Jump to content

Garfly

First Class Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,141

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Garfly

  1. Garfly
    Another instructor agrees:
  2. Garfly
    I was interested to read that RAAus was positioning itself as the masters of Mosaic in Oz (Australian Flying Mag article in the OP) They're definitely going for the top end of town. Anyway, I'm pretty impressed by the pluck and audacity of Mr Gogetair. He surely wouldn't risk the turbine project if he wasn't an incurable aviation addict. After all, he was doing fine with Rotax for his G750 aircraft. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzO62xyjepg
  3. Garfly
    Yes, different ... however, the idea of trying out turbines in recreational aircraft has been a recurring topic over the years. I'm a bit fascinated that folks are still determined to give it a go despite the many obstacles. As red750 posted recently, even the Wilson Explorer II homebuilt from 25 years ago flirted with PT6 power.
  4. Garfly
    That's exactly what I mean.
  5. Garfly
    Who is the "you" you're addressing here? This "you", for one, WANTS or needs neither WARBIRDS nor TURBINES; just happens to be interested in most things aviation. No need to go aggressive.
  6. Garfly
    Might even become RAAus ready one day. RAAus to go the Full MOSAIC - Australian Flying WWW.AUSTRALIANFLYING.COM.AU RAAus is aiming to be allowed to administer aircraft that comply fully with the new MOSAIC regulations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzO62xyjepg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7My16WEnaPY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yS9K1QO2Ekg
  7. Garfly
    Yes, I think everyone agrees that the SE2/ADSB should be always on ... I'd say it can even have uses in the circuit (for reasons like the ones given by Neil, above).
  8. Garfly
    Ah, okay, so that's what you meant?! Yes, it probably could have/should have been attached to the original post. (Maybe still can be?) On the other hand there might be some value in starting the discussion over since so much of the early info was wrong.
  9. Garfly
    Yes, fair enough Neil, I cited the original video so that the presenters would speak for themselves and listener-readers interpret likewise. [Ref. the minute 1:01:45 to 1:02:45 in this RAAus video from last year: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuW5yzC-j5M&t=3724s ] Anyway that difference of approach on the issue between some of us and the RAAus published position goes back a ways:
  10. Garfly
    Yeah, you won't be contradicted on that, preliminary means preliminary. BTW, 'someone just plugged this prelim report here' following the ATSB's making it and 'plugging it into' the World Wide Web, presumably so that all concerned might benefit from what's been established so far (as opposed to some of what's been bandied about so far). Your problem with the 'plugging' is?
  11. Garfly
    Yeah, I agree! For what it's worth, I don't hold to the official RAAus line - that is, generally to diss ADSB-IN devices. They seem very determined to stick to the "See and Avoid" doctrine (that's how I read that minute of their video [above].) But do you accept that the Jab would not/could not have electronically "seen" the Cessna's (non-ADSB) transponder (even if he hadn't been looking outside)? That's the only point of difference, I think.
  12. Garfly
    By the way, for what it's worth, even if the Cessna did have ADSB-OUT, it'd have been against official RAAus advice to use an SE2/iPad in the circuit, anyway. [The ATSB, on the other hand, seems keen for electronic conspicuity to be used to the fullest; way more trustworthy than our lyin' eyes.] Ref. the minute 1:01:45 to 1:02:45 in this RAAus video from last year: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuW5yzC-j5M&t=3724s
  13. Garfly
    Skippy, I think that is one of issues being argued. ADSB-IN devices, like the SE2, can't "see" old style transponders. In any case, for what it's worth, the ATSB report says that on-board video shows the Jab pilot looking outside on downwind, just prior to impact.
  14. Garfly
    He did!! (To fly another day ;- ) CLICK FOR FULL REZ.
  15. Garfly
  16. Garfly
    Rokket, in practice, the aircraft ID part of VHF comms doesn't take up that much airtime. In talking to ATC, it's the reading back of all crucial bits of clearances/ instructions that takes time. And in the case of CTAF (pilot to pilot) chat, it's trying to clarify position and intentions - generally self separating - that fills up the frequency. And actually, in CTAFs, I reckon it can be useful for the ID to be said again at the end, along with the location. (It can obviate a heap of "Say again call sign" type calls.) Also, at ATC's discretion, call signs can be shortened to handles that take a second to say. For example, in this short vid, soon after "Sportstar 9696" has established contact with Tamworth tower his call sign is cut to "ninety-six, ninety-six". But yeah it's a long-in-the-tooth, legacy system which will, I reckon, be overhauled by new ways and means before it's seen as practical to reform it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXukpQlRhnM&t=31s
  17. Garfly
  18. Garfly
    Have we at least made peace with GPS technology yet; you know, the GOTO BUTTON RATING (wink, nudge) of the 1990's.
  19. Garfly
    Ha, ha ... it's Thruster we have to feel for. I only took the shots of his fields that'd sprung a leak.
  20. Garfly
    I was lucky enough to fly with the Thruster in his Trusty Thruster a week back, and was able to see for myself the rain damage that had just occurred half way through harvesting. So yes, he was telling me that about half of his crop will be "shot and sprung". Meaning (I now know) that the grain, having germinated in the head, is only good for animal feed. But being born to the land (as well as the air! ;- ) Mr. Thruster was pretty philosophical about his losses. The man, the machine, the soggy fields: [Click for Full Rez] Here is the homestead, looking South ... the green header stopped in its tracks, mid-head! Looking West and showing some of the uncut fields in the upper left Overhead some of the uncut "shot and sprung" crop looking back East.
  21. Garfly
    But the love of flying-for-fun makes Bristell and Bantam owners alike, a band-of-brothers and sisters. ;- )
  22. Garfly
    A FLYING mag article revives the topic of small wakes with big effect. https:https://www.flyingmag.com/i-l-a-f-f-t/the-wake-invisible-gremlin-grabs-your-attention///www.flyingmag.com/i-l-a-f-f-t/the-wake-invisible-gremlin-grabs-your-attention/ hthttps://www.flyingmag.com/i-l-a-f-f-t/the-wake-invisible-gremlin-grabs-your-attention/tps://www.flyingmag.com/i-l-a-f-f-t/the-wake-invisible-gremlin-grabs-your-attention/
  23. Garfly
    Here's the short version, then. Which I, for one, wouldn't have deemed credible had the passionate guy in the long version not done research and produced receipts. (You're welcome ;- )
  24. Garfly
    Yes, apparently. Improving sustainability by enhanced engine component lifetime through friction modifier additives in fuels - ScienceDirect WWW.SCIENCEDIRECT.COM Engine test rig runs with a standard and a friction modifier containing premium fuel using an artificially altered close to end-of-life oil were... "All 3 independent methods for wear measurement confirmed that the premium fuel containing friction modifier results in an overall superior wear protection compared to standard fuel. Mass spectrometry of oil aliquots from the engine test rig runs showed an accumulation of friction modifier in the end-of-life engine oil, which explains the better tribological characteristics observed in this case. Accordingly, application of friction modifier in fuels can lead to increased oil change intervals since the wear protection is acceptable even in case of an end-of-life oil condition and potentially improved engine component lifetime. Both factors offer economic and environmental benefits."
  25. Garfly
    This guy makes the point that there can be more to premium fuels than octane ratings. He reckons that premium additives like friction-modifiers can make a big difference to engine wear. (with Octane ratings measured differently in the US, their label numbers don't line up with ours)
×
×
  • Create New...