Litespeed

For most assuming a big blow, getting away well in advance is the best, unless you have a very protected spot and substantial mooring. I have that special spot and been far lower on the coast at Port Stephens. The port is a safe harbour with lots of good anchorages, just depends on wind direction. I do know of many up north who sailed well clear last week, others risked waiting and relied on luck and simply anchors- they now have bits and pieces not a whole boat.

Good luck to all. Us boaties will be having fun, lots have moved into marinas which is the last place to be if it gets bad. I am on a extra sized mooring, the only safe place to be unless you can be 100,s KMs away from the storm. My biggest issue is been hit by broken boats, trees etc floating past. Many of the local commercial moorings are way undersized and expect some will break away. Stocked up on supplies esp my Peroni 🍺. Batten down the hatches

All of those mad contraptions that are bike based in the movie including the chariot and multiple sidecar machines are the work of a crazy friend. He is Peter 'Bluey' Selke, prolific builder of 'Selke racing' chassis for road sidecar racing machines. Most champions for the last 30 years have ridden a Selke chassis. In my misguided youth I use to volunteer as a practice monkey on the race machines for testing. Extreme fun and danger rolled into one. 5 laps felt like been bashed by a gorilla for 13 rounds. Battered bruised and grinning ear to ear.

Back on track.... I am listening Nev, About height, I was always taught be at least two mistakes high to give you space to recover when it goes wrong. We need to be way ahead of the aircraft or we are just passengers. How fast and heavy makes a big difference to the envelope of safety. Everything is dependent on conditions and weather is a cruel mistress whilst physics is a evil bugger that refuses to be beaten.

I spent many nights pondering and playing with designs to do a updated AR5. It is a lovely design. I played with basically a Carbon version for reduced weight and increased 'G', trying more advanced airfoils etc trying to get a better low speed handling. The ace in the hole was using a 110 hp Simononi from Italy, instead of the 65hp rotax, the extra 45 ponies would make a substantial dent on the FAI 300kg world record. If I won lottery...

I think we must all agree, The pilot was overconfident in his abilities and made a decision to fly that was poor and this would appear to have lead to a fatal incident. His overconfidence was a result of his general personal attitude and grossly insufficient training, that would reasonably give a pilot a inflated sense of his abilities. Crucial X country and approx 15 hrs missed training, has led to a pilot having a very poor view of what he didn't know but should have or not providing sufficient weighting to the weather and decision making. We can always blame the pilot, that's the easy part and leaves us with a smug " I would never do that" reaction. I agree he should never have taken off and he had made a crucial decision to fly in poor conditions. But did he have the training to form a safe decision on the day? We may never know but he had been signed off as competent in all relevant areas of airmanship for a certificate to fly. Yes, ongoing skill development is expected but he had been cleared to be a pilot when missing a huge chunk of training and experience that forms our decision making skillset. The instructor is not only responsible to ensure knowledge and skills are sufficient but to judge the attitude and aptitude of the training pilot for the crucial human factors. No training or trainer is perfect but the system needs to account for the humans involved, when followed the system tends to produce pilots safe enough for further experience and development. The system failed because the humans involved from novice trainee to flight instructor to regulator, never followed the intent of the system for safe training and flight operations. The pilot should never had the opportunity to takeoff that day, he clearly was not sufficiently trained to have a certificate to fly. Would he have made that decision, if he had the full curriculum and hours needed to be considered competent as envisage in our training regs? Would a complete 25hrs have meant his 'flying brain' had enough control over his ego to make the correct decision? The behaviour of RAaus in this is indicative of the broken regulator and looms large in the overall factors leading to this tragedy. We all talk about personal responsibility and I agree he was overconfident and made a fatal decision to fly. He should never have been in that position due to training and approval failure. We as a community and esp on the flying field have a responsibility to each other as well. Did anyone on that day try to talk the guy out of flying? Radio him and warn him of his dangerous folly? Or did they just comment on his foolishness to mates? He may have said rack off, but may have seen the error he was making. We can't outlaw idiots but we can certainly reduce the chances of fatal interactions with them as a society.

