Admin

Hi All

I hope to have some great news in the next few days - a new sponsor for our great competition with a prize that will certainly get our competition back going again bigger and stronger then ever before so start getting those pictures and stories together...

Stay Tuned!

As at today:

The 152 with one seat removed as well as the yoke comes in at 610kg - 10kg over

There are currently four Cessna 150's on the RAAus books and they come in at 598kg

If the weights increase to 760kg MTOW the 152 would come in under 760kg.

At the moment Steve at the RAAus office can't log in here for a formal response at the moment but he has asked me to send him an email with your post and he will respond to me to insert here.

As at today:

The 152 with one seat removed as well as the yoke comes in at 610kg - 10kg over

There are currently four Cessna 150's on the RAAus books and they come in at 598kg

If the weights increase to 760kg MTOW the 152 would come in under 760kg.

At the moment Steve at the RAAus office can't log in here for a formal response at the moment but he has asked me to send him an email with your post and he will respond to me to insert here.

Well as it happens I broke my own rules when I accepted an offer from a very nice bloke and went for a fly in a J120 recently.Whatever the case when you review aircraft (or anything else) you will get subjectivity simply because a human is involved.

 

So for example it matters not a jot to my daughter if the seating is cramped because she's small - but I'm not and it does matter to me....

 

Regards

 

Mike

J160 is X and scores 5 points,

Aircraft being reviewed is X + 2" so it scores say 7 points in this area

All this is based on whether "cabin width at hips" is in fact a priority choice as defined by the forum users and if it is a high priority it may be given a multiplier of say 1.2 as well. A lower priority area may be given a multiplier of say 0.8

This is an example of what I mean by a proper scoring system. Naturally there has to be some humanised element but a mixture of both I believe will work well especially if the humaniser is of a high level experienced pilot.

The 160 needs to be the first one to get the benchmark but offcourse before that we need one single person who is willing to volunteer to be the Recreational Flying Chief Aircraft Reviewer to do the reports first - anyone willing to put their hand up??????????

One thing that needs to be included is substantial weather reports for the review flight, a priority numbering system for scoring based on the general consensus of Rec Flying members on what they like/dislike in an aircraft (a score sheet for everyone to comment on will be done soon) and much more - as I said this needs to be done properly and professionally so people can compare more accurately then a person's own personal comments which doesn't reaaly reflect the aircraft to the person reading the review.

Hey Pelorus32, feel like being the aircraft reviewer - you would have to start with a Jabiru ;)

The weekly featured magazine article that will be published tomorrow (Sat morning) is on crosswind landing - it is a very interesting read - look for it at the top of the home page from 9:00am tomorrow (Sat 8/11/08)

Its not an easy one....but reviews of different aircraft. I am sure there is some helpfull people here,(might give you some biased opinions) but they may night like the reviews. Maybe comparing aircraft to a bechmark like a JAB 160, or something....just an idea...

http://www.recreationalflying.com/forum/announcements-notams/3744-forum-job-vacancies-enhancements.html

Each review will be constructed in a way that is like what you say in that all aircraft reviewed will be benchmarked on the J160.

It isn't really a big thing but we just want to do it properly not like the amateurish way it is done elsewhere but more on this later.

Anyone want to help out on doing this?

Found the mag - it was Aust Flying Jan/Feb 2008 edition and contains the story of The Bonanza.

I must have got mixed up as all it says was in referring to the model 35 in 1945 that had the V tail:

"Harmon also adopted the somewhat radical concept of having the third wheel in the nose"

Well the mag was almost a year ago now and my memory is getting older but I am not sure if I have said that before or not.

I can't recall which Beech you might be referring to. Could be the one that developed into the Bonanza. Regards Nev..

