we have extensive documentation and tracking needs. we use two sets of software for records and also keep a hard copy for long term storage.
For tracking parts on/off and hours in service, TSO TSI etc... we use TRAX Evo2
We scan all written paperwork into a database which is interfaced with via Alchemy.
This allows us to view the current status of all of our aircraft and their parts and track the paperwork for each action taken. Alchemy has a browser interface and we use IE to access it.
this allows for a person to access the documentation from any of our stations and or offices internally on the network.
Both Alchemy and TRAX are acceptable to our local FSDO.
The hardware setup for this is not something I can shed light on as I do not get to play with computers that are ground bound.
hope that helps,
maric
the big deal about the 406 ELT boils down to three things:
they have a data channel in the signal which allows them to broadcast the GPS coordinates of the ELT location
the 406 frequency will be monitored by satellite - they are planning on dropping this for 121 signals
and the 406 ELTs identify themselves allowing them to be registered. this will allow CAP to call the phone number registered and verify that it really is a crash and not a spurious activation. This will free up SAR elements (including CAP) as a side effect.
the GPS broadcast is the thing that dramatically reduces the search area. I have been told of units that can be removed and hand activated as well. I wonder if there is one that also allows voice on 121/406 to radio to SAR elements.
as for the batch install I would say that would have to be worked out with the shop in question upfront.
HTH,
Maric.
Many private pilots are upset about this requirements for new equipment on their aircraft. I can understand their side of the issue. In many cases their existing equipment has been working fine for many years and now has to be replaced. In addition many equipment manufacturers take advantage of this to price gouge a bit. Plus there is something that is not addressed by many here - install. Aircraft are regulated much more than automobiles. To simply install a part can have a lot of requirements. For an ELT to be replaced it must be done by a Certificated Mechanic with at least an Airframe rating or an authorized repairman working under his/her shops certificate. The ELT can't be some j-random unit, it must be one that is certified for use on that specific model and type of aircraft (like saying that this part is only for Ford F-150s made in 1980 - 82 with the serial number range of such and such) there is a host of paperwork and testing to be carried out to get one certified if it is not already. Assuming that this is a drop in replacement of a unit with identical form factor and weight and power draw etc... there will be STC paper work, weight and balance etc applied. It is not as simple to get a plane with the new ELTs to be legal. Even with the requirement, the actual install is faster and easier then the rest of the regulatory stuff. This all translates to a hidden cost that is added to the purchase price. The customer can end up with a huge bill after buying a $200-$300 part. Not fun.
The flip side is this. Yes, the old 121.5 ELTs work. Yes, the new ones can also broadcast in 121.5 too. My job and the FAA's job is not to fix planes. Our job is our customer's safety. That is the whole point to this and many other things we do. The bottom line is the 406 ELTs will help Search and Rescue assets quickly and accurately respond to aviation emergencies. Even with a good fix on a 121 ELT the search area yeilded can still be as large as 100 square miles.
406's can reduce that same search area to 1 square mile. This will save lives.
So, while I can feel empathy for my customers that do not want to get this new ELT and can in some cases ill afford it, I want them to be safe too. BTW- The money thing does not impact me as I do not profit from the install directly - I'm on an hourly rate.
I would suggest to aircraft owners that they contact their local Avionics shops. Look to the smaller ones as they can usually take time to work with a customer as an individual rather than as a overall policy. Talk with several and make sure that they answer all of your questions. Get several quotes first. Then schedule your appointment. At this point in the game I would say that if you are an infrequent flier consider storing your plane for a while and wait the higher prices out. If you truly need your aircraft to be functional after the drop dead date get cracking as slots in your local shops will fill rapidly once the deadline is close.
WoW is the sole reason I have a computer with windows installed on it. I would gladly buy ANOTHER copy of the client and the expansions if it would allow me to play it on Linux. Anything to get away from windows. I cannot express how much it would please me as a customer to have a Linux port of WoW.
NVIDIA and ATI both offer linux drivers for their cards native to Linux so your graphics will be supported for a lot of hardware out there. I know that you can minimize the bulk of your customer support structure for the Linux client by using a community based approach as we are already quite used to it. Please consider releasing the client to Linux, even if it is under your own proprietary license.
UM, sorry but you are wrong on that one. From www.FAA.gov:
* The FCC and FAA ban cell phones for airborne use because its signals could interfere with critical aircraft instruments. Radios and televisions are also prohibited.
