One item not mentioned when your landing airport/runway is closed at last minute or in the case of the twin having engine out. Declaring an emergency in the case of the twin with engine failure at that point anything goes. True it puts ultimate responsibility to the PIC but that emergency declaration allows the PIC even more discretion. In the case of last minute airport closure I know of one instance where there was no notam issued and the PIC was at max range with minimum fuel at destination. Since the only runway was closed and diverting was not an option due to fuel, she declared an emergency and landed her C172 on the taxiway next to runway. The FAA took no action against the PIC once the facts came out.
Another case where relay of vital information to pilots is fundamentally broken…if the current process can’t keep current safety of flight information in the FIS-B feed, change the $&@$-ing process!! Suggestion that SOMEONE in FAA take initiative to update NOTAM requirement to re-issue safety of flight notams every 28 days until reflected in flight pubs…that is one way (probably not the only way) to address below…why does fixing NOTAM system literally take an act of Congress?
“To save bandwidth, NOTAMDs older than 30 days aren’t broadcast via FIS-B. If an airport was closed, say, two months ago, that’s not going to show up in your FIS-B feed.”
Cessna SkyCourier Makes Public Debut At AirVenture 2021
Actually, I’ve never been so excited about a cargo plane!
There’s only 5 or 6 small cargo aircraft currently in production in the world, if that, so the SkyCourier is a big deal.
I used to see the 10 or so FedEx Caravans parked in a row at HNL back in the day. I’m sure all new pilots there think, “Hmm … how do I get my hands on one of those? Nobody seems to be using them!”
For those wondering how FedEx justifies the cost, it’s all about the corporate accounting. It’s easier for BigCo to move numbers around a spreadsheet than to buy old planes and struggle with maintenance.
Avidyne Brings New Displays To AirVenture
There is nothing wrong with larger displays. For one thing, the easier it is to read, the less time eyes are inside the cockpit.
However, I too share the concern that pilots eyes may be away from outside the cockpit too much. What I’d consider optimal is all relevant information being available, but for normal operations only the moving map be on the (as large as possible) display, and computers monitor relevant information and give verbal warnings when anything is going out of set tolerances. However, it appears most manufacturers are intent on making the user look at all that data.
As for blind pilots, I’d guess that many, perhaps most, have vision problems. Myself, I need reading glasses to see up close, but they destroy my distance vision. I prefer my eyes outside the cockpit. Larger displays mean less time attempting to read the display.
As a long retired fighter pilot and airline pilot, I would suggest that there’s no such thing as too much information. The issue is prioritization, knowing where to look for the info you need NOW and not being distracted by all the other stuff. Situational awareness (SA) is the key to flying safely, and anything that gives you better SA should make you a safer, if not better, pilot. On the other hand, if thru lack of training or experience you can get task saturated with all this information, then that is a problem.
Poll: Are You OK Paying 60 to 90 Cents More For An Unleaded Avgas?
- In the short term that is roughly $7-8 an hour more than normal fuel costs. The proof will be in the pudding with more time to between oil changes and reduced wear on engines. Hopefully market forces will lower the price after full rollout and implementation.
- Yes, especially if things I have heard are true about it being a direct replacement and actually having much higher octane capabilities.
- No. I will continue using unleaded Mogas. It’s 60 to 90 cents (per gallon) cheaper than 100LL.
- All in all, it’s just another brick in the wall.
- If unleaded avgas extends the life of my engine to where the extra TBO time pays for the cost, then yes.
- Why when I can already do that now but 60 to 90 cents cheaper?
- If I can use it in my aircraft, I would.
- My older model Skyhawk is certified to run on UL91, which is cheaper than 100LL anyway. Why would I pay more?
- Does this remain the situation once widespread distribution and adoption occurs, with possible forced elimination of 100LL?
- I pay 12usd/gallon already!
- Are we really going to have a choice?
- I use Jet A…
- Why should it cost more?