bexrbetter

How does that change my statement?

I'm not 100% on it, but there is a point where they have to put you on another flight, regardless of which airline. Maybe they have to officially cancel the flight first?

There something seriously wrong with the plane when you both jump out at 5000 ft.

And yet every flight I have ever had with Tiger has been spot on other than the time I had to pay $300 for the baggage. But that has nothing to do with schedules.

Garmin syndrone. Staring at his bling, or possibly mobile phone. Couldn't id be not on the runway? Seems to be plenty of areas where it could be, what would the consequences of that possibly be?

$300,000 is expensive based on the average median. That's not to say that there's not plenty of people who play in that area. The Nigerian Airforce use 60 Vans RV-6s that they assembled themselves from kits for trainers, and the Taiwanese Airforce used Palmany PL-1s, also 60 in number, and that they also built themselves, in the 1970s. Smart thinking and huge moneys saved as far I'm concerned.

For what reason? That is purely the class system I mentioned, there was NO logical economic, production or maintenance reason whatsoever to continue to develop the Spitfire after early 1943. The Mustang, along with others, was quite capable enough to take care of the skies, and the Mustang was also used very effectively by the British, who commissioned the darn thing, and used a British engine. Nothing but pure arrogant snobbery, Sir Mortimer Pennington Jollybottom the VI wouldn't be seen flying anything but a Spit Old Chap! There's a time for Nationalism, and there's a time to pull your head out of your ask me what I really think.

Ok, Spitfires are overated and pale to other planes from WW2. The myth of the Spitfire winning the Battle of Britain is grossly and unfairly overstated, the Hurricane actually downed the bulk of German aircraft. Also note the Hurricane had to go up against both the BF109s and the Bomber guns whereas the Spitfire could pick at just the BF109s, often when they were busy chasing a Hurricane. The BF109s were often low on fuel and on order to stay close to the Bombers limiting their tactical choices. That single point is quoted by some experts as the main reason for the BF109s losses in the BoB, alongside the Germans underestimating the RAF's numbers.. Some consider that the Spitfire almost lost the war for Britain based on it's complexity, not to mention cost, causing long production rates that in some periods actually fell behind the loss rate, and it's turn around time on the ground that was near a half hour compared to the Hurricane's 10 minutes. Their long repair times, besides the difficulty of repairing them, are well known. The Spitfire was very much the British class system in effect, there were Spitfire pilots, and then there was everybody else. WW2 aircraft history was written by pompus asses on the victorious side. I just want to make it clear that I don't like Spitfires very much, in case that's not very clear.

And the Jews, not surprisingly, quite happily took on the task of overseeing those reparations and collecting the 30+ billion dollars. These are the little details that aren't mentioned in school. A decade? Japan's 50 year occupation of China, Taiwan and Korea persecuting and starving millions to death was happening before WW1. Many people don't know where Chairman Mao came from, he easily rallied a majority of China together directly due to internal Japanese and external American capitilism tearing the country apart and killing millions. Imagine how bad it was in China that Mao's alternates were a better choice. Japan was an Ally only as to not have interference while grabbing the German controlled Pacific Islands they so badly wanted. Japan were the bullies needed to be stopped. You need to study Chinese and Pacific Rim history from the late 1800s to get the full picture. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_colonial_empire

Indeed, I was just looking for a picture of a Mustang with teeth obviously concentrating on the teeth!

Contact the Member 'Flyerme' here, or his other alias, Tim Heylbut on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/tim.heylbut Tim knows of lots of ultralights around the place and does a few up on occasion.

Hope you follow the path and stick with it David, and welcome.

