With some of the flight schools here in Florida, there is a whole lot they don’t know. Things like you shouldn’t do simulated engine outs at airparks and fly righthand patterns, or set up for a downwind approach when traffic is in the pattern for the correct runway, or doing ground reference maneuvers at 80 feet half a mile from a runway.
I can totally see that being an issue. Rookies teaching rookies bad stuff because they were taught it that way.
Yeah, plenty of lakeside homes in Tavares as well. I just wondered about altitudes. Of course, if the Warrior was descending on base it would cross 700' somewhere...
Yes, but in this case the Polk State plane appears to have been doing appropriate pattern work. The question becomes, “What was the Jack Brown’s Cub doing at near pattern altitude in close proximity to KGIF?” It’s possible the Cub was landing or departing from Lake Hartridge, but that lake is not a charted water runway. Jack Brown’s has a water runway on Lake Jessie but as stated above they don’t use it for landing practice due to the lake homes and the nearness to KGIF. It seems to me that it’s poor judgment to fly at or below pattern altitude near an airport when you’re not part of the pattern traffic.
I sure don't disagree that's it a bad idea to be at or below pattern altitude near the runway, but as to not being a charted water runway, all water in Florida (with a couple of exceptions in Winter Park and Maitland) are legal for seaplane operations. As we've discussed many times, legal is not always smart nor safe.
That doesn’t work too well at Brown’s. Lots of towers in the 400’ to 600’ range in the area. I really think it’s no longer safe for Brown’s to do the same sort of ops they did 40 years ago. Too much growth has happened around them and there is MUCH more air traffic now.
I know it’s legal. My point was that a pilot won’t be as vigilant about looking for seaplanes where a water runway isn’t charted. Heck, you know this area. There’s more water than land around here. Do we have to treat every body of water as a runway? That’s unmanageable unless the seaplanes add radios and use them. ADSB would be a good idea, too.
I’m not sure radios make any difference. I hear calls at kgif all the time that give me no useful information on where the aircraft is. Perhaps them being able to hear me helps. Dunno.
Couldn't hurt. If the Cub had heard the Warrior making pattern calls, at least he would have known there was another plane nearby. Would he have stayed away? Been at a different altitude? We'll never know.
According to someone on my FB feed, her friends were in the Polk state plane and according to her, the seaplane took off right into them.
As a flight instructor teaching about good and bad radio calls at a busy non towered airport I have the learner listen to the radio calls, try to point out the aircraft making the radio calls and explain what they are going to do next. I feel making, listening to and understanding good radio calls and asking questions makes for a safer airport environment at a non towered airport.
I don't mean to be rude, but unless she was on the phone with someone in the airplane or something similar, I don't think she'd have any way of knowing what happened.
Might be plausible if the low wing was above the Cub's wing, and the Cub was blanked out by the low wing.
We have rules. Rules. The important thing is to follow the rules. Drones have a whole different system unrelated to ADS-B. They aren't talking to you, you aren't talking to them.
Sure, I agree with you but I know more people from the school have talked and from what I heard, they did hear all the radio calls made by the pilot and student.
Doesn’t necessarily mean they are where they they say are. At least three times at Okeechobee I’ve been in the pattern when a trainer gave an incorrect position report. Me: Close-in left downwind 23 making standard radio calls, Trainer: Reports downwind 23. Actual position very tight right downwind 5, between us and the runway. Trainer: Left downwind 32. Actually turning left downwind to base 14. Head on a swivel, expect BS position reports, don’t believe were they are until you see and confirm firsthand.
Maybe you need to do some research on what's available on drones and what's up and coming. https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2021/april/29/ads-b-for-drones-broadcasts-conditionally https://www.thedronegirl.com/2020/04/28/mavic-air-2-ads-b/ https://www.dji.com/flysafe/airsense https://insideunmannedsystems.com/u...-easy-install-fulfills-ads-b-out-requirement/ And sometimes the rules aren't good enough. See and avoid didn't work in this example, and even the ATC rules for airports have still allowed for some mighty close runway incursion / potential collisions lately. My Luscombe along with plenty of aircraft out there, doesn't have an electrical system. That should remain legal, but there seems to be a lack of willingness to allow for innovation for safety's sake. I personally think it should be like the relaxed rules for allowing for shoulder harness installations. The more people go heads-down on their screens for collision avoidance, the more I want to be broadcasting out even if I'm visual myself.
That is my take on it. The seaplane should not have been taking off from the lake located right under the pattern.
Nordo can happen at any time. You should always assume there are nordo aircraft possible. Enforcing radio use will only make people’s assumption that the radio will save them even worse.
Quote from the NTSB. NTSB officials said that based on preliminary information, Cherokee Piper 161 was doing pattern work at the Winter Haven Municipal Airport. They were practicing touch-and-go maneuvers and had completed several of the maneuvers in a left-hand traffic pattern. Piper J-3 Cub, which NTSB officials described as a high wing airplane, was maneuvering over the lake to enter the normal approach for Jack Brown’s Seaplane, investigators said. https://www.baynews9.com/fl/tampa/news/2023/03/07/2-small-planes-collide-in-winter-haven
That doesn't sound that difficult to cobble together actually. "Forgiveness, not permission" might be the motto here. Although, the same people not spending cash and useful load on the radio in the first place, probably won't be spending it on some self-contained ADS-B reporter rig either.
https://www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/remote_id https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/section-89.125 § 89.125 Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) Out prohibition. Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) Out equipment cannot be used to comply with the remote identification requirements of this part. The exception being https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-...rt-91/subpart-C/section-91.225#p-91.225(i)(2) The operation is conducted under a flight plan and the person operating that unmanned aircraft maintains two-way communication with ATC; or (ii) The use of ADS-B Out is otherwise authorized by the Administrator. Though, as you point out, some UAVs may receive ADS-B in to be aware of your position. But for most UAVs, They ain't talking to you.
Not only that, but I can’t even assume that the other guy has his radio tuned to my frequency. Nevertheless, I prefer a system that is biased toward giving me as much information as possible. If the Cub had even an inexpensive portable airband receiver the outcome here might have been different.
In this replay of the ATC audio the sheriff's helicopter appears to converse with another Jack Brown seaplane and the flight school so it would seem that they do have radios contrary to what is being said here.
I don’t have everything there pinpointed, or how busy it is. It seems the lake is just about centered under the base leg for rwy 29. If near an average airport, the seaplane should EXPECT traffic for the airport. Yes, radios on the same frequency would help too. Is that lake below part of the seaplane base? Or just a practice lake? If water landings are routinely done there, may need some ‘course rules’ to deconflict traffic. Look at Lake Hood near the Anchorage airport, both are rather busy, totally separate rules & arrivals. To bad it’s come to this, maybe the takeoff below the pattern was uncommon. Yes, preliminary at this point.
Brown’s has other seaplanes besides the Cubs. AFAIK, the Cubs do not have radios, but other aircraft from Brown’s might. Or it’s possible the Cubs have begun carrying handhelds. I know there’s an Icon that flies from Brown’s and it certainly has a radio. It was discussed at an airport meeting a few months ago and at the time it was my understanding that the Cubs were NORDO.
See post #11. The seaplane base is on Lake Jessie. The crash was over Lake Hartridge. Base and final for rwy 29 lie over the middle of Lake Hartridge.
When I worked there (several years ago now) they also had a Maule, but none of the Cubs had radios. Things might have changed since then. Like I said, it's been years.
I don't see a radio... I understand that being minimalistic is part of the allure. But with as busy as KGIF is... Running a commercial operation like they do... Im not one to tell people what to do, but I know what I would be doing.
But then Big Brother can't track you... Ah, no. There are many places where NORDO is perfectly appropriate. In places where it isn't, a class D effectively ends it in that specific area. Also, many older aircraft with unshielded ignitions can't use even a portable receiver. I tried, once, a borrowed handheld in my T-Craft, all I heard was ignition noise. Upgrading the ignition would have cost a lot more than a hundred or even a thousand bucks.
Yes, NORDO is appropriate in many places, but Winter Haven is not an Iowa cornfield. Take a look at a sectional. Sandwiched between the Orlando and Tampa bravos, butted up to the Bartow delta, close to the Lakeland delta, etc. The airport will get a tower and become a delta in a year or two (the project is already in work). Lots of traffic, including jets and turboprops.
I don't disagree, bad place for NORDO, sounds like it's late getting a tower. I was only objecting to the blanket statement, "NORDO needs to end."
