turboplanner

I hear the Mazda rotaries can be heavy on fuel, oil and apex seals, but also that they're about 1/3rd lighter than equivalent engines and very smooth running. Anyone heard of an aero conversion?

You could spin the wheels passing someone at 160 km/hr, and cruise around 200 km/hr; once came from Albury to Melbourne sitting on 209 km/hr.

The downside was that power under 4000 rpm was about the same as a 1 litre engine so you had to continually change down and that chewed up the fuel.

The apex seals were fine, but the O ring seals on the side sometimes burnt out on a long cruise into a strong head wind which required maximum power demand from 90 km/hr up. In high power applications the combustion chamber flame licks down the cracks until it found the silicon seal. I became an expert it pulling the engine out and replacing the 6 or so O rings - no steel wear so fully repeatable, but time consuming and I was using it for work, so had to sell it.

If you look at the constant rpm/high power demand of a boat or aircraft engine it fits into the over 4000 rpm, high combustion chamber flame category.

.....talk to Ratso who dribbled on his weet bix, dribbled in the bath and dribbled on the floor and then he .................

I've read the Constitution Maj and that's why I asked, with two people dead this is hardly "day to day" business, and in fact never is, and should receive serious consideration by the people who run the organization. Decisions like this are only a matter of a broadcast email to 13 people, with quick responses, and that can avoid embarrassing mistakes, or decisions which totally change policy or go against the members interests.

Hatso in his campaigning clothes. "If I am elected.........", he started, with his best Executive smile, but someone kindly told him he was talking to the drinking fountain.

"Doesn't matter" he said the guy was as thick as (MOD: One more comment about XXXXXXXXXX and the door might slam on your arxxx on the way out).

It just wasn't Hatso's night; Dazzle, fresh in bright yellow pants, a Cargo top, and bright pink hair heaped praise on Bob Forells for using an n before a vowell.

"So many people these days write: " 'call me a action hero', or 'I'll have a egg', or 'he's a idiot', or 'I'm eating a orange', or 'where's a umbrella', which is all so Logan"

Bob, dressed in lycra and looking like a cyclist was overcome at how clever he was, and said "they don't............"

Hotham has its own airport; do some googling and you'll be able to get the details on where the RPT flights start from, and when it is open. It's designed to fly people straight in during the snow season.

Why is that?

Hey can't please you guys can we......we've actually got the cause of an RAA fatal accident within two weeks of it happening...that's huge progress ..can't you just say THANK YOU !!!! Well done Daren and team !..........Maj....

2. It could also be seen as misleading, since designers use left hand threads for some applications, so it shouold be edited out of the version published on the RAA website

For both these reasons the comment should be edited out of the document posted on the RAA website, and it should be forgotten quickly.

However, Darren's fast release of this information is brilliant, giving everyone a timely chance for some deep thinking, and minimising the chance of another nut winding off. History has examples of unfortunate reoccurrences before corrective action was taken, including three successive fatalities on the one night on a defective corner in a raceway in the USA.

Of course you would need to have a properly equipped aircraft and have done the training and passed the tests.

Deja Vu; CTA was the high point where it all turned around to mud for RAA, and hit the grass roots most of all.

I see some have managed to elude the system, posting without information.

Oops, didn't see your avatar, I was after Foxhunter.

The nosewheels don't seem to be snapping off GA aircraft, so the difference could be:

(a) In the RA aircraft less sophisticated materials and less developed design is more forgiving.

(b) Some people are actually trained to land by pointing the nose down for altitude and throttle for speed, so the arrival is much more likely to be on the nosewheel.

© Training - see the dozens of incidents in Pilot Notes over the years where aircraft have swerved after landing and hit ditches, flipped over the wingtip etc.

Given the many threads on radio procedure, circuit procedure, fuel management, situational awareness and EFATO skills, it could be some time.

I notice many people seem to be having problems with taildraggers; it would cost us nothing going forward to dump the 1920's style taildraggers and stick to proper tricycle undercarriage for all the safe reasons it was introduced, then you can set your braking by the ability to lock up the mains on bitumen like you can with a Cherokee.

On what basis do you say that?

I'm a bit overwhelmed with what I'm reading here, and wondering if our vehicle manufacturers spend all those millions when solutions can be plucked out of the air. For example, when PBR were supplying US cars they had a Corvette permanently running at the Anglesea Proving Ground with an engineering team for YEARS.

Sure we have EBS today, but have you checked the cost per vehicle? Remember in the pre-emission days when we paid $5,000.00 for an upmarket Falcon.

It's the simple solutions that are needed.

Usually, if there's a safe industry benchmark, or "best practice", you have difficulties if you don't meet this.

Yes Bob, here is the RAA submission and the government response, and also prior to this there had been a move towards ATSB investigating EVERY crash (but that would take a bit more finding)

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/asrr/submissions/files/127_ra_aus_30_jan_2014.pdf

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/asrr/files/ASRR_Executive_Summary.pdf

"I watched the owner of a Storch have a lot of problems trying to get it to stop. Took a while but once convinced to try a softer brake pad braking power increased no end."

Brake pad compounds are usually designated by two letters which in turn refer to performance characteristics.

