Garfly

Yes, but ... getting our facts straight on such matters is pretty desirable. And falsely dissing the benefits of ADSB IN-OUT / SE2 is, to say the least, counter to current safety messaging. In its report on the tragic collision of two light-twins over Mangalore in early 2020, The ATSB observed: "Had each aircraft been fitted with ADS-B IN, and a suitable cockpit display, the occupants would have received the same quality of surveillance information received by the controller. This technology could have prevented this accident from occurring ... // The ATSB also notes that ADS‑B receivers, suitable for use on aircraft operating under both the instrument or visual flight rules, are currently available within Australia at low cost and can be used in aircraft without any additional regulatory approval or expense." https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2020/aair/ao-2020-012

This is not correct. SE2 will indicate exactly where other ADSB targets are relative to your own ship vertically and horizontally, and in real time. It will also show whether it is climbing, descending or level plus it's speed and direction. You might be confusing it with a cell based system like FR24 (and even they do way better than a "5 minute window".

I find, while driving off the beaten track, the 250K Topo (AU) map in OzRwys to be a very useful nav tool. Most bush tracks (on which signposts are scarce) seem to be on it - where they belong. And, since the whole country's already downloaded onto the phone, there's no need to be within internet range. I know there are proper downloadable 4WD map apps but, short of one of those, I find my trusty EFB real handy for terrestrial nav as well. (Though, down in the weeds, I take its suggestions re DTG, ETA, ETE etc., with an even bigger grain of salt, and "You Are Here" is all I need to hear! ;- )

An update from Juan:

Yep, it's not for nothin' they built a statue to Eros smack dab in the middle of old London town.

Fair enough OME, and as old mate Hamlet said to his mate Horatio "The best safety lies in fear." Which is why I reckon old Arthur Butler would have been as pleased as punch to have a working iPad with him on that flight. Good on him for his courage, though, in doing without. ;- )

Very true, ditto the whiz-wheel and official forecasts. Having used iPads for yonks, though, I've not, myself, found any internal GPS to be out by more than a few metres, given a fair crack at the sky. But yeah, in aviation, it has to be a trust-but-verify relationship with tech stuff (like with engines, airframes and the old whiskey compass).

You'd also be sorry if you returned to old-school virtue but then mistook town A on the WAC for town B on the earth (so similar!!) and found y'self on some track winding back to an old fashioned shack. Or, if say, those headphones up on the dash caused that compass 'thing' to fail (throwing it out, say, another 60 degrees ... on top of its usual 30) and you end up camping on desert dunes when you'd come all prepared for the beach. Oh, aye, them were the days. I think I do repeat myself (LOL) but I'm sure there were Old Man Seadogs, in days of yore, who reckoned those new fangled magnetic loadstones were a curse; what, with all their stupid "You're sailing in this direction" stuff. Heaven's above, sure it be a far more honest thing for a mariner to watch the waves and stars (so long as they be out tonight, mind) and to heed their ancient wisdom "You've got this new world to find. Look for it." Anyway, regarding those modern screen things and their incessant "You are here" stuff: heck! that ain't the half of it, they're total chatterboxes nowadays: it's all "Your TRK is this, your BRG is that, your ETA is this, your ETE is something else, your GS is XXY kts, the wind aloft is ZXY/X0, the CTA step above you is at AOZY, your current FIA freq. is XX0.XY and, by the way, here's the next one you can dial in right now. The current DA is X000', Last Light will be at YY30 hours and, in case you're interested your present Height Above Ground is only XX'. If you're worried, your nearest suitable airfield is YY.0nm distant on the XYZ radial with an elevation of X,YZX'. Fuel required for that diversion will be ZZ litres. Your GPS altitude is currently X,500' and your barometric is 200' lower. All terrain that might be a threat is now coloured red. This is your Grid LSALT just to be safe. The current Area QNH is XXXX hectopascals. You will notice that all active PRDs, too, on your route are shaded red. They will change in real time so keep an eye out in case you decide to take that short cut if that Romeo is deactivated. Those CBs you were worried about are, as you can see, now moving away from your route. Oh, and by the way, since you've finally bought a SkyEcho2 you will notice that, at present, you have no conflict with that RPT heading for our same DEST. So just relax a little. And now, well whaddaya know? ... your ETE has now reduced to just X minutes. So nice flying with you, Capt." Sheesh! No wonder there's so much nostalgia for those 'Oh, so peaceful' days of paper, clock and compass. But notwithstanding all of that - and despite the many rumours of heads-down screen-fanatics - I do declare I've never been more heads-up on trips since I stopped struggling with paper charts which never did learn to tell me simply "You Are Here".

