ev17ifly2

I would say that the plane and then vehicle with high beam tried to alert the driver. Having watched it twice I'm not on the truckers side.

Obviously those that were running Dick Smith Electronics lately had forgotten Tandy. DSE went down the same path, morphing from an electronics store to a toy and gadgets store and suffered the same fate as Tandy. Jaycar seem to be heading the same way also.Those who forget the lessons of the past are doomed to repeat them.

OK, that's enough of this weeks "Dick Smith bashing"

I'd be more worried about the sale of 2.5 percent of our remaining agricultural land being sold in one hit to the Chinese. The massive Kidman holding is about to fall into foreign hands. I bet there are a few bush strips in the 24000 square kilometres that we will be denied access to in the future.

As for growing FT's precious beetroot, we won't have the land.

Your timing is impeccable, I'd forgotten I left a beer in the freezer.

Good joke too by the way

I mean people need to use there brains when it comes to this.There are times when you may need to make more calls but not constantly.

 

I will use an example of something that happened recently:

 

A couple of student pilots calling everything they did taxi, enter runway, backtrack, roll, crosswind, down wind, base, final and other calls I have never heard of.

 

Meanwhile a King Air is 12 miles out as I had him visual meanwhile he was never able to get a call in until he was 2.5 miles from the airport as these students were clogging up the radios with there dribble!!

 

Not to mention that you can not even understand half of there calls due to another nationality, I am not sure how they pass there english assessment but thats an issue for another day.

 

Although I have to laugh when I do my level 6 english assessment I have to listen and be assesed on my ability to understand foreign air traffic control, not sure how that works for an english assesment but anyway.

 

TO MANY RADIO CALLS CAN ALSO CAUSE ACCIDENTS INSTEAD OF AVOIDING THEM.

In the ATSB booklet "a pilots guide to staying safe in the vicinity of non-towered aerodromes" it also states the 6 minimum broadcasts that pilots pilots should make when operating from non towered aerodromes. Same as stated by Robbo.

Quote"broadcasting on the CTAF effectively helps reduce the risk of mid air collisions or reduced separation by SUPPORTING pilots visual lookout for traffic. This is known as radio-alerted see-and-avoid"

A no brainer really

Th

The trike that you're worried about that's 20 Nm away, is about 20 minutes away.Daza

Given that I fly in an open cockpit, rather than the expense and unreliability of modern electronics I may decide to use other methods of signalling my intentions in the circuit. I have found a Very pistol, semaphore flags and smoke grenades on EBay.

D

Such is life..Can't please everyone.

You have a choice remember, comply with the regs or don't fly. SIMPLE!

And that is how it should be. People talk of the freedoms we have in Australia but these are only if you comply with the mountains of paperwork and ridiculous bureaucracy that has resulted in the most regulations and the most adversarial aviation authority there is.

Those that grew up in the 50s, 60, and 70s, cherish those memories.

On the basis that I refuse to accept that it is always necessary to have and use a radio to fly in safety.This thread started with an incident at a flyin and rapidly expanded to multiple posters on radio as a absolute necessity for ALL flying with anyone disagreeing being moron ...

 

Similarly taking my comment that this thread is indicative of a wider perceived drift towards RAA = GA in terms of other safety enhancements inspections etc and putting a comment about if thats the direction I need a new hobby gets taken as its unhelpful to threaten to walk away.

 

Look through my posts on this thread as a series and I am consistent that there are processes and procedures that allow safe operation without radio even into exceptionally busy airspace. Equally I am consistent in saying that radio is an aid to situational awareness

 

But answer me this - IF you are in circuit or joining circuit and you can visually see three aircraft in the circuit (because they are flying a set and known pattern) and you position yourself within the circuit how is is intrinsically dangerous if one of those aircraft is non-radio? Do you NEED to hear a downwind call from everyone in front of you to be safe to follow the third one in to land? Equally if you are in circuit and a non radio aircraft joins and follows you around the circuit and lands how is it that is intrinsically dangerous?

 

And others have pointed out the issues around errors in frequencies ... we are moving to 8.333mhz spacing - increasing the number of frequencies errors can be made on ... is it more dangerous that a radio equipped aircraft on incorrect frequency appears at an airfield and joins with full calls - all effectively blind due to pilot error - is that equal to or worse than a non radio aircraft?

 

Radios are not a panacea to human error and I do not accept that radio is critical/essential to flying in many circumstances provided basic operating procedures are known and flown

I will at some stage plan a flight up your way as I'm sure we will have something in common to talk about

Cheers

Never said that there was a proposal for any of this. My comments had nothing to do with CASA proposals or RAA or any of the governing bodies.My comments are based on what I see as a gradual and continuous push into ULTRALIGHT flying is the mentality that GA levels of perceived safety and GA processes and ever increasing demands that you must have EVERYTHING in the aircraft for you to be safe are just plain wrong and I will call people on it as to not do so is an tacit acceptance and approval.

