APenNameAndThatA

I just sent RAAus some feedback about their magazine. “In case I ever meet Steve at a dinner, please let him know in advance that he can [redacted for here] right off already.” Maybe Im in a bad mood. 

The article by the flying instructor was really rude. Remind me not to talk to him lest I be judged and written about. His fellow diners  probably stopped talking to him when he got defensive because, shock horror, he didn’t know what wine to order. 

On 31/08/2021 at 1:01 PM, Yenn said:

Surely this is not the place for this subject. It has nothing to do with our flying. How could the RAF or anyone else attack the Gestapo. They were the more or less brutal police and part of the German army. It is rather like expecting an attack on the catering corps.

Im fine with it. Get them to revive the off-topic section. 

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

Eugenics was at the core of the Nazi creed and went hand in glove with racism & anti-Semitism.

Pre WW2 this was a World wide movement. Even the Pope was a sympathiser.

This goes some way to explain the reluctance of the political/ruling classes of the Western World to "move" against the Nazi state. 

Even after war was declared and the existence of concentration/death camps, slave labour and genocide well known by the "upper echelons" little was done to hinder these activates.

How much did they know before the Americans arrived? And what could they do? Apparently some Jewish people in America knew there was a problem but did not want to cry wolf. What could the Allies have done? Changed their mind and decide to win the war? 

On 30/08/2021 at 8:38 PM, Bruce Tuncks said:

I have just read a book called "the gestapo hunters" and it was partly about a raid to save several french resistance from a gestapo firing squad. I got the impression that the top brass even in the RAF sort of liked the gestapo and had to be dragged into attacking them.

This was further reinforced by the story of the Belgian who tried for years to convince the brass of an attack and ended up doing an unauthorised one by himself.

I would really like to be convinced I am wrong about this. But I've got the idea that attacking the gestapo was something the workers liked but the rulers didn't agree.

 

 

One book = no books. Behaviour is determined by lots of different factors too determined, too. And, organisations are made  up of lots of different people. 

With cars becoming more and more fly-by-wire, producing RHD and LHD cars might actually eventually become cheaper. 

On 27/08/2021 at 9:10 AM, kgwilson said:

A few years ago coming back to my home aerodrome I made a 10 mile inbound, then an overhead joining call & heard nothing else. If there is no-one else around that's my last call. I like fairly tight circuits & turn base at about 1000 fpm down. Then I spotted a C172 on final in front of me. I made a call & went full power but forgot to push carb heat off & for a second or 2 was a bit confused at the lack of power. That sorted I watched the landing and turnaround & then he stopped half way along the runway. I made a call on every leg and eventually asked what the !*!* he was doing as I had to go around again.

 

Later at the clubhouse after an initial terse chat I found out he heard nothing and made inbound and downwind calls & his other radio was on area frequency. After testing the radio on CTAF we found it wasn't working at all. He knew radio 2 was working at least receiving as he'd heard other broadcasts. A simple solution would have been to have both radios on CTAF once in the 10 mile radius area. Also testing both radios would have been a good idea. That said I have had radio failures so there is no silver bullet. Keeping a good lookout especially in the circuit is essential and only supplemented with radios and ADSB.

I’m at a controlled aerodrome ATM. When I’m not, I will need to add “radio check” to my checklist. If truckies can do it then I can too. My bet is that radio check is not on everybody’s list. 

On 27/08/2021 at 10:22 AM, Garfly said:

Generally, at uncontrolled airports, it's all too obvious that way too much of a pilot's attention gets soaked up with (mostly) baseless separation anxiety. Meanwhile, the merest glance at a functioning traffic alert screen can show there's no conflict to worry about.

