skeptic36

Nerb, Exactly how did you glean from my post that I have not looked for solutions? Several years ago I sold a property and so had money available (hard to believe now) One of the options I looked at was using that money in the farming business. The best place would be to reduce the biggest cost - energy. I looked at two options one was a wind turbine. The quote back then from Mcfarlane generators for a reconditioned generator similar to the ones (which I can only surmise must be highly subsidized to be viable) you see on the wind farms was $235k - no tower to sit it on, no electrical, infrastructure no installation costs. I can't remember the TBO for the thing but it was surprisingly short. The solar option was also nonviable although I don't recollect much about that except to say the solar array was going to need several acres allocated for it. Funny you should mention Hydro, I look at the power in the water flowing past my property every day and wonder how I could sneak a turbine in there, as yet I haven't thought of a way that wouldn't be obvious. Even with your naive ideals you would realise what would happen if I set up a turbine in a public waterway. I'm guessing that your example is based on a heavily subsidized installation something not currently available to me. Obviously I'm annoyed by your baseless aspersion and I will point out that: You originally apologized for resurrecting an old thread because you couldn't allow the original poster to go unchallenged re the ethanol debate, and having been shown that ethanol is no better environmentally than fossil fuels you have backed away from that. You have demanded all the way through that people provide sources for their information, but you have guaranteed that recycling paper is economically viable with no evidence offered and now you offer your (what I believe is a) government subsidized household solar system as evidence of how we can negate the carbon tax. I will not comment further on this subject Regards Bill P.S I put that bit of money I had in the share market pre GFC, I bet you know how that's working out for me

Frank, You'll find all the people from around Bairnsdale are like that

Not sure how I can get my irrigation pumps to pump the same amount with 10% less power or my milk vat to cool the milk with 10% less power etc. I guess I could pump less water, grow less grass produce less milk and sack Tom, who is currently able to feed his family from some of the proceeds of my milk cheque. I would have to sack him to remain viable because I can't get any more money for the milk because it has to compete in the same market place as the Americans and many others who don't have to add the carbon tax to the cost of production. It won't matter though, the government will have plenty of carbon tax money to give him. While we are having our cake and eating it, the world will go on doing things like having trade agreements where we send beef to the U.S while they send their beef to Europe and we have to import some Chinese vegies we don't need or they won't buy our iron ore. They aren't worrying about all those ships blowing out heaps of that carbon while Recreational Aviators are sitting at home wondering if they can afford the fuel to fly this weekend. Regards Bill

*How are you going to harvest enough seaweed to make any meaningful contribution? *Yes there are a lot of people misled by the advertising of the biggest spender not unlike those being misled by some of the propaganda the Green movement pumps out. That's where the laziness of humanity comes in. We are too lazy to educate ourselves so we take what people tell us as being gospel. *I think you will find the principals of mass production which make manufacturing so much more efficient, are not nearly as effective in agriculture. i.e it is extremely difficult to double production off a hectare of land and is usually only possible with application of a lot of fertilizer and water. *If you have to mandate something it is usually because it is not an economical proposition. Perhaps they could subsidize the bejezuz out of it instead, like they do with wind farms and solar. *I'm glad you didn't start about recycling because most of it takes more energy to recycle than it saves, makes us feel good though. *We now have a carbon tax because it will raise revenue for the government, no other reason. *The government (the taxpayer) has to pay for the NBN because there is no way the public would pay enough to use it for it to be viable for any business to invest in. Just my 2 cents Regards Bill

After I did my TIF I bought all the books but never went on with the training because I saw how many accidents there where and thought maybe the instructor wasn't quite truthful when he was telling me how safe trikes are. A few years later I saw one for sale that looked cheap, that prompted me to read a little more, that's when I realised that most of the accidents, when you read the report are caused by blatant stupidity, similar to the above. I then went back and did the training and so far have been lucky enough to survive the couple of brain fades I've had. Interesting to read how he managed the ditching and survived though. Regards Bill

