old man emu

Where is this piece of plane located now?

The Cri-Cri has an MTOW of 170 kg and an empty weight of 78 kg. Only fir for jockeys and Munchkins.

Skippy,

Your best bet is to pop over to Bankstown airport and see Kyle at Aviation Welding.  9790 6481 He should have some off cuts that will suit you and it's all high quality aviation grade stuff.

 You might have to make the doughnut yourself from some sheet.

3 hours ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

No one here is capable of realising that it is the magneto. 😡

Right-O. You've had your joke. You can drop it now.

OK. Let's call quits. I set a scenario without ensuring that it was completely debugged. I'm sorry that no one had the ability to look for the main point, but focused on wind, fuel and trim.

I was going to pose another question on something else, but I can't be bothered to minutely inspect every syllable to ensure that what I write is blatantly obvious.  Maybe I should work backwards. Provide the answer, then ask people what the question is.

46 minutes ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

Thanks for coming.

Made ya think, didn't I?

41 minutes ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

Which is why your "Diagnose This" question was wrong.

Hey! I was backing you up!

2 minutes ago, pmccarthy said:

Am thinking about removing the ADF which I never use, it is heavy.

That's going to involve a re-weigh and amendment to the POH, isn't it.

4 minutes ago, M61A1 said:

Why.....

Because when I posed the question, I didn't want that to be an answer. I wanted it eliminated immediately from the diagnostic process.

15 hours ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

Suppose you are trimmed and flying along. Eventually, your aircraft will become lighter. Does the aircraft maintain the speed it is trimmed for and gain height? 

This is a good, first principle question. However, the discussion could be prevented from wandering, as it already has, if an exemplar aircraft was used. Basically, things depend on the position of the fuel tanks relative to the CofG. If the question was put with that addition, then the simple situation could be explained, leaving the hangar doors open for a second question relating to things Flying Binghi has mentioned.

10 hours ago, red750 said:

Trump as The Buffoon in the White House

It is an impressive list, probably facilitated by his Party's control of the Senate and Congress which earlier Presidents did not have. 

He certainly does care to back pedal if he gets an idea. True, some of his ideas divert from the status quo, but at least he expresses his ideas. I wonder if he really cares what the electorate thinks of him. He's got the reins and is whipping the horses. It is a shame that his management style falls into the Management by Crisis category, and he makes the crises. One could compare him to Hitler, leaving out the blatant racism of Hitler. Both were charismatic, or forcefully projected themselves to the electorate. Both had social agenda, but Hitler had documented his agenda in the early days. If Trump had prepared a long term plan, he might have been more popular.

We focus on his dismantling of Obamacare, and think of it in terms of Australia's Medicare or Britain's NHS, but what we forget is that the Americans have a different mindset when it comes to social security matters. That mindset is that the USA is the land of opportunity, and if you don't strive to make the most of your opportunities, your poor life is your own fault. While the Americans applaud philanthropy at all levels, they don't want to be required to make regular payments from their own pockets to support a social security system similar to ours or many other countries. To them, that smacks of Socialism, or worse, Communism.

The other thing we should look at is the way the opposition media treats him. They are the ones who label him a buffoon, but do they ever report favourably on what good he may have done? 

I still don't like him to be President, mainly due to his erratic outbursts, but he has definitely changed the style of the Presidency. If he loses, he might well be the developer of American Civil War Ver 2.0.

CofG is probably the crux of the matter, as aircraft structures are built to withstand more than 1 G , the size of the G factor depending on the intended use of the aircraft.

However, getting the CofG out of the envelope is the killer, especially if it moves to the rear, creating a tendency for nose-up and subsequent stall. You rarely hear of a CofG being forward of the envelop.

In relation to this discussion, stating CofG positions in terms of Percentage of CofG range is obscure. Any example should be presented in actual values calculated from the relevant data. Perhaps someone might do that for their aircraft and the figures can be used as the example.

WILL YOU STOP GOING ON ABOUT THE WIND!