 

I have no issue with recreational GA aircraft having a different and parallel process and system than ULTRALIGHTS and the fact that we have an airspace with the classes and requirements that we do recognises that not all space is the same.

 

And I keep making it very clear - I am not pushing to undo airspace or operational limits that currently exist - if I am taking an aircraft - GA or Ultralight - into a zone or airfield that requires equipment X, Y and Z I will absolutely have X, Y and Z or I will not go in there.

 

My issue with the mind set I perceive of many people on here is that minimum flying in uncontrolled airspace is intrinsically dangerous and foolhardy unless you have everything I might possibly need to enter primary control zones - and that is just plain wrong.

 

If I am flying in class G to and from airfields with no radio mandated what is the hell is wrong with doing that? saying I am happy doing that on a flying forum should be acceptable - trouble is I make that comment and get branded a moron - acceptable?

A

Then start a bushfire

I have been using an iPad mini cellular running OZ runways for two years now. Bloody fantastic. It is in a RAM mount just below my MGL Enigma which is also GPS equipped. Numerous outback trips into far west NSW and QLD and never lost GPS lock.

Just be careful if you go down the path a carrying a LiPo battery onboard as they are volatile especially when it comes to charging. I don't have an enclosed cockpit so at least I can throw one overboard if it catches fire.

I fly regional Vic and outback NSW and QLD without the need for an ASIC card. Have even flown into 2 security airports with no issues, just be aware that if you leave airside you may have a problem getting back.

Not quite. My point about the unreliability of radios was for ev17ifly2 who a page or so back stated that radios were reliable.My main reason for not wanting radios mandatory at flyins (those held at an aerodrome were they aren't normally required) is because I think the benefits would be outweighed by the negatives. I would rather see more effort put into informing the attending pilots of preferred techniques or local phenomenons ect to not only make it safer for the non radio flyers but also to help reduce radio congestion during those high traffic times.

 

I don't get to many flyins and as I said before I do have a radio so it doesn't affect me much Per se but I just don't want to see many more decisions between the 'fancier' (for want of a better word) flyers and those happy with machines that were the start of our beloved sport.

Bad installation, lack of operational knowledge, etc, etc.

If you have so little faith in modern electronic technology suggest you avoid commercial flights, diagnostic medicine, space travel, etc.

You could always try and pick up a tuner for your EFIS, that way you can watch the programme as well as listen to it. Try Tandy.

There are a few threads on here that I wish would go away. They have been done to death and keep going round in circles. I would like to see an ignore option for threads, so that when I hit "New" they don't clutter the top of the list.

Surely the first directive in flying - at any time, but especially in airfield airspace - is OBSERVE OBSERVE OBSERVE. As in, look out of the window.To rely too heavily on a radio, which is subject to (possibly undetected) failure, is a bit like relying on GPS when flying VFR. Should GPS be mandated in preference to teaching and practising basic map reading skills?

 

Relying on radio to be aware of what is going on outside is in my view more unsafe than being an observant non radio pilot. Exclusive reliance can lead to laziness on the basics.

 

And yes, I realise radio signals carry further than the Mk 1 eyeball. But collisions & dangerous airmisses don't happen at radio range, they occur at visual distance.

 

Like Kasper, I too have been to fly-ins at both Sandown (my one-time home airfield) & Popham. Very busy, lots of low time microlight pilots, often without radio, but good circuit procedures and practice meant everyone flew home again.

 

Bruce

Rather than be technology Luddites wouldn't it make more sense to employ any equipment that can assist us in the

above. I agree too much dependence on any one device may bring us undone, however that is no reason not to use it.

Of our local flyers 90% have radios but I wouldn't say that radios are reliable, there are so many things that affect the reliability of a radio not least of which is the nut holding the mic button. I myself have a radio but I have stuffed up the frequency change more than once and then it doesn't matter how clear your radio is.Then there is the radio unit themselves, I am sure our club isn't the only club that has different people having technical difficulties. I know when flying that at least a quarter of the planes I hear are garbled and basically unreadable.

 

IMO radios are NOT reliable and our flying practices should reflect that. Terry put it perfectly, if you are relying on your radio you could be setting yourself up for a surprise.

 

In regards to "sub cretins" and their flying 500ft circuits I think the idea of having different speed aircraft at different heights makes perfect sense or do you think we should have everyone at 1000 including the big boys?

 

(Edit, I see the sub cretin comment was not in the post about the flyers at 500ft:doh:)

 

Yes some flyers without a radio could fly to the proper circuit procedures better BUT I have seen (and sometimes been guilty of!) substandard airmanship in the ranks of the radio flyers as well. As for why wouldn't you have a radio, well I think we should always leave that option there for those that like the simple pleasures of flying without all the wires and gadgets and personally I enjoy seeing and meeting those people at flyins, after all those sort of people are the ones who started flyins and it would be a bit rude IMO to stop them attending.

