Exadios

Learning to fly gliders may help you with a CPL. There is a chance that you may be credited some hours.

In any case, IMO, every power pilot should be a glider pilot. You can do all the things that you are not allowed to do in a power plane in a glider. And this is not only my opinion Here is an article about a talk given by the safety officer of a European airline. We have some commercial pilots including a few 747 and Airbus captains (its the only time they actually get to fly a plane :) ).

Hi.

Unfortunately I do not live in your area but there are not many glider pilots on this board so I thought I would answer.

The nearest club to you is Sothern Cross Gliding Club. It is important to live as close as possible to your club while learning because you need to spend as much flying time as possible. You can always change clubs once you have learned.

Give it a try.

These old videos are great. Keep them coming if you have them!

I do not know who the RAS or EasyJet are but I endorse the views given in this article.

Those of you with an Android platform may be interested in XCSoar. It is equivalent to LK8000. In fact LK8000 is a fork of XCSoar. The home page is here.

[medio=full]387[/medio]

Chrisb I was merely responding to Exodias post no:35 about the usefulness of Skylines and its free tracking when in a coverage area. I am aware that it is not directly related to this post.

But it is beyond doubt that the most prevalent system of ground stations now existing is the current 3G network. And this is likely to be the case for the foreseeable future.

For gliding we use FLARM for anti collision although it has been used to locate downed aircraft because each FLARM node records the position of all other visible nodes. The 3G / Skylines system is used for vectoring tugs etc. However it could be used in the aircraft to improve situational awareness etc.

Mark,I am using the mobile phone system plus mesh networks. The reach of mobile phones is considerably greater above ground level but hardly able to cover everywhere. However the great majority of light air traffic in Australia occurs in a very broad "lane" from roughly Melbourne up to the Sunshine Coast and the South West part of WA up to Perth and my experiments lead me to believe that data transmissions should be close to continuous in these areas. Outside these areas I am proposing to use Wi-Fi by way of wireless weather stations that I have been planning to locate in remote areas. These weather stations provide weather data, of course, but also provide Wi-Fi connections from ground-to-air and from ground-to-ground. They can also provide data connections via the mobile phone system.

 

You probably know about mesh networks but in case you don't they are essentially a ground-based network of Wi-Fi stations and if, for example, an airborne station can access a mesh station within about 60nm and that ground station can communicate with further ground stations then the airborne station can access every station in the mesh and through them the aircraft can communicate with the WWW. Mesh networks are very robust as they automatically re-route data if one of the stations goes down for some reason. The entire mesh can be centrally managed from a single station on the WWW.

 

I am hoping to put weather stations on strategically located aerodromes but the rate at which this network of stations might expand will depend on the interest in using them. All appropriately equipped aeroplanes (special and experimental categories only) would be able to access the network via a subscription the cost of which would depend on pilot's expected level of use of the system. Alternately aeroclubs and aerodrome operators could buy their own stations and put them on the network for which no charge would be required. Each station would devote some of its available bandwidth to the network and the remainder could be used by the owners to provide their own secure internet services (including VoIP).

 

I hope that I have provided a satisfactory answer for you but please feel free to contact me for further information at any time. By the way, I do not presently have any timetable for what I am proposing but ongoing experimentation has been highly satisfactory.

 

Evan.

Exadios, yes, they are but at what cost? For a system as completely specified as mine the cost is around $6,000. My system should cost in the vicinity of $600 and offer a range of additional functions as well. The biggest problem with my system is that it is not yet running. Some elements of it are but not the whole system. Keep in mind too that at the price I mentioned you will be able to have ADS-B and Transponder data from other aircraft on your screen too. Still, pie in the sky at the moment!

I assume when you are talking about ADSB in because of the GPS receiver requirements for ADSB out. An ADS-B / 1090ES receiver costs about $35. For the rest the software and hardware already exist an are quite mature so I guess I must be missing something.

exadios, you asked "Apart from any comms capability how is application this functionally different from ADS-B / 1090ES?"The answer is, "very different". My application is intended to provide a full set of flight, navigation and possibly engine instrumentation is a very cheap and easy to install package. It would also allow access to BoM and AirServices websites in flight (weather data and flight planning etc.). I have another project under way to put secure camera on aerodromes along with weather stations, both of which will be accessible from my application, thereby providing real-time access to conditions at a destination. In addition to the above passengers would have access to entertainment via the internet and phone calls via the mobile phone system and VoIP would be available to all on board. Combined with MakerPlane "open source" avionics we could have an entire instrumentation and avionics suite available to special and experimental category pilots at a very low price.

