|
EvilJoven posted:Juat got back from my my CYAV CYBR CJV5 CYAV XC solo today. Nice! Congrats man!
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 23:39 |
|
|
You got to use navaids during your cross country? We had to do direct routing and use dead reckoning and a chart.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
PT6A posted:You got to use navaids during your cross country? Same. It's also a lot more fun that way. "Ooooh look, there's 'XYZ' mountain!" or "ok, so now i just need to follow the 5 to 'wherever town'"
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
Well ya you're supposed to but I was just going to dial it up for a second to verify my position and welp it was broken so no safety net for that trip. The final leg home was a bit of a pain in the rear end. Some RCAF guy was doing practice search patterns at 3000 so I told him I'd stay at 2000 until he was past me. Then for some reason Brandon FISE just wouldn't come on the radio and at that altitude it was impossible to reach Winnipeg FISE for a good chunk of the leg to let them know to add some time to my flight plan to make up for the fact that I did a full stop and shut down at Neepawa instead of just doing a stop and go. Because I was spending so drat long trying to get FISE on the horn I didn't know if RCAF duder ever actually got out of my way so I stayed at 2000' until I was under the charlie so I could go up into controlled airspace without running into him. Also at 2000' the Shoal Lakes look kinda like the southern end of Lake Manitoba so for a few minutes I was trying to figure out how the hell I'd missed Warren and Stonewall but after figuring that out it was smooth sailing back home.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:Well ya you're supposed to but I was just going to dial it up for a second to verify my position and welp it was broken so no safety net for that trip. Did you have an ADF? That's pretty much all you can use in Alberta because we have very few VORs to begin with. Very annoying, though, since you have to monitor the bastard to make sure it's still transmitting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Nope. Just compass and gyro heading indicator.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
Hmm, interesting. Are there many VORs in MB? They have them at the larger airports in Alberta, but not the smaller ones we used for most XC work (one of them doesn't have a VOR within 50nm). I'm always surprised when I look at the US and there's VORs loving everywhere. EDIT: I'm getting my surgery on Aug. 31 so hopefully I'll get my medical back by the end of September or early October, and get back in the air soon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
IceLicker posted:Same. It's also a lot more fun that way. "Ooooh look, there's 'XYZ' mountain!" or "ok, so now i just need to follow the 5 to 'wherever town'" And "gently caress gently caress where is it why did I pick a dam as a visual waypoint..." Good times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Or, in Alberta: is this the right section line or am I looking for the one a mile over (or two miles, or three miles...)? Oh, there's a seasonal pond and a tiny bend in the highway!
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
I suspect flying across any of the prairie provinces is the same as flying across Manitoba: farm roads every mile as far as the eye can see that you use as a reference to align your HI and never even bother looking at the magnetic, also every once in a while there's a river. Just follow the highway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:I suspect flying across any of the prairie provinces is the same as flying across Manitoba: farm roads every mile as far as the eye can see that you use as a reference to align your HI and never even bother looking at the magnetic, also every once in a while there's a river. Just follow the highway. Unless it's changed since I took the test, PPL standard requires that you be able to navigate a direct route, not solely following geographical features or roads. This is different from the recreational pilot permit, which allows you to simply follow roads or highways to get to your planned destination. So, don't follow the highway unless it leads straight to your destination (though in the prairies it probably does, of course).
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
So I'm throwing around the idea of staying a Flight Instructor a bit longer than I have to and getting the Pilot Examiner (or DPE as you yanks call 'em) certification before making a break for the airlines. Basically, the school I work for cranks out a serious percentage of the Multi and IFR ratings issued in Canada every year and our staff examiner is looking to retire, and its looking like he will be replaced by a handful of on-call examiners - I could likely get the company to sponsor me and fulfill the 'need' requirement. I already meet (or almost meet) most of the other requirements pertaining to my training record and such except for the hours (2000TT/1500PIC/500MPIC), I was hoping to make a run at the airlines before Winter but if I want to give this a go I'd need to stick around and up my PIC/MPIC through to the Spring as it'd be years before I start logging MPIC at the airlines. I'd likely seek authority for Multi and IFR rides, and if I could pick up the PPL/CPL authority with it that would just be gravy. On one hand, the Examiner thing is so very lucrative and a huge, huge opportunity. On the other hand, having been an instructor for 2.5 years already I don't think I have another 6 months (and another Canadian winter in GA...) in me. Decisions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
Rolo posted:And "gently caress gently caress where is it why did I pick a dam as a visual waypoint..." "Oh, it's BELOW me. No wonder he told me not to pick that as a waypoint..."