 

As we've come to learn from playing around with EFB traffic, targets display their vertical distance from you as, plus or minus, hundreds of feet.  So a nearby Qantas target at +350 will probably not be a worry (Flight Levels can also be filtered) but, on the other hand, that converging Q-Link showing -009, reducing, could be a biggie. Mind you, if you have ADSB-OUT, that departing RPT (assuming radio probs) should already be alerted to your presence (esp. with newer generation TCAS/fish-finder gear) 

 

Anyway, any close, converging target with two leading zeros, for me, means  "Oh-oh ..." 

 

Obviously, if we're in the circuit together, even three zeros is just fine ( Oooh ...) just as long as all the ducks are otherwise lined up as they should be.

 

It can be instructive to listen in on a handheld at a busy airfield whilst watching the action on an iPad. Nowadays, with EFB traffic plus ADSB-IN, you sometimes get to see, as well as hear, all the players involved. In such a situation you can ache to intervene (but don't dare) in some long and complicated back and forth between aircraft who are - all too plainly to you -  long ago and far away vis-a-vis each other.

 

So when most of us finally come to accept this new tool and learn to apply it in our sector, it's not only the occasional, if disastrous, mid-air we'd avert but on each and every flight we can wander the skies a bit more relaxed, or at least, be freed up to worry more about aviating and less about communicating.

 

Or ... would we prefer Airservices Australia's big and brilliant Class E solution to the problem? 

 

Yes, the sky really is falling in!!!

 

 

 

 

 

I don’t understand how you can be sure that all the traffic will turn up on your iPad. I thought OzRunways just reported OzRunways planes and vice versa for the other mob? I have a transponder but don’t understand them. 

They have a Youtube channel, 24 subscribers, and no videos. 

17 hours ago, facthunter said:

He wouldn't be alone. It takes a bit to get to grips with. It's anti intuative. Nev

I still don't understand it. The wheels drive the propeller. The wheels are pushed by the body of the car... which is pushed by the propeller. 

1 hour ago, Flightrite said:

Just found this, a good watch:-) I loved that this so called educated boffin got called out....that's the best part:-):-)

Yeah. He couldn't stop himself being a bit sarcastic when he was saying that it could not be done. 

On 05/07/2021 at 6:59 AM, IBob said:

The foiling sailboat performances are certainly outrageous. Having said that, the dynamics, or mechanics, or physics, or whatever we should call it......of the foiling sailboat speeds are a completely different thing than what is going on with this downwind land-yacht.

None of the foiling sailboats, regardless of how refined, will go directly downwind at or faster than the wind speed.

Yeah. I thought that I understood it because boats can sail faster than the wind. Then I realised that I still didn't understand it. IIRC, the wheels drive the propeller, FFS. 

On 10/05/2021 at 1:06 PM, F10 said:

Really really don’t want to be political, but I will never agree with your view on Israel. They have faced more of a threat and onslaught than any country on earth, not to mention the slaughter of 6 million countrymen in the last war. They have an undeniable right to exist. It is others, not they, who pick a fight with them, in my view.

What’s your view about the occupied territories? 

This video illustrated why it annoys me that the first thing that pilots are taught is that if you pull back on the stick, the aircraft climbs. The things people learn first tend to stick. 

On 03/08/2021 at 8:54 AM, Kyle Communications said:

Steve

 

It certainly did...It made me very gunshy. I was a low time pilot then and it is indeliby imprinted into my brain. I am so aware of it now when winds are more than about 15kts.

 

We dont really have too much of a issue for DA where I fly but even a small altitude can make a difference in your aircrafts perfomance. I picked up a mate from a airfield west of here to go to a breakfast and it is about 2000ft AMSL so nothing you would usually worry about. But when we finally got back there to drop him off the temperature of the day had gone from about 20degC when I picked him up to about 40degC when I was landing back at his airfield....I had my aircraft drop from about 1mtr above the runway...it was an arrival...not a landing. The extra weight of the pax and the extra fuel I had on board I was probably at about 560kg. The aircraft performance was drasticaly degraded. It sort of shocked me a bit because we never usually see that as most places I fly are around sea level. So I can imagine the huge differences when these guys overseas are landing at 7 and 10 thousand feet. 

