turboplanner

The CSIRO scientists who did the drilling concluded differently from isotopes analysis, and didn't need the millions for future research because they were paid to do the job, and they have a satellite positioned to give them continuing data on the Antacrtic Ice melt, where a piece the size of the Bellarine Peninsula fell off about six years ago, and they were not the "scientists" who tried to spin a story acceleratng the degree of warming.

Dafydd, aside from the 2 seconds of "This shouldn't happen, he's forgotten to wind off his one stage of flap and he isn't flying a motor glider but a J160 or something else which glides like a brick, and he didn't bring your 5 paragraph analysis - there is no real gliding culture in powered flight - too many other things to be concentrating on, too much money needing to be spent just on learning powered flight.

As you have said, people break laws; the idea here is to give then boundaries which stand up in logic, and the precedents of separating commercial and private GA traffic.

My point was, referring to the diagramme, we have single altitude boundaries now, they are the precedents for separation, and if there was to be a height limit it should not create a dual boundary.

"the precedents of separating commercial and private GA traffic."What separation between commercial and private are you referring to here?

The Airfield owner and operator may have a sizeable PL risk here

I wish I could buy a Staggerwing for the price of a Tiger Moth!!!

http://www.controller.com/list/list.aspx?manu=BEECHCRAFT&mdltxt=17+STAGGERWING

It was worth searching for these - 5 people, 183 kts cruise - in 1932. Makes you wonder how much knowledge and initiative we've lost in just eighty years.

SPECIFICATION

http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_staggerwing_en.php

WIKI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beechcraft_Model_17_Staggerwing

Not only a beautiful aircraft but you should see its performance specifications (maybe with the exception of fuel consumptions)

To all you clowns out there who think just because you have a Rotax or any other engine for that matter that it will keep running keep your heads planted firmly up your backsides until the unthinkable happens then see what happens.

Some of these explanations may well be correct, but somewhat impractical to remember when an unexpected crisis occurs.

Also there seems to be different view on where an EFATO ends and becomes a forced landing where there is more altitude and time for the logical thought process to kick in.

My opinion is that EFATO phase ends at the crosswind turn - so below 500 feet.

In that case it contains two factors - very low altitude and with a turnback a high speed downwind arrival.

Motz I'm interested in your Physchologist's "Fight or Flight" analysis, and would probably brand a turnback as flight if it wasn't for so many people confusing the mix by actually teaching/recommending a turnback in this short upwind leg.

In my speedway experience there was no chance of dual training - a driver had to get out on the track at speeds up to 170 km/hr in close company with about 20 others and not hurt himself or any other so we successfully developed set responses to set scenarios.

The one thing we couldn't get out of our heads was to stand on the brakes if there was an incident ahead, and drivers were being killed in the multiple pile ups so we took the brake pedal out and allowed a hand operated master cylinder to the rear wheels.

Within a short time the drivers had converted the 25/100 second reaction time from braking to driving out to the side around the incident and the deaths ceased.

The Tiger Moth in the earlier video stalls at around 4 to 5 seconds after the engine first dies away.

Allow 2 seconds for the pilot to react, and that left 2 to 3 seconds to the stall - he had to respond correctly to keep the aircraft flying in maybe half that time.

In my GA and RA training for the EFATO definition above the instructors just drilled into be NOSE DOWN - GLIDE - FIND A SPOT - ANY CLEAR SPOT, and that's what I built into my subconscious.

So without any recency training, reminders before takeoff, memorising checklists etc. if the engine falters I'm on the way down with maybe a 30 degree divergence - I may tear the gear off but I'm not going to stall.

My hands will be reacting within 25/100 second instead of waiting for the brain to kick in with a command at 2 to 3 seconds - regardless of what bitumen smooth features are behind me.

So Motz, I'd be interested in what your phsyciatrist says about programmed actions like this, because they certainly have worked for me in situations where I would otherwise have been injured.

Sorry Ultralights, I've taken more than 30 mins to post, but I'd totally agree with your preprogramming method - no brain processing required, 25/100 sec reaction at each point - a world of difference in the outcome.

He gusesses...

I wouldn't be making up new oddball separation rules. The current CTA type step graduations are working well; you know you need to be far enough inside/outside them that there will be no incursion either way.

If you start bringing in things like 400 feet, people get to know there's a no man's land and will use it.

As you have said, people break laws; the idea here is to give then boundaries which stand up in logic, and the precedents of separating commercial and private GA traffic.

This unit has 8 engines, so one out is -12.5% local thrust, and an algorithm could be written for a 12.5% thrust transfer from the other engines which could do it just by increasing and reducing speeds.

