Litespeed

Yes, The useful bomb load was similar to the B17 which did half the speed, had a big crew for the pitiful amount of bombs it carried. Was heavily armed and armoured and basically a sitting duck. The "flying fortress" and just like any castle, very hard to move away from the enemy. If you survived a mission you were charmed. Pity the poor rear gunner- always the first to cop it, very much disposable airmen. And a huge cost per aircraft and crew. Often known as the meat wagon For a Mozzie, getting shot down was the exception, not the rule. Hard to be shot down when as a bomber you were faster than any fighter. Biggest risk was low operations and hitting a tree. Or the radar guided flak guns, but a quick bit or aero solved that. The cannons were great for blowing up trains and the big cannon and rocket equipped versions could fire a salvo the equivalent of a battle ship. Ships and subs were sitting ducks and had no chance if seen. Also been wooden they were very smooth and had very little nasty vibration in the airframe, something the tin cans could never match. For a true combat aircraft or bomber they had the highest strike- mission rate per loss of anything in the war. Its spiritual successor the Canberra had the same honor in Vietnam, (a friend flew them).

I my mind- the Mossie is the best aircraft of WW2, bar none. It could fight, bomb and ground attack, kill ships and subs, place a bomb through a doorway and still be faster than anything else with a prop. All from a bunch of wood, made in lots of little workshops by wood craftsman and women. It was fast to design, build and took a hell of a lot of abuse. Could play silly buggers with only one engine, needed only two crew and was damn fast. Was far more streamlined than any metal beast- composites at its best. And best of all made Hitler and Goering very angry the poms could make such a beast from sticks of wood.

I agree- A waste of lives for a simple solution. A friend is one of the those avionics guys who can do the seats. He is still with RAAF but made redundant and now transferred to being a contractor and looks after batteries all bloody day. A waste of talent and money. He could do the seats and as a contractor would not fall foul of RAAF. Typical privatisation crap. Spend a bomb training him, spend a pile making him redundant, and spend a lot more than his wage as a contractor for a foreign firm. All so he can babysit batteries and waste his skills whilst millions are burnt for profit. Economic irrationalism at work

yep what a complete tosser. Even if he did fly straight and level- he is wearing a wankers shirt. Maybe called captain cockup

Dutch, I can see how better training systems can be a great benefit, especially in adverse event and unusual attitude recovery training. I would definitely feel safer knowing my pilots had great training and were encouraged to fly the pants off the simulator etc. I would also like those pilots in a well a maintained aircraft and that is a given. But no matter the training I can't help feel a necessity for the bus driver to regularly be a small aircraft pilot. A currency in small aircraft should be a necessary part of currency and training for the big stuff. No amount of simulator and book time can substitute a small aircraft in keeping the basic skills always at the forefront of the mind. Not somewhere in a check list on page 235. It needs to be instinctive what to do for the most basic aviation needs. Aviate, Aviate................ So I reckon a best practice might be to have a minimum amount of hrs currency in small stuff. How much ? A minimum of 100 hrs a year including advanced stuff like basic aero, stalls, spins. And make it available at no cost from the airline, as a mandatory requirement of continued certification. Yes it would cost a bit on the ticket but really maybe a dollar a seat. A small price to save a incident of mass death.

Would it not be fair to say They did not continue to aviate, when a problem arose. Sure there was a problem and they did pull the circuit- but they failed to recognise a stall and then did the exact opposite of what is required to safely correct the planes attitude. The PIC and 2nd officer where both non english speakers (first language) and had trouble communicating in a emergency. Apparently the PIC said "Pull down" not push down, so they ended up doing opposites of eachother. And fought the controls all the way to the ocean. So a PIC giving the wrong word combination, the 2 nd officer carrys out a illogical command for both the language and flight needs. The PIC then tries to push down but does not take control from the 2nd officer. What a screw up. These seem like rooky mistakes and hard to imagine possible for two well trained pilots. A good crew of actual pilots rather than drivers of a flying computer bus- is the answer. You should not in my opinion be able to get to fly such airlines without lots of air time in small aircraft- starting with gliders. Then move up the ranks. And you should have to remain current in light aircraft- all at the airlines expense. The physics of flight do not care- stalling a aircraft and not correcting it is always fatal. Aircraft may differ but fundamentals do not. A tragedy that should never have occurred.

I think the aircraft you are after is the Mosquito. Accept no substitutes.

Good on the old fella. Not many of us have the foresight to prepare for latter. But he still needs the bodywork. Then he will have the means of his death and the coffin.

The only possible legal out for our dear friend is relying on the medical condition she gave him, which forced him to marry her. STD- Primary infection-Sexually Transmitted Delusion, which we all know is a short term psychosis. It is then followed by the secondary manifestation of the disease STD- Sexually Transmitted Debt:contract: Any attempt to sleep with the sister will probably lead to the tertiary stage of the disease. STD- Sexual Transgression Death:stretcher:

Just add a made in USA sticker, triple the price and the RAAF will buy a hundred. That is if Qantas doesn't order the lot.