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Unless it's changed since I took the test, PPL standard requires that you be able to navigate a direct route, not solely following geographical features or roads. This is different from the recreational pilot permit, which allows you to simply follow roads or highways to get to your planned destination. So, don't follow the highway unless it leads straight to your destination (though in the prairies it probably does, of course). Oh, ya, I know that. My planned route was all set heading points and using the whizz wheel and some basic math to figure out what magnetic heading should get you there given the wind, that's what I was trained to do and did but the reality is unless the winds are super weird when you're flying from one major city to the next major city in the prairies, it's going to pretty much be 'take off and keep the highway on your left until you see your destination' unless there's a piece of sky in the way you aren't supposed to be going in to. If I ever plan an XC where I have to go south of Brandon I'm going to have to make sure I don't wander in to that artillery range. EDIT: also I seriously need a digital watch with a big rear end face that ticks off the seconds nice and clear. My XCs were the first time I've put one on since getting a cell phone and what I used was an analog one I found in my junk drawer. Not being to tell exactly what minute the minute hand is pointing at really fucks up ground speed checks. EvilJoven fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Unless it's changed since I took the test, PPL standard requires that you be able to navigate a direct route, not solely following geographical features or roads. This is different from the recreational pilot permit, which allows you to simply follow roads or highways to get to your planned destination. So, don't follow the highway unless it leads straight to your destination (though in the prairies it probably does, of course). Man I feel like I would be proud as an examiner if someone knew the roads to get to said area. I had to plan out a trip from North Jersey to somewhere a bit south of DC and safety/regs of flying over certain areas were what mattered to her. So much so that the oral was 3 hours and the cross country portion of the flight was 13 nm. Edit: Considering all the airspace class clutter in between I would imagine that following roads would be a rather large endeavor though. Elmon fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:49
|
|
|
Desi posted:So I'm throwing around the idea of staying a Flight Instructor a bit longer than I have to and getting the Pilot Examiner (or DPE as you yanks call 'em) certification before making a break for the airlines. Basically, the school I work for cranks out a serious percentage of the Multi and IFR ratings issued in Canada every year and our staff examiner is looking to retire, and its looking like he will be replaced by a handful of on-call examiners - I could likely get the company to sponsor me and fulfill the 'need' requirement. I already meet (or almost meet) most of the other requirements pertaining to my training record and such except for the hours (2000TT/1500PIC/500MPIC), I was hoping to make a run at the airlines before Winter but if I want to give this a go I'd need to stick around and up my PIC/MPIC through to the Spring as it'd be years before I start logging MPIC at the airlines. I'd likely seek authority for Multi and IFR rides, and if I could pick up the PPL/CPL authority with it that would just be gravy. Getting your DFTE is a highly political process. Better get sucking up to your local Transport Canada office in a hurry.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
Desi posted:So I'm throwing around the idea of staying a Flight Instructor a bit longer than I have to and getting the Pilot Examiner (or DPE as you yanks call 'em) certification before making a break for the airlines. Basically, the school I work for cranks out a serious percentage of the Multi and IFR ratings issued in Canada every year and our staff examiner is looking to retire, and its looking like he will be replaced by a handful of on-call examiners - I could likely get the company to sponsor me and fulfill the 'need' requirement. I already meet (or almost meet) most of the other requirements pertaining to my training record and such except for the hours (2000TT/1500PIC/500MPIC), I was hoping to make a run at the airlines before Winter but if I want to give this a go I'd need to stick around and up my PIC/MPIC through to the Spring as it'd be years before I start logging MPIC at the airlines. I'd likely seek authority for Multi and IFR rides, and if I could pick up the PPL/CPL authority with it that would just be gravy. That's a tough one, but if you are fairly close to those mins that you posted I would say it's a decent time to move to a regional. Upgrade times are low and dropping and if you have PIC time you are in a good spot to move fairly fast.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Update to the first page, I am officially a multi engine commercial pilot as of today.  Next up MEI check ride on the 8th.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
MrChips posted:Getting your DFTE is a highly political process. Better get sucking up to your local Transport Canada office in a hurry. Yep, that reccomendation from a CAI is the toughest part but I've got that part managed should I go down this path. It helps I spent the better part of a decade working in federal politics then government before rage quitting and going into aviation - I played a similar game up the org-chart once already. SCOTLAND posted:That's a tough one, but if you are fairly close to those mins that you posted I would say it's a decent time to move to a regional. Upgrade times are low and dropping and if you have PIC time you are in a good spot to move fairly fast. I'm closing in on those numbers but at the pace I'm going I'd need to go another 6-8 months to get the PIC requirements, TT could come up at the airline level. As of today I'm rapidly closing in on 1,300TT 1000PIC 200Multi. Been a little trigger shy firing off resumes to the regionals. GGN and SKV have 1,500TT insurance mins (which I hope to hit in a 2-3 months), and Jazz the rumour mill is running rampant down in the FTU world, I've heard everything from 'as soon as you can check the 1,000TT and 250multi+ boxes on the app you're in' to a friend with well over that getting rejected for having all instructor time and no 'operational experience' (though he may have had other issues). But yeah, I've heard GGN B1900 upgrade times are stupid fast, could get those PIC requirements quick if I wind up there. I'll hit the 'IFR Instructor' and 'Instructor Time' thresholds no problem before I leave and the Class 1 instructor rating is already in the works. e.pilot posted:Next up MEI check ride on the 8th. Hardest part of Multi instructing - efficiency. Buddy in that left seat is paying upwards of $7-8/minute, better make it count! Desi fucked around with this message at 05:27 on Aug 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