The high barometric pressure and "winds light and variable" was meant to indicate Nil Wind conditions in order to eliminate that factor from the exercise. If you want to go on about the wind, next time I'll give the angle of the dangle, in radians, caused by the winds blowing high up McTavish's kilt.

2 hours ago, Yenn said:

it had re set itself from 2 pulses per rev to 1 pulse

After checking the earth connection, my next step was going to be to check that it was set to the correct sampling rate.

It is about time officialdom came out of its cloisters and looked at the population. 70 kg is eleven stone in the old measure. I passed through 70 kgs while a hairy-arsed youth. According the Body Mass Index figures someone 178 cms tall (5 ft 10 ins) is healthy if their weight is between 60 and 79 kgs. How many blokes that tall do you know who are that light. I'd say the ones of that height we would now call average are between 90 and 100 kgs.

If we take into account population norms (no, not that Norm) then the default weight for aircraft occupants should be 100 kgs.  For the Sling 2, the total of the amounts given above would be 659 kgs, with the aircraft known to be OK with another 41 kgs on board.

54 minutes ago, Yenn said:

in a coastal area,

I suppose that little bit was a red herring. I was thinking of a flight from Camden to Moruya when I wrote that. Just because I know the airport is right on the beach. Perhaps I should have been thinking of a flight from Camden to Temora or Dubbo when the orographic effects of the coastal escarpment might be less of a factor. 

27 minutes ago, Garfly said:

How'd ya like a crack at the Human Factors exam OME? 

Not possessing the necessary physique to be able to soar with the eagles, I haven't had cause to look at the HF syllabus in detail. However, since HF relating to flying an aircraft is just one application of the same theories and practices that fall under the broad umbrella of safety that also includes workplace and motoring safety, I reckon I could think up a puzzler to test HF application.

Someone got a link to the RAAus HF course?

Thanks for enjoying the exercise.

We lost a lot of pioneers to railway accidents and early motor car race accidents, but the meeja has not made those deaths so sensational as to instil a fear of train travel of motoring in the General Public. Comparatively, the use of motor vehicles has ended more lives in the last 100 years than have both air and train use.

I disagree with the statement, "Many of the early aviation deaths were completely preventable, and were caused by exactly the same reasons why aircraft crash today". How could those early aviators known what they were stepping into. Prevention is a result of experience, and those pilots and designers had not built up the experience. They were crossing the steam by jumping from rock to rock, and calling back to their followers where it was safe to step. The next jump could have landed them on a slippery rock and given them a dunking.

1 hour ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

A trimmed aircraft would have list heigh, not speed.

Theoretically, quite so, but it depends on where the centre of mass of the fuel load is in relation to the CofG of the aircraft, and also the weight loss from fuel burn in 30 minutes at 75% power. 

If one accepts that altitude would have changed, would that negate a search for the reason for the altitude change? Would not discovering a dud magneto be the result of that search?

27 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

you and me and the rest of the interested world both (gramatically incorrect,

Grammar Police:

I believe that, in the light of current usage, this phrase is acceptable, if one concedes that the verb "to agree" in the First Person Plural form is inferred by the context.

32 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

there will be low tax country ownership and other rorts that governments allow

Now there's a point! Where are the Trump companies registered? Cayman Islands?

Participating in the Thread "Diagnose this..." has got me thinking about perceptions of flying.

Go through the many topics in this forum and there is a preponderance of discussion of worst case scenarios. It's as if Man found out how to fly like the birds, and the gods are determined to knock him out of the skies.

Over one hundred years since those fragile first aircraft clattered their way into the air, we are still convinced that every flight is a flight into catastrophe. Aircraft don't fly in response to the Laws of Physics. They remain airborne in defiance of Murphy's Law. At least that is what the popular feeling is.

Look at what those early pilots took into the air. Their engines were low compression, low power assemblies of metals with questionable metallurgical properties. Their fuels were of low quality and carburettion  was a developing art. The materials they built their aircraft from were of random specification, and the effects of aerodynamic loads were poorly understood, if at all.

