Jump to content

skippydiesel

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,796

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    69

 Content Type 

Everything posted by skippydiesel

  1. skippydiesel
    "In your dreams" my friend. More likly you/the pilot have made that last look/check, straight down the runway & slight up, the glidescope, before entering the active - WOW!!! that aircrafts lights shows up realy well. REALITY! the aircraft will be on final, perhaps a kilometer away, silhouetted against the sky, you would have seen it anyway. This is a classic bias reinforcement story. As for the tower - In most instances the tower will have a perfect view of landing/circuit traffic, light on/off. Also, if they are not asleep, will know in what direction to look, with or without radio calls to assist. On final, the tower will be viewing, the aircraft, at some point, against the terrain (lights show up beautifully) So the combinator of knowing where to look, the all important obligatory radio calls (giving location/intention) is all the tower need in Day VRF. 😈
  2. skippydiesel
    Nothing to do with aviation , sorry. Can't help but give you this little gem of Americanisation: Within Amazon, the parcel dispatch facilities are known as "Fulfilment Centres" This explains that warm tingly inner glow I get when receiving a parcel from Amazon🥵
  3. skippydiesel
    The way I "see" it is that we all expect/hope that lights will somehow improve airborne visual acquisition of another aircraft. Our experience on the ground tells us that a light will grab our attention; of another vehicle, indicators, danger, traffic controls, room occupied etc, etc. A further reinforcer of this, is how well aircraft/lights can be seen from the ground - people forget that most often they know where to look first because they hear the engine(s) and/or they are a pilot, so look to the circuit, then the is dramatic view of an aircraft on final (again a known location/direction) with is landing lights on - what an entry!!! So it goes against this experince/intuition, that they just don't work very well iday VFR conditions. Many/most can't (?) separate their terrestrial experince from what happens in the air. Their expectation is so strong, they reinforce their own bias, by relating a story/event where suddenly they saw the other aircraft because it had flashing lights - in reality it is most likly they saw the aircarft & its lights at the same time, after their attention was drawn to it location by a radio transmission.
  4. skippydiesel
    If you know where to look😈
  5. skippydiesel
    Rgmwa - I have attempted to give what I feel is the empirical rather than the emotive position. The subject of aircraft lights always attracts strong support - its a no brainer good thing - right? Someone reading this "thread" need to know that despite the apparent safety benefits, the reality is a long way from what might be expected.😈
  6. skippydiesel
    I think all four are brokers ie not insurerse. In the event of a claim it is the insurers who pay out or not, in in hole or part.😈
  7. skippydiesel
    Just my opinion: Foxbat's are grossly overpriced, for what is a very ordinary aircraft. Many others with similar characteristics, can be had a much lower price, new or preloved. Once again a triumph of marketing over reality. 😈
  8. skippydiesel
    As I keep saying, I like lights, so support your decision to fit them. Unfortunatly I think your rational, for doing so, is just a wee bit suspect. "I saw him because he had his wingtip strobes on and he was against a fairly dark land/sea background at around 5:00 pm." The above statement supports my position - for lights to be effective ie seen by a pilot in the air they must be viewed in marginal light conditions and/or contrasting background - not your typical day VFR environment. Further; On the day in question when was "last light" in your part of Australia? Given the light conditions described, were you flying in day VFR? I would speculate: Most, if not all aviation authorities would not hesitate to legislate, for day VFR aircraft to have lights, if there was a sceric of evidence to show that such laws would have a significant posative impact on safety.😈
  9. skippydiesel
    The problem with stories like this is that Rgmwa already knew, in which direction to look for the Mooney, THANKS TO GOOD RADIO COMMUNICATION. His assertion "I saw his strobes much more quickly than I would have been able to see him otherwise at that time of day" is completely undermined by his good listening & the Mooney pilots transmissions. How can anyone possibly know that it would have taken a longer/shorter time, to see the other aircraft without empirical study. We would all like lights to be a wonderful safety feature but it just ain't so for day VFR.😈
  10. skippydiesel
    Media is reporting, officials speculating a bid strike causing undercarriage to fail???? Taking advice from the Russian????😈
  11. skippydiesel

    Savannah owners

    skippydiesel replied to a topic in Savannah

    " I notice a NO FLOW of fuel in the fuel filters" I do not understand this statement. Is there an electronic fuel pressure sensor/read out, involved or is this some sort of sight glass with a fuel flow indicator in it?😈
  12. skippydiesel
    The point is, that there is little evidence that lights "....makes you more visible...." in day VFR conditions, when being viewed by a pilot in the air. Sure people on the ground can see you "....in the circuit", how does this significantly improve airborne safety? I agree " they are a nice-to-have".😈
  13. skippydiesel
    I am not against aircraft light, I like them for their aesthetic show off appeal. Safety is always a hot topic, almost all will have their opinion and personal standard (comfort zone). In the real world we all make judgements constantly/risk assessment - can I get through the lights, when they have turned orange, start across the pedestrian crossing as the red light goes on, walk outside in a thunderstorm, ride a bicycle on a public road, etc. etc , ad infinitum. My point is, at what stage do you say this is not a cost effective enhancement?? Onetrack will install his lights to get that last drop of perceived safety - great. Me - One day, if I am feeling a little richer than today (after Christmas) I may install lights for the shear fun/bravado of them - they do look good. Fun aside , my transceiver & transponder(s) confer real safety benefits, not just for me,t all other aircraft in my vicinity. Forget the pretty lights - All aircraft should have a transponder with a listening channel capacity All aircraft, operating in congested airspace, should have a functioning transponder. Preferably an ADSB IN/OUT bluetoothed to something like Oz Runways 😈
  14. skippydiesel
    More power to you! Just don't get too peeved when you see an identical fitting at,say, 1/2 the price from an automotive supplier. The example I gave of AN fuel line fittings is something you can inspect yourself - unless certified aircraft, why pay for a piece of paper that in no way improves the quality of the product, its efficiency, durability or safety in use. Other "things" may have standards that you can research eg oil /coolant/fuel hose - I guess if you feel it's necessary to go the extra certified aviation paper mile you will do so and if it somehow makes you feel more confidence in your work - great!😈
  15. skippydiesel
    "............I am guessing that it didnt come with release paperwork either..." Important if you are building/maintaining a certified aircraft - otherwise just more costly fire lighting material. I have purchased "stuff" from automotive performance supplier, at a much lower price, than an identical looking product, from an aviation supplier (with documentation) at higher cost. Example AN fuel fittings from: https://automotivesuperstore.com.au/aeroflow?srsltid=AfmBOoqy1ftIqkGp6QZrWnhDnTNelL8m1Jj5vjy8SUTp1DaI39HtiVXK 😈
  16. skippydiesel
    Disagree all you like - Aircraft lights show up very well against a contrasting background. Most often this will be when viewed from the ground, leading supporter to point out how well they catch the eye. In normal VFR conditions it has been demonstrated time & time again, they have little/no effect when viewed from the air (by pilot) Ground based vehicles/hazard warning lights, are almost always viewed against a background. The studies that have been done on this topic, relate to GA /certified aircraft. Some of the experimental LED systems deliver much higher lumens (?) than the certified equivalents however this is not going to significantly change the research, which is about the human eyes lack of ability to see airborne objects, from an aircraft. Supporters will wax lyrical about lights delivering enhanced visibility at dawn/dusk, mist, etc - all non VFR environments. I like lights and wished they were a more effective system for enhancing visibility BUT a wish isn't a fact.
  17. skippydiesel
    Cant speak for VH/GA however as RA is still strictly VFR the answer is - No lights of any description/function are not required. As for IBobs inference that lights will somehow assist in See & Avoid, the short answer is also an enfactic No. In air to air (pilot looking out) lights have been found to be completely ineffective, except when viewed against a contrasting background eg dark cloud. Having said the above, I do like lights, for their esthetic/look at at me, appeal.😈
  18. skippydiesel
    Sling 4 seats should be compared with GA 4 seat aircraft, not RAA 2 seat. Do your homework: a base specification A factory built ATEC Faeta 912 ULS, T tail, Max TO 600 kg, Empty weight 300 kg (nominal), 2x50L wing tanks, would set you back well under $200,000 Au, about 6-9 months ago (no longer agent, so a bit of a guess) I would expect the kit to be significantly less. Au Dollar plummeted since then. Nothing wrong with Sling aircraft, however they do have an excellent marketing department. In many ways the aircraft version of a Harley, 90 % advertising. The Faeta using same engine, (very similar in appearance) cruises 15 Kn faster, Stalls 11 Kn slower and has a higher "payload"
  19. skippydiesel
    The word aspirational comes to mind. I believe this to be a marketing term, meaning BS😈
  20. skippydiesel
    Hmm! Thats two civilian airliners, in recent times. They must be immensely proud of their military capabilities😈
  21. skippydiesel
    My T tail Zephyr had a relativly small (to my eye) horizontal stabiliser (with elevator) and a large rudder. Aesthetically I didnt much like the concept but grew to appreciate it. Great rudder and elevator authority, right down & through the stall - couldn't ask for better. X wind landings/TO handled with ease. Aside from aesthetics, why do most gliders and a few small powered aircraft have aT tail, while most do not?
  22. skippydiesel
    ATEC are supposed to have made one, special order, tailwheel variant of the Faeta (original T tail). Last I heard, a few years back, it was for sale in Greece. ATEC were very disappointed in the ground handling characteristics of the aircraft & are said to have vowed never to build another. No expert; I have been told that a tail wheel varent, of the same nose wheel aircraft, may have a small cruise speed advantage, for a significant ground handling penalty. Further; A well faired fixed undercarriage, will usually come close to the same cruise speed, as an equivalent retractable, without the weight and complexity penalty of the latter.
  23. skippydiesel
    True! Unfortunatly all too often at, even below, circuit height. ERSA sais not below 2500 ft, the most pedantic overfly at 2500 ft - so aircraft inbound to, The Oaks/Camden, at same altitude - not good!
  24. skippydiesel
    Like you, I overfly prior to landing however I am usually well over the 500 ft minimum above circuit height - more in line with 1000 ft. Reason; not all pilots are so disciplined to be at circuit height +/-
  25. skippydiesel
    Of course. If transmit &/or receive failed and you intended to land at a CTAF, I think an overfly, well above circuit height, to visually assess aircraft activity & circuit direction may have been the prudent choice, rather than a join at circuit height, to what may be the up/down wind leg. There are several possible/legitimate circuit joining strategies at The Oaks, the most common is to join X wind from "the dead side" which is over The Oaks town itself.😈
×
×
  • Create New...