From where else but the Clear Prop Shop

I was reading something just recently, forget what it was, but I seem to recall that Beech created the first nose wheel aircraft just at the end of the 2nd world war - not sure on my accuracy though, it may have just been the first "commercially" produced nose wheel aircraft

Rufus, tail draggers ARE more challenging to takeoff/land - notice I didn't say fly ;)

But the same question can be applied to high or low wing - again there are differences in takeoff and landing of high/low wing aircraft due to ground effect.

and just on the side, maybe your choice of words in your first post could have been a little different mate!

I have checked your account Adrian and everything looks ok - not sure but just wondering if it is mac related - I have no way of testing, developing or bug finding for a mac but if running windows and IE or Firefox it should be ok - any other suggestions?

:big_grin: :big_grin:

Not sure if this is true or not but it's funny either way

I think that is the best quote of the decade.

Judge to prostitute : 'So when did you realize you were raped?'

Prostitute, wiping away tears: 'When the cheque bounced.'

We should always let the instructor "instruct" but we also know that:

1. All instructors are different and instruct differently

- all students learn differently so how does the student know if there is a mismatch in teaching/learning styles?

2. There are good instructors and there are bad instructors

- how is the student to know if he is being instructed properly unless they can ask for other opinions in a medium such as we have here

3. If a student takes in 25% of the theory that they are learning then they are going really well

- we can let the instructor instruct but the student will consume much more knowledge if being able to discuss what they are learning in an unforced (as in not the time instant they are being taught) manner and in many different ways with many different people. The only issue with this though is quality that can suffer from diversity but it is hoped that majority would be the self correcting quality enhancer

As a foot note Mike's (Pelorus32) knowledge in aviation theory would put many well learned people to shame, if Mike talks, I listen - now Mike, have I got a job for you...you have seen our new quizzes here....well you see it is like this...

motzartmerv - I will give you a phone call about the rock throwing as soon as I can steal some time

Couple of things if I may Planedriver:

- Firstly, welcome to what has been proven to be the most popular and friendly recreational flying site in Australia...there isn't any "dog eat dog" here!

- You say that you "have all the right gear", please don't lift the right leg...or even the left leg for that matter

- and finally, if you are into tail draggers, ...can you please check for worms!

Yes Bernie, you did make the right decision as the aircraft is now flying with a defect.

We all know that accidents are caused by a group of events or situations and whilst flying without the ability to use the flaps isn't in itself a great problem but add it together with an engine failure mixed with a small landing area, coming in to fast and to high and no flaps to bring that aircraft down safely is a problem. The pilot ends up deceased simply because the flaps were not working - think about it.

You may say well what about a Gazelle that doesn't have flaps in that situation. Then the cause of the pilot losing their life was the engine failure whereas the cause of the first scenario was pilot error for flying an un-airworthy aircraft and thus becomes the subject of a caning in aircraft accident forums

I just want to be able to focus totally on the experience and not be thinking about what the instructor wants

Can you elaborate a bit more on what you mean by what the instructor wants?

G'Day Mate and welcome to the site.

Being in the US you would be better getting it directly from:

Composiclean, LLC

Hope this helps!

and Tony...you will the first person to register here at Recreational Flying those years ago - seems like just yesterday but I would hate to guess how many recreational pilots have been helped by you and everyone else here at this site

I will be there - probably in the Gazelle

Unfortunately Shelley left the Editor's role at Australian Flying and due to time constraints I never got the time to follow up the competition with the new editor about the monthly prize for the competition.

So what would you like me to do to get the competition going again?

Naturally we need a monthly prize so should we go for the 3 free copies of Australian Flying again or is there some other type of realistic prize that I could seek out to have?

as for this forum, well, i believe i might have been the catalyst for its existance!

Would the simple answer be that you become a "student" and no longer flying under your licence/certificate privelidges once you travel further then the allowable distance from your departure that your licence/certificate allows you to and thus, you are not allowed to carry a passenger:

RAAus - 25miles

PPL - 15miles

Your xcountry nav would require you to be flying further from the strip then this so it means that you are training - wouldn't this be correct and a way to look at it?