Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule
On 19-Oct-12 11:11, Mike Borgelt wrote: At 06:16 AM 19/10/2012, you wrote: But in any event is the rule necessary? We all know the advantages of not hitting the far fence at 5 knots over going through the near fence at 50 knots. Those who don't are not around to tell! So, clear all obstacles is the key, and land as safely as you can. Thanks Alan, lets put that in Caps, Bold SO, CLEAR ALL OBSTACLES IS THE KEY AND LAND AS SAFELY AS YOU CAN. Which is exactly what I was trained to do, learning in the UK, where the paddocks (at least back then) were small. -- Robert Hartha...@interweft.com.au Darling Downs gliding weather information +61 438 385 533 ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule
So put your proposal to ICAO. Tom From: Al Borowski al.borow...@gmail.com To: tom claffey to...@yahoo.com; Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 1:53 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule On 19/10/2012, tom claffey to...@yahoo.com wrote: Aviation uses feet for height, metres for horizontal distance and knots for speed - deal with it! The teenagers I teach with the AAFC have no problems with it. Tom The only problem with the this is the way it's always been done approach is we end up with weather reports etc that are more suitable for WW2 then 2012. If we're already mixing metric and imperial units, what's the harm in putting a metric equivalent as well? I suspect no-one goes into aviation with an intuitive understanding of what 2000 feet AGL looks like. Everyone has to learn at height X, the view looks like Y, so the units are irrelevant. The altimeter could read in fractions of a football field and I bet student pilots would cope just as well.. Smaller distances are a different story. It's reasonable for a 20 year old to instantly point to something ~100M away, but I bet they'd be much slower when the unit is specified in feet. Cheers, Al ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
[Aus-soaring] Metric versus imperial, you gotta learn to love it.... ; -)
In some parts of the world, metric units are used for altimetry, and metres are used on European altimeters, and many paragliders and hangies here in Oz use metres on their instruments: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_level#Metric_flight_levels Although I believe there is a push by ICAO wrt RVSM that the whole world uses feet and flight levels. The type of units used, well, despite the confusion, my brain hasn't exploded yet: Altimeter = feet or flight levels Runway dimensions = Metres Vertical clearance from cloud = feet Horizontal clearance from cloud = Metres Visibility = Metres or kilometres Fuel Flow = Gallons per hour Fuel capacity = Litres Oil temperature =Degrees Fahrenheit Outside Air temp = Degrees Centigrade Manifold pressure =Inches of Mercury Tyre pressure = Pounds per square inch Distance of the airfield from the town when you drive in a car = Kilometres (i.e the airfield is 3 km SE of the town) Distance the town is from the airfield when inbound = Nautical miles (i.e. Inbound from the NW at 2nm) Duration of your flight = 1hour and 6 minutes VDO time = 1.1hours Area forecast winds = degrees true. Airfield forecast winds = degrees magnetic Important measures when rigging a twin seater glider: Distance required to move a wingtip forward or backwards = Just a smidge, any distance more is too much Distance required to lift a heavy wing = Just a smidge (really means more, i.e. until your hernia pops) The mass of a wing = They don't weigh much = They're bloody heavy Upright = Usually not truly vertical Have a great w/e flying everyone... ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule
Hi Tom; I am 62 years old so I have no problem dealing with it. But I am not that old that I do not remember that I was once young. Recreational flying - and gliding - have become almost exclusively the pass times of old men. So when glider pilots start talking about teaching young kids to drive a bus (the rough equivalent to flying a plane to a young person) and they want to do it using feet and knots then I can see no relief. Looking at the date I see that the year is 2012, not 1962. If flying is not to be abut the future it will become about the past (as it already has) - deal with it! On Thu, 18 Oct 2012, tom claffey wrote: Aviation uses feet for height, metres for horizontal distance and knots for speed - deal with it! The teenagers I teach with the AAFC have no problems with it. Tom From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi; Irrespective of whether it is 50' or not I find it hard to believe that the figure is given in a system which people under 40 have no heuristic knowledge of. On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Mark Newton wrote: Hi folks. My google-fu is failing me, but at least one of you can probably help. I've long accepted that the rule for obstacle clearance is 50'. However, the GFA instructor handbook describes it as a wingspan, and the B certificate oral exam calls 50' a recommended minimum, so I'm trying to go back to sources to find the origin of the rule. And I can't seem to find it written down anywhere. I'm beginning to suspect that my long-term acceptance of the 50' rule is wrong, and that the real limit is, shall we say, more operationally fluid than that. Wondering if the strict mention of 50' that I've seen at clubs all over Australia is actually more of a tradition, perhaps derived from a misunderstanding of certified light aircraft performance charts which give minimum takeoff distances including clearance of a 50' obstacle. Does anyone have a cite to the regulations? (while you're at it, providing a cite to a current GFA or non-exempted CASA regulation which states what GFA annual check entails, whether it's required to be signed out in a logbook, or whether an instructor is even required to be present, would help to settle a long-standing argument :) - mark Cheers Cheers -- Peter F Bradshaw: http://www.exadios.com (public keys avaliable there). Personal site: http://personal.exadios.com I love truth, and the way the government still uses it occasionally to keep us guessing. - Sam Kekovich.___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule
Peter, I am only 48and can deal with either measurement. I spend my spare time instructing 14-18 year-olds who also deal with it quite well. At work I deal with it with 25-30 year old second officers who have no issues with it. As I replied to Al, if you have better ideas then put them to ICAO!! We could change anything we like but the rest of the world wont change because of it. Like it or not we are part of the wider Aviation community. Tom From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaritymuning in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 6:30 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi Tom; I am 62 years old so I have no problem dealing with it. But I am not that old that I do not remember that I was once young. Recreational flying - and gliding - have become almost exclusively the pass times of old men. So when glider pilots start talking about teaching young kids to drive a bus (the rough equivalent to flying a plane to a young person) and they want to do it using feet and knots then I can see no relief. Looking at the date I see that the year is 2012, not 1962. If flying is not to be abut the future it will become about the past (as it already has) - deal with it! On Thu, 18 Oct 2012, tom claffey wrote: Aviation uses feet for height, metres for horizontal distance and knots for speed - deal with it! The teenagers I teach with the AAFC have no problems with it. Tom From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi; Irrespective of whether it is 50' or not I find it hard to believe that the figure is given in a system which people under 40 have no heuristic knowledge of. On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Mark Newton wrote: Hi folks. My google-fu is failing me, but at least one of you can probably help. I've long accepted that the rule for obstacle clearance is 50'. However, the GFA instructor handbook describes it as a wingspan, and the B certificate oral exam calls 50' a recommended minimum, so I'm trying to go back to sources to find the origin of the rule. And I can't seem to find it written down anywhere. I'm beginning to suspect that my long-term acceptance of the 50' rule is wrong, and that the real limit is, shall we say, more operationally fluid than that. Wondering if the strict mention of 50' that I've seen at clubs all over Australia is actually more of a tradition, perhaps derived from a misunderstanding of certified light aircraft performance charts which give minimum takeoff distances including clearance of a 50' obstacle. Does anyone have a cite to the regulations? (while you're at it, providing a cite to a current GFA or non-exempted CASA regulation which states what GFA annual check entails, whether it's required to be signed out in a logbook, or whether an instructor is even required to be present, would help to settle a long-standing argument :) - mark Cheers Cheers -- Peter F Bradshaw: http://www.exadios.com (public keys avaliable there). Personal site: http://personal.exadios.com I love truth, and the way the government still uses it occasionally to keep us guessing. - Sam Kekovich. ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule
Hundreds of thousands of young people staying away from gliding because of feet and knots? Just how many TIFs does your club do? ;) There are many reasons for low numbers of new pilots but units are not one of them! [old mumbling instructors may be!] Tom From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 8:14 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi Tom; I'm not sure what you mean by second officers but I'm guessing that you are not talking about glider pilots. In any case the people you need to talk to are the young people who are not taking up gliding in their hundreds of thousands. As you have said young people should deal with it and they have - by staying away. They simply have no interest in a bunch of old guys mumbling incoherently about TIFFs in feet and knots etc. I have actually submitted the suggestion about units to CASA. Are they interested - hell no. But even if they were, by the time the ICAO got around to it gliding will be well and truely dead in this country. On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, tom claffey wrote: Peter, I am only 48and can deal with either measurement. I spend my spare time instructing 14-18 year-olds who also deal with it quite well. At work I deal with it with 25-30 year old second officers who have no issues with it. As I replied to Al, if you have better ideas then put them to ICAO!! We could change anything we like but the rest of the world wont change because of it. Like it or not we are part of the wider Aviation community. Tom From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaritymuning in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 6:30 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi Tom; I am 62 years old so I have no problem dealing with it. But I am not that old that I do not remember that I was once young. Recreational flying - and gliding - have become almost exclusively the pass times of old men. So when glider pilots start talking about teaching young kids to drive a bus (the rough equivalent to flying a plane to a young person) and they want to do it using feet and knots then I can see no relief. Looking at the date I see that the year is 2012, not 1962. If flying is not to be abut the future it will become about the past (as it already has) - deal with it! On Thu, 18 Oct 2012, tom claffey wrote: Aviation uses feet for height, metres for horizontal distance and knots for speed - deal with it! The teenagers I teach with the AAFC have no problems with it. Tom ___ _ From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi; Irrespective of whether it is 50' or not I find it hard to believe that the figure is given in a system which people under 40 have no heuristic knowledge of. On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Mark Newton wrote: Hi folks. My google-fu is failing me, but at least one of you can probably help. I've long accepted that the rule for obstacle clearance is 50'. However, the GFA instructor handbook describes it as a wingspan, and the B certificate oral exam calls 50' a recommended minimum, so I'm trying to go back to sources to find the origin of the rule. And I can't seem to find it written down anywhere. I'm beginning to suspect that my long-term acceptance of the 50' rule is wrong, and that the real limit is, shall we say, more operationally fluid than that. Wondering if the strict mention of 50' that I've seen at clubs all over Australia is actually more of a tradition, perhaps derived from a misunderstanding of certified light aircraft performance charts which give minimum takeoff distances including clearance of a 50' obstacle. Does anyone have a cite to the regulations? (while you're at it, providing a cite to a current GFA or non-exempted CASA regulation which states what GFA annual check entails, whether it's required to be signed out in a logbook, or whether an instructor is even required to be present, would help to settle a long-standing argument :) - mark Cheers Cheers Cheers -- Peter F Bradshaw: http://www.exadios.com (public keys avaliable there). Personal site: http://personal.exadios.com I love truth, and the way the government still uses it occasionally to keep us guessing. - Sam Kekovich. ___ Aus-soaring mailing list
Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule
At 07:55 PM 19/10/2012, you wrote: Hundreds of thousands of young people staying away from gliding because of feet and knots? Just how many TIFs does your club do? ;) There are many reasons for low numbers of new pilots but units are not one of them! [old mumbling instructors may be!] Tom Well said,Tom. Not that many 18 year olds can probably do simple mental arithmetic for unit conversions, if they know what that is. Mike Borgelt Instruments - design manufacture of quality soaring instrumentation since 1978 www.borgeltinstruments.com tel: 07 4635 5784 overseas: int+61-7-4635 5784 mob: 042835 5784: int+61-42835 5784 P O Box 4607, Toowoomba East, QLD 4350, Australia ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
[Aus-soaring] Young people hate the 50' Rule!
Maybe we would attract young people if we wore our caps the other way round, provided the cap size is metric! The idea that young people are staying away from the sport has nothing to do with units of measure and everything to do with the motley crew found at the launch points most weekends. SDF On 19/10/2012, at 20:55, tom claffey to...@yahoo.com wrote: Hundreds of thousands of young people staying away from gliding because of feet and knots? Just how many TIFs does your club do? ;) There are many reasons for low numbers of new pilots but units are not one of them! [old mumbling instructors may be!] Tom From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 8:14 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi Tom; I'm not sure what you mean by second officers but I'm guessing that you are not talking about glider pilots. In any case the people you need to talk to are the young people who are not taking up gliding in their hundreds of thousands. As you have said young people should deal with it and they have - by staying away. They simply have no interest in a bunch of old guys mumbling incoherently about TIFFs in feet and knots etc. I have actually submitted the suggestion about units to CASA. Are they interested - hell no. But even if they were, by the time the ICAO got around to it gliding will be well and truely dead in this country. On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, tom claffey wrote: Peter, I am only 48and can deal with either measurement. I spend my spare time instructing 14-18 year-olds who also deal with it quite well. At work I deal with it with 25-30 year old second officers who have no issues with it. As I replied to Al, if you have better ideas then put them to ICAO!! We could change anything we like but the rest of the world wont change because of it. Like it or not we are part of the wider Aviation community. Tom From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaritymuning in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 6:30 