[VFR Events]

So that is the explanation for the absence of last week's event. I wondered what happened.

 

I have a couple of past infokits with me here. In fact, the docs indicate Paul was the original author. One of these could be posted for this week. I suggest YWOL to YSBK as the YPJT to YRTI was conducted as recent as Dec 2009 before the xmas break.

 

Alternatively, there might already be one created for leg 14 of 'Flying the Great Divide' Leg 13 finished at Cooma, so the next would commence from Cooma and finish some where to the south west.

Wollongong_Bankstown.pdf

Jandakot_to_Rottnest.pdf

[RED ROCK RUN - 28 feb]

Just testing to see if you are all awake! :rolleyes: Okay, I confess. I should know better than try to read an online calendar late at night. So as Dave Neil points out and contrary to my previous post, Red Rock Run does fall on the off week. I knew that all along Not!

 

Dave, it is difficult to judge the scale from the clip you have provided. What's the estimated time to fly something like a C172 on the published flight plan? I like the fact aircraft would be in close proximity and have to exercise visual separation by flying at specified levels. A good chance for pilots to demonstrate good airmanship. A fun challenge. :-)

[RED ROCK RUN - 28 feb]

There's a great VFR Event that extends around Ayers Rock and the Olgas that would fit well with this event. You should have the details of the event.

 

I like this idea. However, Feb 26th & 28th would under the current pattern of VFR events coincide with Flying the Great Divide Leg 13. FtGD has been flown bi-weekly since it was introduced. I would support deferring leg 13 a week or alternatively, flying two legs over the next two weeks and then having the Ayers Rock VFR Event for the 26th-28th. Each option seems a reasonable way to go.

 

Thanks David Z. for the VTC and TAC. Very handy indeed.

[It's a VFR Holiday Season!]

Hi,

 

Is there an event for the 25th? I was expecting to do the next leg of "Flying the Great Divide". It's been a while, but I think we were to depart Inverell for out next destination where ever that is to be.

[Clearances]

Thanks all,

 

I think David makes the point that best identifies the issue that is providing the most confusion. The issue is determining the classification of the aerodrome airspace. This is linked to whether the tower is active or not. This works fine in the real world but online this proposition is indeterminate since responsibilities can be but aren't necessarily always escalated. As complex as the Essendon airspace is, the fact remained that you are always departing into controlled airspace, so the pilot is left with little doubt that clearance needs to be obtained.

 

I think my future approach is to ask CTR whether the airspace at the aerodrome is active ie controlled or uncontrolled. This appears to be the underlying factor that dictates the pilot's interaction (or lack thereof) with ATC.

 

Would that be a reasonable approach? (pardon the pun :rolleyes: )

[Clearances]

Just to progress this a little further. I as a pilot sometimes find myself wondering how to proceed when I am at a smaller towered aerodrome such as Essendon or Tamworth where Control Services are offered part time and there is no tower controller however there may be a ctr present.

 

It is at this stage that I wonder how to proceed. There are two possible alternatives.

 

• Assume CTAF procedures as per the radio tutorial 'IFR:CTAF TO CLASS C' and call ctr with taxi call.
  
• Assume CTR will provide TWR service and request clearance?

 

It becomes even more difficult when you are at an aerodrome not within the normal CTR coverage but CTR advises they are providing extended coverage work load permitting.

 

Can anyone provide some guidance as to the appropriate way to proceed in the circumstance described above?

[VFR Operations - Jandakot to Rottnest Island]

Yup, thermal :cool:

 

Overhead with Settings/Display/Weather/Visual Thermals/Schematic set.

 

Anyone up for some gliding?

[Australia Online 14/12/09 YBAF Archerfield]

I have been refreshing my ATC procedures by tuning to Archerfield ATC on ATC Live. http://www.liveatc.net/feedindex.php?type=international-oc

 

Whilst you are there you can eaves drop on YSSY, YPAD, YPPH and YMMB.