I believe his formation buddies were over to his left. If he was being asked to formate on them he had a right to expect the organisers to look after the airspace to allow that. You can't fly formation and dodge traffic at the same time, or even look for any.

Fair enough, SP, but just taking a look at the new WACs, I can see there are remote parts (e.g 50nm NE of Alice, just beyond the YBAS VTC) where wee Romeos might pop up out of nowhere (ones the feds might be serious about ;- ). So, in such cases and places, one'd probably do well to use the new WACs. They're pretty uncluttered out there anyway. If you're on paper only, though, and you haven't planned with such unlikely no-go's in mind (or you're on a diversion, due whatever) the new WACs will warn you off but won't tell you much more than the PRDs name and boundaries. They won't say, for example, if it's only NOTAM activated or to what flight levels it applies - in the way that VNCs and VTCs do. (There should be a quick look-up-by-number function so that all PRD details can be gotten on the spot - when Capt. Google is out of the cockpit.) Anyway, if you do a long-press on any spot on your OzRwys map-screen you will bring up a list of all airspaces overlying that position. In this case we can at least discover that R235, in fact, applies from SFC to FL070. (I'm assuming that this list is drawn from the app's database downloaded to the device and thus available anywhere.) CLICK ON IMAGES FOR HIGHER REZ.

Sure, being that close, formation flying, in fact, even pro-tech guys (like m'self ;- ) would say your eyes would HAVE to be outside. But even if you had aural warnings available you'd have to turn them off during an airshow, they'd be going beserk.

I guess that even if they'd had time to glance at their traffic displays they'd have been expecting to have a bunch of other aircraft buzzing around very close, anyway. (No time for a "but not that close!" thought to be thunk, let alone acted on). We do know that both ADSB-OUT devices were on since we've seen their flight paths displayed and discussed on several of the video reports.

Well, with today's AIRAC 2212 Updates for OzRwys (and AvPlan?) we now have - for better and for worse - PRDs marked on our EFB WACs. I'd say it's worse for the busier regions because all that magenta just adds clutter, obscures detail and gets your course line lost in a magenta jungle. Sure, for the most part, you'd be using VNCs and VTCs anyway, so it doesn't matter that much. But I've found that having at least one aeronautical chart devoted entirely to geographical realities has been a good thing. (Given that other charts, just a click away, have all the airspace info anyway. And, for that matter, the EFB can be set up to display active PRDs as a layer onto any chart. (With the catch that you need to be in internet range to get those real time updates.) But, yes, it's a lot better for remote areas because, as pointed out above, in the absence of the large scale charts, the marked PRD borders are not redundant but necessary. These new WACs in their paper form, will, I gather, be printed kind of on-demand, because they will now be going out of date with as much regularity as all the other airspace documentation. Therefore, to be legal, remote paper-chart users will have to keep a close eye on all PRD updates. (And I presume that pencilling in the changes won't cut it anymore. ;- ) CLICK IMAGES FOR HIGHER REZ.

