Powerin

Wow! Sums up our economy so well!

I've been a FlightGear user for a few years now and I love it...mainly because Linux is my OS of choice (but it is available for Windows or Mac as well). It is open source, free, and tries to be as realistic as possible. So even though it might be a little rough around the edges, and the scenery is a bit basic (because they use freely available terrain data), bear in mind it is put together by volunteers and anyone can contribute to the development. The whole "open source software" movement is somewhat similar to RAAus (and Recreational Flying of course) in that it is all about community, sharing ideas and helping each other, rather than being something to try and extract as much money as possible from the user. Peter

Simple versus complex design? Wayyy off topic...this comment seems to be a common sentiment in recreational aviation, but I often wonder if it is really correct. In terms of probability of failure, modern, complex, computer controlled car engines are far more reliable than the simple car engines of 50 years ago aren't they? Simpler devices that need maintenance more often (such as solid lifters) introduce extra points of failure such as incorrect maintenance. A simple sleeve bearing with one moving part will fail very quickly if you forget to grease it every day. A tapered wheel bearing with 50 precision moving parts only needs re-greasing once a year or less, but will probably last for several more years if neglected. Is simple design really more reliable? i_dunno Peter

Great footage!! But the first thing I thought of was this guy chewing on gum, pulling 7 G's and passing out. What if the gum ended up in his windpipe while he was napping up there??

Google Earth's inbuilt flight simulator might help too?

Hi All, Here's another weather website to add to your pilot toolbox. It is from, believe it or not, Norway. I have found it reasonably useful and accurate (from a farmers point of view) and imagine pilots would too. It gives 3 or 7 day forecasts for just about any locality in the world. The 3 day is split into three forecasts per day and also has a nice animated hour-by-hour map showing temp, shaded precipitation areas and wind barbs...useful for visualising what the weather might do. Bear in mind these forecasts are probably purely computer generated so don't rely on them too much...but use them in conjunction with your other weather sources. Here's the one for Echuca...but you can get a forecast for any city, suburb, town or location with just a wheat silo! Weather forecast for Echuca in Victoria (Australia), 73 m. ? yr.no Enjoy, Peter

Thanks Capt, I'll keep them in mind when I find some coins to rub together...and convince the significant other ;-)

Down near Henty. Would be very happy to be victimised!

Hi Ahlocks, Ahh...the real answer Just in case I win the lottery or it rains heaps...any recommendations for a good RAAus instructor down here in the Riverina?

Thanks for the welcome Tomo. Yeh... theoretical knowledge is all very well, but translating it into practice is another thing. That's why I value all the practical knowledge you flyers have here and why I asked the questions! One day I hope to be a good pilot because of what I learn here. Cheers, Peter

I think you're right. My take on it is that the net effect of all those things is lift. But for me lift itself is pure Newton's 3rd Law...every action has an equal and opposite reaction. So, if you are flying straight and level in your 500kg aircraft, at any point in time your wings will be causing exactly 500kg of air to be thrown in a downwards direction (which is the end result of the camber, Bernoulli, AoA, etc). If you throw 500kg of mass in one direction you will get 500kg of force in the opposite direction (in this case up). To climb you will need to throw down a bit more than 500kg of air and to descend a bit less. You can vary the amount of air a wing throws down, up to a point, by either changing your speed (using power) or changing your wing's angle of attack (with elevators/trim) or a combination of both. How does that sound? Or am I in danger of starting a religious war here ;) Peter

Hi All, Long time lurker, but here's my first post and I have a few questions for the wonderfully wise pilots here. I am not a pilot but hope to be one day! (if this drought ever ends). So, while I am waiting for that wondrous event to happen, I do a lot reading about flying. Today I was looking in the Articles section here and read the article "Types of Airspeed" in Training & Student Pilots. I was puzzled by the following sentences: "True airspeed is the actual speed of an aircraft with respect to the air through which it flies. This speed is what determines the aerodynamic behaviors of an aircraft such as its Mach number, lift, and drag." From what I've read elsewhere the first sentence seems correct but the second one seems wrong. Isn't it actually IAS (or CAS if you allow for instrument errors) that is important for lift and drag? Isn't IAS a measure of the dynamic pressure of the air against the pitot tube (and therefore the wings etc) and the dynamic pressure is what contributes to lift (or drag)? From my reading I assumed the number on your ASI is what you follow for your takeoffs and approaches because that is what tells you how close you are to stall (and therefore also a rough indicator of Angle of Attack). So if you are landing on a hot day (or high at Mt Hotham), the air is thinner and you will have to be going faster to have the same pressure of air flowing over your wings generating the same lift. And even though you are going faster through the air, the indicated airspeed will be quite a bit lower. True airspeed would only be useful for calculating groundspeed and navigation. Is that correct? Is the article wrong? I guess when I learn to fly all will become clear. But there seems to be a lot of different opinions and confusing info out there. While I was reading the above article I was watching the doco on TV about the C5 transport plane. They used the same old myth we learned in school to explain lift....the shape of the wing causes low pressure above and high pressure below (ie. Bernoulli's principle). It took me a long time and a lot of reading to come to grips with the concept of AoA being responsible for lift rather than the shape of the wing! Cheers, Peter