walrus
    transponders roughly $3500 each for ?2000 RAA aircraft? Plus installation. $6 million?
  23. walrus
    An EC device will get you into class E Airspace and nowhere else. What pisses me off is that GPS equipment that is legal in the USA - accepted by the FAA for adsb, isn't legal here because, well, we are special.........
  24. walrus
    You can stick ADSB and the skyecho up your proverbial. I spent over $15000 on avionics, I have a transponder and I STILL can't get a compliant ADSB installation without shelling out for a high accuracy GPS ($3000+). CASA killed the low cost option stone dead. Read CAO 20.18. Not only that, we STILL cant get access to class D or C airspace anyway. I am NOT putting a box on the windscreen and fiddling with an iPad in flight for anyone. It is simply too dangerous in turbulence to have all this extra stuff floating around, nor do I want to be head down trying to find traffic on an iPad. Sometimes I feel that CASA and AsA are doing their level best to kill Australian Aviation, in all its forms, stone dead. The Class E proposal is a step in that direction.
  25. walrus
    Then in the absence of further information, the answer is: “it depends”. Why would you use stainless steel instead of alloy or fibreglass? While you need to constrain the edges of a baffle for structural reasons, why try and connect it to a (vibrating) engine? It won’t stay connected for long. What’s wrong with silicon baffle seal material like everyone else uses? Are you solving a problem that doesn’t exist?
×
×
  • Create New...