Again no mention of carb heat, with symptoms exactly typical of carb ice.

USB adapter for programming Jeppesen data cards. $50 + shipping.

With 172s you virtually never get carb icing. The 150 is a pretty special case, as it happens so often.

From the report (see quote below), it mentions they were doing circuits. I doubt that's would be an issue at 1000' AGL. What's that around, 1300 ft ASL?. I don't know exactly the elevation of that airfield. "C-GFFG, a privately registered Cessna 150B aircraft, was conducting circuits at Alexandria,...

The first step in a partial engine loss -- especially in a 150 -- is to turn the carb heat on.

There's a new grass strip on Saltspring at Long Harbour (CLH3), details in the CFS.

They had already stopped other flights from Calgary for a while. Westjet has also stopped direct flights to Vancouver from many places, and is concentrating on Calgary. It makes sense to consolidate.

Agreed. The Garmin user interface on these units is abysmal. It’s really easy to punch the wrong thing and end up confusing yourself. It takes way too long just to enter a waypoint by knob twirling. At least the later Gxxx units have an integrated keyboard that takes some of the effort out of makin...

Nice replies admonishing me. But it doesn’t change what I said. If we were all broke and not putting out one bit of carbon in the air, all your evacuations would still be happening. But hey, I am the bad guy while the rest of you make a living to (or voluntarily) pump out carbon in just about the w...

You're placing a lot of weight on flightaware data that shows a 206 climbing over 180kts and a 737 climbing at 150 kts. To your credit, you did mention that these numbers seemed off. But, how can you throw out those ground speeds yet maintain the rest of the data is accurate? Several other experien...

That means that if the take off roll of a 206 would also have taken 45 seconds, then they would have had to lift of 7/8 NM (5300 ft) before the 737. If we estimate the takeoff roll of the 206 a bit shorter, for 30 seconds, then the required distance difference in the lift off points would have had ...

Ok. So what? It's a twin. An anticipated shut down engine and subsequent landing should be a non-event. If it happens all the time, then obviously something is wrong in your maintenance department. But every now and then? Doesn't seem much different to me than having flaps stuck full down in a C152...

Was the 737 airborne when the 206 started its roll? I'm trying to input the above info in the formulas to see how close they got. Google fu says the average 737 take off roll lasts 40 seconds, which would mean that the 737 would still be on the ground in this particular scenario. Yes, it would have...

porcsord wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 3:32 pm .... did anything happen? Or is this purely based on somebody seeing something and wanting to complain?

Nothing happened and nobody is complaining. Carry on.

If we make a few assumptions to calculate some things: - both planes fly the same ground path - from rotation onwards, the 737 flies a constant 150 kts, and the 206 flies 90 kts - 2 minutes of separation is deemed 'safe' - wake turbulence starts at the moment of rotation If we consider the distance...

TC says "Actual engine shutdowns for training purposes are not recommended, as the training value is not worth the added safety risk and abuse of engines and airframe" https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/publications/instructor-guide-multi-engine-class-rating-tp-11575/ex-6-engine-failure-cruise-flight-...

Having flown the 737, I can definitely say it's not rotating at 0.5 NM (3000'), and it's probably not climbing at 2700 FPM right off the ground. It's also going to be going much faster than 150 kts, meaning the initial takeoff angle will be much shallower than the 206, thereby lengthening the time ...

The 206 turned left, the 737 turned right. The crosswind is a red herring, it's going to drift the wake turbulence, but also both airplanes. Not quite. The 206 would presumably have been staying over the runway until at least the end of the runway on their VFR departure, and the 737 would have been...

For some reason your image isn't appearing on any browser I'm using and I've tried two different computers. That's odd. It works for me in different browsers, and in incognito mode as well. Try this link: https://imgur.com/URPrYMo I was just confused because you said the 206 "rotated a few thousand...

The 737's faster forward speed means that the wake is actually much further ahead of the 206. The 737 was grounding 150kt at 2000ft at the position marked in the diagram, and the 206 was doing 165kt at that point at 1100ft or so, accelerating to 184kt by 1600ft. Actually, I would disregard the (fli...