Cyril Gibb

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Cyril Gibb last won the day on June 26 2017

Cyril Gibb had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

425 Excellent

About Cyril Gibb

  • Rank
    Won't Leave!

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Model
    1975 M20F

Recent Profile Visitors

1,896 profile views
  1. I think the thread has gone somewhat sideways from my original intention. I know that the PIC has the final say on items to maintain safety. That's not in contention. My point was to question the advantages of multiple clearances to land (only used in the US) to a single clearance to land everywhere else in the world. If there are any other countries that allow multiple clearances, I'd welcome the information. If pilots, and not controllers, have the primary responsibility for separation, runway obstructions or any other go-around reasons, what does "cleared to land" really mean? It would seem that controllers just issuing a sequence would be equal. Just two examples of where "cleared to land" was misinterpreted as being the next to land. Would the ICAO single clearance have made a difference?
  2. Just to be clear, I was just commenting on an append regarding multiple cleared to land instructions, nothing to do with the specific Kansas accident. Sorry for the implication. In Canada there is NO multiple simultaneous cleared to land instructions. Never. Only one aircraft is cleared to land, and then only if the runway is clear. At my very busy training airport, I’m often number 5 or 6 to land. It’s not unusual to enter the zone after the first one or two have already called in and given a sequence. In that case I don’t know where all the other aircraft are. It would be interesting if our European members would comment to see if they follow ICAO regs or not.
  3. It was mentioned again as a personal experience in the Kansas crash thread. Why does the US not use the ICAO clearance philosophy. There’s no shortage of deaths as a result of several aircraft ALL being cleared to land on a given runway. Outside of the US, when you’re cleared to land, that means the runway is yours. In Canada (ICAO rules) if you’re on approach with other aircraft the controller will say number 3 following a whatever.. If there’s an aircraft dawdling on the runway for takeoff, a plane on final will be told to expect late clearance... It doesn’t make sense to me. When you’re cleared for takeoff or cleared across a runway, it means the way is clear. Why not in perhaps the most critical phase in flight are the pilots expected to be on the frequency long enough to know how many aircraft have also been cleared ahead?
  4. Following up on the custom Mooney mugs my son gave me last Christmas is this 3D printed Gladys Christmas tree ornament.
  5. You beat me to it. Took longer than expected to blow out the driveway at the cottage. I got the emailed report in about 5 minutes after submitting.
  6. I didn’t change whatever the factory default was. I’ll send next time I’m at the airport if I can get connected. PAPR_20191212_C06892_416231262.pdf
  7. I wish I'd seen this before going to the airport today. I set it up using a friends android phone on Thursday, but tried unsuccessfully today to connect on my i-things. The good news is that it passed the ADSB test with 0 errors.
  8. My annual cost for aeronautical fees in Canada is 67.20 last year, escalating massively to 67.40 this year. That's about the same as my annual fee for the US customs sticker. Pretty insignificant. The legislation/agreement states that the fees can only cover actual expenses. No profit. Privatisation CAN be a good thing or it CAN be an unmitigated disaster. eg. Two of the many enforced limitations on fees that specifically relate to private GA: •charges must not be structured in such a way that a user would be encouraged to engage in practices that diminish safety for the purpose of avoiding a charge •charges in respect of recreational and private aircraft must not be unreasonable or undue
  9. When I'm listening to the pitch for a potentially life-saving technology (meaning my life or my passengers lives), I don't believe more than what is explicitly stated. People extrapolating what is explicitly stated as a limitation is the reason we have insanely large warning labels on damn near everything. eg. do not use snowblower on roof; and:
  10. I have a GNS430W and currently use Jepp nav data. For the last 2 updates, the update has failed if I use the latest Jepp JDM application. After doing some problem determination, I can successfully load the navdata using an old version of the JDM. I think it's because I have the silver (old) navdata card as opposed to the orange label (new) data card. It's going to cost me a couple hundred bucks just to buy an orange label card. Additionally, the obstacle db is outdated. It might be time to move to Garmin... less expensive too Speculation abounds on Al Gores interweb, so I'm asking if anyone has personal experience with the same setup as I have, and moved to the Garmin nav package. Specifically, can I use my existing nav and terrain data cards moving to Garmin, and does the single programmer work for both navdata and terrain?
  11. If you are referring to the ICAO definition of MSA, it means Minimum Sector Altitude. The MSA guarantees 1000' clearance within a 25 NM radius. A student pilot dropping 100' and hence keeping 900' feet above obstacles to avoid entering cloud sounds like a reasonable, safe and prudent action. He should be applauded for making a good decision under the circumstances.
  12. I use SPLnFFT on my IPADs. It's got a self calibrate function, but I have no idea about accuracy. I just used it to get a relative measurement for my soundproofing.
  13. Although the referenced sound levels were stated to be DB (total sound pressure) vs DBa (perceived level within human hearing range), you were correct to assume they were DBa. Those levels are WAY too low to be DB. That said, my soundproofing efforts did get me a cruise DB reduction from 106 to 97 and the DBa from 92 to 79, so it can be done. The original 92 DBa seems close to others reporting typical F levels and the "soundproofed" 79 DBa close to J levels, so the effort gave me old model J levels from F levels. Not withstanding the measured loudness improvement, It's still LOUD. It's probably good to emphasize that hearing damage is measured against total sound pressure (DB). A meter that only measures DBa can give a false sense of security. Sound you can't hear can still cause hearing damage.
  14. Oops. I shouldn’t append before my second coffee. I got the wrong mod. My bad.
  15. I’ve been out of touch for a while. Any mention of a price? Then I can do the unfortunate conversion from real dollars to Canadian pesos.