skippydiesel

Being an electronic neophyte, I shouldn't comment however even I understand that the signals generated and appearing, on whatever electronic device you have, are not in real time. Those who rely on these sorts of systems for separation, may get into real trouble (The Oaks incident?). In small VFR aircraft, you can't beat the radio for situational awareness, followed by the dodgy MK1 eyeball. In my mind, there is a real danger that pilots will get sucked in by the computer screen ,not communicate & look outside the cockpit.

I read this, to say BrendAn has the information. Not an observation on how it may be derived.

What information have you got? I think the investigators were still on site Wednesday possibly also yesterday.

There is a witness, a child (age?) who supposedly saw a wing tip to wing tip contact, between the two aircraft. The relative location of the two crash sites, would suggest, if the child is correct, the aircraft may have been traveling in opposite directions.

AND as far as we know, at this time , in contact with The Oaks/Camden/Sydney

Contemplating purchasing a SkyEcho BUT have Mode S (OUT) would have to disable the SE OUT according to UAvionix; "In addition, they must not be allowed to transmit when (a) in VFR flight at or above FL290; or (b) concurrently with a Mode S transponder that is also transmitting ADS‑B. An EC device may be operated in Australia concurrently with a Mode A/C, or a Mode S transponder (other than one that is transmitting ADS-B). UAT is NOT used nor permitted in Australia". I would be financially better off with a "Ping" (IN) - the question is - will I get as good/much information from the Ping???

It would seem likly that the Jab was fitted with a SkyEcho (or similar) system (ADSB IN/OUT) - hence the availability of a track.

Thanks for that Roscoe, It's about two years since I flew at Camden & only remembered the inbound height. The observation regarding the proximity of the two airfields and the potential for traffic inbound to Camden to conflict with The Oaks activity remains. The "not below 2500ft" is insufficient - it should be not below 3000ft. Reason - aircraft inbound to The Oaks are often at 2500 ft, giving a 600ft circuit safety margin, to overfly prior to descending to enter the pattern. Added to the above is the not so infrequent Camden bound aircraft at or below Oaks circuit height. There is no excuse for this as it's perfectly easy for most small aircraft to descent to 1800 ft by Mt Hunter

Forgot to mention Camden & The Oaks on diffrent frequencies.

Of possible interest - The Oaks is a Camden airfield inbound reporting point. Camden's circuit height is 1800 ft. Descent to circuit height is usually required some distance to the east of The Oaks (MT Hunter). On occasion aircraft overflying The Oaks, inbound to Camden, are well and truly on descent (low) over The Oaks.

The crashed Jab (A), in company with another Jab (B), departed The Oaks at around 11.30, for Cessnock. Jab B had a fuel problem in the vicinity of Badgerys Creek & decided to return to The Oaks. Jab A also decided to return. On return Jab A made a balked/missed landing. Jab B landed very shortly after. Jab A appeared to be going around for another landing attempt, when the accident occured. There was some turbulence in the area. To the best of my recollection there were no calls from the C182 and I have no idea why they would have been so low and likly in or very close, to the circuit pattern. The Oaks Circuit is 1900 ft. The 18 & 36 circuits are both to the west side. Inbound aircraft will usually be at 2500 ft prior to descent.

Yes it's my area . Thanks for the thought, alive & well. I will leave the speculation to others but will report the death of two possibly three people. One of the aircraft, RAA Jab, was from The Oaks. The other appears to be VH registered, I do not know from where. The incident appears to have occurred at or about circuit height.

"I believe a factory built LSA cannot be converted to run on condition, it must remain running on the manufacturers service schedule. Upon inspection of the relevant documents for my plane, an early Evektor Sportstar, is not an LSA but a Type-Certified aircraft so I dodge that rule. It's not done yet but after RAAus looked into it they sent me the paper work to convert my 24- rego plane to run on condition." It would seem from the above statement, that your belief "factory built LSA cannot be converted to run on condition" is not supported by RAA - "RAAus looked into it they sent me the paper work to convert my 24- rego plane to run on condition." It seems to me that you will be able to fly your Sportstar "on condition" . The only other option, is to replace the engine, with one still within TBO (new?) and sell the old engine (which is probably worth a pretty penny) so that the aircraft can meet the factory approved standard.

