dsam

I believe the OzRunways "traffic paint" data filtering is quite sophisticated. Whilst you may see your own road track (local device only) following you home after a flight, the iPad track data doesn't get "re-broadcast" as an airborne target to others.

Yes, I'm in the same situation with my Skyview system & transponder!! It's madness that they require me to degrade the broadcast ADSB-out signal so they preserve their TSO'd "integrity"! The GPS accuracy isn't at issue (it's spot-on), it is the expense of the bureaucrats being paid to TSO the system (a ransom of millions no doubt...)!

To be clear, I wasn't suggesting Airservices Australia broadcast anything of the sort. Each iPad EFB already "broadcasts" position & ID data (via the mobile phone network where signal is available) back to each software EFB app developer. In turn the software developer (OzRunways & AvPlan) returns this traffic data to their respective clients via the mobile phone network - but they won't agree to share this data with each-other (probably for corporate reasons). Airservices already have their own ADSB data received from aircraft transponders (but not the data from OzRunways or AvPlan yet). I'm suggesting Airservices Australia facilitate a service by integrating their own ADSB data directly from aircraft transponders, together with the traffic data shared from each of the software developers (AvPlan & OzRunways). Then Airservices could share the integrated three sources of traffic data back (via the internet) to both software developers equally, for them to return collective data back to their respective EFB clients via the mobile phone network. That way, traffic data from ADSB, AvPlan & OzRunways gets to both EFB client's iPads without needing a Raspberry Pi ADSB-in receiver gadget in each aircraft (nor multiple EFB software on the iPad). Caveat: Aviators must always understand that they aren't seeing everything on the iPad, and many non-ADSB aircraft are always out there, so keep a good eye out anyway. However if you do see a "paint" it is just an extra alert for a pilot to be especially vigilant. It suggests where to look, and what rego & altitude is involved. You can reasonably trust a "paint" to be something to look out for. You can't trust the absence of a "paint" to mean it is all clear. Having said that, I'd always prefer a false positive paint to nothing at all. It is all about adding to situational awareness, NOT "wannabe" ATC & IFR by software!

Unsurprising. Airservices Australia could possibly act as a neutral third party and integrate software paints from both OzRunways and AvPlan, returning combined traffic data to each app developer + ADSB data from their own Airservices servers & radar. No need for a Raspberry Pi receiver that way - and just one app, too! Yes I know that's unlikely, but I'm an idealist, I suppose...

That's hard to say, really. To be clear, my comment about "equal paints" excluded RPT paints which are numerous around Melbourne (showing up with flight ID). The remaining paints I see are alternatly a mix of OzRunways + ADSB in, - or AvPlan + ADSB in (depending on which tablet software I'm currently viewing). The GA (ADSB in) paints show rego and altitude info, but I'm not sure how I'd differentiate commercial vs. private just from the rego. Clearly it would all be easier and cheaper if OzRunways and AvPlan shared traffic data, but one of the two doesn't want to cooperate, so I'm told.

For some years now, I've used their ADS-Pi ADSB-in gadget with OzRunways (on an iPad). Just today I was on a local Melbourne & coastal flight tracking north over French Island past Tooradin when I had an ADSB "paint" appear on climb 5nm ahead crossing my track. I enjoyed having the situational awareness to radio the Sikorsky using his rego from the "paint", and coordinate safe clearance (even though I didn't have him visually to start with). Knowing where to look, having his rego and changing altitude made seeing him much easier and straightforward. I'm very happy to have this facility. In general, I see some paints on OzRunways, some on AvPlan (yes I have & broadcast that too), and some GA via ADSB - all in about equal measure. Note that there is a small lag on the software based "paints" so look ahead of their apparent track to find intersecting traffic. One mustn't be complacent though, as not everyone has ADSB-out (nor OzRunways/AvPlan for that matter). It always pays to keep your head out of the cockpit and keep your radio on nearby CTAF's (+ area freq.). I hope this helps. Dave

ABC report on air turbulence event 100 km prior to Hong Kong arrival: http://ab.co/2p9KSBS I wonder how often turbulence causes a 747 on autopilot to trigger a stick shaker? There were 15 passengers claiming injury, so it must have been quite significant turbulence. Why don't passengers keep their seat belts on??!

Political scandals and bickering like we see in this thread are a product of a sick democratic system. I invite everyone to invest a few minutes viewing: or linking to: MiVote MiVote is a genuine and serious attempt to "re-boot" democracy for the modern age and it seems to be triggering interest worldwide. It has the potential to ethically elevate the core of democratic practice, without the current decline into party-political binary squabbling. I have no personal or financial interest in this movement, other than seeing it as a promising (if idealistic) way forward from the lamentable decline we all see within current democratic process around the world. I'm sorry for contributing to this thread drift, but note that it could potentially allow us to improve our aviation policy should this innovative democratic movement take hold - albeit some way down the track.

The maximum range of the Concorde with pax & payload was only about 3500 nautical miles - certainly not long enough to fly LHR - SFO. Indeed, an ATC friend at Halifax, Nova Scotia advised me that all Concorde flight plans LHR to New York would start out with Halifax as the primary destination due to (even more) limited range when subsonic. Only when they established supersonic speed, could they revise their flight plan to New York, knowing they had achieved their most efficient speed. I believe Halifax actually had one or two Concorde landings there, due to an inability to remain supersonic (mid-Atlantic engine issues, I believe).