* Laptops and other personal electronic devices (PEDs) such as hand-held computer games and tape or CD players are also restricted to use above 10,000 feet owing to concerns they could interfere with aircraft instrumentation
(from http://www.faa.gov/passengers/fly_safe/information/)
I am a lab assistant/substitute instructor at my school. We are a technical school for aviation maintenence and many students come here because they did not do well in an academic environment. This proves to be their undoing many times as this is not the place for slackers and we do not take pity on them. The guiding logic is that one must not allow sympathy to blind you to the fact that if they can't cut it in the real world BAD things will happen. This school is for adults and we expect you to behave accordingly. As for the pod casts I hope that they will happen here - it would be a wonderful addition to the AC65 series of texts which cover the entire degree and every bit of data that you will be expected to know. Lab grades are of greater import here as one needs to meet very specific minimum standards. Attendance is mandatory and regulated be the FAA here. So that is a point where ours is a specialized environment as compared to the other schools. If they are concerned about attendance at class other colleges should simply stop holding the students hand. If they make the grade all is well. If not then the college can charge them more money for tuition. Either way attendance and grades simply stop being a problem for the institution. This may seem cruel on the surface but I must ask are we really being kind when we help others get a degree and responsibilities that they don't understand/can't perform? That F may be just the thing they need to find something better suited to their skills and abilities that will make them much happier in life.
Your statements about the nasa management is preaching to the choir - I am in agreement - hence why I said they were hopeless. Any additional funding would have to come AFTER a total management replacement and an effective oversight commitee was put into place.
As for the Russians vs Good ole America:
sorry, but the best we got pushes 15 tons - 20 tons max avg and 25 tons max.
there may be a rocket that we have that pushes 50 tons (but I dont have, and did not find any data in regards to that - sorry).
quite a bit shy of the Energia at 175 tons in vulcan format
-this bit is a combo reply -
as for Energia being a fossil - its younger than both the atlas and the shuttle.
yes I know that buran got crushed, Youll note that I said Energia, not Buran.
I also said Energia in vulcan config - which if you look it up you would find that in that config the buran would not fit on the craft. you would also find that the buran was simply cargo to the Energia. Energia does not need the buran at all. As for un tried/tested, I said "(so far)" meaning that it did not have a lot of launches atm. However if you look into it - there are a lot of successfull launches of the technology it has from Baiknor (SP?) and that Boeing Sea launch uses alot of the side boosters as a solo launch vehicle - reasons: safty - not a lot of explostions, efficiency - the russians currently have the most powerfull/most efficiant rocket motors in the world - and even the idiot nasa management took notice of that.
go ahead call energia bad things and reject it - youll make wonderfull nasa management material and help keep us off of mars for the forseeable future.
hopelessly flawed. First they missmanage and over use an inefficiant air/spaceframe design. During which they get two crews killed needlessly. They have ignored repeated warnings from the manufacturer on one incident. They lose/destroy multiple multimillion dollar probes. Commission needless studies that in this case even duplicate earlier efforts. And just when I think that they have run out of stupidity they start the magnum project, and pursue hyper x as space transport.
The magnum project is supposed to provide a mars launch vehicle. It was estimated that the crew to mars would need approx 100 tons to be launched. Magnum is slated to lift far less than that requiring a slow and expensive orbital assembly period. Meanwhile the Russians have a nice reusable space vehicle called Energia. In its Vulcan config it can lift up to 175 tons and has been sucessfully launched with a good safety record (so far). But nasa cant be bothered with existing tech that works - we need expensive and buggy tech instead.
Hyper x - now it is a wonderfull device and I have great respect for it. It is just not what nasa is selling it to be. They claim it will be a space plane that will not use a rocket and fly at high speeds and even into orbit. Just one problem - SCRAM jets need a supersonic air flow at the intake and through the engine to even work. You just do not get that at subsonic speeds. The test data that I have seen thus far indicates that they have not even had it work below mach 5 yet and it needs to be boosted to speed by a pegasus rocket. Hyper x makes more sense as a return craft where speed can be a "bit" more easy to come by.
The really sad thing is that there are real high quality people working for nasa that are getting painted with an ugly brush here. Nasa has made wonderful contributions to military,comercial, and general aviation in the areas of new materials. wind tunnel research, new safety systems, new avionics systems, manuverability studies and developments, aircraft design and testing and many more. These hard working people are doing many things that are improving the world arround us and no one is talking about it. Instead we all sit back and notice what the PHBs that they are saddled with go on to the next idiotic stunt. Nasa needs new management from the top down, a swift kick, some better media coverage, LOTS more money - with a better oversite to make sure that it gets used intelligently, and support from the government and the average citizen - in that order. If they dont get all of that stuff soon they will become totally irrelevent. Which, in light of their tremendous achievements to date(Apollo 11 for one), and their enormous potential, would be a terrible loss.
