cscotthendry

I use a combination of cockpit noise picked up by the gopro, and voice recorded off the intercom. Digital voice recorders are cheap and plentiful at the moment. Some are available for around the $25 mark.

This is what I do also. You can buy adapters, or if you're handy with a soldering iron, you can buy bits from Jaycar to do it. I use a 2 into 1 6.5mm adapter, with a cable I made that has a 6.5mm plug at one end and a3.5mm plug to go into my audio recorder at the other end.

LOL, glass houses ... stones???

Yep, but if he's 10nm on one side of the field and I'm 10nm on the other side (or some other combination of those numbers) I really want to know he's there.

Another straw man argument. Who said anything about a near miss???

Really? You can reliably spot a trike 10-20 miles away? I don't think so!

Mark: It depends on the model of engine. The newest engines have different heads and the temp sensor is embedded in the coolant now. There is a service bulletin for this on Rotax Owner.com.

Alpi: You need to make sure that the sender on your engine is matched to the gauge. There are different types of temperature senders and some of them have different resistance / temperature coefficients. You can usually check which type of thermocouple is in the sender by looking up the markings on the internet. To see if your gauge matches it do the following Go to Jaycar and buy a 56 ohm resistor Disconnect the wire from the temperature sender at the engine Connect the resistor between the wire that you disconnected from the sender, and the engine crankcase or head. With that resistor connected securely, go and turn the master switch on. Your temperature gauge should read somewhere around the 100 deg C mark. If it is significantly different (like reading very low or off the scale) then your gauge doesn't match the rotax sender. The Rotax senders are VDO parts and if you look at their data sheet available from their website, you will see that the Rotax sender is type C (calibration chart 2) which should have about 62 ohms at 100 deg C. If the sender has been changed, or you suspect it is faulty, take it home and put it in some boiling water and measure the resistance with a multimeter. It should read about 60-odd ohms.

Yenn: Notwistanding the amount of flying you have done and whether a radio is helpful in all situations, Having a radio gives you the option to use it when and where it's required or NOT use it when and where it's not required. Whereas NOT having a radio, restricts you to those places and situations where it's not required. Why throw away a significant chunk of sky to fly around in? As for a transponder? Yes, they are beneficial too. But if you're suggesting that just because some think that radios should be mandated, it is fair game to extrapolate to transponders, I think you're setting up a straw man argument there. Why stop there, Why not mandate anti-collision TCAS and weather RADAR, autopilots etc etc?

All that is necessary is a call like "Brisbane Center, MyAircraft 9999 request status of Amberley airspace" They will respond with something like "Station calling, Amberley is Active" or "Station calling Amberley De-Active" or "Station calling, Amberley Deactive, (pause) Active at 2 2 0 0" I always then respond "Amberley Active, MyAircraft 9999" to acknowledge receipt of the info. You don't need to inform them where you are or your height etc, that just clogs their airwaves. And wait until there is a clear gap in their transmissions and try to stay out of the middle of them directing airliners.

And that IS just plain wrong. I have not seen any posts in this thread saying or even suggesting that you should have everything needed to fly in primary control zones just to fly in uncontrolled airspace. You have distorted what people have posted, in order to try to discredit their position. To fly in control zones you need to have a calibrated altimeter and transponder and need to be flying with a certified engine and a class 2 medical. NO ONE has suggested anything along those lines in this thread, but your exxageration of their posts says a lot about your determination to justify your position by any means.

In my original post, I didn't advocate mandatory fitment of radios to ALL aircraft. What I did say is that I believe they should be mandatory to attend fly ins where high performance aircraft will be doing flying displays. However ... Seeing some of the tissue thin justifications put forward in some of the posts for NOT fitting radios, I have come to the position that if you're flying around out there without a radio, I don't want you anywhere near me. I accept that as a PIC, I must keep a lookout for other aircraft, and I do. But I expect the other pilots to do their part to help me know where they are and what they're doing. Without a radio, you are effectively saying "Everyone else has to keep a specially watchful lookout for me because I can't be bothered to let anyone know where I am or what I'm doing." Here's the news: My safety is my responsibility. Your safety is NOT my responsibility, but if you go radio-less, you make both our safety MY responsibility. As others have said, when you have spent the $20K-$200K on an aircraft and then spent the money getting qualified to use it and then the money to maintain it, if you can't be bothered spending a bit extra on some kind of comms YOU SHOULDN'T BE IN THE AIR.