Link

You mean like this or this

Airborne price guide

There is a time and a place. You don't see people cheering at the dawn service, that is the time for remembering the fallen, but as the survivors and those representing them are marching past later in the day we should show our gratitude in an enthusiastic manner IMHO. Regards Bill

Or you could put a sidecar on one of your old motorcycles, put your toolbox in it and tour the country doing maintenance on peoples aircraft. I'll be your first customer:wink: Regards Bill

here

These seem to be the most popular. Regards Bill

A bigger issue I see is what the hell are you doing using your sons birthday:celebrate: as an excuse to give yourself a present:bash: Regards Bill

Hi John, How do you recognize min safe flying speed? I guess from watching the ASI There is quite a lot to going on when taking off from a short field and my eyes are always straight ahead, making sure I am still on track and not going past the point previously determined as the abort takeoff if not airborne mark. If when using your technique my attention is distracted from the ASI at the point of reaching takeoff speed making me a bit slow recognizing exactly when to push out that would be a disadvantage I believe. If you have the bar full out rotation happens automatically, giving me one less thing to worry about and getting me off the ground at the earliest possible moment. I see nothing wrong with this given, as Alf said, if efato occurs early your only going to mush back to the ground and anything after that I don't see much difference in either technique. The main thing is getting the bar back to trim immediately after liftoff and maintaining full power. Having said all the above, I did most of my training in the instructors 912 using the full out technique then I purchased a 582 powered trike. The first time out in that we took off as per normal, on returning to trim we didn't climb at all for a second or two. Discussing this with the instructor he suggested I may need to delay pushing the bar out until I had a bit of speed built up, no mention of any particular air speed. The airfield is at 935ft AMSL and the wing is a Pegasus Q2. I don't have this problem at home, (about 72 ft AMSL.) In a previous post you mentioned avoiding the problems associated with the bar out technique. Could you explain what those problems are? Regards Bill

O.K well that's alright then. Just one thing though, if your that old - how old is Guernsey?

Hi Mardy, I was willing to put up with you when you said you where a trike pilot but seriously mate...........gone back to 3 axis........ oh well welcome anyway Regards Bill

Ve have vays of making you talk:compress:

Never worn a watch, not really compatible with farming. For flying I use the one in the middle of my panel. Very reliable, only on it's second battery in four years and you get 'em for next to nothing on e-bay

Hi Bluey, I'm not arguing the point that a wet wing has an increased stall speed, but I can't swallow the bit about holding the bar out on take off being the problem. If the stall speed is increased the wing will not produce enough lift to become airborne until you are traveling faster so that can't be the problem. Two potential recipes for disaster I see, 1) Takeoff distance is increased which obviously could cause trouble if operating from a short field and the second is something I've seen a few times is incorrect inputs after takeoff ie. you must let the bar return to trim immediately you leave mother earth and the second is maintain full power. The nervous pilot is prone to not doing the later because the steep climb that trikes have causes them to s**t their pants so they back off. Most times they get away with it but if the stall speed is increased or they are at a strange airfield that is at a higher elevation than normal or both......... Regards Bill

At 80k for the base model probably not :eek: Regards Bill

It's here

Hmmm must be the Coriolis effect

3.8k was just for the wing, that thing he strapped on his back was another 6.9k :eek: Regards Bill

Yeah I know Alf, I was just using your hypothetical one to try to high light all the other info you need before making such a decision, especially given all the talk of bodgey trikes being offered for sale. I'm goin to bed now:bye:

Hi Rick, What you say is fundamentally correct, the problem is, did the pilot broadcast his intentions prior to take-off, if not who new he was intending to travel that far. There would have been plenty of short duration joy rides/demonstration flights taken that day and if that was what was happening then people would appear a bit foolish rushing to stop the guy or clogging the frequency to try and dissuade him. Regards Bill