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi Tom; I am 62 years old so I have no problem dealing with it. But I am not that old that I do not remember that I was once young. Recreational flying - and gliding - have become almost exclusively the pass times of old men. So when glider pilots start talking about teaching young kids to drive a bus (the rough equivalent to flying a plane to a young person) and they want to do it using feet and knots then I can see no relief. Looking at the date I see that the year is 2012, not 1962. If flying is not to be abut the future it will become about the past (as it already has) - deal with it! On Thu, 18 Oct 2012, tom claffey wrote: Aviation uses feet for height, metres for horizontal distance and knots for speed - deal with it! The teenagers I teach with the AAFC have no problems with it. Tom ___ _ From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi; Irrespective of whether it is 50' or not I find it hard to believe that the figure is given in a system which people under 40 have no heuristic knowledge of. On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Mark Newton wrote: Hi folks. My google-fu is failing me, but at least one of you can probably help. I've long accepted that the rule for obstacle clearance is 50'. However, the GFA instructor handbook describes it as a wingspan, and the B certificate oral exam calls 50' a recommended minimum, so I'm trying to go back to sources to find the origin of the rule. And I can't seem to find it written down anywhere. I'm beginning to suspect that my long-term acceptance of the 50' rule is wrong, and that the real limit is, shall we say, more operationally fluid than that. Wondering if the strict mention of 50' that I've seen at clubs all over Australia is actually more of a tradition, perhaps derived from a misunderstanding of certified light aircraft performance charts which give minimum takeoff distances including clearance of a 50' obstacle. Does anyone have a cite to the regulations? (while you're at it, providing a cite to a current GFA or non-exempted CASA regulation which states what GFA annual check entails, whether it's required to be signed out in a logbook, or whether an instructor is
Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule
Hi Tom; There are two problems flowing from the units. One is that the average 20 yo does not know what a foot is (and does not care). The other is the image it presents. Of the two the second is the more important for the future of gliding. As I said try asking around. P.S. I inserted the TIFF reference as an example of the impenetrable language used around the average gliding club. It is a marketing disaster. On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, tom claffey wrote: Hundreds of thousands of young people staying away from gliding because of feet and knots? Just how many TIFs does your club do? ;) There are many reasons for low numbers of new pilots but units are not one of them! [old mumbling instructors may be!] Tom From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 8:14 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi Tom; I'm not sure what you mean by second officers but I'm guessing that you are not talking about glider pilots. In any case the people you need to talk to are the young people who are not taking up gliding in their hundreds of thousands. As you have said young people should deal with it and they have - by staying away. They simply have no interest in a bunch of old guys mumbling incoherently about TIFFs in feet and knots etc. I have actually submitted the suggestion about units to CASA. Are they interested - hell no. But even if they were, by the time the ICAO got around to it gliding will be well and truely dead in this country. On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, tom claffey wrote: Peter, I am only 48and can deal with either measurement. I spend my spare time instructing 14-18 year-olds who also deal with it quite well. At work I deal with it with 25-30 year old second officers who have no issues with it. As I replied to Al, if you have better ideas then put them to ICAO!! We could change anything we like but the rest of the world wont change because of it. Like it or not we are part of the wider Aviation community. Tom ___ _ From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaritymuning in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 6:30 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi Tom; I am 62 years old so I have no problem dealing with it. But I am not that old that I do not remember that I was once young. Recreational flying - and gliding - have become almost exclusively the pass times of old men. So when glider pilots start talking about teaching young kids to drive a bus (the rough equivalent to flying a plane to a young person) and they want to do it using feet and knots then I can see no relief. Looking at the date I see that the year is 2012, not 1962. If flying is not to be abut the future it will become about the past (as it already has) - deal with it! On Thu, 18 Oct 2012, tom claffey wrote: Aviation uses feet for height, metres for horizontal distance and knots for speed - deal with it! The teenagers I teach with the AAFC have no problems with it. Tom __ _ _ From: Peter F Bradshaw p...