Mark: I have been trying to be as polite as I can about some of the weird logic some have presented in their excuses for not making radios at major fly ins mandatory. I must admit that I have had to bite my tongue more than once. I especially take exception to the notion that because not all radio installations are reliable, this leads to poor airmanship or is somehow a reason why radios should not be mandated for fly ins or some other twisted logic. But everyone is entitled to their opinion and in this country, entitled to voice it. I'm pleased that people have troubled themselves to have an input to the discussion.

I'm a bit puzzled by your logic. No one was blaming the pilot's confusion over daylight savings on having or not having a radio. What I DID say is that if he had had a radio, he would most likely have been able to catch his error before arriving at the circuit. That simple fact is indisputable.

Yes, I guess that is technically correct, but the program was laid out in local times. If it had been set out in GMT that may have helped with the DLS confusion, but it brings its own level of confusion when pilots have to convert from GMT to local. Again, a clock in the cockpit running GMT would help there I guess. Hmmm .....

I think I get where you're coming from, but the case of the Evans Head fly in (IMO) kind of overruns your sentiment. There was a great effort made to inform pilots of the procedures in this case, and indeed the pilot in question was informed about the procedures. He made a simple mistake about timing and having a radio would have given him the chance to discover his mistake BEFORE he got to the circuit area. As Kaz suggested, if the P-51 had not had a radio, or there was another radio-less aircraft doing the demonstration, things could have turned out quite differentlt at GEFI. BTW, I have to admit that I also made the same mistake as the drifter pilot, but (1) My arrival time slipped me into the circuit 5 minutes before the display started, and (2) I heard the warning calls on my radio just as I was on short final.

In this particular case, the pilot of the drifter HAD all the relevant NOTAMs and even had a sheet on his kneeboard (or whatever) with the display times highlighted. He is to be given credit for being as informed as possible, and he mad a simple mistake concerning daylight savings... HOWEVER, had he had a radio, all would have been well. Had the Mustang NOT had a radio as well, it could have been a disaster. I don't get where you're going about the reliability of radios though. Are you suggesting that it shouldn't be mandatory for radios at these types of fly ins because some aircraft have dodgy installations or poorly maintained equipment?

It was a great Eastern Fly In, although it was fairly humid. I will be posting some video when I have it edited in a couple of days.

REALLY? You don't acknowledge the potential for disaster that was there? What if the drifter hadn't been spotted in time? What if there had been a mid-air and one or both aircraft had come down in the crowd? Because the above scenario didn't happen, you think it's no big deal?

If you had been at Evans Head on the weekend you wouldn't have posted that. A radio-less drifter blundered into the middle of a flying demonstration by a P-51 mustang. Sure, this didn't become an "accident" but it very easily could have. That is only one incident that I know of caused by an aircraft without a radio. I would bet London to a brick there are many more. Had the drifter in question had a radio, he would have heard the calls by the ground operator announcing the start of the demonstration and warning approaching aircraft to remain at least 5 miles clear of the field. His error was a simple mix up regarding daylight savings, but if he had had a radio, this would not have resulted in the demonstration incursion.

Bruce: Having a radio in the aircraft in no way absolves the pilot from keeping a lookout, nor was this suggested in my original post. The radio is our means to alert other pilots to our intentions and presence. They are still required to LOOK. In the same way as cars having turn signals and brake lights doesn't mean that the drivers don't have to watch traffic.

Interesting thought. There seemed to be a few aircraft without radios at GEFI, or at least if they had radios, they weren't on the correct frequency or weren't working properly.

Karen: Welcome to flying and the forums. I had a brief read of your blog. Love your sense of humor esp the bit about always flying with a fabulous hairdo! Looking forward to seeing the pics of your flyin travels. Your Cirrus will take you to anywhere you want to go, just ask Ryan Campbell. Happy landings, and smooth flying.

I know this will be contentious with some flyers but I believe this discussion needs to be had. IMHO aircraft without radios are like cars without brake lights or turn signals. They're fine for paddock-bashing, but in traffic they are a menace. I've just returned from the Evans Head fly in where radio-less aircraft caused confusion and dangerous situations in the traffic. I think that aircraft without radios should not be allowed to attend fly ins where there will be significant traffic, but most particularly where high powered aircraft are performing aerial displays near the airfield. This could be done by implementing the equivalent of CTAF® by NOTAM for the fly in.

Is the Pope Catholic? Are the Kennedys gun shy? Also works the other way round...