onetrack

A fluid coupling would be an excellent way of absorbing power pulses and even providing a method of vibration damping.

Porsche actually lodged a patent for a fluid coupling for the thrust propellor on a gyroplane, but appears to have let the idea lapse. Maybe weight was the bugbear.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US4970860A/en

Glen, the "mobile" application for that little diesel Wankel has a fuel consumption of 305 g/kWh. AT 6000RPM, a diesel is throwing a lot of unburnt diesel out the exhaust.

The ideal RPM for best diesel efficiency is around 2000-2200RPM, but diesel fuel burn losses are still acceptable at 3000-3300RPM. Over that RPM, the unburnt fuel losses increase substantially.

Weight is always the killer with a diesel engine in a lightweight aircraft. With the upgrade to 760kg MTOW for RA/kit build aircraft, there probably is the potential to fit a small automotive diesel in a light aircraft.

To that end, the Subaru EE20 2.0L horizontally-opposed 4 cyl diesel is an attractive option, because it's still relatively light (but still comes in around 170kgs, as I understand), it's turbocharged and intercooled, and the engine layout is comparable to the regular petrol aviation engine design.

But it produces its maximum of 150HP at 3600RPM. However, it would be possible to set up the Subaru EE20 to run at say, a maximum of 3300RPM, which would allow for direct drive - but this would reduce the HP output somewhat.

Regardless, it would still need to be fitted in a heavier airframe than many current kit-build aircraft, and there would need to be quite a bit of re-engineering of the engine to suit aviation use.

The electronic injectors of today have numerous advantages, in that they're more precise with injection, and they carry out multiple injection events over milliseconds, thus reducing diesel knock and vibration.

However, diesel engines with direct drive in aircraft need to have a rubberised drive mechanism for the prop, to suppress the bigger power pulses that come from the high-torque power strokes of the diesel.

Kevin, I'm sorry, despite your normally good information, there was no BDPC specification issued for the P-51 Mustang. When a Govt issues an aircraft specification, they state their requirements as to speed, range, armour, weight, HP, and other military features regarded as useful or necessary.

The true story is, the British went to NAA to see if they could build P40 Tomahawks for them, as Curtiss were flat-out, and the entire Curtiss production of P40's was all destined for the U.S. military, and Curtiss could not supply the British requirements.

James Howard "Dutch" Kindelberger, the President of NAA at that time, offered to build the British an "entirely new aircraft with improved performance over the P-40".

The British accepted his offer, and NAA  produced the P-51 from a basic design idea of Schmueds, in under 4 months. As rgmwa correctly stated, the primary P-51 designer was Edgar Schmued - but he was ably assisted by at least 7, and possibly up to 10 or 11, other American engineers, designers and aerodynamicists - all aided by 3 test pilots. 

These people also relied on aircraft design ideas and principles produced previously by British engineers and scientists - in particular, work by Sir Bennett Melvill-Jones, who produced the principle of the laminar flow wing in 1929, and Beverley Strahan Shenstone, a Canadian/British aerodynamicist who produced the idea of the Spitfires distorted elliptical wing.

NAA's greatest achievements were in designing and redesigning the P-51 to suit factory mass-production by relatively unskilled workers (remembering that around 35% of Americas WW2 domestic workforce was female, and in aircraft production, it was up to 65% of the workforce at its peak) - and by designing the P-51 with anal attention to smoothness of the wing and fuselage surfaces.

Also, it's important to remember that the P-51 was in continuous development all through the War, and as with most warplanes, there is no "standard" P-51, the design was changed and refined constantly.

By far the greatest move that established the P-51's outstanding abilities, was NAA's design change of power plant from the Allison V-1710, to the Packard-Merlin - which was produced at exactly the right time, as NAA were having problems with Allison reliability and its lack of high-altitude performance.

This change to the Merlin was believed to be initiated by the RR test pilot, Ron Harker. The British converted 3 early Allison-powered P-51's to Merlins with outstanding success, and then advised NAA of the major performance improvement, and requested that all British P-51 orders then be Merlin-powered.

https://www.mustangsmustangs.com/p-51/history/

https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/p-51-mustang-a-36-apache-time-it-took-to-design.57666/

"Flying" Magazine - Sept 1944 - https://books.google.com.au/books?id=VqavV_QLOcwC&pg=PA33&lpg=PA33&dq=NAA+Project+Engineer+Ken+Bowen&source=bl&ots=wXga848w60&sig=ACfU3U1aB9rw5iYaqgjBFCRM-rZuUqPbPA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiqlPy9t5T6AhW0R2wGHRouDl8Q6AF6BAgDEAM#v=onepage&q=NAA Project Engineer Ken Bowen&f=false

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melvill_Jones

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverley_Shenstone

We just had a vicious low-pressure system pass through the S.W. of W.A., and it's currently centred in the Bight. If it continues its Easterly path, you're due to get some nasty weather in NSW and VIC.