Yep lots of holes made and they lined up, sadly. As for the wife, I can see her perspective, her husband has been trained and certified to fly by the current system, whether good or bad . She had concerns that have been borne out, what power would she have had to deny her husband who the trainer had ok'd , not to fly? The system completely failed her as a spouse, yes personal responsibility is paramount but it relies on the training and regulation of the sector aka proper governance. I think the potential of a law suit has driven the process to ensure the whole story is explored. Sometimes you have to sue to ensure you get the truth in open court, any compensation awarded is a minor consideration. To sue can absolutely bankrupt a person, I am sure she felt it was justified in her hope for recognition of what happened and the lessons to draw from it. It would appear from the Coroner's findings that not only was very limited training provided and pilots cert granted, but RAAus deliberately obstructed the Coroners investigation into the fatal of the pilot with less than ten hours flight time. I would think the wife has every right to pursue this in any legal means she has. Think from her perspective, hubby gets all of 4 flights,9.5hrs total, so long ones, a max of 4 days and all compressed with ground school. It could have been shorter? Husband comes home with pilot certificate, wife not sure. Next Hubby is dead, was it just him or was he undertrained and in a position that he was completely unprepared for? We talk about human factors in incidents/accidents and the greatest overall determinate is the mindset of the pilot and his/her ability to know their abilities and not allow ego/excitement/sensory overload to take over. But if you don't get the training, it's like throwing a fledgling out of the nest.. If it wasn't for this case would anything change?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-02-14/coronial-inquest-mathew-farrell-pilot-death-mount-beauty/104931548 I notice it was dumped in the news as a Friday closing time special, aka taking out the trash. So RAAus has admitted it's completely unable/ unwilling/ conflicted/ unqualified to conduct investigations of crashes? ATSB and Casa to investigate and regulate training? About time, irrespective of the nature of a regulatory body, it should never get to investigate its own crashes/ stuff ups etc. Independence in oversight is fundamental to safety and culture of aviation. I don't want to see the costs just burdened on the sector but rather seen as the efficacy of government funds to maintain a vibrant aviation sector that trains and can innovate. We should not be looking at a user pays system but rather a regulatory approach that sees light aviation as essential transport infrastructure even at a private scale. Not a hindrance to government but a actively favoured area of the economy. Alas, I think a absolute shit fight is going on and by the time it's done, the 'night of long knives' would seem apt. Or will it all vanish in a puff of confected smoke never to be uttered again? Either way we may never find the body of truth other than the Coroner's statements. As we know Coroner's are ignored when convenient. We can be sure it won't be followed up by the MSM and will be seen as a niche issue, except for the targetted walloping for the labour government as a whipping boy. I hope the ABC continues to followup particularly after the recent efforts.

It would not be plain ag pipe but a specific grade of alloy tube for aviation spec. Others should have the actual specs, do not shop at Bunnings Aerospace for your parts. Cheers Phil

So they let cattle scaring which is very high risk but not "sensible" low level stuff? Sounds typical.

Damn, a sad outcome for pilot and loss of a truly great fun aircraft. I would love to have a Drifter, be perfect cruising Port Stephens on floats. I hope they work out the cause. Hopefully the passenger can help fill in the details. Speaking of Drifters, has anyone heard from Farri and his drifter antics from FNQ?

Yes, We have been missing Phil's humour

It must be that new fangled safety paint. It takes the hit like a bumper bar. Pigs arse

Always loved the design of the Sapphire, it just looks right. Would be a great candidate for electric conversion/hybrid in a few years as batteries get much better. The rise of drone warfare has stirred the development pot for small hybrids particularly rotary.

Looks like a Winton Sapphire on floats.

As used in the movie, Flight of the Phoenix.

