I’ve noticed an interesting contrast in Phil’s comments over the course of about 5.5 weeks.
P.G. on 5/16/05:
From a macho pilot point of view it is kind of cool that the FAA has
such antiquated systems and relies on people to squint at charts and
peer through the haze at bridges that they might never have seen
before, or to tune in radio beacons from the 1950s and interpret the
dials and needles and reference those back to a paper chart. It gives
us the opportunity to laugh at people who screw up and feel
superior. But from an engineering point of view it seems better to
design (literally) fool-proof systems if our goal is to avoid airspace
incursions. There are hundreds of thousands of pilots who could have
done that flight last week in any airplane without violating the
ADIZ. But as an engineer with a $20 GPS receiver chip in your hand you
want to ask yourself “What about those last couple of guys who might
not get it right?”
P.G. on 6/27/05
The Cirrus is holding up quite well except for one distressing
incident an hour from Yellowknife in which the entire Avidyne Primary
Flight Display “red-screened” for 15 seconds but then came back to
life. Once again the latest in software technology proves to be less
reliable than what mechanical engineers designed 50 years ago.

More color on Norman Wells would be appreciated. Was there anything that struck you about the town? The river walks were stunning as I recall. I haven’t been there myself for a long time — Elvis Presley died the day before I left. As I recall, this event was reported on the CBC in languages you don’t often hear south of the 60th.

You’ve gone a long way since the winter of 2001 when you first announced the plan for Alaska. This time solo with no ground support!

Watch out for rabies.

Oh, no! Hugs to Alex for a speedy recovery (and to you also, of course!). I still have a small indentation on my hand to remind me of my attempt to break up a dog fight . . . it wasn’t pretty at the time.

What do they call those, “Aerotels?”