Dick Smith

RA-Aus members can now log in to our website and download the official RA-Aus response to CASA regarding pilot medical standards. Their response to CASA is well researched, and quite forthright, with references to numerous studies, citing statistical evidence both here and abroad. They strongly refute misleading inaccuracies made in the CASA discussion paper, and draw attention to the conflict of interest that CASA has in certain respects. I recommend RA-Aus members have a good look at this response to CASA on their behalf. I think RA-Aus have done a good job supporting and representing members interests against the regulator. The more motivated members among us should still write to our local member, as well as The Hon Darren Chester MP, Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, and voice our individual support for our organisation's response to the regulator. It may not help, but it can't hurt either...

"Taking Flight" is an Australian aviation documentary series (filmed at Caloundra Aerodrome) that takes you behind the scenes at an aviation ground school, to see what it takes to learn to fly. See students overcome fears and face disappointment as ordinary people try to fulfill their dream of taking flight. At present there is a promo and episodes 1 & 2 on YouTube ( ) I'm not sure if this is also available on broadcast or pay-tv.

And that could explain the longer than normal take-off roll...

There's no doubt about it... Aussies are true adventurers, and this looks like a magnificent achievement. At Lake Boga earlier this month, I had the pleasure of seeing this flying boat, and meeting the pilot (Michael Smith) who achieved the first solo global circumnavitgation - a seven month adventure! www.southernsun.voyage/ I look forward to seeing the premiere of his film in Yarraville, Vic. April 12th.

It looks like the Bureau of Meteorology want survey feedback from aviators about BoM aviation met services & products. It took me less than 10 minutes to respond. I hope it is worthwhile. Follow a link from: www.bom.gov.au/aviation/index.shtml In my "additional comments" I told them to look at www.windytv.com for better ideas of how to present aviation-Wx content. I also directed them to learn from OzRunways and AvPlan in designing a better user interface of weather content & information. Aviation meteorological interfaces should be much more intuitive, and supportive of modern airborne IT capabilities (not ancient fax machines & pre-internet un-decoded abbreviations & jargon). I am aware that regulations may impose some of this old-world Wx format, but that doesn't mean that legacy formats can't be preserved just to comply with regulations. Ideally, readily available, interpreted Wx content with modern "app" interfaces are still possible and desirable, especially for the non-professional recreational aviator. I've also commented to them that whenever I've telephoned the aviation met services, the people I speak to are very helpful and informative when I plan my cross-country trips. It's very hard to beat the verbal human "interface" too.

It is interesting that there was no CVR content from that flight... only a flight on January 3rd. I will look forward to evidence on propeller pitch functionality.

Did they only have the 80 hp Rotax? The 100 hp 912 ULS is the best option. I'm told this engine/aircraft combo is capable of towing gliders up to 750 Kg. Premium Mogas is more economical too, I would think.

My friends at Tocumwal are always enthusiastic about the Eurofox as a tug. Fuel economy is another big advantage too, I'm told.

I'll have a "round-trip" ticket, thanks

Interesting to observe (from the two photos in this preliminary ATSB report) there isn't a hint of rudder being used, but heaps of aileron! At least the elevator appears neutral. A very sad and tragic outcome for all concerned.

It is interesting that they've mentioned the Minister, CASA, and Airservices roles in this. I've especially been waiting for comment on CASA's actions (or inaction) on inappropriate property developments in proximity to many aerodromes.

Have AOPA (or other non-airline & non-regulator bodies) published any submissions or discussion papers about revision of airspace design? I feel I should inform myself better before responding. For example, what potential is there to replace vast quantities of C with E airspace, or would that create more problems than it solves? From my standpoint, as a recreational aviator (Mode-S equipped, but currently without CTA access), I would like to see a huge reduction of controlled airspace, and much less military restricted airspace, as currently I'm prevented from avoiding "tiger country" at a safe altitude, or cannot conduct safer coastal flights up much of the east coast of Australia. That being said, I'm looking at the issue from a personal standpoint living in Melbourne, and needing to constantly avoid CTA all over my region. Once RA-Aus gets it's CTA endorsement approved, I might be better off, but still there are vast regions of C unused by RPT. Obviously, some CTA and military restrictions are warranted, but surely not as much as is imposed now. Any links to independent discussion papers (esp. GA & recreational) would be welcome...

As a follow-up comment, also consider full back-stick position clearance to your gut (and "family jewels" for the male aviators among us). If I don't sit fully back into my seat, (and my passengers who also have a joystick in front of them), free and full movement of controls is impeded (definitely a no-no). That is why there is only one option for a thicker seat back, and rudder pedal modification would be the next option for unusually short people. Those who are seriously overweight, or basketball players may not be able to fly with me....

I'm not sure if this is directly addressing your question, but here is my 2 cents worth. My Eurofox does not have adjustable seats - it is not designed to have anything like that. It does have a spare seat-back cushion that is thicker for those with shorter legs & have trouble reaching the rudder pedals. Even shorter people might need modifications to the rudder pedals (I haven't really investigated what that might be, though). As for comfort, I find my non-adjustable high density foam seats are just fine for flights under 3.5 hours, although my average-height 60+ year old body does seem stiff when I get out. Since I'm generally the only person flying my aircraft, it never seems to be an issue having non-adjustable seats. If this was an an aircraft used by a flying school, I'm sure I would consider the question in a completely different way.

Thanks very much for your helpful and informative responses Bevan. Much better than crickets! "The force of the dark side" is getting much much stronger