It would appear that you are lost for words Rob.
Cheers
JR___
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
At 03:14 PM 30/04/2012, you wrote:
John,
It sounds like your FLARM or its antenna is defective.
This is very easy and free to verify, by uploading a FLARM IGC log to the
online range analysis:
http://www.flarm.com/support/analyze/index_en.html
or simply email it to me and I will take care of it.
: Sunday, 29 April 2012 9:36 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Mid Air collision risk
Sean,
With respect, I posit that you totally miss PS 's point. What he is
suggesting is that EVERY recreational aircraft (GA, RAAus, Gliding), be
fitted with flarm
At 07:13 PM 30/04/2012, you wrote:
My argument is that these devices COULD prevent a collision but
cannot be relied on to ENSURE it does not happen, that is up to the pilots.
How many examples are there out there of aircraft colliding when
fitted with such devices, in these
On 30/04/2012 12:02 PM, john.mcfarlane wrote:
snip
Upon landing I mentioned this to the relevant instructor. After all had
landed without leading I asked the glider pilots if around the time of the
launch their flarms had advised them of anything - All I got was the
passenger thought the
At 08:42 PM 30/04/2012, you wrote:
BTW Flarm can even synthesise tracks of adjacent gliders from other
glider's Flarms should one crash; another benefit of having a Flarm.
Only if the range happens to be good enough which clearly may not be
the case as in the case John is talking about.
Message-
From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Urs
Rothacher
Sent: Monday, 30 April 2012 2:44 PM
To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Mid Air collision risk
John
On 30/04/2012 8:56 PM, john.mcfarlane wrote:
Hi Urs,
How do you explain the other 2 aircraft - the on tow glider was only 120ft
behind me and had no idea of the other glider.
This is a club aircraft - downloading and uploading files for remote post
event review/analysis to determine
2012 8:12 PM
To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Mid Air collision risk
On 30/04/2012 12:02 PM, john.mcfarlane wrote:
snip
Upon landing I mentioned this to the relevant instructor. After all
had landed without leading I asked the glider pilots
-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Peter
Stephenson (Internode)
Sent: Monday, 30 April 2012 8:12 PM
To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Mid Air collision risk
On 30/04/2012 12:02 PM
Having been involved with two near hits in the last 10 years, both of
which would have been prevented by a Flarm, it seems bloody stupid not
have a 750 Euro unit not installed in *every* aircraft.
PeterS
On 22/04/2012 12:29 PM, S Smith wrote:
Greetings
If you look in the following database,
April 2012 5:48 PM
To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Mid Air collision risk
Having been involved with two near hits in the last 10 years, both of which
would have been prevented by a Flarm, it seems bloody stupid not have a 750
Euro unit not installed in *every* aircraft
) p...@internode.on.net
To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Mid Air collision risk
Having been involved with two near hits in the last 10 years, both of
which would have been prevented by a Flarm, it seems bloody stupid not
have
to Soaring in Australia.'
aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Mid Air collision risk
Replace Would with Could and I'll agree with you.
I seem to remember that one person on this list decided that they would
be
safer if they fitted a flarm
On 29/04/2012 9:22 PM, gstev...@bigpond.com wrote:
Peter,
I think you have got to the nub of it, but I am somewhat surprised
that you feel it necessary to bring this topic up again.
Because I have been stewing on my reply.
Whilst Stu's figures are no doubt valid for actual strikes, the
@lists.internode.on.net
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Mid Air collision risk
Having been involved with two near hits in the last 10 years, both of which
would have been prevented by a Flarm, it seems bloody stupid not have a 750
Euro unit not installed in *every* aircraft.
PeterS
On 22/04/2012 12:29 PM, S
(Internode)
Sent: Sunday, 29 April 2012 5:48 PM
To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Mid Air collision risk
Having been involved with two near hits in the last 10 years, both of which
would have been prevented by a Flarm, it seems bloody stupid not have a 750
Euro unit
John,
It sounds like your FLARM or its antenna is defective.
This is very easy and free to verify, by uploading a FLARM IGC log to the
online range analysis:
http://www.flarm.com/support/analyze/index_en.html
or simply email it to me and I will take care of it.
Mike,
This is the second time you
Greetings
If you look in the following database,
http://aviation-safety.net/index.php
which is a wiki and lists aircraft crashes around the world back to 1920's
you will find very very very very few mid-airs.
So far this year, for 896 recorded accidents there are the following only;
3 -
19 matches
Mail list logo