@exadios.com To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule Hi; Irrespective of whether it is 50' or not I find it hard to believe that the figure is given in a system which people under 40 have no heuristic knowledge of. On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Mark Newton wrote: Hi folks. My google-fu is failing me, but at least one of you can probably help. I've long accepted that the rule for obstacle clearance is 50'. However, the GFA instructor handbook describes it as a wingspan, and the B certificate oral exam calls 50' a recommended minimum, so I'm trying to go back to sources to find the origin of the rule. And I can't seem to find it written down anywhere. I'm beginning to suspect that my long-term acceptance of the 50' rule is wrong, and that the real limit is, shall we say, more operationally fluid than that. Wondering if the strict mention of 50' that I've seen at clubs all over Australia is actually more of a tradition, perhaps derived from a misunderstanding of certified light aircraft performance charts which give minimum takeoff distances including clearance of a 50' obstacle. Does anyone have a cite to the regulations? (while you're at it, providing a cite to a current GFA or non-exempted CASA regulation which states what GFA annual check entails, whether it's required to be signed out in a
[Aus-soaring] Women in Gliding Week 2012
Hello Everyone, We thought we'd just draw your attention for a minute to another Gliding Event happening this Summer. The Women In Gliding week is happening from Jan. 19th in Gawler SA and we'd love to see you there. The week is for Women glider pilots of all ages and stages as a sort of coaching and achievements week. Don't think it's just for women though, we would love to see just as many SNAGGs (Sensitive New Aged Gliding Guys) tagging along. For more information see: http://wigweek2012.blogspot.com.au/ [1] or our facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/events/224493711006077/?fref=ts [2] Cheers, Jess Stauss, Ailsa McMillan Claire Scutter Links: -- [1] http://wigweek2012.blogspot.com.au/ [2] https://www.facebook.com/events/224493711006077/?fref=ts ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule
On 19/10/2012, tom claffey to...@yahoo.com wrote: So put your proposal to ICAO. Tom I wish I had that much power. Given the choice, I'd keep Feet etc, but introduce a plain English option to run in parallel with TAFs / NOTAMs etc. Something in a simple table format that takes a student pilot 10 minutes to learn, and is trivial for casual pilots to read. The existing system would be kept as per international standards. While I'm dreaming, I'd also simplfy the recreational licensing situation in Australia. If you want to fly Jabirus, Gliders and Paragliders, there are 3 different bodies to join, each with their own fee and ops manual. It's entirely possible for a pilot to legally fly in controlled airspace in a motorglider, but not in a Jabiru. It's also possible for a pilot to legally fly a Tecnam with numbers on the side, but not if it has letters (even though the one with letters is supposedly better maintained - what's the sense in that?). Come to think of it, I'd be happy with the FAA's rules! cheers, Al ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule c.
I thought the RAA is introducing a controlled airspace endorsement. Dave Long On 19/10/2012, at 6:43 AM, Al Borowski al.borow...@gmail.com wrote: On 19/10/2012, tom claffey to...@yahoo.com wrote: So put your proposal to ICAO. Tom It's entirely possible for a pilot to legally fly in controlled airspace in a motorglider, but not in a Jabiru. It's also possible for a pilot to legally fly a Tecnam with numbers on the side, but not if it has letters (even though the one with letters is supposedly better maintained - what's the sense in that?). Come to think of it, I'd be happy with the FAA's rules! Al ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule
It was done a decade or so in the USA. You could log on to DUATS - Direct User Access Terminal Service - and choose plain language weather briefing. Unfortunately, plenty of things were rost in transration, with multiple choices given for their own translations. Really shows how silly the abbreviations are. Currently I can't log on to DUATS for glider flight, as the only aircraft types their new website understands have an engine or so. But I consider that type of weather briefing obsolete with map based gliding weather. NOTAMS need to be checked on a different site or sites (ie graphic TFR map for temporary flight restrictions) Jim http://www.duats.com/index.php From: Al Borowski al.borow...@gmail.com I wish I had that much power. Given the choice, I'd keep Feet etc, but introduce a plain English option to run in parallel with TAFs / NOTAMs etc. ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 109, Issue 36