 

 

That sounds like turbulence off the black runway and nothing to do with DA.  

2 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

I will stand by my comment.

Richer mixture, less friction, cooler oil, better air ducting in AND out. Worked for me. Theoretically, heat lost from oil cooling can contribute to thrust. 

1 hour ago, Paul davenport said:

No Flightrite I am not angry, but I am disappointed that so often these discussions deteriorate from what was a reasonable question to just plain waffle about anything . The question was ,I thought plain enough and I would have thought those with FIRST HAND information would have either told me yes it is possible this is what I did ,OR no this is what we have and it’s not possible under the current rules. I thank those of you that did enter the conversation in the spirit it was intended and ask those of you that didn’t to consider the worth of what you said in light of the original question. We seem to be discussing DOGS now so as far as I am concerned this topic is now closed 

To be honest, I have actually got my J230 to run faster and cooler. 

55 minutes ago, Paul davenport said:

No Flightrite I am not angry, but I am disappointed that so often these discussions deteriorate from what was a reasonable question to just plain waffle about anything . The question was ,I thought plain enough and I would have thought those with FIRST HAND information would have either told me yes it is possible this is what I did ,OR no this is what we have and it’s not possible under the current rules. I thank those of you that did enter the conversation in the spirit it was intended and ask those of you that didn’t to consider the worth of what you said in light of the original question. We seem to be discussing DOGS now so as far as I am concerned this topic is now closed 

OME have you appropriated *another* account? 😧

On 12/06/2021 at 1:42 PM, Paul davenport said:

All good information and I take your point about attention to detail and your Cummins referral but I caution you about wandering away from my initial question and remind you I asked about Jabiru and nothing else and would ask you keep to ONLY Jabiru

😆

On 19/05/2021 at 11:12 PM, Paul davenport said:

So I take it none of you have actually tried any of this on a JABIRU. Engine and at best it’s speculation . My initial question stands what can be done to tweak without modifying to make it more efficient and possibly gain some free hp 

Do you want your money back? 

58 minutes ago, KRviator said:

I figured this'd be the best place to put my updated nav log for anyone that's interested. I'd originally done this up as a static Excel page that required external calculations, but have since updated it to do the calculations for me, as well as adding things like W&B and a few automated warnings and such that can utilise the additional inputs.

 

The basic idea is you plan on the left, fly from the right, and there should be no red boxes when you print it out. If you've done that, in theory, you'll have enough fuel to fly the plan, you won't be outside the CG or MTOW limits and you'll (hopefully), not get lost by screwing up the wind correction angle or introducing some other manual error. Orange boxes are used for inputs and the only spots that should be altered, grey for automatic calculations, whitespace (ETA/REV/Notes) for handwriting.

 

This form is customised for my RV-9A, but the limits can be changed to suit almost any aircraft by updating the various values used in the W&B or fuel calculations. By the same token, CG is shown as an arm location, but could easily be shown as a percentage of available, to give an at-a-glance indication as to whether you're forward or aft of neutral so you can set the trim accordingly. I may well end up changing it for that reason...

Here's a typical long-rage flight, two people, a bit of baggage and full fuel. The TOW & ZFW CG's are in limits, as is the MTOW, so they're all green. The CRZ END box up the top right shows how many minutes you have until you hit your fixed reserve on landing. Climb, cruise for 248 minutes, descend and land, and you should have your FR (only) left in the tanks. Fuel flow for all these calculations is hard-coded to 25LPH, typically what I get but you could introduce a variable if you wanted low-speed or high-speed cruise or something in between if you're really keen. Same for CLB/DES fuel. That's hard coded at 10.5L, which is what I've demonstrated I use to climb to 8,500 and descend from 8,500 - but that can be changed if you're keen.

 

I've uploaded the Excel file here too, but as always with everything I put out there, verify it works for you before you try to fly with it - if you get lost, run out of fuel and crash and die, that's on you! 😝 

If anyone want's help tweaking it to suit your CG/plane/fuel flow, let me know and I'll do what I can.