"I did a few landings in 12 to 15kt cross winds but they were untidy and he wants me to land and keep it within 1.5m of the centre line." This may come as a surprise to you & your instructor - humans can not see the wind. The practical result of this disability (for pilots) is that cross winds, particularly of the blustery variety, will always be a challenge, no matter the skill/experince level. Sure, the experienced pilot will generally make a better fist of the situaton, but "keep it within 1.5m of the centre line." is an aspiration we all strive for and all too often have to accept an untidy but safe alternative.

THE LIST may have been updated, in the 2-3 years since I tried to use it.

Yeah! Last time I tried to use THE LIST a large percentage of the names had retired, even died, no longer "on the job" etc - gave up after many phone calls.

Thanks Gents - will take your suggestions on board 😈

Thank Onetrack. I should have included the Dart River in my question. I knew a small part of the Dart . In my very early twenties, I skinny dipped, with my then Devonshire girlfriend in the Dart. Great girl! - Tourist in a steam train passing along the bank, got a lovely glimpse of some Devon charm, when she stood in the shallows and waved.

Is term "The Old Dart" derived from naval slang for Dartmouth ??😈

Thanks Neil for all the trouble you have gone to. I am a tad dim on what the transponder actually does (something about being interrogated/responds with ID/Alt/Location/Heading)- Trig TT22 (ModeS) new (like aircraft), been professionally set up/certified, so all should be okay. I just turn it on before TO and assume all will be well.. I have three GPS systems, operating in the aircraft . As far as I know, none certified. In my current aircraft I have only had one instance when ATC contacted me (had to SQUAWK CODE given) . In my last, I had several instances where ATC either contacted me or more often, contacted other aircraft (usually IFR) to warn them of my presence. I have a panel mounted iPad Mini with OzRunways & extra GPS antenna, so have some traffic displayed. If I understand you correctly; The Skyecho could be configured to work on ADSB IN (only) & "paint" onto my iPad, any ADSB OUT aircraft, within a 20 NM radius of my position. Without ADSB OUT I would not appear on other aircrafts systems. I am confused about using Skyecho IN/ OUT with TT22 also operating - is this functionally okay or not? I could just get a PingUSB from UAvionix. This will display ADSB IN on my iPad but as no OUT capability, would be as for Skyecho above. Seems to me that if Skyecho & Trig TT22 can both be active at the same time , this would be the way to go.

Interesting. I have AofA in my homebuilt, no stall warning. My AofA has a series of coloured bands and tone (sound). For me the AofA is most useful in the circuit , turn to final and on approach to touch down. This is a mostly head/eyes up time. The coloured bands are down on my instrument panel (integrated with Dynon) so I rarely use this. The tone system warning works well for me, I hear it in my headset. Its set for 10 knots above stall. I know everything has "come together" when the AofA is squealing, as I round out.

Thanks Neil, Veeeeeeeeeery interesting! If I understand correctly - I would have to turn off my Trig TT22 when using the SkyEcho. Presume this would be to prevent two (confusing) signals going ATC/another aircraft. With the SkyEcho (IN) I would be getting additional inflight information on the location of other aircraft . The SkyEcho's (OUT) broadcast integrity is below that of my Trig TT22 and there is a question over whether ATC monitors it or not. So I must decide if the benefit of "seeing" other aircraft displayed on my iPad, outweighs my current "relationship" with ATC.

Hi F10, I'm with you on overflying, before descending to join the circuit - lots of pluses cant think of a serious negative. Again like you, I get concerned with straight in approaches, for all the reasons you mentioned. In my limited experince this is typical of commuter (RPT) aircraft - fast & big! Best to keep out of their way. Its some time since I had a RPT call to say they were on (very) long final, when I was established in the circuit,- I decided I would like to "orbite" at some distance, convenient to rejoining the circuit, with a good view of the approaching RPT (I communicated this to the CP & was thanked for my consideration). I rejoined the circuit, when I assessed I could make my landing, after he had left the active runway - all good!.

Hi, I have Trig TT22 Mode S transponder (out only). Is the SkyEcho compatible with the above? ie what effect, if any, does carrying the Sky Echo, have on ATC's reading of my existing transponder transmissions?

I strongly advise talking this over with the RAA technical staff - way too many slightly contradictory opinions from well meaning helpers. RAA will tell you exactly what is permitted & not and help you plan a way forward As for the Rotax 912UL (80 hp). Contact Bert Flood Imports for definitive advice.