nickduncs84

Useful for ifr procedure practice but not much else. The flying of the plane isn't very realistic but the procedures and equipment are. I use a pretty powerful pc with 4 monitors. Main view on 3 and instruments / gps on the 4th. In hindsight don't worry too much about the main view unless you're doing it for fun. 1 screen for the main view and 1 for the panel would be fine. There are a few options for software. Microsoft flight simulator fsx, p3d or xplane are the main ones. I am using p3d as I couldn't get fsx to work properly with windows 8

Went to Goulburn recently. Good airport. Friendly people including jump school. No issues from what I could tell.

Good piece of publicity

http://kitplanes2.com/blog/2015/07/new-camit-distributor/

Good episode. Well worth the listen.

Yeah that's one of my concerns. I am exactly the same distance from a controlled and a non controlled airport, and am leaning towards the controlled for just that reason, I don't want to be one of those guys that steer clear of controlled airspace because they're not confident on the radio. Although it will no doubt cost more, I think the experience will be invaluable.

.....I ended up emailing a flight school that specialises in light sport, and they told me that my 6 hours PPL training wouldn't count towards my 20 hours for RPL......

I've currently got an RPL and have done about 100 hours since getting it. I also have a cross country endo, retract/csu endo and CTA endo. This is essentially the same amount of training that it would take to get a PPL, except I didn't have to sit the theory exam. To convert my current RPL to a PPL would mean passing the exam and passing a flight test, there would be no extra training hours required.

The only reason to get your PPL if you have an RPL is if you want to fly IFR or NVFR or want to fly a heavier plane.

So if you are starting out in the GA world, you should just do the PPL, it's essentially the same thing and it will make it easier when you do decide to do your night / instrument rating.

If you're looking at saving some coin, I'd get my Ra Aus certificate first and enjoy flying around for $150 an hour for as long as possible. Then when you want to move on to bigger planes, controlled airspace etc, you can convert to a CASA license then. Once you have the RPL, you could probably get checked out in something like a 172 in a few hours and then maybe 3 o4 4 more for the CTA endo.

yes i meant rocket surgery. i was trying to be funny. but i digest. back to topic.

geeez you know it's not always a bad thing to have to learn something new. it's not like any of this stuff is rocket surgery. there are many things you can do to make the UTC thing easier, even here in the halfa state!

1) Buy a cheap watch that you use for flying that's set to UTC

2) Buy a more expensive watch with 2 time zones

3) Install a clock with UTC in your panel

4) Use OzRunways to submit flight plans. When you file a flight plan, you can click 'now' which changes it to current UTC and then set the time based on that. So if you're filing an hour before departure, set the time as now, change the hour forward one and submit. Simple.

5) Use ozrunways for your weather briefing. The TAFG feature shows the conditions in a graphical way with both local and zulu time on the bottom axis. After you look at that for your departure and arrival airport, you should know the zulu start and end time of your flight without having to do any conversions which will help when looking at the area forecast...

Yes . A Glasair is a nice plane. I didn't think it needed an engine that bigRe STOL. Going slow all the time to do a few short takeoffs and a short field landing doesn't add up here like it does in Alaska, where you can't drive to your fishing spot. Drag is with you all the time to slow you up and burn fuel. Nev

Whattabout a Glasair sportsman.Fast enough, [ would like to cruise at 135 k] 4 seats [ I would like to take the 2 kids up] can convert to taildragger quickly, Folding wings and removable tail section[ big bonus], carbon fibre option!

No Radial or aeros but.

 

As nev says there is no perfect aircraft.

 

I reckon the glasair gets close.

I'd say wait as long as you can. I'm 3 years in and my 'ideal' plane has changed multiple times from a jabiru to a 4 place tourer to a STOL tail wheel. Just fly as many different planes as you can and be realistic about your main 'mission'.

I'm a bit of a tech nerd ie I often get stuff I don't really need just to try it out. As such, I have switched between OzR and AvPlan for the past 2 years. To be honest with you, I always end up back with OzR. I just find it easier to use in general and I find the weather planning a lot more useful in OzR than AvPlan. I'll probably keep subscribing to AvPlan and re evaluate every now and again, especially when I do my instrument rating, but for now I think OzR is a better platform. I have also found that AvPlan has been buggier than OzR has been. The last time I tried to use it I gave up because whenever I left the app and tried to get back into it, it would crash. I guess the biggest thing for me is that with OzR I have never needed to look at the instructions. For people who are familiar with technology, they will be able to work out 95% of the features just by playing with it a few times...