Slashdot Mirror
we have extensive documentation and tracking needs. we use two sets of software for records and also keep a hard copy for long term storage. For tracking parts on/off and hours in service, TSO TSI etc... we use TRAX Evo2 We scan all written paperwork into a database which is interfaced with via Alchemy. This allows us to view the current status of all of our aircraft and their parts and track the paperwork for each action taken. Alchemy has a browser interface and we use IE to access it. this allows for a person to access the documentation from any of our stations and or offices internally on the network. Both Alchemy and TRAX are acceptable to our local FSDO. The hardware setup for this is not something I can shed light on as I do not get to play with computers that are ground bound. hope that helps, maric
the big deal about the 406 ELT boils down to three things: they have a data channel in the signal which allows them to broadcast the GPS coordinates of the ELT location the 406 frequency will be monitored by satellite - they are planning on dropping this for 121 signals and the 406 ELTs identify themselves allowing them to be registered. this will allow CAP to call the phone number registered and verify that it really is a crash and not a spurious activation. This will free up SAR elements (including CAP) as a side effect.
the GPS broadcast is the thing that dramatically reduces the search area. I have been told of units that can be removed and hand activated as well. I wonder if there is one that also allows voice on 121/406 to radio to SAR elements. as for the batch install I would say that would have to be worked out with the shop in question upfront.
HTH,
Maric.
Many private pilots are upset about this requirements for new equipment on their aircraft. I can understand their side of the issue. In many cases their existing equipment has been working fine for many years and now has to be replaced. In addition many equipment manufacturers take advantage of this to price gouge a bit. Plus there is something that is not addressed by many here - install. Aircraft are regulated much more than automobiles. To simply install a part can have a lot of requirements. For an ELT to be replaced it must be done by a Certificated Mechanic with at least an Airframe rating or an authorized repairman working under his/her shops certificate. The ELT can't be some j-random unit, it must be one that is certified for use on that specific model and type of aircraft (like saying that this part is only for Ford F-150s made in 1980 - 82 with the serial number range of such and such) there is a host of paperwork and testing to be carried out to get one certified if it is not already. Assuming that this is a drop in replacement of a unit with identical form factor and weight and power draw etc... there will be STC paper work, weight and balance etc applied. It is not as simple to get a plane with the new ELTs to be legal. Even with the requirement, the actual install is faster and easier then the rest of the regulatory stuff. This all translates to a hidden cost that is added to the purchase price. The customer can end up with a huge bill after buying a $200-$300 part. Not fun.
The flip side is this. Yes, the old 121.5 ELTs work. Yes, the new ones can also broadcast in 121.5 too. My job and the FAA's job is not to fix planes. Our job is our customer's safety. That is the whole point to this and many other things we do. The bottom line is the 406 ELTs will help Search and Rescue assets quickly and accurately respond to aviation emergencies. Even with a good fix on a 121 ELT the search area yeilded can still be as large as 100 square miles. 406's can reduce that same search area to 1 square mile. This will save lives. So, while I can feel empathy for my customers that do not want to get this new ELT and can in some cases ill afford it, I want them to be safe too. BTW- The money thing does not impact me as I do not profit from the install directly - I'm on an hourly rate. I would suggest to aircraft owners that they contact their local Avionics shops. Look to the smaller ones as they can usually take time to work with a customer as an individual rather than as a overall policy. Talk with several and make sure that they answer all of your questions. Get several quotes first. Then schedule your appointment. At this point in the game I would say that if you are an infrequent flier consider storing your plane for a while and wait the higher prices out. If you truly need your aircraft to be functional after the drop dead date get cracking as slots in your local shops will fill rapidly once the deadline is close.
Either way, stay safe.
Maric
WoW is the sole reason I have a computer with windows installed on it. I would gladly buy ANOTHER copy of the client and the expansions if it would allow me to play it on Linux. Anything to get away from windows. I cannot express how much it would please me as a customer to have a Linux port of WoW.
NVIDIA and ATI both offer linux drivers for their cards native to Linux so your graphics will be supported for a lot of hardware out there. I know that you can minimize the bulk of your customer support structure for the Linux client by using a community based approach as we are already quite used to it. Please consider releasing the client to Linux, even if it is under your own proprietary license.
Thank you very much for reading this post
Maric.