What a beautiful aircraft. Such a loss of a wonderful machine

Unless it's built of special high temp epoxies resins and then post cured by a oven, the answer is ... No. Sadly you need a very high reflection level from infrared and UV to stop the resin softening with heat. A hot day and a +4G aircraft can become 1-2G and due to heat soak the spar will still be soft until at height for extended periods. It tends to be only the very expensive prepreg carbon machines from Europe which are oven baked that can take the lovely darker paint and not suffer. You can get away with some colour decals on the vertical sides or cowl but anything else is suspect. If Jabiru say No, then it's No. That also goes for the undersides of a wing, a dark underwing will soak heat esp from a hot concrete or worse tarmac surface. Is it possible to do a ultra high reflectivity silver? Probably but the risk is yours. I personally love shiny silver. If you want to go that way then test modules for heat transmission would be needed to see the effect of the paint. Not all paints are equal.

Careful Some skyhooks are better than others. Just ask Shirl and his chopper.

Great in concept, I have often watched Kestrels up close gliding on a cliff into the airstream to hunt. They can stay in the same spot gliding into the wind even with gusting. Even getting the idea to work at drone scales seems hard, advantages will greatly depend mission profile. Changing the shape of a wing in area will still require strong fast servos and be complex for mechanisms. Essentially you need to change the wing area to provide for a higher wing loading penetration into rough air. This for a bird means folding the wings in a not just changing angle of the wing but greatly reduces the area. A blended wing body with variable retractable or folding tips would seem the answer. Retractable would reduce drag but folding tips would be more stable. It's all going to be mission profile dependant. A drone can anything from a party killer for a tank hatch or a high speed winged missile.

This idea of been stuck til next year seems plausible but extreme. It was even on the BBC World service with interviews from expert insiders. The capsule is a nightmare design and full of questionable design and quality. More a upgraded 60s design with high tech. In typical Boeing style the fails are much more than stated. As per the 737 max, safety was a cost option, esp given it was a fixed price contract. The tests done in the capsule naturally included the ability to launch, dock , undock and safely land via parachute. All automatically via programs. As you would expect. Alas, the mods done for the crewed flight somehow involved those auto systems programs ability had been partially removed for expense/ stupidity, it may have been just a new version of programming for the crewed flights but it somehow is not able to fully Auto return. They are now rushing to try and reprogram for the capsule to be able to undock and fly home without crew for safety. So it's considered unsafe for uncrewed return, at this stage. Apparently they either -fix it for safe crewed flight return, which is seemingly a tough task in space with no spare parts and still programming problems are a thing. - get a lift in the next Dragon, which will need to leave two seats spare for the crew return. That means the Boeing capsule must Auto return or at least undock for the gate to be available for the next Dragon flight. Apparently they will even need new suits for the Boeing crew as they are not compatible with Dragon. It seems like the typical litany of fuckups Boeing style. At least NASA are on the job or Boeing would just hit the launch button and safety be damned. I do take many reports with a big dose of scepticism but it seems to have some legs given Boeing's track record on this program. Meanwhile NASA are very pissed and have to find a use for two unexpected long term guests which use valuable on board resources and a media disaster. From here on terra firma is seems a good laugh, but I am sure those Astronauts are not happy about getting in the capsule again.

The first two are good. The last is downright scary. Fortunately at this time that video is a fake and no such systems are currently available. My robotics engineering son and I discussed this exact thing over ten years ago and decided not to proceed as it would be evil and open to mass murder. But it is a indicator of the possible, esp in China where constant surveillance and face recognition is a thing. Fortunately for us, my son and I are not evil. He promised never to make killing machines and we are much safer. Sadly lots of smart bad people exist.

Because it's the driest place on earth, for available moisture. No moisture available to ice up from the pressure drop due to the Venturi effect. Where's the free 🍺

Bit of history. This guy is a Swedish 737 Captain.

It's called ETOPS. Which stands for.....Engine Turns Or Passengers Swim. 😶‍🌫️