Wayne T Mathews

Bloody excellent... It's good to see an incident with a "happy ending"... Well done that man... Keep the sunny side up, Wayne.

Sorry guys, I just edited my post #34. I was thinking about what djpacro said, so I went back and reread my post and DJ is right, "sitting on the ground, the angle of the wings are much less than the stall angle." So I was wrong to say the wing is stalled after touch down. The correct thing to say is it's producing less lift. Or perhaps; producing insufficient lift to continue flying. Thank you for pointing that out to me as gently as you did DJ. Keep the sunny side up, Wayne.

I've only ever been up in a Pitts once DJ. It was many years ago, and it certainly wasn't me who did the takeoff and landing... I'm told nasty things have been known to happen to folks who try to wheel them on... Keep the sunny side up, Wayne.

I agree with most of what you are saying Kaz... But not the stalling bit... I don't want my students deliberately stalling the aircraft onto the ground... I want them to fly level with the ground, raising the nose (increasing the angle of attack) as the speed bleeds off, until the inefficiencies of man and machine overcome lift and the aircraft settles to earth. In the case of my taildrager, we aim for the mains to kiss the ground, the tail will drop the last inch or two, the angle of attack will increase slightly but the speed is still deteriating, so the wing is producing less lift and the aircraft stays on the ground. Doesn't always happen that way of course. But that's what we're trying for. Keep the sunny side up, Wayne.

It is not uncommon for an old pilot to remember more about his first solo than his first lady. we'll certainly talk more about it... Well done Glint, well done! Keep the sunny side up, Wayne.

You've been given a truck load of good advice here, Mr Badger... I especially agree with everything Turbs said straight up front, and within 13 minutes of you posting the question too... Spot on... Especially the bit about, "I'd rather have you around me than the super heroes who soloed at 5 hours, got their PC in the minimum, and have never seen any of their narrow misses." We've all had near misses... It's the people who don't know/realize/admit they've had near misses that frighten the crap out of me... Because they haven't learnt anything from the experience. Keep the sunny side up, Wayne.

Hey Mate, ya found us... Welcome to the friendly skies.

An absolutely classic aircraft... But the maintenance on them... Jeezzzuus... It'd make ya wallet weep...

G'day David, it's good to see you over here... I like the way you treat your engine...

You wanna see a turbo 95.10???... YEE HAR!!!!... You put a turbine in your javelin and I wanna come see the luna shot....

I heard that Bruce told Tecnam about you and I, and that's why they've put tailskids on their aircraft.

You do know don't you David, that even though it's a C185, when it's on floats, it hasn't got a tail wheel? Well, not one that works, that is....

Sounds like a plan we may wish to address Ozzie... Would you care to expand on the details for us, please??? Bewdy Dexter, Steve asked me to concentrate on the 20 tasks that are listed in the tech manual section 4.1.1 annex B. Which, if the mature age participents I'm expecting have any sort of previous maintenance experience (and Steve said that having rebuilt motorbike engines as an example, will count towards the total required), then we'll have a better than fair chance of reaching a competencey level that'll allow him to issue our participents with a line maintenance restricted L2 authorization in two days. The aim here is not to turn out full blown L2s (that'd take a 3 year "apprenticeship"). The aim is to get interested members onto the first rung of the ladder that'll lead to a full blown L2 authorization in due course, if that's what the member wants. Steve also suggested that at this level, the tooling requirements for line maintenance L2 authorization could be met by the club having a communal "shadow board" that the members can share.

Welcome Jake. I agree with Blackrod... If at first you don't suceed,,, keep trying until you do... One of Winston Churchill's most famous speeches took about five minutes to deliver, but had only five words in it... "NEVER!!!! (he spent a couple of minutes making eye contact with his audience),,,, NEVER!!!! (he again made eye contact with his audience),,,, NEVER GIVE UP!!!!" And on the subject of the mass exodus... I do believe it's more a migration of like minded people to a more friendly and less dictatorial place, than a mass exodus... Many of us still visit the other side, for there is value in both...