UM, sorry but you are wrong on that one. From www.FAA.gov: * The FCC and FAA ban cell phones for airborne use because its signals could interfere with critical aircraft instruments. Radios and televisions are also prohibited. * Laptops and other personal electronic devices (PEDs) such as hand-held computer games and tape or CD players are also restricted to use above 10,000 feet owing to concerns they could interfere with aircraft instrumentation (from http://www.faa.gov/passengers/fly_safe/information/)
I am a lab assistant/substitute instructor at my school. We are a technical school for aviation maintenence and many students come here because they did not do well in an academic environment. This proves to be their undoing many times as this is not the place for slackers and we do not take pity on them. The guiding logic is that one must not allow sympathy to blind you to the fact that if they can't cut it in the real world BAD things will happen. This school is for adults and we expect you to behave accordingly. As for the pod casts I hope that they will happen here - it would be a wonderful addition to the AC65 series of texts which cover the entire degree and every bit of data that you will be expected to know. Lab grades are of greater import here as one needs to meet very specific minimum standards. Attendance is mandatory and regulated be the FAA here. So that is a point where ours is a specialized environment as compared to the other schools. If they are concerned about attendance at class other colleges should simply stop holding the students hand. If they make the grade all is well. If not then the college can charge them more money for tuition. Either way attendance and grades simply stop being a problem for the institution. This may seem cruel on the surface but I must ask are we really being kind when we help others get a degree and responsibilities that they don't understand/can't perform? That F may be just the thing they need to find something better suited to their skills and abilities that will make them much happier in life.
Your statements about the nasa management is preaching to the choir - I am in agreement - hence why I said they were hopeless. Any additional funding would have to come AFTER a total management replacement and an effective oversight commitee was put into place.
As for the Russians vs Good ole America: sorry, but the best we got pushes 15 tons - 20 tons max avg and 25 tons max. there may be a rocket that we have that pushes 50 tons (but I dont have, and did not find any data in regards to that - sorry). quite a bit shy of the Energia at 175 tons in vulcan format
-this bit is a combo reply - as for Energia being a fossil - its younger than both the atlas and the shuttle. yes I know that buran got crushed, Youll note that I said Energia, not Buran. I also said Energia in vulcan config - which if you look it up you would find that in that config the buran would not fit on the craft. you would also find that the buran was simply cargo to the Energia. Energia does not need the buran at all. As for un tried/tested, I said "(so far)" meaning that it did not have a lot of launches atm. However if you look into it - there are a lot of successfull launches of the technology it has from Baiknor (SP?) and that Boeing Sea launch uses alot of the side boosters as a solo launch vehicle - reasons: safty - not a lot of explostions, efficiency - the russians currently have the most powerfull/most efficiant rocket motors in the world - and even the idiot nasa management took notice of that.
go ahead call energia bad things and reject it - youll make wonderfull nasa management material and help keep us off of mars for the forseeable future.
hopelessly flawed. First they missmanage and over use an inefficiant air/spaceframe design. During which they get two crews killed needlessly. They have ignored repeated warnings from the manufacturer on one incident. They lose/destroy multiple multimillion dollar probes. Commission needless studies that in this case even duplicate earlier efforts. And just when I think that they have run out of stupidity they start the magnum project, and pursue hyper x as space transport.
The magnum project is supposed to provide a mars launch vehicle. It was estimated that the crew to mars would need approx 100 tons to be launched. Magnum is slated to lift far less than that requiring a slow and expensive orbital assembly period. Meanwhile the Russians have a nice reusable space vehicle called Energia. In its Vulcan config it can lift up to 175 tons and has been sucessfully launched with a good safety record (so far). But nasa cant be bothered with existing tech that works - we need expensive and buggy tech instead.
Hyper x - now it is a wonderfull device and I have great respect for it. It is just not what nasa is selling it to be. They claim it will be a space plane that will not use a rocket and fly at high speeds and even into orbit. Just one problem - SCRAM jets need a supersonic air flow at the intake and through the engine to even work. You just do not get that at subsonic speeds. The test data that I have seen thus far indicates that they have not even had it work below mach 5 yet and it needs to be boosted to speed by a pegasus rocket. Hyper x makes more sense as a return craft where speed can be a "bit" more easy to come by.
The really sad thing is that there are real high quality people working for nasa that are getting painted with an ugly brush here. Nasa has made wonderful contributions to military,comercial, and general aviation in the areas of new materials. wind tunnel research, new safety systems, new avionics systems, manuverability studies and developments, aircraft design and testing and many more. These hard working people are doing many things that are improving the world arround us and no one is talking about it. Instead we all sit back and notice what the PHBs that they are saddled with go on to the next idiotic stunt. Nasa needs new management from the top down, a swift kick, some better media coverage, LOTS more money - with a better oversite to make sure that it gets used intelligently, and support from the government and the average citizen - in that order. If they dont get all of that stuff soon they will become totally irrelevent. Which, in light of their tremendous achievements to date(Apollo 11 for one), and their enormous potential, would be a terrible loss.