Ada Elle

According to the CEO, if you called yourself Professor Avius, they would assume that you were male because they assume all pilots are male. RAAus: run by men for men.

The website assumes that everyone who isn't a Miss, Ms, or Mrs, is male. but, what do you expect from an organisation that thinks that women aren't actually interested in aviation.

It's not an opinion, it's (unreferenced) data. The plural of anecdote is not data, but in this case the data apparently exists. This very case illustrates that some pilots will want to fly the plane to the site of the crash rather than pulling the chute.

Hitting a bit of cumulus granitus in a spin is likely to cause breakup.

Do you remember Mercedes and the moose test, where it would roll over when swerving at high speed? putting in airbags to pass the moose test would be fine by me, unlikely to ever see a moose, but grateful for extra airbags in case I ever get hit by a truck.

Oh my. I now have dreams of a RV9 (not 9A) with a 915. If only the USD wasn't so strong...

I've been cleared for HS2 after requesting HS1. I'm told that it depends on the runways in use at YSSY at the time.

Basic conversions: 1m/s = 2 kt = 200fpm. What sort of gyros do the uncertified AHRS systems use? Casual googling suggests that they're rate gyros which are integrated and EKFed to get rid of drift etc.... how well would they work in an unusual attitude situation?

What happens when the gyros feeding the autopilot tumble?

you can request an exit onto V1 from HS1; it means you don't have to go all the way back to longreef, instead you go to manly and head south.

not that long way around - up the lane to hornsby, turn for the coast, ask for clearance, then south, turn west at stanwell park. pretty pleasant trip from camden.

That is when I would pull the chute, yes - but an instrument rated pilot *might* think that they can recover from unusual attitudes in cloud. I don't see how you could possibly justify not pulling the chute once you're at Vne+50%, though. The part attached to the chute is a kevlar cockpit frame.

This is the point where I wouldn't have tried to recover, but would have pulled the chute instead. You've flown 50% past Vne. You can't trust any part of the airframe to still be there.

The wings on that plane are removable, so the BRS cannot be attached to them. The real question is, why did they not activate the BRS when the ASI hit Vne+20%? You know you're in trouble at that point, you know that you might hit some cumulus granitus at any time... pull the chute before the wings come off! Also, that report doesn't say if the dive brakes were activated. (When I flew a Pipistrel with a chute into the oaks a couple of months back I initiated the discussion of: when inadvertently IMC, when do you pull the chute? My answer was: immediately once you are below LSALT or above Vne.)

Well, no - if the MTOW limitation was not structural, then they could have tested/certificated to greater than +3.8/-1.9. You don't actually know what the limitation on MTOW is. I'm now very confused about the Jabiru speeds. Vs1 is 53KCAS; Va is 102KIAS (or 97-98 KCAS according to Jabiru's tables). They mention that stall speed is reduced with aft CoG (supporting Oscar's statement about elevator authority) but not by how much. 97KCAS/sqrt(3.8) is 50KCAS, which sounds pretty reasonable for Vs at full aft CoG. However, I thought that the reason that Va is related to Vs is so that the aircraft will stall before it breaks. If Vs is not an aerodynamic stall speed in this instance, does this calculation for Va still apply? Also, we had the discussion that higher weight == higher stall speed == more chance of stall/spin on turn final == less safety.