The winds were particularly strong with this Low, far stronger than we've had for the last month.

http://satview.bom.gov.au/

http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/4day_col.shtml

The crash victim has been named as a local (Townsville) pilot, Rob McKenzie, aged 67. RIP and condolences to family and friends.

But ... there has been a CASA relaxation of the above restrictions, which needs to be taken into context with the earlier Jabiru engine failures history.

You need to look at the whole picture, including the maintenance regime on many Jabiru engines, where numerous owners and maintainers were not following Jabiru recommendations.

And of course, there have been Jabiru engine design upgrades since 2014.

https://australianaviation.com.au/2016/07/casa-eases-restrictions-on-jabiru-engines/

Despite FlyBoy1960 jumping to some very premature and unwarranted conclusions about this crash in particular - the RA reports just for this year alone, show a concerning high percentage of Jabiru engine failures.

RA reporting is inadequate to address the reasons behind the engine failures as it is obvious that a percentage of Jabiru engine failures are not due to poor Jabiru engine design - but as a result of poor maintenance or poor engine operation.

You can't lay the blame for engine failures at Jabirus feet when reports list items such as failing to use carburettor heat when it was required, or for spark plug leads falling off because they weren't properly secured.

RA crash and incident reports need to be produced in a different format with a clear summary outlining the precise reasons behind the crash/incident, in a similar format to ATSB reports.

A concise summary gets the message through without the need to wade through reams of incidental information, which many people will not do.

A permanent link to RA-Aus accident and defect summaries needs to be added to this forum, so RA pilots have prompt and easy access to the reports.

https://www.raa.asn.au/our-organisation/safety/accident-and-defect-summaries/

The media is "embedded" (to use that notorious American term) with all the Police forces. The instant a report comes in for a major accident/crash/disaster, the media are all over it. "Scoops" are worth millions to them.

I have this feeling that there has been an increase in RA crashes in recent times, but the precise figures are not currently available. People are human and they make mistakes and poor decisions regularly, but a mistake or poor decision, when in control of an aircraft at low level often means a fatal result.

Remember that bad weather, and pressing on into it regardless, features high on the many reasons behind aviation crashes.

Greetings SAH - The reason that speeds and Mach numbers are different for different aircraft, is because the Mach number is related to the speed of sound - which can vary according to altitude, air pressure, and temperature.

This article below will assist you to understand better.

https://sciencetrends.com/mach-speed-breakdown-examples-mach-1-2-3-beyond/

The basic fact remains that all RA-Aus aircraft are a maximum of a pilot and one passenger. I would imagine it is more the exception than the rule, that only one person needing medical treatment is carried when a flight is planned - these people often need a parent or a carer with them.

It's unfair to expect a pilot of an RA aircraft to take care of a person with medical problems if something develops during an angel flight.

If lightweight aircraft were the answer, the RFDS would have some in their fleet.

Even the medical/rescue/crash choppers are heavy, for the simple reason they need to be able to carry medics and patients, as well as the pilot.

More guesswork from the FB ....

https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.1003231#:~:text=Lead emitted from aircraft using,Agency (EPA) 2010].

I guess quite a few people have already forgotten about this guy (Richard "Beebo" Russell), and how easily he stole a Dash 8 and flew it around for hours, before he committed suicide in it.

He had no pilot training whatsoever, apart from what he learned from ground handling the aircraft, and some computer FS time.

The summary starting at around 23:44 is interesting, and it shows the distinct possibility that a lot of disturbed people are still slipping through aviation security systems - while those systems still treat every passenger as a potential terrorist, even though 99% of them, are no risk to aviation whatsoever.

I wonder how many queries they'll get, as regards the "erroneous" figure in the additional runway length?

There's nothing surer than the fact that within the next few years, we will be taxed on an emissions level basis. The move to EV's will accelerate that, whereby your vehicles will have no rego cost, but will be taxed on kilometres travelled, plus emissions produced.  EV's will pay only a km rate, and pay no emissions tax, but if you want to drive an IC engined vehicle, your tailpipe emissions will be calculated, and you will pay extra monies to pollute the environment.