Can we only get TAF in plain talkWhat about area?

We wrote plain text weather about 18 months ago. Didn't turn it on as we realised it broke one of the contract requirements with NAIPS (that we pass through weather unmodified). We asked for this to be changed and are still waiting.We don't intend to break the conditions of our license agreements without something from the Airservices lawyers I'm afraid.

 

As for the rest of the stuff they have put in - we've had it all for a while now :-)

One of the best safety things since sliced breadOzRunways V5 now has the TAF weather in plain English as well as the (unreadable) international format

This will add to safety for the all pilots easy to understand weather reports

 

One day the CASA, Air Services might ask pilots what is needed to make flying safer

 

Well done OzRunways, am sure AV Plan will follow soon

 

My 2 cents worth

Well, seeing as this topic is about Dick Smith, I'll throw in my 2 cents to get back on topic. IMHO, how anyone who loves aviation can be opposed to Dick Smith is beyond me. Threads like this only reiterate why we have a problem in the first place. All this moaning and nitpicking amongst those that should be able to band together to fight the real issues that impact on all of general / recreational aviation. Rotax vs Jabiru, RA Aus vs GA, Dick Smith having an opinion on something related to aviation that you don't agree with. I'm not saying that we shouldn't be free to discuss it, because after all, it's our passion for aviation that makes us passionate about aviation related topics, but when push comes to shove, we would all be better off if we learned to get along a little more often on the things that really matter. Dick Smith is an aviation enthusiast. To put it bluntly, if he was the Prime Minister, general and recreational aviation in Australia would be better for it. What some people don't seem to understand is that for the vast majority, recreational and general aviation doesn't matter. Governments do have the ability to totally kill (and I mean totally kill, not just almost kill as it now stands) all forms of affordable recreational aviation just like they have the ability to upset any small subset of the population without consequence.

At the end of the day, love him or hate him, I would like to think that if you ever get the chance to vote for him, you don't let the small stuff get in the way of what should really matter.

Don't you mean "many of the HUD options including current / next area frequencies, closest local QNH, etc aren't on RWY on the Android".

What about RWy go?Extra app for iphone to run alongside OzRunways, pretty handly but does cost extra. Auto follows and finds nearest runway, swipe to see taf etc

Strip graphic line up with your travel direction. Provides ctaf and atis for selected strip

 

Gps issue only effects external GPS, not internal

 

Having next G (and therefore internal GPS) is a key part of OzR in my experience.

Do you mean it runs a head-up display? I've been waiting for this.

Ok......i'm on a "Mac", had it for a few yrs, all's good............butfinding an EASY......repeat....EASY app, free, to resize pics is just not happining, our other pewter toshiba

( windows ).......has a really great resizer.....( bluefive.pair.com ) version 1.0.9, it's just perfect.

 

So.......you Mac guys, what are you using.

 

russ

skitch is another very useful tool on the mac. now linked to evernote. good for capturing screenshots, making notes and sending on.

With the current issues around iPad and external GPS I am going to get to the stage where I need to upgrade - either a new iPad mini with internal GPS or an android tablet with RWY.This thread has not been active for a while - any updates on how RWY is going ? Is it close enough now to OzRunways to be a viable alternative ? Its certainly a bit cheaper to buy an android tablet such as a Nexus 9.

 

I have been running RWY on my phone but its hard to get a feel for it on that size device

1) RWY is by no means as feature packed as the iPad version. The weather tool on the iPad is especially useful on XC flights. It basically pulls all the weather info and gives you a graphical depiction of the various elements superimposed on your flight route. It really allows you to get a good idea of where the weather is and where it is going in relation to your flight path. Another great weather feature is the TAFG or TAF graph which plots all relevant information from the TAF at an aerodrome. Really useful. There are other useful things that the iPad does in flight that the RWY doesn't. many of the HUD options including current / next area frequencies, closest local QNH, etc aren't on the iPad.