Vehicle design by the Henry Ford method will be virtually extinct in Australia within two years, but I'm hopeful it will return in cars and trucks with a "plug and play" type modular design system, and this "truck" has some great potential for that.

To all you clowns out there who think just because you have a Rotax or any other engine for that matter that it will keep running keep your heads planted firmly up your backsides until the unthinkable happens then see what happens.

These engine threads seem to be treated like a football match, with extremist spectators squawking from the sidelines, but the statistics indicate its more like Russian Roulette with the eventual likelihood of a fatal when someone fails to pull off the forced landing.

What is needed is someone with balls to step in and do something to protect lives.

,,,,Sergeant Major because they aren't a real Major at all as a real (but never proved) Major once said when......

..........flagellating buttocks, and.........

Yea that won't happen ay. People dknt break rules. Even the rules they know about. ;)

Love that about the rules they know about!

Madge's stiffly extended skid (avref), and Madge.........

So what happened to the Model Aircraft Association of Australia, Inc.?

Uninhabited Aerial Vehicles have been around for decades, just not with the cute name coined at Area51

Their management and control through their State divisions and through that to their clubs leaves RAA in the dust

For example:

Take a look at their $20 million Public Liability insurance cover and compare it with yours

Preflight takes about twice as long as it does with an RAA aircraft, and they don't just say "go out and preflight it and I'll be with you in a minute" The instructors preflights it until you can do a perfect job.

Here's the linkhttp://www.maaa.asn.au/

I mentioned Area 51; Peacetime US Aerial Intelligence started after WW2 with converted military flying at high altitude, then progressed to U2 which were virtually unnoticed from the ground, then to the CIA's Oxcart/USAF Blackbird which was too high and too fast to be shot down, all developed at Area51, near Groom Lake in Nevbada http://www.dvice.com/archives/2011/01/how_to_peek_int.php and then with cheaper Satellites.

These all had the achilles heel that they only showed a plan view overhead photo, so the UAV was developed to fly at lower altitudes to peer under overhangs like verandahs and build a much better 3D picture, and these, not containing a pilot, were dispensable.

It's true that military use has gone back to high altitude where the bigger ones can launch a similar payload using FLER and laser designating to a fighter, and with the advantage of being virtually unseen.

However, for commercial use I doubt that high altitude access would be of any real benefit. Satellite photos are relatively cheap, and even photography from aircraft is made available for about $6000.00 per year by companies like Nearmap, providing a Google Earth - like searchable view in much higher definition, with photos taken about four times a year.

Commercial UAVs fit in at low level to get those obliques shots of the front of a factory, planning issues etc.

Personally, I wouldn't see a problem with a maximum altitude of 500 feet with a step to ground level around airfield circuits, much the same as CTA steps, and then leave it to MAAA.

In my experience MAAA don't just wring their hands when someone is flying through a caravan park, they get in their cars and justice takes place.

Under those circumstances a GA/RA pilot might collide with a UAV if he is flying illegally below 500 feet, or the UAV is flying illegally above 500 feet.

".............what is your name?"

Now as we know, Madge had been programmed to say nothing by experts which would leave the CIA, NKVD, Stasi, ASIO, Mossad, and even Aunt Flo in their dust, and he remained mute, which............

Electric motors with solar power battery charging should allow short distance haulage - so crossing bogs, lakes with thin ice etc.

Remote control becomes practical too for these applications.

.......Mia Mia via Umbillico, Jacksons Hole, Watsons Gully, and the post office box at Outer Nothing using his newly purchased GPS with Romanian Maps, and then.......

This design has some issues - trucks are flat sided cube shaped to meet road regulations, and the prop overhang requirement/ground power requirement would knock it out as a combination vehicle.

However, putting this in our face is going to get a whole lot of people thinking about an aerial freight module.

You don't really need the truck part, the freight containment device can be that, so a lot of weight is saved, and you don't need a driver/pilot so more weight is saved.

The top area between the props provide potential for a large area of solar panel.

This concept would fit very well with some freight applications for hovercraft which haven't worked out, particularly around bogs, marshes, rivers, and bays.

http://www.carsguide.com.au/news-and-reviews/car-news/flying_truck_revealed_83628_20140523

".....good, I can tell you, and the fragrance was how you say........."

Here's another one. Count the seconds from the engine failure, deduct the first two seconds for the brain stumbling with "This can't be happening, I have to get back down on the strip" - very little time left except for Nose down straight ahead.

This is how quickly a spin can develop when you try to get heading by squeezing the turn: