Geoff13 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 I have learned simply that whatever you achieve, there is more and with work it can be done. Cheers Geoff13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Why would you teach orbits on final approach below 500'. Isn't that what a go-around is for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Why would you teach orbits on final approach below 500'. Isn't that what a go-around is for? The mind boggles at what would happen on a busy airport with everyone else following the rules and fitting in - I wonder if an instructor ever actually taught this? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 The mind boggles at what would happen on a busy airport with everyone else following the rules and fitting in - I wonder if an instructor ever actually taught this? Yeah, I was taught some pretty hair-raising manouevres at very low level and very high speed in my previous aviation life for many years before I moved to an inherently less dangerous style of flying, but doing orbits at low level on final approach wasn't one of them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dafydd Llewellyn Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Why would you teach orbits on final approach below 500'. Isn't that what a go-around is for? Whilst CAO 95.55 exempts RAA aircraft from CAR 157, and therefore from the legal requirement to fly above 500 ft except when actually landing or taking off, or in a designated low flying area, I would have thought teaching people to fly orbits below 500 ft instead of going around would be pretty irresponsible. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 It is a manoeuver that requires concentration, no distractions and current skill ? How often could it be the best and safest way of achieving separation. The best way of increasing separation from a preceding aircraft is to extend down wind a bit, . It's the most effective. Some say vary the speed but the range once you are in the circuit is not very much and flying too slow isn't clever , nor is getting a lot of flap out before final .Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 It is a manoeuver that requires concentration, no distractions and current skill ? How often could it be the best and safest way of achieving separation. The best way of increasing separation from a preceding aircraft is to extend down wind a bit, . It's the most effective. Some say vary the speed but the range once you are in the circuit is not very much and flying too slow isn't clever , nor is getting a lot of flap out before final .Nev I'd argue the best way to adjust separation is actually to extend the upwind leg of the circuit, delaying the crosswind turn. Having said that, yes there is sometimes no other option than to extend downwind, but in doing so you are now forced into flying a level base leg rather than a descending one, and possibly even a level final segment. Either way, you are no longer in the position in the sky where people behind you in the circuit expect to see you, and they're about to turn base at some point for their approach too. Whichever way you do it, I'd be a bit disconcerted to see someone orbiting at 300' or 400' on final approach! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 In normal flying you take off a one airport and land at another, (as you know). Circuits are a training situation pretty much, where you have more options. Fitting in with aircraft in the circuit with largely different performance capabilities requires experience and application. You have to know what speeds (approximately) the other aircraft operate to. I recall a time at Mascot on 16 where I was trying to pedal an Auster J1/n on final with a DC-6 behind me and not get in his way. His approach speed was faster than my max cruise. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 1.5 hours of ground teaching for every hour in the air. I don't think I could remember 1.5 hours og ground teaching when I got into the air. Seriously though I did low level training as part of my PPL and I don't think many current pilots had that advantage. Someone said pilots fly too fast, but in a lot of cases, if you are gouing to fly low safely, you need a bit of extra speed. No good flying at 200' at 10kts above stall speed. What happens if the engine coughs? The big thing about low flight is to trust your instruments, not your seat of pants and how you see drift. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 im guessing here, but let me ask you guys how will you judge AGL? if your answer involves the use of the altimeter then guess again cause AGL only equals ASL definantly when your over the beach tide mark.....(and even then assuming you know QFF.....but how would you?) As I see it we generally have no means to measure AGL. Bigger aircraft have radalt's (radar altimeters) that rely on on a radar bounce from the earths surface. Altimeters and most GPS only measure ASL. Some GPS have terrain data and as such can measure AGL, but my recollection ( may be wrong is that GPS is less accurate in height..but not so sure about that Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chird65 Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 ...As I see it we generally have no means to measure AGL. Bigger aircraft have radalt's (radar altimeters) that rely on on a radar bounce from he earths surface. Altimeters and most GPS only measure ASL.... Someone with better electronics skills could up the power on this... http://lea.hamradio.si/~s53mv/avionics/raltalk.html (Low-power (30mW) FM-CW precision radar altimeter, 700ft range, 1/4ft resolution.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 or use one of the hand held laser range finders......but really?? We are recreational flying.... and if the laser how will you know you have it straight up and down and not some slant angle...which is potentially true of radalt's as well unless they have a wide beam and respond to first return...... F111's used to have 2 low altitude radalt's (LARA) and the recon aircraft had a high alt radalt's so that photo's had a known altitude AGL and as such the photo interpreters could do their I spy with my little eye magic.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 I had a radar alt in Twin Commanche LLV. Lil Bonzer I think it was called. They are only used really when shooting an approach and not required item. Nice to have though. You shouldn't need one in VFR. Your height judgement should be pretty good under 1,000' if you are in practice. Where you get caught out is when you are downwind of a mountain range and flying toward it. Your map gives you hypsometric tints and spot heights but you altimeter may not be close relying on a standard atmosphere model and setting an area QNH. giving you separation from other A/C using the same method ( we hope). Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Andy, go dam busters style with two light beams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M61A1 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Andy, go dam busters style with two light beams? So now we are seeking night VFR ratings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 in the name of safety Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M61A1 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 in the name of safety Sounds legit.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabiru Phil Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 I bought an Aero 500 gps some time ago as a back up for my 296 I rarely use it, but if memory is correct it gives AGL by touching the screen. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 So I went looking to see if I was right about vertical resolution and found this which backs up what I was saying....Garmin suggest +/-400ft is not unrealistic.... It all depends on which satellites are available for the fix....the further apart they are the better all fix accuracy (horizontal and vertical) become. If the satellites are close together they all degrade, but height degrades more so than horizontal position......Also the greater the number of concurrent channels it supports (which equates to the number of satellites at the same time it can listen to) , and if it can cope with the USA system and the Russian System at the same time then vertical accuracy will be better..... Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Geez. Practice judging it by eye. That's what you will have if the air hits the front of the fan. The more you do the better your luck will be. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 My point, even though it was here, is that GPS height is not, accuracy wise, what people might expect...don't get caught out busting CTA by rising into a wedding cake layer and thinking your well clear....I mean even if it was accurate we still have the discrepancy between barometric height as a function of QNH vs height above the WGS84 datum which is an approximation for sea level. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaz3g Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 So get an iPhone 6 which has an internal barometer which will give altitude results in a suitable app :-) Kaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 You mostly require separation from other traffic. You all have to have the same reference and the same settings with serviceable altimeter(s). Nothing else at this stage. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank marriott Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 If I am flying low level for whatever reason I want VMC and my eyes outside. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 It's required to be VMC anytime in this "sport" (as U know) Looking outside is a no brainer and you rightly emphasise it. Most of the discussion so far has been about "gadgets". (Fun perhaps but NOT of the "essence".) Don't get distracted from the main game. Judging you height and other flying skills are what this is about, not a maze of instruments, or a head full of numbers. Nev 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now