Desi posted:
The hardest, but best, lesson I ever learned when I was instructing was not to care too much about how much the student was paying. This poo poo costs money, learning takes time, and I can't produce good pilots if all I hear is the cash register noise every time the hobbs ticks over.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 06:35
|
|
|
VOR LOC posted:The hardest, but best, lesson I ever learned when I was instructing was not to care too much about how much the student was paying. This poo poo costs money, learning takes time, and I can't produce good pilots if all I hear is the cash register noise every time the hobbs ticks over. Absolutely agree, I meant more in the sense of once those props are turning its 'business time' and making the most of ground and sims as training tools to minimize that burden on the student. No more briefing-as-we-go kindof teaching. I think the way you guys do instrument ratings is a bit different too, because with the way the way the requirements break down in Canada the vast majority of an instrument rating winds up being done on a twin for most students and most wind up with ~20ish hours (Multi + Group 1 Instrument). As such, my school has the philosophy of "The teaching happens on the whiteboard and the skill is practiced in the sim, and only once its truly understood do the engines turn." At the end of the day, if the guy can't fly a single engine ILS, we're going out again to do it again; but he shouldn't be learning how to do it for the first time in the plane. Basically, the old "gently caress it we do it live" attitude that creeps in to flight instructing is something to be avoided IMO
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 06:51
|
|
|
completely agree. Brief it on the board and then go do it in the air.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
I had to put my PPL lessons on hold due to work this year but I am about to jump back into getting some flight hours in soon this coming month. Like many students, I am nervous communicating with ATC. Would you recommend utilizing VATSIM or Pilotedge as a learning tool in the interim? Grats to everyone on their new certs. I love this thread! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
Richlove posted:I had to put my PPL lessons on hold due to work this year but I am about to jump back into getting some flight hours in soon this coming month. Like many students, I am nervous communicating with ATC. Would you recommend utilizing VATSIM or Pilotedge as a learning tool in the interim? Why so nervous? What do you struggle with, exactly?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
Here4DaGangBang posted:Why so nervous? What do you struggle with, exactly? Most of it is due to the vast majority of my training at a non-towered airport. I think it is the brevity required over the radio that makes me nervous. My CFI has instilled into me that I need to communicate with brevity. However I tend to fumble words, especially when I am doing readback with more complex instructions. My CFI mostly handles the radio at this point but as I get close to doing more work around towered airports I want to ensure I at least am competent at using the radio. Richlove fucked around with this message at 04:10 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
Yeah VATSIM helps. Also, brevity is nice. But it's also ONE THOUSAND PERCENT OKAY to get your message across in regular 'american.' 'Hey Tower, I'd really like to do a go-around on this one and make the next one a full stop.' You know what, if its under 30 seconds long and you're being safe and not cutting other people off and hurting things, who cares? I HIGHLY recommend you listen to LiveATC.net for your airport (or the closest airport you can find) to get a feel for how ATC operates in your particular area.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
Richlove posted:Most of it is due to the vast majority of my training at a non-towered airport. I think it is the brevity required over the radio that makes me nervous. My CFI has instilled into me that I need to communicate with brevity. However I tend to fumble words, especially when I am doing readback with more complex instructions. My CFI mostly handles the radio at this point but as I get close to doing more work around towered airports I want to ensure I at least am competent at using the radio. The goal of any radio transmission should be clarity, not speed. I know when I started my lessons I strived to talk as fast as my CFI but the thing you have to remember is that they've likely been making the same radio calls day in and day out a lot longer than you have so of course theyre going to be a lot quicker. Don't let your CFI rush you, take your time. I used to practice running through my whole call before pushing the button and saying it again. Do what works for you I highly recommend live ATC as well. I always listen to it when im on my way to the airport just to see whats going on. I used to practice by picking out a tail number and pretending I was that guy and practicing talking along when ATC would give them an instruction. I wouldn't worry about it too much. If the worst thing you can say about your lesson is that you sounded a bit silly on the radio, then I consider that a great flight. poo poo, I'm pretty sure in one of my early lessons I told ATC that I had "ATIS information Unicorn".