I guess that depends on if you watched Saturday Matinees on TV as a kid with lots of P51 Mustangs, or sat in Cinimas and got Pathe news shorts. Mustangs, with teeth of course, are the iconic WW2 planes to me, while not my favorite. Interesting reading .. http://www.darwinspitfires.com/index.php?page=spitfire-vc-versus-the-zero Spitfires < Zero < Hellcat. Hellcat for the win! Then I noticed this, guess what, the guy's not British or American, lol!... Filip Vidinovski, Science Editor at Ars Lamina Publishing (2015-present) Answered Sep 19 2017 · Author has 556 answers and 565.2k answer views Originally Answered: What was the best fighter plane in World War 2? There are several criteria by which one can judge which one was "the best". Plain score: Bf109. Probably THE WWII fighter. This iconic aircraft shot down more enemy aircraft than any other. All German aces with 100+ kills flew one. Although a pre-war design, remained relevant throughout the whole war. Late versions, such as "Kurfurst", with their fantastic power-to-weight ratio, could easily out-climb (which typically translates to "kill") any opponent. Dogfighting: A6M Zero. Getting into a turning fight with a "Zero" meant almost certain death. Pilots flying much more powerful, faster and advanced fighters were forced into developing special tactics to defeat them. Best performace at low altitudes: The Tempest. Untouchable at tree-top level, this super-fast fighter, coupled with right tactics, attacked with more-or-less impunity. Best performance at low and medium altitudes: a draw between N1K and La-7. Both claimed by many to be the best fighter of the war, both with very good reasons. Best performance at high altitudes: a draw between P-47 and Ta-152. Exploiting massively powerful 2000+ hp state-of-the-art engines, both were nimble and "at home" flying at altitudes at which most other fighters would struggle to merely maintain level flight. Both were among the fastest fighters in the war. General usefulness: P-38 Lightning. Manufactured and used in all theaters throughout the whole war. That's how good it was. Perhaps the most versatile fighter of them all. There was no role in which you couldn’t use the Lighting. Equally "at home" dog fighting single engine nimble fighters in broad daylight and energy-fighting the best opponents in the stratosphere. Lightning -fast at all altitudes, with long range, excellent climb rate (best among Western fighters) and capable of lifting the same bomb load as a typical heavy, four engine bomber. Always in demand, they were even assembled outdoors when orders surpassed factory capacities and weather permitted. The "big picture", actual impact on the course of war: P-51. No contest here. This fighter defeated the mighty Luftwaffe. Having incredibly long range coupled with excellent flying characteristics (especially when flying fast), fancy modern efficient wings and outstanding visibility from the cockpit, it presented an insoluble problem for the defenders of the Third Reich. The "game over" fighter. That's why many rightly claim the Mustang was the best WWII fighter. But, if I had to reluctantly and mindlessly choose ONE, based on no particularly defined criteria, it will probably be the Dora, FW190D. It had a deadly combination of speed, roll-rate, ruggedness and powerful weaponry. Between 10,000 and 20,000 feet it was better than almost anything else in the skies. It was always a dead-serious opponent. If engaged by one between 3 and 6 kilometers of altitude, the best (and, most of the times, only) chance for survival is an immediate attempt to run away. Honorable mention goes to MiG-3. Let down by less-than-perfect engine. If fitted with the planned AM38 engine, it would easily compete and win against the very best fighters of the war. Unfortunately, Stalin said "no" and ordered all of the precious AM38 engines to be used in Il-2 ground attack aircraft, itself produced in vast numbers. And his first reply was from a Brit, and guess what... bahaha! .... I might be biased (being a Brit and an ardent fan of the plane) but, for my money, the best all-round fighter plane of WW II was the Vickers Supermarine Spitfire. What a surprise ...

Could you offer your opinion as to some of those "avenues" please?

Then high on the list should be a Backyard Flyer. Watch what happens at 2.40 minutes in the video and see the single seater flying later in the video. I am trying to judge what a 15 year old might be able to afford, but you need to offer more information in this area. .

.. or half of it anyway. They all do it, and has been a worldwide trend as far as I can see started by the Hawke Government when they started the "Clever Country" and all the training schemes. Not a first to be proud of.

Drifter would be an excellent option, especially when you go to resell it later.

Replying to the title, claiming 10,000 pilots in 10 years is only relevant to the number that have left during that period, and the demographic breakdown of the 10,000. As respectfully as I can put it, every show I go to or look at pictures of, every meeting (RAA, CASA etc) and Fly'In report I see, shows a large sea of grey hair. I would like to see a demographic breakdown of the inducted 10,000 for relevance, especially age breakdown to make determinations of the sport's future strength.

There is a need for both. Your hope is well placed because the cheaper variants and kits draw participants to the hobby who then go on to desiring craft such as yours. You're doing fine. Plenty before you have come in with a 'superior product' arrogance, yet you have been straight up and down. Hope you stick around.

Not sure why he's wasting the use of the rear wheel to aid in acceleration, braking and suspension.

A lot of civilians committed suicide rather than be captured by the Americans for fear of the treatment they were told to expect apparently, there's lots of sad film of it, the cliff jumpers for example. There is no clear reason the Japanese surrendered, but indeed the Russians jumping in at the same time as the A bombs was certainly a major influence, as was the entire country being gridlocked as the population went in all directions seeking safety. That was in part due to the Americans leaflet bombing them telling them they were going to bomb where they were ahead of time, a very effective technique saving civilian lives and causing immobilisation of the Japanese military at the same time due to roads being heavyly blocked. in a similar fashion, but a bit more sinister, Germans often used Stukas to strafe fleeing refugees to direct them up roads that advancing Allies were using.

A number of high up Japanese were educated in America and knew what the Americans could acheive eventually if allowed to. They were mostly ignored by Japanese superiority arrogance.

That's simply not true, and I certainly hope not Nic, as it would be the destruction of recreational flying. Others and myself are attempting solutions.

Nah, it's a $300,000 aircraft mate. When you throw that in the face of a demographic of people who don't have $3000 in their bank account, then you will ellicit a reaction usually in line with 'what's the point?' when something is clearly unreachable for them, it's human nature. No one is against the aircraft, no one is against Nic running a business as required, it's just a demographic thing. I would consider your opinion on the Gabriel to be no different to other's opinions here on the Prime.. "tandems" are actually the easiest to balance, relative to all other 2 place craft, you just plonk your Pax and baggage on the CoG. I suggest the roast beef and spuds.