skippydiesel

I have a feeling that the definition of a soap is not limited to the type used for personal hygiene "Soaps are potassium or sodium salts of a carboxylic acid having a long aliphatic chain attached to it"

What do you think a recreational activities chart, showing relative risk of an injury, requiring hospital attention would look like???

She certainly did. Interesting that the canopy latching system is not connected, through an inhibitor/safety switch, to the ignition system. The switches are very simple & cheap - every ride on mower has them.

I have had a lot of success with Molykote 111 where a "rubber" lubricant is required. One tube will last me up to 2 years, so despite its initial cost, it works to be quite economical. In general products containing hydrocarbons (engine oil/fuel/ many polishes/ etc) should not on "rubber"

The focus is on dying - All very dramatic however nothing can be done for the dead . Far more important is the risk of injury, especially those that leave the person with a permanent disability. I would speculate, that death has quite a ow economic impact. Injury costs a motza and ongoing disability must have a huge impact. My bet - the above chart would look a lot diffrent if it was about injury, requiring hospitalisation.

If your planning on cutting an oil level inspection hatch, check out the very many examples on other aircraft. Location & size are critical for frustration free operation.

"There are comments here that imply just that...that this the best way..period." The implications are but your interpretation ie may not be the writers intent.

Descending/Ascending traffic can come from any point of the compass, relative to an airfield. Communication and the eyeball are you best defence against a collision with another aircraft. Pilots operate in a dynamic environment, who in their right mind would "constraining yourself to a single mantra that works for one set of circumstances" ?

Something has been changed. If memory serves, where you have whats looks like a cupped washer from a car suspension, there were purpose made aluminium plates. This goes for all the through firewall bolts. You need to remember that the engine frame and remains of front wheel mount, steering mechanism were all removed, prior to the new owners purchasing the aircraft. Prior to the accident, the engine frame to firewall mounting bolts , all had at least 3 shreds showing above the nut. How the engine frame has been fixed and refitted, is for the new owner to comment on.

Depends on, amongst other things the transit height and traffic associated with the airfield. When on a trip, for the most part, I fly the shortest distance, at the altitude for best time & minimal fuel consumption. If I am at , say 7500 ft, most airfields & their circuit, are so far below me that any aircraft in/out bond aircraft in the circuit, are also safely well below - safe to over fly the airfield. If I was at 3500 ft, a detour might be the safest decision - 10 Nm would be appropriate. However if radio traffic is very light/non existent, I may elect to fly closer or even overhead the field. No matter the altitude or the radio traffic, I would still do the 10 Nm call, with estimated time overhead/abeam the field. I would call again when reaching my intended position, relative to the airfield. The above lets pilots and ground radio monitoring, know where I am, what my intentions are and when I am leaving their vicinity. It also provides me with a bit of a safety net in the event of some misfortune to me & my aircraft - when/where was my last transmission, was I on planed track/altitude.

You live and learn - still don't see how you can" join overhead" from 500ft plus over the circuit height. I do an overhead call for almost every airfield I land at but its a position call, followed by "joining X wind for runway ?????"

Hmmm! I have no recollection of hearing or making a X wind call on climb out - this would certainly cause confusion if happened in a busy circuit.

What is an "Overhead join" ? I routinely call "Overhead The Field xxxxft" followed by whatever circuit joining information as previously stated. As as far as I understand, to be overhead the field means that you are at least 500 ft preferably more, over circuit height. You can only join the circuit once established at circuit height.

Yeah! I have visited the factory. If attention to detail, cleanliness and order, have any bearing, they must produce top products. For the most part their aircraft products are aimed at in flight fuel transfer (as in "ferry tanks"). I already have a fixed (in aircraft) conservative 6 hr duration with reserve. On all my travels I intend to land at around 2 -3 hr intervals, if for nothing else to have a pee & some exercise. This will greatly impact on overall trip time but what the heck, I am retired and I do this for fun. The carriage of additional fuel would only be contemplated in the event of uncertainty about the next refueling point. Not sure but think my 2 x20 L collapsible Jerrys/bladders may have been made by them - they don't have inflight transfer capability. The Jerrys have, up until now, only been used for fetching ULP from the nearest suitable petrol station (do not containe fuel in flight).

It's not as bad as these vested opinions(including mine) might seem. For the most part pilots are keen to feel that they have communicated their position (in space) and their immediate intentions. That they may not have been absolutely correct in their phrasing /terminology is a secondary (not unimportant) consideraton. For my part I believe courtesy is vital - A pilot should not go against the established circuit pattern, without very good reason Should be only so brief in transmitting, so as to establish an accurate understanding in the receiver(s) Should, only if needed, seek clarification (Say Again) in a neutral tone Should not, while in the air, belabour any point of air etiquette IF sufficiently informed of the other pilots position/ intention and that no conflict need exist. Be willing to "make room" for the inexperienced or stranger, even if this means Going Round or flying an extra wide pattern, etc Should inform the transmitting pilot that their radio has a problem (transmission is weak/noise/broken/etc) thus alerting them to a possible communication issue 😈

The landing direction, therefore the circuit direction, is decided by the PIC ie there is nothing in the rulebook that says you can not land down wind. This is even more so in light/nil wind. By announcing the approach direction & the joining choice, all pilots in the vicinity will know where to look (find me) and what to expect. The Oaks airfield has a conventional (left hand) circuit for 36 and a right hand circuit for 18 ie there is no circuit over the nearby township of The Oaks (it's always DEAD/not active) . By announcing "From The Dead Side" I am informing the listening pilot(s) that that is the direction I will be coming from and intending to "Join Cross Wind" - I will be overflying the departure /upwind end of 18 or 36 , to turn midfield, on Down Wind, whichever is the active (or pilot selected) landing direction. There is no ambiguity.

