Jump to content

djpacro

Members
  • Posts

    2,969
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Everything posted by djpacro

  1. Some traffic showing on Webtraks. I’m away at the moment but my guess is the wind per BOM observations stopped many. The temperature is not pleasant so some may have cancelled for that reason. Most of the airplanes there were certified to CAR 3 or FAR 23. No specific temperature limit in the POH/AFM even though performance charts may stop at 40 deg C.
  2. The principle is that there is no safe height to be demonstrating spins, including incipient spins, in a type not approved for intentional spins. From FAA AC 61-67.
  3. That’s the problem with Australian rules for LSA, you need the manufacturer’s approval for any modifications. Whereas, PMA parts and TSO’d items are available for FAR 23 types.
  4. Indeed. Some flight schools do that. How about more focus on prevention? Look at the altitude in most of the reported accidents. Many such raaus types are certified and suitable for spinning and aerobatics. LSA and ELA etc in other countries.
  5. "These Planes" I've never flown a 210 but I have done spins in many types. Some are reluctant to spin for normal practice spins but I usually manage to shock instructor trainees with an entry from a skidded turn with some power on. NASA did extensive spin tests on a 172 - with the CG further aft than its utitility category limit and readily enters a spin, move the CG further back (but within the normal category limits) and it will become unrecoverable. Certainbly agree with Nev on the parlous state of spin training in this country but probably not relevant here - more important is spin prevention. I see some flight schools train for the test and largely ignore the stall situations which won't be tested. From the book, Stall/Spin Awareness, by Rich Stowell: "“In the early 1970s …. a couple of flight instructors reported difficulty in recovering from spins. A representative from the FAA subsequently flew many different 150s with Cessna test pilots. No problems were found with the airplanes. The FAA representative then went into the field to address questions about the 150’s spin characteristics. The representative was met with considerable misunderstanding about spins in general and the Cessna 150 in particular. ….. The instructors responsible for launching this investigation apparently did not know the effect of aileron inputs during spins. Nor did they understand the importance of proper recovery control sequencing. Recognizing this problem, the FAA published an eight-page Flight Instructor Bulletin devoted to spinning. The FAA also sponsored a prototype stall/spin clinic and Cessna published a supplementary pamphlet … “ We are in a similar situation again now.
  6. They work well. Under the aileron and on the rudder in these photos. Extract of a magazine article by Darrol Stinton.
  7. Spruce here specifies brass. https://www.aircraftspruce.com.au/catalog/appages/safaircav110.php?clickkey=4324
  8. I've had the same problem with new drain valves. Take them out and clean them - dirt or a burr is enough to open them enough to leak. Have a friend with you to stick their finger in the hole or have a plug (perhaps an old valve) ready to screw in.
  9. Some of the American kids were in our class at school. I knew a lot at Laverton over the years, including some RAAF display pilots back then eg the guy who did the roll after takeoff in the Canberra at a Laverton airshow. A day or two later an American pilot tried it in a B-57 but tragically failed.
  10. I wouldn't use it enough to warrant Garmin Pilot. My Aera is very easy to read up there. Mine came with maps and I've never bothered to get updates,
  11. I've had an Aera 500 in my airplane (it was there when I bought it). I use only use the HSI display because it is easily visible high on the panel. Otherwise I don't need it as I have a TSO'd GPS and I use an iPad with AvPlan if I go anywhere. Mine is panel mounted.
  12. This indicates that it will but it will cost you https://www8.garmin.com/manuals/webhelp/GUID-49EC93CF-DA3F-4514-817F-4098FC4A71AE/EN-US/GUID-621EAB08-32EF-4F23-8987-704A7ABC3E03.html
  13. I've had a Garmin D2 Aviator watch for 6 years and just upgraded to a D2™ Air X15 https://www.garmin.com/en-AU/p/1957609/ Marvellous! Real aviation flight plannikng &U navigation, METAR & TAF. I've added the Windy App to get my usual forecasts plus weather radar. Over 10 days of battery life.
  14. A slip is inherently spin resistant. Unlike a skid.
  15. They looked very swish. The new Junkers nearby looked interesting.
