Jump to content

Lowering Class E between Melbourne and Cairns


Recommended Posts

With all of this talk about getting a transponder to be able to use class E, what about some small aircraft (single seaters) with very limited panel space! I will not be able to fit a transponder in my panel/cockpit that is reachable in flight. And that is the incomplete panel, still need the fuel level tube and a few switches installed. I will have to crawl around the Atherton Tableland like in the old days with the limit of 500'!

CIMG0686.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 572
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

RF guy, RAA and other organisations HAVE to reject this proposal out of hand or otherwise they are conceding Airservices the right to make arbitrary decisions. We are then reduced to just being suppli

'Welcome to OneSky™ Australia, where we want everyone to be included.' To be included in 'OneSky'™ will cost you about ten thousand dollars per aircraft for initial installation, An annual f

I see you are starting to give in already, which is as I predicted earlier. The aim of the process was to upset us so much that we breath a huge sigh of relief when they bring Class E down to 3000'

Posted Images

Air Services don’t care about you or anyone else......matters nothing to them the disaster they are trying to cause?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, horsefeathers said:

And Airservices didnt even consult  with CASA about this proposal

Well CASA should step in and shut their stupid plan down and then sort out something workable.  IF they don’t, then they are complicit in this whole ugly mess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll need to fly with a co-pilot so they can watch the screen info and PIC can fly and maintain effective lookout scan.  I can see people spending enormous time looking at the screen to interpret the targets, will be very distracting and may contribute to midair’s etc. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Blueadventures said:

I’ll need to fly with a co-pilot so they can watch the screen info and PIC can fly and maintain effective lookout scan.  I can see people spending enormous time looking at the screen to interpret the targets, will be very distracting and may contribute to midair’s etc. 

It's not that bad. If you are using it for navigating you will be glancing at the screen anyway. It just gives you idea whats around. Even if you have 2 aircraft each traveling towards each other at 200kts each you only have to look at the screen every 3 minutes to notice if you are on a collision course. I would be very surprised if the software developers are not working on an automated collision warning system as part of the electronic flight bag.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone seems to forget that this is an Airservices proposal that CASA has not had any involvement with  and replies to questions will state only current rules or fob you off. The 1500 feet AGL has to be expressed as height AMSL to be legal so that must be 1500 above the highest point in the so called "medium or high density traffic areas" and these have not been defined. I don't see it getting up at all as it will be unworkable and reduce safety. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blueadventures said:

I’ll need to fly with a co-pilot so they can watch the screen info and PIC can fly and maintain effective lookout scan.  I can see people spending enormous time looking at the screen to interpret the targets, will be very distracting and may contribute to midair’s etc. 

I don't think the regulators have much to say about the ADSB targets that sole pilots choose to scan for - or not. They're interested mainly in our conspicuity (the 'OUT' side of the equation). But I think they are interested in RPTs getting ADSB-IN displays (CDTI) so they can detect VFR targets on descent through G (soon to be E ?). 

Of course, they already have co-pilots for that purpose.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Blueadventures said:

I’ll need to fly with a co-pilot so they can watch the screen info and PIC can fly and maintain effective lookout scan.  I can see people spending enormous time looking at the screen to interpret the targets, will be very distracting and may contribute to midair’s etc. 

As others have said you only need to glance at the screen quickly to assess if another aircraft is a potential risk or not. Five seconds looking at a screen is more productive than five seconds looking at an "empty" sky.

 

Two 100 knot aircraft have a closing speed of 3 miles a minute,  based on my experience we can't always see a small aircraft at 3 miles so less than a minute to see and avoid and so much sky to scan.

 

As pilots we have almost total control over airworthiness, weather and airspeed as we fly, seeing all the traffic not so much. I choose ADS-B in (SkyEcho2)  displayed on a tablet to minimize that risk for a very low cost.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your old KT74/KT76 is just fine, if it is working. if the altitude encoder is not functional , put a note on the instrument panel and write a note in the MR  not to use it in ALT mode (Mode C) and just run in Mode A,

(in conjunction with Skyecho which will provide the altitude and position fixes)

 

Since the Skyecho can accept multiple connected clients, I am going to make a matchbox that talks directly to the Skyecho, and makes the calcs  if there is an aircraft in the VCNY and tells me in a synthesised voice into the intercom...... 

 

 

 

  • Winner 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, RFguy said:

Your old KT74/KT76 is just fine, if it is working. if the altitude encoder is not functional , put a note on the instrument panel and write a note in the MR  not to use it in ALT mode (Mode C) and just run in Mode A,

(in conjunction with Skyecho which will provide the altitude and position fixes)

 

Since the Skyecho can accept multiple connected clients, I am going to make a matchbox that talks directly to the Skyecho, and makes the calcs  if there is an aircraft in the VCNY and tells me in a synthesised voice into the intercom...... 

