Do you read Flight Safety Mag?
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: A sweet spot
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like other posters my copy arrives intermittently - if at all - despite hammering the desk.
If they can't get distribution correct then what else is Air Services screwing up?
If they can't get distribution correct then what else is Air Services screwing up?
clinton mc
I also think (c);
can we take the question apart?
assuming the aircraft flies on the same height relative to sea level (i.e the same geopotential surface) the altimeter will indicate a higher altitude (compared to before) because the pressure reduction at all heights is the same (assuming the same lapse rate holds).
We can call this "over-reading" I suppose although I always think of "over-reading" as being an instrumental error.
The actual terrain clearance doesn't change if we fly on the same geopotential surface. But it might appear that there is greater clearance between aeroplane and terrain because the altimeter reads higher
(apparent terrain clearance is increased)
Yup 'tis (c) as far as I can make out
I also think (c);
can we take the question apart?
assuming the aircraft flies on the same height relative to sea level (i.e the same geopotential surface) the altimeter will indicate a higher altitude (compared to before) because the pressure reduction at all heights is the same (assuming the same lapse rate holds).
We can call this "over-reading" I suppose although I always think of "over-reading" as being an instrumental error.
The actual terrain clearance doesn't change if we fly on the same geopotential surface. But it might appear that there is greater clearance between aeroplane and terrain because the altimeter reads higher
(apparent terrain clearance is increased)
Yup 'tis (c) as far as I can make out
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember questioning one Ms Mary O'B as to why she made the questions so ambiguous on the very first single IFR exam......to which she quickly replied......."I set them to fail not to pass", which resulted in a 95% failure rate. 
Many questions are dependent on your interpretation of the English language.
Many questions are dependent on your interpretation of the English language.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, agree that the answer should be 'C'. It's the word 'apparent' that negates 'D' - apparent terrain clearance (ie. indicated altitude) will be increased if you maintain the same actual altitude whilst flying into a low; alternatively, if you fly into a low and maintain the same indicated altitude, you'll obviously be in a descent as the aircraft attempts to 'find' the same pressure height as before.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Suggestion to make FSA more popular:
Cut back a lot on advertisements.
Cut back on wasted pages of colourful graphics. Children may love the pretty pictures but the mag is not for children
Get hold of overseas accident reports - there are many sources including NTSB, the British and Canadian equivalent. With careful editing to suit space requirements of FSA, publish those accident reports especially where loss of control crash - burn -die is involved. This includes airliners as well as GA types. Fortunately, in Australia major accidents are rare so FSA needs to look overseas for the serious accidents.
There is no shame in reproducing some of the UK incident/accident reports and in fact in the good old days of Mac Job's Aviation Safety Digest - and before his time the earlier DCA Accident digests, those magazines frequently used overseas accidents in their pages simply because there were so few in Australia.
It can be seen in earlier Pprune pages there has been more or less continuous negative attitudes to the present editorial policy that plagues FSA readers. To have flying schools spruiking their wares in almost every page of FSA plus so much station self promotion, means more copies of FSA reach the waste paper basket than ever happened to the 1950-1970 era of the old "Digest" crash comic.
In those days the term "Crash Comic" was an affectionate term and most pilots eagerly awaited their free copy in the post box. Many oldies - and I include myself - jealously hoarded each copy. I still drag mine out and enjoy a good read. The crashes haven't changed much and there are always the same causes and lessons to be learned. But the way the stories were presented then are quite different to now in FSA. Now it is just a cursory glance through FSA which takes maybe five minutes -rather like reading the local suburban newspaper full of ads and shoved free into your letter box.
No doubt the editorial staff of FSA are greatly constrained by their bean-counters. Cost recovery has a lot to answer for. But in my book, the money spent by the tax payer for those annual travelling Flight Safety Forums around Australia, would be better spent on a completely revamped Flight Safety Australia magazine minus those bloody flying school ads. Right now you can't call FSA a crash comic anymore. More like an Ikea advertising magazine
Cut back a lot on advertisements.
Cut back on wasted pages of colourful graphics. Children may love the pretty pictures but the mag is not for children
Get hold of overseas accident reports - there are many sources including NTSB, the British and Canadian equivalent. With careful editing to suit space requirements of FSA, publish those accident reports especially where loss of control crash - burn -die is involved. This includes airliners as well as GA types. Fortunately, in Australia major accidents are rare so FSA needs to look overseas for the serious accidents.
There is no shame in reproducing some of the UK incident/accident reports and in fact in the good old days of Mac Job's Aviation Safety Digest - and before his time the earlier DCA Accident digests, those magazines frequently used overseas accidents in their pages simply because there were so few in Australia.
It can be seen in earlier Pprune pages there has been more or less continuous negative attitudes to the present editorial policy that plagues FSA readers. To have flying schools spruiking their wares in almost every page of FSA plus so much station self promotion, means more copies of FSA reach the waste paper basket than ever happened to the 1950-1970 era of the old "Digest" crash comic.
In those days the term "Crash Comic" was an affectionate term and most pilots eagerly awaited their free copy in the post box. Many oldies - and I include myself - jealously hoarded each copy. I still drag mine out and enjoy a good read. The crashes haven't changed much and there are always the same causes and lessons to be learned. But the way the stories were presented then are quite different to now in FSA. Now it is just a cursory glance through FSA which takes maybe five minutes -rather like reading the local suburban newspaper full of ads and shoved free into your letter box.
No doubt the editorial staff of FSA are greatly constrained by their bean-counters. Cost recovery has a lot to answer for. But in my book, the money spent by the tax payer for those annual travelling Flight Safety Forums around Australia, would be better spent on a completely revamped Flight Safety Australia magazine minus those bloody flying school ads. Right now you can't call FSA a crash comic anymore. More like an Ikea advertising magazine
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: YBBN
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No doubt the editorial staff of FSA are greatly constrained by their bean-counters.
If you haven't seen, I'll upload some images of them...
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Mars
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It just tries to be too many things to too many people accross the industry. Its not just aimed at pilots and ends up without any particular focus - and the inevitable journo lowest common denominator prevails.
Do we really pay for it through an Avgas levy? They really need to work out what they are trying to achieve with it and think of better ways to do that because its obviously costing a motza and not doing very much.
Still judging by how much they spent on the Class D roll-out and the value that provided for the industry, they have plenty of motza's and value for the safety $ is not too high in their consciousness.
I wonder how much of a hole it does actually make in the CASA Budget - probably not a very big one so don't worry.
Do we really pay for it through an Avgas levy? They really need to work out what they are trying to achieve with it and think of better ways to do that because its obviously costing a motza and not doing very much.
Still judging by how much they spent on the Class D roll-out and the value that provided for the industry, they have plenty of motza's and value for the safety $ is not too high in their consciousness.
I wonder how much of a hole it does actually make in the CASA Budget - probably not a very big one so don't worry.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: In an Airplane
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It just tries to be too many things to too many people accross the industry. Its not just aimed at pilots and ends up without any particular focus - and the inevitable journo lowest common denominator prevails.
I read it in the smallest room of the house.....
Fills in the time while there.