They're plenty well qualified but not well supported by the establishment in the investigative role. I'd have thought that most, if not all, lessons learned investigating an RAAus accident would be applicable to GA. Furthermore, the Ballina airprox incident, alone, shows that all flying machines are inter-locking parts of the one sky-safety system. It's foolish to regard the RAAus sector as Sunday drivers who can be dismissed and set aside. From the RAAus website: Who are RAAus Accident Consultants (ACs)? Accident Consultants (ACs) are typically RAAus employees who are requested to assist at accident sites. ACs who are employees of RAAus are required to complete the ATSB Accident Investigation Training, or an equivalent course, to formalise their qualifications. RAAus is also supported by other subject matter experts and the ATSB. https://members.raa.asn.au/safety/fatal-accident-investigation-process/?

Well, like always, the pro-theory mob reckon the skeptics are crazy and vice-versa. ;- )

Hmmm, interesting theory but the only source that EurAsian Times seems to offer for the 'new information [that] has emerged' is this: @Boeing @Joe Biden @PENTAGON 펜타곤 (Official YouTube Channel) Worth clicking through to view the YouTube Comments for some debate on the theory: DEADLY CRASH Of B-17 Bomber EurAsian Times 312 subscribers 87,704 views Nov 27, 2022 New information has emerged about the horrific mid-air collision between a Boeing B-17 bomber and a Bell P-63 Kingcobra, during an air display on November 12 at Texas’ Dallas Executive Airport. @Boeing @Joe Biden @PENTAGON 펜타곤 (Official YouTube Channel) 86 Comments Kellen Razzano 1 day ago If that artifact is actually an object, it appears out of nowhere in close proximity to the aircraft, leading to believe it's more likely a part ejected from the aircraft or engine block. Mechanical failure? xjet 20 hours ago I'm not saying it was aliens.... but... Seriously, one can not distinguish between a bird, a drone or anything that is represented by only a couple of pixels in a few frames of a noisy video. Some would love to speculate that it was a drone (sigh) but the odds are far more likely that it was either something totally unrelated to the incident or perhaps a bird. Remember, bird strikes cause over US$400m a year in damage to aircraft and losses to their operators but in the past 15 years there have been just a tiny handful of evidenced drone/plane collisions, none of which resulted in death or significant injury. Odds are... based on an analysis of 15 years worth of data... it was a bird. But don't let science get in the way of those who want to villify drones because they are ignorant. ETC.

Actually it is the same Dan Gryder and while there may be good reasons to take that position, that article might not be one of them. The man himself explains why:

Those charges were eventually dropped, though, for lack of solid enough evidence. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-08/josh-hoch-supreme-court-charges-dropped-plane-sabotage/13226466

Ah, yeah, a nice little outing to Culin. Some great picnic spots there at Culin - for the STOL mob who can get in, that is.

He did have a licence to fly passengers so he may not have been all that dangerous as a pilot per se. He was convicted basically of fraud and of running a charter business without an Air Operators Certificate. https://www.theislanderonline.com.au/story/7987752/qld-pilot-guilty-of-illegally-flying-mps/ "Hoch had a private pilot licence but was not certified with an AOC when he engaged in charter and cost-sharing services with the KAP politicians." He had, though, been charged with far more serious offences in the past: https://www.avweb.com/news/australian-pilot-accused-of-sabotaging-rivals-planes/

Sure, we know what it's called and nobody's standing up for Medvedev here, so far. The Reuters article we're on about, though, digs out some geo-political detail behind the headlines. I'd guess Medvedev's 'Anglo Saxon' comment refers to those who control the banks that hold those frozen Russky dollars. U.N. General Assembly calls for Russia to make reparations in Ukraine https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/un-general-assembly-calls-russia-make-reparations-ukraine-2022-11-14/

True, but that General Assembly resolution may be taken as justification enough for having those frozen Russian assets redirected (by the countries holding them) towards Ukraine's reconstruction. This quote from that article might not be too far off the mark: 'Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, now deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council, said on the Telegram messaging app that the "Anglo-Saxons are clearly trying to scrape together a legal basis for the illegal seizure of Russian assets.'

Hopefully a bit of inspiration from the heyday of country air races and early TV melodrama:

True, though I was meaning cartoons of this kind ... ;- )