1910                                                       2010

The novelty of flying was transformed into sensationalism by, once again, an ignorant meeja. Like Ancient Romans at the Colosseum, every public flight was a chance for people to see a hero fall to his death, like Icarus. Did the meeja of the 1920's report on the mundane successful early passenger flights from Cricklewood to Le Bourget? No. They concentrated on the failed pioneering long distant flights.

This concentration on catastrophic failure has remained with us, and forms the basis of our approach to flying. It has hamstrung the development of aircraft as essential components of transport and communication on this continent. It has provided the breeding ground for complex regulation of everything from the ability to obtain permission to learn to fly to the service life of small aircraft components.

Motor cars of the 1920s were not much better in their mechanicals, fuels or construction than the aircraft of their time, but both have been greatly improved over the past 100 years. Who amongst you take a trip in a car and constantly worries about engine failures or structural failures? Your greatest worry is the condition of the nut behind the wheel of the other car.

If aviation is to take its place amongst the efficient modes of transport available to the people, then we who practise it must abandon this mantle of Doom and Gloom in our approach to it, and  fight against the misrepresentation of its safety by the meeja.

18 hours ago, Yenn said:

I know what happened, do you? I will fix it before next flight.

I've tossed and turned over this problem all night. I've created a systematic diagnostic list and carefully used it to diagnose the problem.

The light bulb in the centre lavatory in Economy Class has blown.

On 14/10/2020 at 2:00 PM, old man emu said:

You take off and set for cruise, checking that you have "Carby - Cold; Friction Nut - firm; fuel On and sufficient quantity; oil pressure and temp "in the green"; RPM set to 75% cruise power. The aircraft is trimmed nicely. The needle of the VSI isn't moving away from Zero. The arrow of the ASI points directly at your desired value.  God's in His heaven and all's well with the world.

 

This paragraph has got to be what was misunderstood. I described an initial situation where the aircraft had been set up in cruise configuration and the things that indicated that the set up was correct were checked and found correct - just after take off.

In some of my replies I mentioned that the pilot was flying TIBMIN. My mistake was in using an obscure acronym, (Thumb in bum, mind in neutral) implying that the pilot was carefree and enjoying the flight. So it is possible that the pilot was not being scrupulous in monitoring the instruments. It does happen.

So after a not so long period, the pilot sees where the plane is and finds that it is not where he expected it to be. After eliminating external factors affecting airspeed, the question was meant to turn attention to aircraft systems, and I thought that losing one magneto would be a pretty obscure cause. Homing in on that required a knowledge of aircraft systems. Sure, a lot of people went straight to the ASI, but failed to eliminate it by a logical process. But they stopped there. 

I even said  in response to an very early reply that attributing the cause to an ASI fault was not the answer. Thruster suggested loss of power and I said he was on the right track. Nobody took that up.

I know I have learned a lot from this about how people read and comprehend stuff. I ran what I had written through a style analyser and it concluded that the content would be comprehensible to a Year 6 student. 

1 hour ago, rgmwa said:

What’s the next question?

How much wood

Would a wood chuck chuck

If a wood chuck could chuck wood?

9 minutes ago, M61A1 said:

Check the wind.

OK. Did that. Aircraft is on track. Forecast winds are "light" which means 1 to 2.5 kts. But variable, could mean periods of calm.

5 minutes ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

So, the answer should have been. "Check to see if you are no longer at 75% power, your revs dropped or you are flying slower than normal".

After the pilot sees that the ASI is less than what it was when set up for cruise, looking at the tacho would be the next step. 

Then the question is, "Why are the revs down?" That leads into examination of the fuel/air mixture.

1 hour ago, Blueadventures said:

No mention that I can read about an RPM drop.

No there wasn't

BECAUSE THE FIRST THING THE PILOT NOTED WAS THAT HE WAS LATE ON HIS ETA. 

HAVING NOTED THAT, WHAT WOULD A PILOT DO?