midlifeflyer

Wow! That's a heck of a leap! I'm aware of the rules and the guidance. I didn't say or even intimate that the call sign should not be used. Just that there is value in using type and color in a pattern where the whole idea is to visually identify traffic. Ever try to read a tail number from 3 miles? Adding brief identifying features doesn't in any way, shape, or form require excluding the N-Number. I don't know why you are so vehemently against "Red and white Mooney 9876Z, left downwind..." Besides, type and color have limitations too. "White Diamond" is meaningless in a pattern full of them. That's true of a lot of Cirrus and late model Cessnas too. And you can't tell a blue pinstripe from a red one at any air to air distance unless you are flying formation. ADS-B? I have a friend whose airplane is in the PIA program. For ADS-B purposes, it broadcasts an N-Number that is not associated with the airplane. So which one to use in the pattern? What good is "Cessna 1234A left downwind" if, even if you could read the number it's different than what you see on the traffic display?

The Gen 2 coupled with a compatible iPad attach magnetically to the side of the iPad and recharge via that attachment. Some clones do. Some don’t. Some provide both magnetic and usb charging. Even the usb-only ones I’ve used last quite a long time between charges.

There’s a lot of value to that even with ADS-B displaying tail numbers.

Yes, it’s definitely airport dependent. And some have “preferred” runways. When someone mentions “favoring” at mine, it’s not due to an insignificant change,

At my home base someone usually points out, “wind is favoring Xx now..” People turn around.

Yeah, the inexpensive alternates usually don’t have pressure sensitivity. They also don’t have some writing functions like crossing things out to delete them.

I have used both and the Apple pencil (and it's clones) beat the rubber tipped stuff by several nautical miles. Much easier to use and less inclined to stick and hit and miss. Clones: My history losing things makes me very shy of spending >$100 for a pencil (you want the Gen 2 not the Gen 1). So I uses one of the many clones available on Amazon. They don't all magnetically recharge and some can be annoying when they decide to shut off - I had one that just the normal (for me) action of brushing my thumb over the top would shut it off. If you want a recommendation, I'm using this one from Amazon and it's been perfect. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0BMTCY6ZN/

That can be very useful. For example, here's my home base. Taxi location when using 3 is not all that important. But with 21, the typical turn off is at A3. That means aircraft taxiing to 21 and back to the ramp from 21 are in potential conflict. The taxi call in either direction helps avoid many of them.

Technically, make that "runway I'm using."

In over 30 years, I have never heard anyone complain about a standard “clear of the runway” call.

Radio congestion permitting, I have some standard replies. Any traffic in the area please advise? “It’s bumper to bumper on Route 1.” Last call. ”Two Bud Lights.”

The contrary view does not negate calling when clear of the runway. It’s about the use of the term “active,” which really only means, “the runway I used.” I I use “the runway” or “runway 21” instead but don’t cringe at “the active” (any more :D)

Yeah. Removing the approach is not necessary (and may not even be desirable) in many scenarios, but it will always free up the flight plan.

You can, and with the IFD you have to. But it’s a bunch of extra steps. I use the “long way” when I’m creating a user waypoint for later use. If it’s for the current flight plan, I create it within the current flight plan.

Exactly. Here it is in a GNS, GTN, G1000 and IFD (in which it’s a little different). The smaller Garmin units do it the same way as a GTN. (BTW, the clearance is based on an older video - not mine - in which this clearance was given. )

Mentioning a Collins explains a bit. I've never used one but from the little I know it would basically require you to start from scratch. Not necessary with the GNS, although there is one gotcha. Garmin doesn't like multiple approaches in the same flight plan. One consequence is that while it's easy to change the approach to the same destination, you need to clear the currently loaded approach to change both destination and load an approach to it. As usual there are a couple of ways to do this. With time to spare, clear both the approach and the destination. But at least clear the current approach. You can always remove the old destination later. Here's a video in which I try to simulate what you are describing: I am starting on the ground with a flight plan from OXR to CMA with the CMA RNAV 26Y loaded. I'll change the destination to VNY and load the ILS Y 16R. I'll do it "wrong" to show the problem and then do it by removing the approach (not bothering with the original destination). The video is 2.5 minutes and that includes doing it wrong first. As usual, doing it on the PC trainer with mouse clicks takes much longer than doing it with the real unit. No audio - this was a down and dirty capture. I'm not sure what the autopilot mode has to do with it.

Just to clarify: the second flight plan is created and stored in the Flight Plan Catalog. And if you want to include an approach, in the GNS, you do not use the PROC key because the PROC key is dedicated to the current flight plan. Instead you use the MENU key. If you saw my post in the other thread about my "GPS Tsks Pilots Don't Know How to Do", it's the extra credit one (#7).

Can you give a specific scenario? With real places and something that needs to be changed. In a theoretical sense, It sounds simple, but I’m probably missing something. Change destination - put in the new destination at the end if the flight plan and go. Or insert it if that makes more sense. Change approach - tap PROC and put in the new one. Why would you need to wipe out anything, especially the current active waypoint? Any cleanup, whether necessary or optional, comes later. i did this video some time ago changing the destination and approach in a GTN. Is that what you want to do with the 530?

Oops. It was @MikeOH.

Of course a contact approach requires intimate knowledge of the surrounding terrain. I was stating the impression your first post made, not quoting what you said, which was I think I even said it was the impression this post left and not a quote. Based on @eman1200's response, I wasn't the only one to whom it sounded like you were creating your own IAP. Sorry if the mistaken impression bothers you.

While I can do all that, I choose to use my EFB for most non-navigation tasks. I’m about 50/50 on the frequency thing. The ones I worry about are tasks that are regularly assigned by ATC like amending the flight plan you mentioned. I spoke with an instructor from a university flight school while their student was taking the IR checkride. “If they pass, is your student ready to fly IFR solo tomorrow.” “No,” was the answer without hesitation. It wasn’t about IMC. To some degree it can’t be helped. The rating has always been a gateway but in the day of simpler avionics there was so much less to learn for avionics proficiency. The VOR/HSI knowledge test questions are far more difficult than anything you might do with them in flight. But with sophistication comes so much more to learn. No way to really test all that in the confines of a practical test. And CFIIs end up teaching to the test - KISS for efficiency.

That’s 101 level operational knowledge. Not particularly surprising. But scary when one considers that this is about the level of knowledge tested in many instrument checkrides and displays a sense by pilots that transition training is not necessary.

Described as “providing situational awareness for a contact approach” sounds very different from “rolling your own instrument approach and betting your life that a 3 degree descent will keep you clear of terrain and obstacles you can’t see.” Which is what it kinda sounded like originally. So, a question. In the US a contact approach requires that an IAP exists for the airport (even if you are not using it). Not so in Canada?

Clearances and instructions still include course interception from time to time which can be handled in OBS mode rather than tuning in a VOR radial. Some are common in some parts of the country. When I did my Garmin/Avidyne comparison video on OBS mode during COVID, I used a commonly then commonly-assigned routing in the northeast. nice for some of those non-RNAV text ODPs too. It is also used for random holds. Pretty much needed with a GNS and some G1000 flavors, but the fallback for those unfamiliar with creating one in a GTN Or IFD.

Interesting about that 20 LOP. There are multiple cruise performance charts in newer Bonanza G36 models (same engine). Two are based on flying 20 LOP. So LOP is apparently coming into the mainstream.