  16. You can probably get it locally - if not in stock it won;t take long. https://www.aircraftspruce.com.au/catalog/eppages/bb700-1_oilfilteradapterkit.php
  17. This video stated that the Extra's flight was unrelated to the competition however elsewhere someone stated that the pilot was a competitor. ADSB track of the Extra's track is consistent with it not being a competition flight. With the competition aerobatic box not being active then the aerobatic club's ground radio operator would also probably not be active. That video reported Metropolitan State University stated those involved were not students. It may have been an aborted competition flight and above comments may not be correct. We will see a full investigation and report from the NTSB. From the International Aerobatic Club: "We are grieved to report that IAC Competitor Kristen Morris passed away in the accident. IAC Competitor David Shangraw is hospitalized but expected to recover. Both occupants of the Cessna survived with minor injuries."
  18. Two with minor injuries from the 172. The Extra was consumed by fire. That video might've had some different comments if he had referenced FAA AC 90-66 Non-Towered Airport Flight Operations more so than the Airplane Flying Handbook. It was an aerobatic contest so overflying at "well above circuit height (min +500ft)" would directly conflict with aerobatic aircraft. The aerobatic club should've had someone on the ground with a radio to alert anyone to a traffic conflict.
  19. That's what I would expect. However prior to the correction of crew moment arm the factory manual showed 2 people on board at 90 kg each being OK - without that forward ballast I would expect a quite different behaviour. To illustrate:
  20. That too. Yes, but the wrong crew moment arm was in the manual so the pilots did not know their CG was further back.
  21. You probably missed the saga prior to your 5 years with it? Much happened after that. I was following it all but I'm sure I don't know the whole story. Some years ago, one of my friends sought a dual flight in a Bristell at a flight school. He was told they didn’t do stalls in them! A year or so later a CASA examiner told me that pilots were presenting themselves for flight tests in Bristells and refusing to stall them for the test. Why was that? I spoke to some Bristell flight instructors. In 2020, CASA issued a safety notice for flight schools operating Bristells which “prohibited from conducting an intentional stall of the aircraft, or from performing any flight training activities that could reasonably lead to an unintended stall …” CASA then “sought confirmation from the manufacturer as to compliance with the ASTM LSA standards and, in particular, spin compliance flight testing. At the present time, CASA has not received sufficient assurance as to the extent of such testing, including testing covering each design variant.” It seemed to me that BRM had shown compliance with the spin requirements (I reviewed the reports) but CASA was stuck on the thought that it must not comply because of the spin accidents but unable to identify any specific issues with the test reports. Then we got some independent flight tests of an in-service aeroplane with questions as to the conformity of the particular aeroplane and conduct of the tests. All a little murky as to who authorised these tests. Certainly not CASA. I did a W&B calculation from the data in the manual. Two people at 90 kg each right on the aft limit. Then there was another airworthiness alert! The crew moment arm in the manual was incorrect. W&B section of the manual was rewritten to make comparisons difficult. The same two 90 kg people now put the CG way way behind the aft limit! Aeroplanes were reweighed and ballast added firewall forward to move the empty CG forward. Moving the CG forward has a beneficial effect on handling characteristics, especially stalling and spinning. All the issues seemed to disappear overnight. No more said that I am aware of. The whole saga certainly showed the incompetence of some at the factory, RAA and CASA. Some at the regulatory authority especially were out of their depth.
  22. Australia's rules for LSA are unique to Australia. Europe is different. USA even more. https://www.australianflying.com.au/recreational/raaus-to-go-the-full-mosaic good to be optimistic but .....
  23. Nice aeroplane. I met John Isaacs and saw the prototype when I was in the UK back then.
  24. My friend, John Biggs, built his in the '70s. I visited the Taylor family in the UK back then.
  25. Easily resolved, just ask CASA https://www.casa.gov.au/about-us/contact-us
×
×
  • Create New...