 

Here's an example with a ridiculous loading and insufficient fuel. The MTOW box is red, as it's above 1,800Lbs and it's also thrown a warning in notes box - as have/is the TOWCG & ZFWCG's as well as an Insufficient Fuel warning. The total fuel box is also bright red to draw attention to the fuel being less than required. In both this instance, and the one above, the Margin boxes are red, as the fuel margin, that is, fuel above what is required, is less than 30mins. They will turn yellow for a 30-60 minute margin, and green above 60 minutes. This is a "feel good" feature, nothing more, but is meant to draw attention to the fact you're getting close to using all your available fuel and should keep an eye on things.

And here's a more normal example. 2 POB, a bit of baggage, full fuel and a couple of hours airborne with a healthy 80 minute margin to the fixed reserve. Everything's green, no red & no warnings, nothing to worry about.

NavLog.xlsx 33.04 kB · 0 downloads

So you did the trigonometry for the wind? Wow. 

11 hours ago, onetrack said:

That's pretty thoughtless, but people with lots of money usually think they can do what they like, when they like.

 

The greatest single problem here is that what would be a sizeable fine to an average person, is only small change to people like this.

He might have to hire a pilot for a while. 

13 hours ago, Blueadventures said:

Yes, to do a blue line.

I thought the Nynja was single engined?

10 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

Human nature is truly amazing - As sure as night follows day a public servant (of some description) will see a good thing and want to tax it (rip it off) to the hilt, often killing the goose in the process.

These days the modus operandi is to "license" a contracted/operator  (usually a mate of the aforementioned public servant) to have exclusive "rights" to something (camping in this instance) that includes preventing anyone else from,  having a bit of a kip under the wing of their aircraft.

Nature is wonderful in its predictability.

Which Skippydiesel is this? 

4 hours ago, RFguy said:

Flew up to Narromine yesterday, ex YCWR in my J230D 24-7597. Visual.

Never landed there before. flight planned it all on paper and wizz wheel, should land with 97 minutes in the tank at the end.. 

 

Departed YCWR with my mate Tony    on board. He was suprised (very) how well the jab got off the ground (1032 hPa, 10C) (966 feet >> 6 feet on density altitude)  1200++ fpm ha ha ha.

headed WEST  to Grenfell for a look around, then turned north for Narromine  . bit of turb, NE blowing 25 kts (45deg off the nose) @ 6500' , couldnt escape it. 

 

Not much of a Nav exercise since any idiot can fly up the Newell Highway at 6500' 🙂 . did some wizz wheel exercises en route with the wind. even though the garmin was telling me...

 

A couple of planes on the runways, nice landing, plenty of good tiedown points (10 kts, 080 deg) ,  bit of action in the clubhouse..

Nice clubhouse ! Walked into town....sleeping sunday arvo..Good steak sandwich with the lot. good coffee (ordered double shot- cannot RISK a weak coffee) .

off we went after a bit of a chat with the locals.  now, easterly blowing, cross wind. no probs, nothign 4 deg subtracted from my track wont fix.  again, the Newell highway underneath, how hard can this be ?

 

initial at 5500, climbed up to 7500, dodging clouds. (FEW). OAT6. Jab performance at 5-10% better (lower) fuel flow for same TAS  up here. hmmm. slightly more RPM .   

 

We come down to 5500 over parkes, , the cloud is thickening up BKN  as we get south , dont think I want to get stuck ON TOP !!!! 🙂

 

chat with ATC deconflicting with learners coming out of Cowra...... then hear a PAN PAN on the radio, some unfortunate Cirrus with engine trouble heads home and safely gets it onto a strip.... 

 

uneventful everything, enjoyable. first long ish flight as PIC in my Jab. 

 

 

 

 

Did you manage to calculate winds aloft while in flight? If so, well done.