If your toilet roll is sticking to your aircraft, maybe.................... You should not use the bog roll first. Just like the chicken cannon problem- thaw out the chicken.

Sure does, after a good vigorous exercise, my head aches afterwards. Maybe I should lube- being a trad guy- I might try Coarse Plus 50 weight.

Thanks for the great file. I suggest you place it in the forum labeled - Student Pilot and Further Learning. That will make it easy for others to find. Since you have a huge amount of low level experience, You are a old pilot not a bold one. Well done and a great resource for us all.

When it comes to Cleco's, it is a bit like having fuel on the ground, useless. YOU can never have too many cleco's, the more the better the alignment and easier the job gets. I also like the clamps- very useful. Also get many sets of the pliers, two is just a start. Especially as you will need a helper with some parts. Get as many as you can afford - a few hundred extra spent on the tools can make a big difference. They will last a lifetime of builds and you can always rent/borrow them out later. Do you have a good rivet gun and rivet sets for the solids? Do you have a hand rivet setter for solids? Do you have dimple sets for flush if needed? Do you have a pop rivet gun running on air? I once did about 1000 rivets by hand- never again. The better the tools available the better the end result can be, faster and with low fatigue/boredom/pain for the builder. Every single rivet should be perfect, practice and the right tools makes this easier. Every bad rivet is a chance to wreck the job when replacing it. And aircraft rivets are expensive as well. It is in my view a case of " tools maketh the man and man maketh the aircraft"

You lucky bastard- been able to have holidays! Damn rich bugger.

Quick Madeline, and do not forget the blue pills. And the tickler feathers- these English and into that I hear.

Or maybe for those with a Italian bent- The Pagano- a quasi Ferrari 500/Alfa Romeo of the 50's but with 80's Alfetta tech inside. So that means font/mid engine and a gearbox /transaxle in the rear. Perfect 50/50 weight balance. Suits Alfa 4 or glorious V6. No real modern features but who cares, this is 50's road racing porn. It could off course be upgraded to modern driveline if needed. weight is 750-800kg, performance exciting, and sexy as it comes. And lightweight wire wheels are available- for the finishing touch. No that is damn sexy.

So you want classic looks of the 50's- 60's and modern stuff as well? How about this- The Marlin Sportster It uses all BMW running gear as a kit car but can be factory built. It takes the entire running gear including suspension and brakes. This can inlcude the standard features of the BMW- anything feature wise- eg ABS, traction control, stability control and even blue tooth. The only thing that would be a problem is the 5 star ANCAP and air bags- but that is possible. The chassis is very strong. It will accept a BMW 4,6,8 or V12. This is nothing like a clubman it is substantially stronger and more refined and larger for real sized humans. They have been constantly upgraded and now accept the drivetrain of the BMW e39 5 series- on of the best drivers cars ever made. The E39 has fantastic handling and brakes for a big car- at almost 55% of the weight the Marlin performs like a supercar if needed. Can be built will aero screens or a full strong framed windscreen. Certainly a car I would love to build/own.

What like this Kestrel? Nice

Sure is Sexy. Hopefully this will bring back the beauty in car design- not damn brutalism or a half sucked lolly effect. Back to a bit of elegance in design- like the sexy 50-60s italian stuff. Like this Alfa Disco Volante, beautiful but lifted her skirt at speed- the design made too much lift at race speeds. The car was intended as a race car for Targa floria, Mille Migilia etc Besides the looks it was a tube spaceframe and alloy panels, more aircraft inspiration. If not for the lift at speed it would have been very fast.

What if car and aircraft design melded into something special. Not a flying car but using the best ideas from aircraft aerodynamics and blending that into car design. Anything that takes todays blandboxes and throws away the molds would be good. I love polished alloy- a personal fetish, but any type of suitable material is cool. Here are some fantastic pics of a concept design for the next generation of F1 cars. The new cars will be fully enclosed for much greater driver/pilot safety. The execution is beautiful to my eye, it has a very jet fighter look about it. Gone are all the weirdness of the current cars and something that now is Sex, Speed and Ground effect hugging, G slaping fun. There is so much to love about this design.

Re: Martin Shaw, Bloody cool bloke in my house. Fantastic in Inspector George Gently. Has also done some doco's on aircraft. See it on I-view (ABC) I love my Aunty

My current ride is a 1991 TDM 850 yamaha. This was the adventure bike original and the jap version of the Paris dakar racer. Gone are all big body work, twin headlights, instruments, panniers, racks- in fact anything non essential. Weight is now about 180kg and down to finally 172kg when finished. Now it is a real fun machine and runs rings around the SV650 in the shed. The extra weight loss will be a home made exhaust that ends under the motor- and will be fruity.

Some more

for your viewing pleasure some modded K series