Of our local flyers 90% have radios but I wouldn't say that radios are reliable, there are so many things that affect the reliability of a radio not least of which is the nut holding the mic button. I myself have a radio but I have stuffed up the frequency change more than once and then it doesn't matter how clear your radio is.Then there is the radio unit themselves, I am sure our club isn't the only club that has different people having technical difficulties. I know when flying that at least a quarter of the planes I hear are garbled and basically unreadable.

 

IMO radios are NOT reliable and our flying practices should reflect that. Terry put it perfectly, if you are relying on your radio you could be setting yourself up for a surprise.

 

In regards to "sub cretins" and their flying 500ft circuits I think the idea of having different speed aircraft at different heights makes perfect sense or do you think we should have everyone at 1000 including the big boys?

 

(Edit, I see the sub cretin comment was not in the post about the flyers at 500ft:doh:)

 

Yes some flyers without a radio could fly to the proper circuit procedures better BUT I have seen (and sometimes been guilty of!) substandard airmanship in the ranks of the radio flyers as well. As for why wouldn't you have a radio, well I think we should always leave that option there for those that like the simple pleasures of flying without all the wires and gadgets and personally I enjoy seeing and meeting those people at flyins, after all those sort of people are the ones who started flyins and it would be a bit rude IMO to stop them attending.

Radios as a device ARE reliable, as you cited yourself it is the human factor in the majority of cases causing the problem.

I personally have always utilised any technology or device that enhances performance or safety.

Please don't tell me you drive a vehicle that has ESC or ABS fitted. It may detract from you driving (airmanship) ability

What frightens me is it appears that the most of you have become so reliant on your radio and place so much faith in it that you have forgotten what is required of you as pilot in command of an raa aircraft

What frightens me is it appears that the most of you have become so reliant on your radio and place so much faith in it that you have forgotten what is required of you as pilot in command of an raa aircraft

Feel free to enlighten me as to "what is require of you"

Cost and quality of transmissionThe fact that transmission quality can be so variable in the type of aircraft and setups that exist and then there is just the fact that a radio system end - to end is then a series of systems that can individually fail in part or whole that needs then to be maintained and trouble shot on a regular basis.

don;t get me wrong, my aircraft has radio, MP3 interface with auto mute, intercom and I fly trike with a helmet installed headset - I have all of that and for the most part i am happy flying 'non-radio' if i am just going local ... from my past flying if I am flying into a tower or radio required airfield I operate in line with the processes, flying international add in the transponder and reporting scheds, and if I am doing group flights I am reporting for 1-5 aircraft across borders and into airfields ... even got enough French language to do radio safely into and out of fields in France where radio is required but language is not allowed to be English.

 

I just do not see why adding technology is required when alternate operating procedures are available that do not add cost, complexity and points of failure that then ground you when in fact the aircraft is perfectly safe to fly.

I suspect we are never going to agree on this subject, however cost and quality are not valid reasons. radio systems ARE reliable and the transmission quality CAN be achieved regardless of which aircraft. Technology and proper installation can assure this is so. They are also a two way device, transmit and receive and its amazing when touring how much information regarding your destination can be gleaned by listening and talking to other pilots ( not to mention Melb Centre)

Why would you not turn your radio on if conducting a LAF ? Especially as you say you have one fitted. I fly out of a very small regional strip but at times have air tractors, fire bombers, rotary, charter, and touring aircraft in the CTAF so I make calls as a courtesy to them and my own safety.

So because of inappropriate and inconsistent behaviour by the few the majority need to up-skill and up-fit their aircraft is more equipment ... the sarcastic ba$tard in me asks are you on retainer for CASA? would you also like us all to ADSB in and out?Standard procedures and some limited additional management controls for large gatherings can address the risks and provide a safe environment.

 

And for your examples:

 

1. if they have a radio and don't know how to use it they are actually making things worse than having no radio

 

2. if they are a cocky using a radio like a CB they are in the same boat as 1.

 

3. 500ft and no radio - welcome to the mixed world. Unless its stated as 1000AGL then down to 500AGL is allowed even if not helpful when mixed in with GA ... and then mix in gyro and gliding and its very mixed

 

Everyone can play together and safe but it requires reasonable standard processes and awareness of others

Its not "the majority that need to upskill" It is the sub-cretin minority that need to get their act together !

Since man first took to the air we have been seeking and adopting technology to assist us and make flying safer. Why would you NOT fit a radio, makes no sense.

If done correctly then flying without a radio will be safe. Basically all our circuit procedures are set out the way that they are so that a radio is not necessary, yes it is nice and helpful but not critical.I think it would be a pity to shut out non radio aircraft from a flyin. For sure a flyin is a higher traffic time but if everyone sticks to the basics it will be safe.

There in lies the problem - "if done correctly"

"Circuit procedures" - we have recreational pilots out there flying 500ft circuits, no radio and those that do have a radio not trained in its use. And then we have the gliding fraternity.

And then we have our friendly Cocky who only flys occasionally and uses his radio as if he is on the CB in the tractor talking to the missus back at the homestead.

Go and buy two Flycom helmets with built in headsets. Expensive, but the best, no more issues