2) RWY does a lot of things well which makes it a viable backup. I'm not sure if its legal as a backup due to screen size?? so I always have the paper in the back seat, but realistically, RWY is my backup and I have had to use it. I was on my way to a class D airport and my iPad completely died (screen was faulty). I was able to pull up the charts, frequencies, etc from my phone very easily as well as navigate to the approach point.

So I guess it really depends on what you are planning on using it for, but for me, the weather feature on the iPad alone is enough to justify spending the extra dollars on an iPad vs Android tablet.

What is the reference/requirement for IFR aircraft being on Area QNH when Local QNH is available?

AD APP equipment takes the area QNH below A100 or YPAD QNH or above A100 it uses 1013.2, when you set QNH to the same as everyone else in the similar area, you are all using the same height datum or reference point, and if you are on different settings the information is useless. Between VFR and IFR. In CTR we can use 500ft verticals separation, if your transponder is out by 200 and the other guy is out by 200ft, there is a minimum of 100ft. The 200ft is the maximum tolerance for a mode C transponder, if you have a faulty transponder and also set it incorrectly this can potentially make a greater error.If I get an error greater than 200ft I'm required to instruct the pilot to use mode A only, we prefer the transponder on but outside the 200ft tolerance is bad for many reasons TCAS is just one of them, I will suggest that you get it checked before entering controlled airspace again. We can cancel or refuse a clearance to enter or use CTA if your transponder is out of tolerance.

 

I stand to be corrected, but I think if you have and use a transponder IFR or VFR it is a requirement to have it checked for operation and calibration every two years for private operations and less for commercial operations.

I get it, that makes a lot more sense. The transponder is the original 1979 so no altitude readout. It's starting to sound like there is a problem with it. I might give Adelaide a call next time I'm up and they aren't busy to see if I can do a comparison. Thanks for your help!

Check (or get whoever does your maintenance to do so) that the transponder encoder is correctly connected to the aircraft static system. It could be that the encoder is using the pressure in the cockpit which is usually lower than the true static which would give a higher reading(first situation) and in thermally conditions would give a fluctuating reading as the gusts pass(your second situation). Some models of transponder allow you to see the altitude that the transponder is outputting. For example refer to page 7 of this. You could compare that to the altimeter reading but note that the transponder is transmitting the altitude with 1013 set as the pressure setting. You can either adjust the altimeter to 1013 to compare or use the approximation that each millibar is 30 feet to convert.I suspect that a number of violations of controlled airspace are due to transponder altitude problems and not true violations.

Here's one for the ATC guys, or at least people that know the ins and outs of how it all works. Twice in the past month I've had an ATC at Adelaide Centre call me up saying that I was at the wrong height.

The first time, I was tracking coastal along the Adelaide coast within the control zone. The required altitude is at or below 500. Obviously not much room for error, so you're pretty much watching the altimeter the whole time. When he called, he said he had me at 700 feet. on Adelaide QNH I was looking at the altimeter, verified the QNH and the altimeter was reading about 490 feet. So I really had no idea what to say other than. "Confirm QNH currently showing 490 ft". He then came back and said that I was 'just within tolerances' but to carry on.

At the time, I didn't think much of it. I know what I was seeing on the altimeter so thought he might of made a mistake and didn't want to elaborate more hence the 'just within tolerances' comment.

Then yesterday, I was under the 4,500 step heading east away from the zone. There was a few clouds about so I was up and down a little, but made sure I was on Adelaide QNH and never went above 4,500. Adelaide Centre called me up and after we established communications he made a comment to the effect of 'I have you on SSR varying between 4,000 and 5,000 please confirm ops normal and that you will stay outside class charlie at 4,500.'

Note that in both circumstances it was the same controller.

So now it's got me thinking. I know that the altimeter is correct for a number of reasons, one of which is that it matches up with the GPS altitude on the Garmin with the QNH set on the GPS. I'm also assuming that the equipment at Adelaide is operating normally. So what is most likely:

1) There is a problem with the altitude reporting from the transponder?

2) The controller is just letting me know that he sees me. Might explain the second one, but not the first one??

And finally, what are you supposed to say when you get a comment from ATC like this and you're looking at information in the cockpit that doesn't match what they are saying?