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
I'm taking my lessons at a controlled airport, two of my cross countries involved going in to a charlie (same requirements as a US Bravo) and one MF RCO airport. All in all I found that none of the controllers I've spoken to IRL so far have had a stick in their rear end, while on VATSIM it's almost 50/50. Also it's way easier to hear people over a real radio than the lovely codec VATSIM uses. I'd say go for PilotEdge over VATSIM. In the end though, at least VATSIM is better than dead air. EDIT: as for brevity, it's important but not the end all and be all. Sometimes you can find out you're saying way way too loving much (C-GRIN with you on apron 2 with information alpha requesting taxi to the active for the circuit really should be 'C-GRIN on apron 2 with alpha for the circuit) but other times, there's information I really really insist on giving, even when technically I don't have to (VFR taxi instructions, I'm drat well going to read back any cross runway instructions because it gives them one last chance to think about if they really did want me to cross and not hold short) EvilJoven fucked around with this message at 05:14 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
Do a quick rehearse of what you want to say. And when you make the call, talk slow. If you blaze thru it, they will likely think you are more experienced than you really are.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:Yeah VATSIM helps. yeah don't do this. You want to be a good pilot? Talking on the radio is part of that. Look at the AIM and ICAO radiotelephony procedures for proper radio phraseology. Practice to yourself and then think think think about what is going to come out of your mouth when you key the mic. What messes people up about talking on the radio is that they don't know what they want to communicate to the receiver so they spit a bunch of garbage and then feel foolish after they're done. But please, for the love of god, don't use a bunch of slang or regionalisms when you talk. It messes up ATC and other aircraft when you do this and it takes longer for you to communicate effectively. Essentially talking "regular american" will make you sound like this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89AIQbOAfuQ VOR LOC fucked around with this message at 08:49 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 08:38
|
|
|
Apollo is right in the sense that if on the spot you come up with a blank on the proper phraseology, you should say what's on your mind in plain English instead of fumbling around with words and wasting precious attention on coming up with the right phraseology while forgetting to fly the airplane or getting behind your profile (student pilot, remember). Of course after landing, look that up as one of your debrief items and get it right next time. Apollo, you did kinda come across as endorsing "plain American" as a general matter of course beyond just a student pilot fallback, and that's not OK. vessbot fucked around with this message at 13:02 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 12:59
|
|
|
VOR LOC posted:yeah don't do this. You want to be a good pilot? Talking on the radio is part of that. Look at the AIM and ICAO radiotelephony procedures for proper radio phraseology. Practice to yourself and then think think think about what is going to come out of your mouth when you key the mic. What messes people up about talking on the radio is that they don't know what they want to communicate to the receiver so they spit a bunch of garbage and then feel foolish after they're done. But please, for the love of god, don't use a bunch of slang or regionalisms when you talk. It messes up ATC and other aircraft when you do this and it takes longer for you to communicate effectively. Strive for brevity and proper terminology at all times, sure. But if things are nonstandard or you're confused, I 100% support going for Plain English. Better you sound Less Cool On The Radio than just giving up because somebody might think you're not cool, propagating a misunderstanding, and doing something unsafe. e: also, unrelated: https://twitter.com/JoshuaACNewman/status/767713502006013952
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 14:28
|
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:
The internet cares. Captain Apollo fucked around with this message at 15:46 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
Appreciate the spirited responses. Will continue to strive towards brevity while maintaining safety. I will look into pilotedge and start listening to some KROA and KCLT communications on Liveatc. Still have alot to learn but am having fun with the process.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Pilotedge also has a free client you can download to listen to all of their traffic. The controllers are very professional. I think they're even paid to do what they're doing. They are very very close to the real thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