[VFR Operations - Jandakot to Rottnest Island]

I have been wondering when there would be some ops out West. Finally get a chance to put my FTX Jandakot Scenery to good use!

 

Couple of things. The info doc is a little unclear about the desired aircraft type. I am assuming the flight is best suited for a Single Engine aircraft despite the doc suggesting a twin. It's only 87nm after all.

 

The other issue that many might be unaware of is the proximity in FSX of a thermal at the Jandakot location. When trying out my FTX Jandakot scenery it took inordinate effort to set down an aircraft on 06R. Dive at the runway and hope! At least there is in my copy of FSX. Check for yourselves to see if this is the case for you as well.

 

If you are affected like I am, I recommend disabling the thermals feature of FSX before flying at Jandakot. Unless someone has a way of disabling the thermal in the scenery? :confused: Another thermal can be found 2nm north of Parafield's 21L that can hamper setting up a good approach. :cool:

[VFR Operations - Albury to Melbourne IFR]

Yep, I know one pilot who could benefit from this flight based on a recent flight I was flying. Things started off on the wrong foot for the pilot and deteriorated. He was given the incorrect SID for the departing runway. I intervened here since I was also flying the same route as he was and when I was given the same SID I politely pointed out the SID was for another runway. ATC apologised and made amends. That was as much assistance as I could provide. The rest of the adventure was brought about by the pilot's own actions.

 

Enroute he learned the flight plan submitted to ATC wasn't the one he had programmed into FS. Had to re-submit the plan enroute. Not so bad...

 

When approaching top of descent the pilot realised his flight plan did not coincide with the star clearance received and decided to open FS flight planner at TOD and make some minor corrections. :eek: Of course his plane suddenly became motionless as FS paused the flight creating havoc for BN_CTR as he attempted to sequence a number of converging aircraft, one of which was my flight! I thought the controller showed just the right amount of restraint as he politely informed the pilot of his folly.

 

The downhill slide for the pilot continued as he would have discovered that changing the flight plan reset the GPS sequencing to the first leg in the plan and under the pressure of ATC and online traffic trying to set the appropriate leg can be tricky unless you know exactly what you are doing. Doing this in the FS GPS is not intuitive by any means

 

In the end he reported a GPS failure and requested vectors. The best decision for all concerned and a valuable lesson in realising that it is often better to not accept an assigned STAR if you are not in a position to navigate it.

 

Hopefully the sour taste of the experience doesn't deter the pilot. That's the advantage of making the first tentative IFR flights in the supportive environment provided here.

[VFR Operations - Flying the Great Divide Leg 7]

Hi,

 

I was going to print the docs from the infokit from work and realising I had forgot to bring in the docs I downloaded them from the site. Unfortunately, the infokit I downloaded is last week's kit, Mudgee to Canberra. No problem for me since I was mailed the correct kit, but any first timers relying on the download will be given the incorrect info.

 

May need to monitor Mudgee this evening just in case. :cool:

[VFR Operations - Bankstown]

Hi,

 

Isn't there an opportunity to complete an entire circle between Woolongong and Bankstown? The VFR route depicted is the "Bankstown Victor1 Wollongong" which was flown at a past VFR event. There was also a VFR event flying a "Wollongong - Warragamba Dam - Bankstown" route in the past that could readily be used also.

 

In theory, for the Friday some could be doing one and the rest the other, then supposedly there is the opportunity for all to fly the other route on the Sunday. Would spread the traffic over a wider area and would give any Bankstown ATC both outbound and inbound traffic. Might be a little late to arrange this however. I guess allocation could be accomplished by arbitrarily using the first letter of aircraft registration/callsign. 'a-l' Victor1 and the rest fly the Dam.

 

Just a thought. I will be there in any case. Might just arrange to fly the dam so I arrive at YSBK as the event starts! :eek:

[VFR Operations - Essendon]

Thanks James for providing the link.