50' obstacle clearance rule- As a 49.9 year old with a mechanical background, I was taught both imperial and metric and are conversant in both. I was taught to glide with an outdated imperial measuring system and the other false theory that hot air rises by highly respected instructors. The problem I have with the imperial system is* IT IS CRAP*. The fact that it is common or trusted or historic or everyone else uses it is a cop out, the system is unconvertable crap. We should all be retaining (and I use the word specifically, the evil imperial system is creeping back in via fishing shows and bunnings and american influence) and enforcing the metric system here in Australia for a number of reasons -even though it is hard to change. Primarily because metrics a better system, but also because the American preference WILL fall, as will the Americans. (They have to, they are currently on top, there is only one way to go) The Chinese (maybe) will replace them, the Chinese use metric. Perhaps the Brazillians or indians will replace them, maybe the French (hey -dont they use metric avaitor units anyway?) -dont know, but my bet for the near future is the Chinese. Regardless, metric is better all round. Accept it or give up learning. Dump your computer and return to quill and parchment, clergy and horseback. Now dont get me wrong, I can hear some of my respected friends blowing gin out through their mustaches at the thought of going metric, but trust me, it is so much simpler on so many levels that laymen and the majority of us simple gliderfolk do not even consider. Change is not to be feared but embraced. Avaition should change worldwide to metric, as should shipping navigation systems, fishing entertainment shows and hardware stores. Rant over, multiple flamesuits being pulled on. Wayne ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
[Aus-soaring] JS1 Jet
Dave Shorter successfully flew his JS1 for the first time yesterday with the brand new jet sustainer. This is the second jet sustainer installation on the JS1, the first of its type in Australia and Dave reports its operation is simplicity personified. Pics follow when I get the fillum developed. Regards Ian Downes Lake Keepit Soaring Club ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 109, Issue 36
Trivia. I believe the United States of (North) America and Myanmar (Burma) are the only officially non metric countries in the world. From: wayne carter Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:39 AM To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 109, Issue 36 50' obstacle clearance rule- As a 49.9 year old with a mechanical background, I was taught both imperial and metric and are conversant in both. I was taught to glide with an outdated imperial measuring system and the other false theory that hot air rises by highly respected instructors. The problem I have with the imperial system is IT IS CRAP. The fact that it is common or trusted or historic or everyone else uses it is a cop out, the system is unconvertable crap. We should all be retaining (and I use the word specifically, the evil imperial system is creeping back in via fishing shows and bunnings and american influence) and enforcing the metric system here in Australia for a number of reasons -even though it is hard to change. Primarily because metrics a better system, but also because the American preference WILL fall, as will the Americans. (They have to, they are currently on top, there is only one way to go) The Chinese (maybe) will replace them, the Chinese use metric. Perhaps the Brazillians or indians will replace them, maybe the French (hey -dont they use metric avaitor units anyway?) -dont know, but my bet for the near future is the Chinese. Regardless, metric is better all round. Accept it or give up learning. Dump your computer and return to quill and parchment, clergy and horseback. Now dont get me wrong, I can hear some of my respected friends blowing gin out through their mustaches at the thought of going metric, but trust me, it is so much simpler on so many levels that laymen and the majority of us simple gliderfolk do not even consider. Change is not to be feared but embraced. Avaition should change worldwide to metric, as should shipping navigation systems, fishing entertainment shows and hardware stores. Rant over, multiple flamesuits being pulled on. Wayne ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] 50' obstacle clearance rule
Surely the important thing here is to clear any ground fixed obstacle on approach by a _safe margin_. That will vary according to the circumstances and the pilot's experience and competence. This discussion has demonstrated how quickly things can be confused by getting hung up on units of measurement. I think we should maintain the simple concept of a minimum of a wingspan clearance as a guide when training (and for early post solo), and allow competent pilots with experience to vary this in later flying according to the situation they find themselves in. Finally in respect of units of measurement it's worth repeating a story told by Mike Valentine.In an earlier lifetime he found himself sitting in pretty basic military jets training with Indian pilots. (Don't ask - it's complicated).Impressed with one particular pilot's ability to repeatedly do good landings, Mike commented on the fact. The reply was Oh well, my instructor always advised me to start the round out when at the height of two elephants . Perhaps we can mandate clearing approach obstacles by the height of ten kangaroos . tn ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
[Aus-soaring] Gliding Lingo
Published that same day in the Plainview Evening Herald, it explains that the school’s commanding officer, Col. Norman B. Olsen of Chicago, coined the term “bird brains” as it applies to unpowered flight. “It means: What it takes to be a good glider pilot — ability to feel air currents and trace blind sky trails by instinct.” Obviously, the meaning of that term has taken a turn for the worse in the past 70 years. From an article today about training WW 2 young glider pilots. For other lingo if interested: http://www.myplainview.com/news/article_eb0899b4-1a38-11e2-bb88-0019bb2963f4.html Cheers Bird Brains wlEmoticon-smile[1].png___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
