turboplanner

You'll have a compass and probably can sight the centreline, but what about the maths and what about the variations in gusts and wind directions.

 

 

I've been doing Trigonometry all day and my head's spinning, but that sounds like one of those grandma recipe things which requires calibrated eyeballs.

 

 

68 Volksy, I'll give you one reason why - when you run out of rudder authority even when you're bending the pedal tube.......and you start to become a helicopter

 

That sure gets your attention.

 

Only problem is even in the 21st Century we still don't have enough visual data to measure the wind component vs the max AC rating accurately, particularly with intermittent gusting conditions.

 

 

I think you are making some valid points here, from a big picture perspective.

 

Many of the airstrips I've seen posted on here are in fact very narrow, some with power lines over them, some with close tree lines, and a few you could only describe as one way strips being used both ways.

 

The old military airfields sometimes have enough grassed area with smooth transitions free of infrastructure which might allow diagonal take offs and landings to meet legal requirements, but that has to be researched before getting anywhere near hitting the throttle.

 

But as we see so often here, someone will come up with a procedure which requires a strict set of circumstances, but not mention them and then we have low hours pilots putting that in their tool kit - like the one a couple of posts up which assumes the weather report you get before you take off will produce the same conditions when you land.

 

 

I remember my first experience with traction control in the Commodore. Coming home one night, the lights were about to change so hit the gas and, fresh from speedway, threw the car through the corner, only to find the engine slowed down, brakes went on and I came out of the corner about 50% slower.

 

 

Ah, you caught me, couldn't be bothered calculating a theoretical roll to takeoff,

 

 

I'll admit my trigonometry is rusty, but using Motz's hypothetical runway of 1000 metres length x 50 metres width:

 

If the crosswind component is 90 degrees to the strip, and you opt to roll diagonally from one side to the other into the wind, you'll only have changed the crosswind component by 3 degrees to 87 degrees in exchange for the being less than optimum from the side of the runway for 2/3 of the runway.

 

Doesn't look like a good risk/reward ratio to me

 

 

The bush is full of jacks.............

 

 

So, you've flown out to a small country strip, for a relief break, no one around, no tools.

 

You walk back to the aircraft and find a tyre flat........no jack or lifting method other than your muscles, no pump, no tools.

 

Can't use the tube filler because it doesn't jack the wheel.

 

What do you do?

 

 

The original Handling Notes for the Airtourer that Victa posted, and the original DCA Flight Manual for the Airtourer, stated 20 Knots demonstrated and there are a number of pilots, myself, included (and at night for good measure), who would include safe operations (ie no accident) at excess 20 Knots.

During my training, the instructor of the day, taking time off from reading up on theory for his CPL course decided to show me how to do a crosswind landing, the only one I was asked to do in the PPL syllabus.

 

He congratulated me on a smooth landing in the Cherokee adding "we were well over the maximum component of the aircraft"

 

And so I was released to fly and take up passengers.

 

Then I learnt all about gusts, variable winds, wind shear etc.

 

My point here is, yes you may be able to demonstrate it now and again, but if you want to promote it you have to be careful of what inexperienced pilots are absorbing as acceptable practice in ALL conditions.

 

Not having a go at you Narremman, but your post was a good example to talk about what some of the other "unconventional" pilots are preaching.

 

 

What a load of BS!

 

 

Some rough ground there on take off, looks a little like the Hay Plains

 

 

Better go and see a Public Liability lawyer M61 to have it explained - might cost a hundred bucks or so, but that's nothing compared to not being prepared for the real thing.

 

A lot of people struggle with what seems to be the reverse philosophy of these laws, but it's not that hard to avoid trouble once you understand what your duty of care is.

 

What I've posted here are real cases based on the precedent case way back in 1924, so nothing new.

 

 

All true I'm afraid Jenkin, an Authority unable to generate enough momentum to get out of the telex era.

 

 

Someone asked about manslaughter cases about a month ago. This is the first swimming pool case in NSW, just announced.

 

I'm not sure if the person who entered the enclosure was an oxygen thief or an innocent family's little boy, now gone forever.

 

This link might be easier than the attachment:

 

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/charged-for-pool-death-of-toddler/story-fndo317g-1226417283451

 

Source: Daily Telegraph/Herald Sun

 

 

 

In the example the civil claim is going to be in the vicinity of $5 to $10 million, and the culpable negligence of alcohol and knowing he couldn't complete the flight before last light will kick in.

 

 

So you're at a BBQ, knocking back a few stubbies and towards sundown someone suggests you should go up for a fly. It's 30 minutes before last light and you're 25 minutes from the airport, but you decide to take a carload out, and your best friend decides to go up with you. You know you can't make the flight before last light, maybe not even the take off but you can see the sun on the hills and off you go.

 

In the ensuing loss of control and crash, your best mate becomes a quadriplegic, so now will need major modifications to his house, a full time nurse, and an income to support his wife and children for the years he would normally expect to have dependants.

 

Who should pay?

 

 

Good outcome Chris, we really need a lot more contributions and training data on Met and how to evaluate it in flight.

 

 

Fly a Cherokee and leave your troubles behind!

 

 

The post electric era may not be so far away

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=HSKyHmjyrkA&feature=email

 

 

....dig...

 

 

Here you are FH, put my arm into the haystack and felt a prick almost immediately.

 

CAR 166 reads:

 

"(2) The Pilot in Command of an aircraft that is being operated in the vicinity of a non controlled aerodrome must:

 

"(2) (f) to the extent practicable, land and take off into the wind..."

 

(empasis mine)

 

 

We did have a thread a mile long on that FH, and I hunted for and found the legislation you are supposed to be complying with re take off direction so there's no question about that.

 

 

Yes, you will still be at fault, but you'll have minimised the risk back into manageable insurance claims rather than corporate penalties and criminal prosecution - you don't want those.

 

 

1. Its a scary thought cause i can meet all regulations, codes of practice and legislation and if anything should happen im still at fault. So example, I have a job and i get subcontractors in, I tell them what needs to be done and what safety measures need to be in place then leave site and they do not do what has been asked of them its my fault.

2. Another i could put up 16' fences out the front but a 16yr old boy climbs over at midnight and brakes his leg

1. There are training courses for you here. Mitigating circumstances could be that you leave them with written information (which can be email, sms), have a Code of Practice in place and have someone in charge of the site at all times (ie he wants the job, he takes charge of the site as well). The point is the reason you are held responsible is you have the duty of care., and have to find a way of managing the site to minimise accidents. Another mitigating factor is having a history of careful management and publicly noticed compliance.

 

2. It's not the 16' fences they're getting through but the open yards with loose 4x2's holes, stacked timber, unguarded drops and so on. If someone scaled a 16'0" mesh fence you'd have a good defence, provided you'd placed suitable warning signs.