 

A word of caution. I just discovered the additional waypoints can confuse FS Flight planner when request a plan using airways. It's taken 2 weeks to happen upon this. Shows how often I use FS Flight Planner :rolleyes:

[VFR Operations - Essendon]

Hi,

 

Are you aware Anthony Lynch, author of Ants Australian Airfields also released scenery that adds all Aust VRPs and IFR waypoints? I found them on the OZx site for download. The Visual References are portrayed as intersections and adopt the AsA encoded form as the name so it is useful to have the AsA list of Visual References close to hand. It's nice having them right there on the GPS as you fly. Interestingly, Kmart Warehouse is included in the scenery. So the scenery may be a little out of date.

[VFR Operations - Essendon]

It doesn't appear on more recent VTC and isn't listed in AsA's Visual_ReferencePoints_27Aug2009.

 

It looks as though it has fallen out of favour with AsA. Probably a story behind this. If not we can always make some up. :rolleyes:

 

Maybe Coles/Myer hasn't been handing over enough money for the advertising. Or maybe the warehouse is being relocated so it is suitable as an inbound/outbound VRP somewhere. Lot's of advertising there. I doubt there is anyone who flies Archerfield in Queensland that doesn't know where the Target VRP is

[VFR Operations - Essendon]

No problem. Fly it on the Sunday evening

[Ariane Design B737 Download]

The information I have is that there is full simulation of virtually all systems including FMC. You have to search through the specifications for each of the available models to gleen all of this on the web site.

 

What isn't provided is a working 2D cockpit. There is only a 3D cockpit with various 2D popup panels. At least, I think that is what there is :rolleyes: Anyone around who can verify this?

[Ariane Design B737 Download]

Hi,

 

The quoted article is quite old. 2002 no less. Given the age I would be re-assessing this with an open mind.

 

With this in mind here is another view regarding the standing of Ariane. No date with this article so it too might be dated.

 

I had every intention of waiting on PMDG for their 737 NGX, but their site indicates this isn't expected until 2010. My patience is limited!

 

I am also considering their 737 product as well and still trying to come to a conclusion. The pay for everything approach is galling, ie. you have to purchase base models for each sub-variant. If you want the 737NG family, then you have to purchase each independently. Of course, if you want liveries you have to purchase those as well. Having made the purchase you aren't given the ability to print the manuals and are encouraged to purchase them instead. Now these are things to alienate potential purchasers. :mad:

 

In my case, I have specific wants that minimise the impact of the above. So I now have to struggle with having a quality 737 versus showing annoyance at the apparent inflexible and money grabbing nature of the policies being employed.

 

Jury is still out! :confused:

[Ariane Design B737 Download]

Hi,

 

The quoted article is quite old. 2002 no less. Given the age I would be re-assessing this with an open mind.

 

With this in mind here is another view regarding the standing of Ariane. http://flightsimulatorxworld.com/home-mainmenu-1/opinion/906-other/335-in-defense-of-ariane No date with this article so it too might be dated.

 

I had every intention of waiting on PMDG for their 737 NGX, but their site indicates this isn't expected until 2010. My patience is limited!

 

I am also considering their 737 product as well and still trying to come to a conclusion. The pay for everything approach is galling, ie. you have to purchase base models for each sub-variant. If you want the 737NG family, then you have to purchase each independently. Of course, if you want liveries you have to purchase those as well. Having made the purchase you aren't given the ability to print the manuals and are encouraged to purchase them instead. Now these are things to alienate potential purchasers. :mad:

 

In my case, I have specific wants that minimise the impact of the above. So I now have to struggle with having a quality 737 versus showing annoyance at the apparent inflexible and money grabbing nature of the policies being employed.

 

Jury is still out! :confused:

[Free FSX and FS2004 Aircraft to download]

The SAAB 340 is pretty good. Nice flight dynamics and performance is close to the numbers. Even managed to find some acceptable REX livery for the model.