It will take very little for Govts to initiate this taxing system for all IC engines, including aviation. It is a system seen as fair, and benefiting the environment, and it is designed to make IC engines extinct as much as possible.

He's going to wish he really was dead, when he gets the bill for the damage to the King Air!   

I wonder how far off he was, from being shot down?? This is America, remember! Shoot first, ask questions afterwards!

Once you commence excavating massive great holes in the ground for coal or gold or other minerals, you always run into groundwater on a large scale.

Trust me, I was involved in open cut mining for many years, and I've seen plenty of mines where they struggled to keep the water level down, so they could operate.

Once these open-pits are finished with, they fill with water from both underground, and from surface runoff (if allowed - because all operational mines have berms or banks around the excavation to prevent flooding their operations). You may recall the floods less than a decade ago that completely filled many of the coal mines in the Eastern States.

The recent NSW floods delivered enough water to fill all the Snowy Scheme dams several times over. There's no shortage of massive excavations, huge amounts of water, and plenty of sunshine here, it just needs money, and some leader either in industry or the political scene, to drive pumped hydro into fruition.

During WW2 it was common for fighter pilots doing cross-country training at low level to cause major upset by frightening horses and making them bolt, often when harnessed to equipment.

There were many complaints to the military authorities about the problem, and a common attitude amongst the pilots of the day that it was fun to frighten people on the ground with low passes, wasn't helpful.

Pumped hydro is the way forward for Australia, we have staggering amounts of sunshine, and the country is full of massive mining excavations that lend themselves nicely to pumped hydro.

Utilise solar power to pump the water up, and produce power at night (when it's needed), letting the water run back down again.

As to transport fuels, the market will become more fractured and I can see blends becoming more common, with synthetic fuels increasing in volume.

It's entirely likely we can make a considerable volume of synthetic fuels from waste, straw, timber byproducts, and used tyres, utilising solar power. 

And the problem child in Europe today, with regard to energy supply, is ..... wait for it ...... France!

https://reneweconomy.com.au/frances-troubled-nuclear-fleet-a-bigger-problem-for-europe-than-russia-gas/

I have all the propellor instructions for Bruce, right here - they were included with my latest purchase from AliExpress ....

Do not swallow propellor parts, or an ambulance will say hello.

Do not burn propellor parts in a fire, or you will need protective clothing.

Do not hit propellor on ground, or your propellor will quickly be damage.

Do not litter ground with broken propellor parts, otherwise beg for mercy as a prayer.

Do not mix different propellor parts, otherwise look to us to buy some other.

Do not disassemble propellor parts, otherwise sharp parts will let you know hands can bleed.

I'm pleased to be able to offer Bruce such useful assistance with his new purchase.

I once employed a Pom (in the early 1970's) who had worked in assembly at a French car factory (I seem to recall it was Renault), and he laughed as he told me how much they hated the management, and how they purposely assembled components incorrectly, just to give managers the sXXXX. It was fairly obvious the way he spoke that employee morale there was at rock bottom.

Yes, I was indulging in a fair amount of generalisation - but then again, I have an intense dislike for anything manufactured in Europe, with their massive inbuilt taxes, and social welfare costs, where every factory worker retires on a pension that equates to about two-thirds of the average wage. Price gouging by European manufacturers is an art form.

A friend was silly enough to buy a Citroen C4 a few years ago, and when the key remote fell apart, as most European stuff does, Citroen wanted $800 for a replacement remote!

Quote

If you have an engine failure on takeoff or accidentally find yourself stalling turning final, do you a) adopt a glide attitude or b) quickly get the nose at least 10 degrees below the horizon? I favour the latter, big time, but Ive got a massive 212 hrs

A stall at low altitude is a recipe for a fatal accident. Watch any video of an aircraft stall at low altitude, they rarely recover to make a satisfactory landing. Why is 500 feet the legislated MSA?

Quote

What proof have you got that French IQ has been reduced by lead?

French cars? The French must have been brain-damaged when you examine the design of some of those monstrosities. I mean to say, having to remove mudguards and bumpers just to change a headlight globe? An RAC serviceman I spoke to once, was adamant and forceful in his opinion - "Never, EVER, buy a French car!! The greatest abortions on wheels, that anyone ever manufactured!!"

Marty, if you keep adding all these extra, luxury, fancy accessories - you'll soon need a power upgrade, and a MTOW upwards adjustment!