A lot of the trouble with kids these days is if they cant master a new skill in five minutes flat is "its boring" or "this sucks" whether it be taking up a sport, musical instrument or probably learning to fly. Its straight back to the latest moronic iphone app!

Aviation has always been the domain of the rich, the problem for aviation now is there is a lot of competition for the rich dollar. The world has moved on since GAs peak in the 1960s

The thing is the drag created by a dead engine can be higher especially a seized engine with the prop not turning.

Otherwise, with a data logger, the whole exercise can be done at a safe altitude - say 5000' - with a real dead engine.

Maintaining CONTROL of the plane is essential whatever you do. With a fairly low speed stall plane you continue more or less ahead and into wind. You have a very good chance of living with no serious injury. Turn back and get it wrong and the bad possibilities start to come at you, with a good outcome not very assured . Nev

Flying is about making decisions. As any pilot who has landed in a paddock will know landing out is far more dangerous than landing on a runway. So the question becomes will the aircraft be above the required glide slope after a 180 degree turn. If yes and the runway is clear and the downwind is not too great then a runway landing is preferred. If the pilot is not sure that these three conditions are met then paddock (or road - parking lot etc) ahead is generally the only decision that can be made.

You can stall at any airspeed if you exceed the critical angle of attack . I agree with some of what your saying but in my opinion that footage is not suitable for low time pilots/students.

Power pilots concept of flying at best L/D is limited. IT IS important at times ( holding and ranging and power off etc) Gliding is another matter where it rates as a high priority all the time since it is directly linked to performance. A lot of power pilots would not know what the speed for L/D was as it's so linked to actual weight at the time, and many don't vary the speed on approach with weight variation. Nev

The speed for straight and level L/D is the speed for best climb. If in doubt fly the speed for best climb at MTOW. Also most operating manuals give a "Max. Glide Speed" (i.e. the speed to be flown to achieve max. distance) which may also be the engine out landing speed. At 45 deg multiply this speed by root(2) (i.e. approx 1.5). The polar varies as the square root of wind loading and so is not so sensitive to weight as you may think.

What you seem to be saying in your post is that pilot training is inadequate. Fortunately, as the video shows, this is not universal.

Decision time is the time it takes you to consider everything and start some action. The accelerate stop thing is pretty clear. Up to V1 you stop and after you GO. Your problem is assessing all the factors and how important they are. While you normally go after V1 if there was a loud explosion from somewhere the ability of the plane to fly at all might be suspect as there could be structural damage, so you might take your chances with stopping on the ground, and let the armchair theorists take a month or so to tell you, you were (technically) wrong. Nev

Actually the whole V1 thing assumes that there is enough engine to get to V2 - and beyond. On singles this may not be the case.

Boy watching that ground come up in the turn bought back some bad memories for me. I was in a 182 that tried that and didn't make it, lost two good friends that day...not a flash manoeuvre, and one fraught with danger !.............Maj...

I'm guessing that the crash you are talking of was caused by the pilot making a decision made after the engine failed. The decision made before the failure is the best one and should not be changed.

There are some aircraft for which a turn back is never an option. Most Cessnas are in this category.

I don't think a Go Pro does that video quality. Maybee computer animation I think. Some real footage some computer generated.

Probably few happen at a height that permit a turn back. The turn has also to be done in a certain way which takes a lot of training. Regards the decision time, I think 2 seconds is the time used for engine failure recognition for rejected take-offs. Most engine failures are not instant cuts, though the older two strokes were usually seizures, and fairly sudden. Nev

As you know stall airspeed Rises with angle of bank struggling with getting back to the runway by steepening the turn and stretching the glide isn't an option either how many engine failures happen at a convenient height on take off

My own rule max turn 45 degree with EFOTO depending on height and aircraft type ,terrain and wind if he tried that with something like a lancair in a 15k headwind and not enough height chances are he would stall it on the downwind turn with predictable results not a good thing to teach a student.

If, given the aircraft and the day, the plane would pass below the necessary flight path then another decision would have been made.

Stalling the plane is never an option.

As I have said this is standard training and this particular exercise is common.

Before the engine fails? How would you know, in a real life situation?

[medio=full]369[/medio]

[medio=full]368[/medio]