On another thread someone was talking about changing Jab overheating characteristics by fitting a bigger jet (without specifying what size - which could lead to other engine issues).

and the same applies with unspecified brake linings.

As a rule softer linings increase brake performance, but at the expense of pad wear and heat, but this is not something to test on your aircraft unless you are happy to bear the cost of aircraft repairs if the wheels lock up due to the aggressive performance. So some very sound technical advice from a brake expert is required.

Another byproduct of different brake compounds is harmonic squealing. Aggressive performance and loud squeal are not a problem on race cars, but I've seen hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on trying to build out squeal with special pad compounds.

You could be lucky, but just tread carefully, particularly if you have a taildragger. I've done wonderful things with aggressive brake linings on trucks - for a little while.

I watched the owner of a Storch have a lot of problems trying to get it to stop. Took a while but once convinced to try a softer brake pad braking power increased no end.

This is what I posted on the other thread:

The biggest factor in improving brake performance is the disc diameter, and that can't realistically be less than a deflated tyre - around rim size, and with small wheels that may not be enough. Just 25 mm increase in diameter (with the pads correspondingly 25 mm further out) makes a big difference.

The second biggest factor is the leverage from the centre of the hand point to the master cylinder.

When either of these is less than optimum it becomes very difficult getting a workable result, and in such a light airctraft this is likely to be the big challenge.

There are a number of reasons why good brakes are needed to prevent aircraft damage, for example:

• A shortfield forced landing into a confined area less than the aircraft's landing roll where survival is your prime objective
   
   
  
• A landing on a very short runway where you have floated longer than expected
   
   
  
• To avoid a runway incursion, or another aircraft's runway incursion
   
   
  

Sure you can fly an aircraft without brakes, or with just enough brakes to do your runups - older aircraft like Tiger Moths had no brakes, but they were designed to operate from all-over fields.

While some people have referred to motorcycle brakes, the discs are usually a lot bigger than can be fitted to a recreational aircraft with it's small wheels. There's nothing wrong with adapting motor cycle calipers, lines, master cylinder etc. but if you can't get the fundamental of the diameter optimised, the rest doesn't help that much. Motor cycle brakes are designed to operate from 300 km/hr to zero repeatedly, whereas with an aircraft it's usually one spike brake only, so heat dissipation is not so much of an issue. If you can get an aircraft brake disc red hot, you can pretty much assume the pad/caliper/pressure design is optimum.

I cannot recall in the "OLDEN" days of a t/w doing that. With the tail on the ground, the CofG is further back and with full back stick there should be a sufficient down force. I would suggest that you don't apply the hand brake but rely on the feet holding them on and never take your hand off the throttle, being ready to close it, but NOT if the tail has already raised, and is still lifting. Have room to roll forward too and never apply the brakes hard at low speed. Full Power should be treated with caution. An L-188 Electra Jumped the chocks at Essendon. IF you are doing full power runs tether it to something strong or heavy like a Four wheel drive... Nev

.....very much in gear, and Hot!, Hot!, Hot!, and ......

The biggest factor in improving brake performance is the disc diameter, and that can't realistically be less than a deflated tyre - around rim size, and with small wheels that may not be enough. Just 25 mm increase in diameter (with the pads correspondingly 25 mm further out) makes a big difference.

The second biggest factor is the leverage from the centre of the hand point to the master cylinder.

When either of these is less than optimum it becomes very difficult getting a workable result, and in such a light airctraft this is likely to be the big challenge.

There are a number of reasons why good brakes are needed to prevent aircraft damage, for example:

• A shortfield forced landing into a confined area less than the aircraft's landing roll where survival is your prime objective
   
   
  
• A landing on a very short runway where you have floated longer than expected
   
   
  
• To avoid a runway incursion, or another aircraft's runway incursion
   
   
  

Sure you can fly an aircraft without brakes, or with just enough brakes to do your runups - older aircraft like Tiger Moths had no brakes, but they were designed to operate from all-over fields.

While some people have referred to motorcycle brakes, the discs are usually a lot bigger than can be fitted to a recreational aircraft with it's small wheels. There's nothing wrong with adapting motor cycle calipers, lines, master cylinder etc. but if you can't get the fundamental of the diameter optimised, the rest doesn't help that much. Motor cycle brakes are designed to operate from 300 km/hr to zero repeatedly, whereas with an aircraft it's usually one spike brake only, so heat dissipation is not so much of an issue. If you can get an aircraft brake disc red hot, you can pretty much assume the pad/caliper/pressure design is optimum.

There were quite a few news photos of the BUK type missile launchers before the incident and two owned aircraft earlier in the week.

For someone to fly over a 32,000 ft exclusion altitude at 33,000 in a War zone implies a belief that missiles have brakes,

While the tape makes it very clear that separatists fired the missile by mistake,it also makes it very clear that they were under Russian command at the time.

While we know who did it, we also know they were engaged n a war, so I'd agree the NOTAM will become important, but the loss of confidence in the airlines who blatantly flew through a war zone to save money, may well cost them more money in the short term.

The witness statements did say say it went straight down rather than spinning so the terminal velocity would be the maximum.