 

However, it also lacks the technical navigational sophistication that many may be accustomed too. No FMS or even integrated GPS in this bird. Expect to have to resurrect VOR and NDB navigational skills. I enjoyed it myself. I often enjoy shooting a full NDB approach in IMC.

 

Having said all of this, I was eventually able to port my FS9 FFS SAAB 340 into FSX with acceptable loss of functionality. As such, this has since become my defacto SAAB 340 in FSX. This plane has a great way of depicting VOR/DMEs that no other plane simulates. If Brett's panel also simulated this then I would jump into the freeware SAAB and abandon the FFS in an instant.

[VFR Operations Parafield]

Does anyone know where there is any good FSX scenery for YPPF? It is my RW flight training airport and it would be good to have this airport with the right buildings hangars etc... I have created a good AFCAD using ADE to represent the runways/taxiways correctly. RW21L/03R is not gravel as depicted in FSX default. Its the reverse actually. Taxiways feeding the runway are gravel and the runway surface is low grade bitumen suitable for lighter aircraft types. Whilst this provides a good environment to operate in, it would be nice to include some more convincing surrounds.

 

The image in the InfoKit doc for parafield looks great. It even depicts the hangar for my flight school correctly I suspect that is FS9 however, but even this would be better than what I have at present.

[Matter of Time]

Hi, I am a fairly new pilot to the VATPAC scene and reading through all the available material I am always bumping my head on the issue of reporting time.

 

The problem relates to using FS in a multiplayer environment. Each player can assume a date and time of their own choosing for their local environment. This leads one to question the validity of RX/TX'ing time reports in the online environment as interpretation is ambigious unless everyone has a common frame of reference. A definition of anarchy if ever there was one. :eek:

 

I am not aware any recommendation/requirement indicating that an online pilot (or Controller, but one assumes they are using a common frame of reference ) synchronise the 'Minute offset' in their local FS so that any report of 'at 15' relates to XX:15 (where XX could conceivably represent any hour from 0-23) for all online pilots and ATC. This appears to be implied in docs but doesn't warn about the fact that time in FS is subjective. Is this better documented somewhere for general access?

 

Even so, I have been attempting to do this, though there are times when I forget this step when mentally working through my pre-connection check list. It would be nice to have the connection software do this at the time of connection with it re-synching as it updates FS weather just in case FS has paused (going to the map for example) and lost time.

 

Since I cannot be certain on how time will be interpreted by other online players, I usually avoid the issue altogether when possible and instead use IN to provide referential time. Less chance of ambiguity if I report I will arrive somewhere 'IN' One Zero as opposed to 'AT' One Zero. So far I haven't done much IFR in controlled airspace so I have yet to face this issue but the time will come and getting clarification here is better than having to best guess it online. :confused:

[VFR Operations - Flying the Great Divide]

Is the proposed time for the Sunday op really 20:00 EST? Would be a good time for me if it is. I am usually playing golf until 18:30 EST. What's worse is that the golf course is right next to YPAD and after watching all the flights arriving and departing I find I have the developed an urge do some virtual flying once I have settled in at home. So some VFR would be most welcome and you could count me in

[FSInn development site offline]

I found some mention in the VATSIM forum.

 

http://forums.vatsim.net/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=42300

 

FSINN has been a little painful since the site became unavailable. If you have set FSINN to synchronise the plane repository, the process suspends itself within FSX/FS9 whenever you open the FSINN interface. A corresponding icon is visible in the windows system tray. Even so, connectivity didn't appear to be affected. Took a couple of attempts to get the settings to no longer try and synchronise the repository from the site. It needs to be done whilst FS is closed.

[VFR Operations ? Grampians]

I am a bit rusty on the ol' cub. But hey, I like a challenge. Took it up for some tail dragger practice in Melb's weather. It was so windy I could land it on the helo pad Let's hope that moderates by Friday!

 

Which version of the Piper cub were you referring to in the infokit? I couldn't sustain 100mph let alone 100kias. However I did achieve this in a powered descent. Hmm.. Maybe we slew to 150FL and descend the whole way!