 

 

 

Your first line says it all, and that may be OK when your repair Avionics and have the service gear to do it.  I come from 30 years in the Radio Comms industry and still have all my service gear for radios. I wont take chances on an old relic transponder that may not be fully functional,  IF it so much as sneezed while I was flying.....slide it out of the tray and frisbee it out the door hoping it did not hit a poor cow behind the ears.

I will get a Skyecho and that will be as good as it gets, it’s better than nothing and Air Services/CASA should recognise the benefits they provide and fully include them in the new proposed rule changes.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Garfly said:

I don't think the regulators have much to say about the ADSB targets that sole pilots choose to scan for - or not. They're interested mainly in our conspicuity (the 'OUT' side of the equation). But I think they are interested in RPTs getting ADSB-IN displays (CDTI) so they can detect VFR targets on descent through G (soon to be E ?). 

Of course, they already have co-pilots for that purpose.

More distraction possible if someone spends lots of time interpreting the display at say 10 or 5 miles out when aircraft merging to join circuit. Some cannot get the runway direction they select correct at times.  Just an opinion time will tell. Cheers.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Garfly said:

How good is that. If we all carried skyecho's this is what we could have for collision avoidance. I think almost everyone would be happy to make the coastal class G into to E if this was the future. Just allow us to fly class E with Skyecho2 or equivalent. ATC have proved having crashed 3 aircraft recently that they don't care about our safety. Foreflights example has me excited for what can be done if we all carry (cheap) ADSB transmitters.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes thats a perfect example of what can be done now with EFB and smart software writing and devices just like the SE2

This literally makes the SE2 part of a TABS device available for reasonable cost

 

ASA surely cant be that poorly run that they can not see these potential devices will also save them time and energy when aircraft are not withing the high traffic areas

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Kyle Communications said:

ASA surely cant be that poorly run that they can not see these potential devices will also save them time and energy when aircraft are not withing the high traffic areas

 

AH Kyle, don't do that to me. It took me a couple of minutes to pick myself off the floor, I was laughing so hard

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, jackc said:

Well, WHY don’t Air Services accept it for what it is, and want this TABS b/s? Just let us fly on our merry way?   
WHY?   Because they have no idea how to run Aviation, just as well they dont subby their ideas out to the Transport Dept or we would be driving everywhere at 80kph.

Sorry jackc - occupational health and safety wont let you drive a car if they had there way!!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a spanner in that world !.

What sized battery will l need ?

No generator, 12volt, XX amp h,s ?.

Five hour,s flying around the circuit, for a fun day.

Max take off wright.

And no margin for extra bits & pieces. I doubt l am the only one in this predicament.

spacesailor

Edited by spacesailor
Missed word
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, spacesailor said:

Just a spanner in that world !.

What sized battery will l need ?

No generator, 12volt, XX amp h,s ?.

Five hour,s flying around the circuit, for a fun day.

Max take off wright.

And no margin for extra bits & pieces. I doubt l am the only one in this predicament.

spacesailor

The SkyEcho2 for all intents and purposes is a ADS-B transponder.

It has a battery like a smart phone, charge it up and your good to go all day. No aircraft electrical system required.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, waraton said:

Hemispherical flight levels. There's an olden days idea that could work, actually I believe it does work. 

It definitely helps however if you are flying a heading of 030 in your gyro and I am flying 060 in the RV (160ktas) at the same level and I dont see you............. You will not even have the opportunity to see me.

 

The other thing is aircraft spend a reasonable amount of time climbing and descending.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Thruster88 said:

 

 

The other thing is aircraft spend a reasonable amount of time climbing and descending.  

In particular, IFR traffic in and out of regional ports. Which is what it's all about.

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/02/2021 at 8:59 PM, horsefeathers said:

Lets put some real world numbers for the Sky Echo 2 out there, just to inform the debate a bit.

 

My SkyEcho is mounted on the top of my Jabiru windscreen, fyi.

 

This morning, at 3,000 ft, I was able to see ADSB traffic approx 190 km away (using Ozrunways), from behind me.

Also, we get a fair few Qantas Link aircraft overhead, approx 25,000 ft, typically coming out of Brisbane. Never have any problem picking them up

I can see coastal traffic (about 50km away as the crow Jabiru flies), typically flying about 1,500/2,500 ft, with  hills in between.

 

Using FlightRadar 24, I can usually see my own aircraft while flying, or look at the tracking after i landed.

 

I unfortunately don't know how good the reception is of my SkyEcho, and I'd love to be able to test it with another aircraft sometime.

 

All in all, reception is brilliant, and more than sufficient for ADSB-IN, and so far with limited testing, ADSB-OUT seems more than adequate for a (say) 30Km safety zone

HF mentioning that he checks his flight track (on FR24) when he gets home, points to another safety benefit of VFR aviators getting into (low cost) ADSB gear.  (Especially if the PLB fails.) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Skyecho CANNOT be interrogated- therefore it isnt really a transponder.

But if the ADSB OUT beacon goes out often enough, it would serve a similar purpose.

 

Time to look up the GDL90 interface protocol 

 

Edited by RFguy
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...