Cross wind in this context (joining the circuit) is a direction not a location - simply put its flying across the wind/active runway prior to joining. The only other X wind is on climbout again a direction. Thanks for that reference pmccarthy - it appears I am mistaken about the use of the word "midfield" - my apologies. There does seem to be a bit of official confusion on this point - the circuit joining/landing diagram just refers to joining cross wind and shows the aircraft joining at the approximate midfield point on the downwind leg.. As midfield is the recommended joining point, it still seems to me that using the word "midfield" is redundant - I almost always used the phrase "Sonex #### joining X wind from the dead side" and have never used the word "midfield" as listening pilots will know at what point I will join and turn down wind (midfield).

Interesting - I guess the airfield authorities wish to emphasis the need for pilots to avoid the midfield area - bit hard to do if they don't use the word midfield. To be clear, I am not suggesting that pilots should not join midfield (where allowed) but that they don't use the word midfield, as its not approved terminology, adds to the length/complexity of the transmission, for no improvement in clarity. As I said earlier joining X wind means the pilot will be transiting between the upwind threshold and midfield (preferably the latter), across to the downwind section of the circuit. The actual joining point will be aproximately midpoint downwind, between the top of climb (Cross wind) out and the top of descent (Base) for most aircraft ie not midfield (which refers to the runway itself, as in airfield). One more thing: As stated earlier I am far from an exponent/good example of aviation terminology - I am expressing my understanding of what should be uttered at this point in a pilots activity.

"Joining crosswind means joining at the point where an aircraft taking off would turn onto crosswind, say 0.5 to 1.0 km beyond the end of the runway" I do not think you are correct - there is no joining point "beyond the end of the TO runway". Joining, beyond the upwind threshold increase the chances of conflicting with climbing aircraft. A X wind join is preferably over the upwind threshold but may be closer to midfield should the PIC decide to do so. "Midfield crosswind means over the runway, toward the departure end. " It may be that we are saying the same thing but the use of the word "midfield" in the joining circuit context, is non standard ie not in the book of rules Note the blue highlights & wording below

I understand "joining X wind" to mean the pilot intends to join the circuit, crossing the airfield at a point between the up wind threshold & midfield. The objectives are, for the joining aircraft to # not conflict with fast climbing aircraft climbing out, to be # in a known 3 dimensional position. The use of the word "midfield" is redundant ie does not enhance awareness and just adds to the length of the transmission.

Via Forrest - Fuel IS the BIG consideration My assessment of the options for fuel on the inland/railway route via Forrest : Refuel with AvGas @ Forrest - No problem. Rotax will accommodate the resultant "shandy" with 98 RON. Cost may be a factor. Carry additional fuel - I will have 2 x 20L fuel bladders with me, that could containe 98 RON. If needs be could add a third 20L. This would add > 4 hrs to my duration, still air > 1339 NM. There seem to be a number of auto fuel possibilities, close to ALA's , along the Stuart Highway, well within range but of course all would have to be contacted/verified before decision/launch time in Perth. Not entirely comfortable with idea of carrying fuel in the cockpit area but many have done it before me.

Interesting! Speculation: Motors in the wheels delivers; True 4X4 without the need for complex systems to overcome torsional wind up Potential for each wheels traction to be controlled by the "drive" computer = Much better acceleration, safer cornering, braking and control on sub optimal surfaces (oil/gravel/ice) Places the weight of the vehicle were it needs to be for optimum traction and minimal body roll Potential for optimum body design/shape to minimise drag, while maximising internal space/layout Zero transmission efficiency loss Simplifies construction (cost efficiencies) and same basic motor/wheel may be used across many diffrent body styles.

Thanks again, Any thoughts on most auspicious weather time(s) of the year??

Ah hhh! "Flushing Oil" - The memories that little phrase brings back -magic in a can. I still have a container of it gathering dust on a shelf somewhere. A redundant concept now, with the almost universal use of high detergent engine oils.

Slow day in The Forum "Recreation" as in recreational pursuit - activity done for enjoyment when one is not working. Often involves learning and maintaining/practising a skill - The word recreation is derived from re create, as in to make oneself again, in this case diffrent to your work or other activates. Private/recreational pilots learn to fly to re create themselves, develop new skills, enjoy a challenge & the magic of flying, continue to learn & maintain/enhance the skills acquired. It seems to be a very human trait, to add complexity when non is needed (electric trim/autopilot/autoflaps/CS props/ EFB/ etc etc). I, along with many others have often commented on the over enhancement/complication of small recreational (RAA) level aircraft . Thanks to miniaturisation & computers, small aircraft can now be equipped with systems/capabilities formally only found in airliners/military aircraft. There is no doubt that, technology's of this kind, can enhances safety and reduce the "workload" ( eg OzRunways ) so the pilot is freed to enjoy other aspects of the flying experince BUT it is a "two edged sword" as it also "dumbs down" the pilot who now does not have to maintain his/her skills in planning/ meteorology/ WB/ tracking/etc. This does not bode well for the pilot, who becomes dependent on these systems, when they fail/malfunction, these small aircraft rarely have system redundancy beyond the skill/knowledge of the pilot to adapt and manage the situation. While I support the right of an owner to fit out his/her personal magic carpet, with whatever "bling" systems they desire, I can not help but wonder at what drives such excess, after all it's supposed to be about recreation.😈