On of the most important things I can pass to VFR pilots is that when you make a request with basically any ATC facility that isn't a tower, the controller is going to want a couple things. A: Who you are; Generally your tail number. B: What kind of aircraft you are. C: Your destination for flight following. D: They're going to give you a transponder code so they can radar identify you. They'll probably also have you ident once you get the code in your transponder. (no longer required, actually, but old habits die hard.) E: They're going to want your CURRENT altitude. We're required to verify that your Mode-C reported altitude is within +\-200ft of what you say it is. I don't generally give a poo poo what you're climbing to. For a radar controller, the train of thought during MY ideal initial interaction works like this:  : "Center, VFR request." : "Aircraft with the VFR request, say callsign."(Keep in mind that he controller is staring at a screen, which is full of information he's keeping track of, none of which has anything to do with you. Unless he's not very busy, your request is a bit of a blindside to him, and a callsign, type, destination, anything at all is basically going to be wasted breath, which he's going to ask you to repeat. You can hit him with the callsign if he's slow, but VFR request gets him listening for something new.) : "That's November two four one bravo juliet, VFR request.": *enters callsign and gets a beacon code from the computer, but can't add any more information until he has a track for the aircraft.* "November two four one bravo juliet, squawk six six six six, ident.": six six six six and ident, November one bravo Juliet.: *goes about his business until the computer aquires your beacon code and pairs a track to it.* "November one bravo Juliet, radar contact three zero miles south of GOONS intersection, Lakeland altimeter three zero zero two, say altitude, type aircraft, and destination.": "November one bravo Juliet is at one-one-thousand five-hundred, North American P-51, landing Sebring, looking for flight following."*At this point, the interaction is over, assuming the controller got all the info on the first try, which, since you got his attention first, instead of shoveling information at him, he should have.* : "North American one bravo Juliet, course and altitude at your discretion, maintain VFR at all times."Basically, expect that he's going to want certain things, but let him ask for them, rather than spewing them on frequency, where he may or may not copy it all. Some controllers may ask for all, some, or just one thing at a time. It is only at this point that I would request weird poo poo, like VFR practice approaches, air work, etc. The radar controller's first order of business is to get you radar identified, tracked, and finish the VP message. Anything else can wait, PARTICULARLY if they're busy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
As an approach controller, I don't want the callsign separate from the rest of the information. If I just type a callsign in and generate a code, it's a local-only code and now I have to assign a different one if it turns out that they want flight following outside of our airspace. Also, once I've entered in the information for a flight plan leaving our airspace, I can't edit it from my radar screen. It requires calling the Flight Data position on the landline, or getting up and walking to their station if you're close enough and your cord can reach. The Ferret King fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:As an approach controller, I don't want the callsign separate from the rest of the information. If I just type a callsign in and generate a code, it's a local-only code and now I have to assign a different one if it turns out that they want flight following outside of our airspace. That's because your computers are even more hilariously backwards than ours. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
Yeah, this is what a Tower/Approach Control flight plan computer looks like:  Monochrome green. Keyboard only. Though, the CRT monitors on ours were replaced with LCDs earlier THIS year...
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 23:39 |
|
|
In Phoenix, the controllers seem perfectly content with: "Phoenix approach, N12AB, vfr request" or even "Phoenix approach, N12AB" then they want everything "N12AB, Phoenix approach, go ahead" (or standby if they're busy) "Phoenix approach, N12AB, over thunderbird lake, 3500, vfr flight following to prescott (or identifier if its less common) at 8500" Then for completeness. "N12AB, Phoenix approach, roger, squawk 1234 (ident optional)" "N12AB, Phoenix approach radar contact over thunderbird lake <further instructions to get you across the bravo>" I guess my point is that what a controller wants can vary from locale to locale or even controller to controller. Just get experience in your area and listen to what other pilots say on average. There will obviously be folks who talk too much and talk too little. There's no replacement for experience. If you want I'm sure the controller would appreciate in most cases if you told them that you're a solo student pilot so they at least have some expectations until you're more comfortable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 17:56
|
|