Geoff_H

Most of the theory is a starting point. Practical experience overrides it all. Bernoulli's theorem is a two dimension equation about every balance, great for simple aeronautical thing. Fantastic for pitot calls, usable but not perfect for a 3 dimensional wing. Air flowing in a duct at low velocities is different to high velocities. If you really want to calculate wing lifts moment and drag accurately you need to it like finite element does stress. Every air molecule affects the nearest molecules in a different way and its the collective use forces of all these molecules that let us fly. This site is not a mathematical site, nor an ego site. The 3d lift of air around a body should use the 'del' operator mathematics for calculation, but who cares. After weeks of mathematics something will be assumed incorrectly and the whole calculation is crap. As an engineer for over 40 years it's just about very intelligent assumptions (i have had many wrong ones too). It doesn't matter, we just use our collective experiences and we get there in the end. I believe that this site for us to use our collective experiences, sure there will be lots of errors, and lots of good advice. If we work together we will have a lot of enjoyment. We all contribute something from a different set of previous experiences. Turbo i enjoy your enthusiasm on this site bringing me learning from our collective minds. Good on you.

Were you able to get fuel in Timor? Some years ago I looked at flying to Timor, problem was tht we could not get Avgas there and we did not have an import licence to send a drum there in advance.

John did navigation fixes using single ALF'S across the top of the Atlantic, Canada and Iceland had >100kw ADF transmitters in those days ( maybe still do). John registered the aircraft on the Australian register as VH-NWF.

It is not the first Mooney to fly from Germany to Australia. VH-NWF did it in the 1980's without GPSS. In fact it flew from the USA through Canada and into Great Britain over the Atlantic.

It's not learning for me it's recalling long unused and not needed learning.

Maybe the name BFR should be changed to BFT (Biannual Flight Test) or BFE Biannual Flight Exam).

I carry batteries for Garmin and pocket and hand held radio. I carry extra ELB, polished stainless steel, water and even maps. And yes while I try to eliminate single mode of failure as a retired engineer believe me that single modes of failure will always find a way to be found at the worst possible time. .Murphy was an optomist.

When I suggested that I do gps navigation, 500 hrs experience with gps navigation, I was told that I might encounter RAIM. I thought that RAIM only applies to IFR. I carry 3 GPS, Farming 196, small pocket GPS and phone, could all 3 go flat once?

Why??? I just want to fly around the patch, BFR is not intended to be an exam, more a review of what flying you do. When I was flying long distances across Australis and outback flying I use EFIS and GPSS 3 off in the aircraft etc), now I just want to fly around the patch. I know that the wheel is just a slide rule, I have 3 yr level university level in mathematics, I know nav and would revise it if I ever wanted to fly away from the patch. I am so knowledgeable about mathematics to know that the 1:60 rule should be a 1:57.3.

I have the same issue with a PPL BFR. I have not flown without a gps since 2000. My flight calculator that I used in the 1980/1990s is lost. I bought a circular calculator, I am 77 and it is a chore to learn. I even said that I only want to fly locally with friends and family. No they are demanding a flight navigation without GPS. I ha e now walked away from them, anyone know a Flight School near Sydney that have a reasonable attitude, as per the CASA recommendations? Was i just being overstrained? Maybe.

I just looked up the CASA data on BFR. It talks about your present and future intentions of flying, I told them this, it is just flying near the patch with friends occasionally. All flying in last 24 years has been with a GPS. I was told what if RAIM is not present, do a full navigation using only visual. I bought a circular slide rule, reluctantly learning how to use it ( even in 1982 i had a small aeo calculator that did it all, alas it is lost). The biggest thing the CASA document says is that a pilot should look forward to a BFR, with all this relearning for no future benefit at 77 years of age NOT, maybe i am just being over serviced.

Thanks. Just what I wanted to know. I have had my GA since the early 1980's. Then I did all my flying FullSAR. Since 2000 all my flying has been via the magenta line. Since 2007 via 430 into autopilot. It has come time to do my biannual flight review. This time, for the first time, I have been asked to do 3 hours of desk office review plus a 2 hour navigation solely on visual. First I find that NDB and VOR has nearly disappeared, I used these heavily before GPS. Now this is going to cost me serious money. So I am looking at a rec licence, I don't do long navigation flights any more and essentially only on my own or with a friend. So the question is if I have to do it for GA why not abandon GA for Recreational flying? I assume that I would still have to do a navigation exercise, maybe not so long, and the desk exam pass, is this so? If my GA licence has not got a BFR what restrictions would I have on a recreational licence? What medical would I need in the future? I now have a class 2, it is very expensive with a yearly stress test and heart ultrasound. Needed for age alone reasons.

Is navigation training for RAA allowed with GPS?

Unfortunately Cowra takes a long time for me to get there. But I like your idea.