Good evening Folks, I went and spent a morning talking to Steve Bell about how we can help our members improve their maintenance skills without rewriting the rules and/or handing out L2 endorsements to people who can’t pick up a screwdriver without hurting themselves. It's a big ask, but it can be done... A 2 day limited L2 course… Steve looked at the course outline I showed him, and with the exception of some areas where he wanted me to prune down the volume/depth of information, he has said that he will look favourably upon applications for an L2 (limited to line maintenance) endorsement from people who have done the course I’ve developed, and who meet the Tech manual requirements. The course consists of 16 fifty minute modules over 2 days. The first 8 modules are chalk and talk (actually power point), and the second day is a day of practical; initially doing basic hand skills like changing a tyre, servicing wheel bearings, using a torque wrench, lock-wiring, split-pinning etc. Then moving on to inspecting the aircraft in accordance with the maintenance manual checklists It is a full-on 2 days, but by the end of it, it is expected that participants will be able to competently carry out the tasks specified in the RA Aus tech manual section 4.1.1 Annex B.

Dang,,, What's it called when all the top men keep trooping across to the other side? Yeah,yeah,,, we know what he calls it... But what do ethical men call it? Welcome to the friendly skies Igy...

Good one...

Hi Guys, My take on transponders is that if you have it you should use it, and it should be checked by a radio doctor every two years so as to comply with CASA AD/RAD/47, irrespective of whether you are or are not going into controlled airspace. I say that because if you're flying at Narrabri say, with your transponder on, and an RPT is inbound, he'll "see" you on his TCAS and make decisions accordingly. If your transponder is lying to him though, can you see the potential for a disaster? Bottom line, in my opinion: If the aircraft I'm in has a transponder that complies with RAD/47, I'll turn it on and use it. But if the transponder doesn't comply with RAD/47, I won't turn it on. Because when the RPT guys are making separation decisions that relate to me, I'd rather they had no TCAS information about me than what may be wrong TCAS information.

Yee haa,,, No questions from me at this time Scotty, just a statement... What a great yarn... I'm sorry it gives you a brain pain tapping it out on the compute. But tough, I wanna read/hear more. So keep up the great work, and I'm really lookin' for some sippin' whiskey now, 'cause I'm looking forward to listening to you around the campfire in Gloucster, and sippin' whiskey's been known to loosen a tongue or two...

Wow!!! That's one hell of a story about a special aeroplane, Dexter.

There's no doubt the pomms have come up with some brilliant inovations over the years... But, as with most of their equipment, I pity the poor ******* who has to maintain it... Let's hope its electrics aren't Lucas.

I've been waiting for an opurtunity to answer a question with complete confidence. And this one I can... A/ I don't know.... But I'm guessing that if you look in the Jeppersen manual and/or Casa's Manual of Standards (MOS), you may well find your answer.:luck:

G'day Guys, Just spent the day driving down to Canberra (and yes, it is faster to fly the Cub down, but only just)... Had dinner with friends, and will be catching up with my Son tommorow... On Monday I'll be going in to see Steve Bell with the course outline he's asked me to do... I'll get back to you later after I've heard from Steve what he believes needs to be done, and how he wants it done.

Thank you Eastmeg2 and Davidh10 for your input in this discussion. David, what you have said is, in my opinion, correct. All reciprecating engines that I'm aware of, will benefit from the technique you have described when descending from altitude with the throttle closed (for whatever reason and/or weather conditions) because it helps to control/reduce the engine's rate of cooling. And then there's the added benefit that if the engine does "quit" during the descent, you'll know about it earlier than you would have, had you not done this gentle "test". The idea though, of increasing to full power and then back to cruise power every 2 - 3 minutes during cruise is not something I agree with. Please bear in mind that if your flight manual says to do it, then so be it... Do it. Beat your engine up... But if your flight manual doesn't say to do it... Don't. At the risk of having the aeronautical design engineers amongst us cut me a new ring gear, let me try to explain in a way normal people can understand, why we shouldn't "pump" the throttle during cruise. Every time we go up to full power and back to cruise, we're whipping the engine. The internal temps increase and then decrease, even though we don't see it on the guage. There's lots of different/dissimilar types of metal in our engine. They expand and contract at different rates, and they remember, because all metal has a memory. Keep the sunny side up, Wayne

Not bad at all... Now if'n we could just get you to teach them how to spell it the way they say it... And the outback starts at M'rundee? I don't think so... But you can hear banjos in the hills around there,,, if'n you listen close...