onetrack

Who would hire an aircraft to someone without proof of being able to operate it, and make them produce proof they're licenced to do so? This is hypothetical BS. If the student takes the aircraft without permission, that is a criminal act.

Legislation allowing for petrol with ethanol added was introduced in 2003 and it went national in 2005. Petrol containing ethanol must be marked and stored and sold separately to other petrol grades. E10 is the ethanol blend and it contains 9-10% ethanol. It has a RON of 94. More importantly, engines and fuel systems must be labelled as ethanol-compatible, as ethanol degrades natural rubber, and when using ethanol blends, seals and gaskets and hoses must be formulated from synthetic materials that don't contain natural rubber.

Only in relatively small percentages, up to 1% in some cases.

Because you can't have a plane crash report in the media without inserting the following terms or headlines ..... "Horror" "Stunned" "Shock" "Screaming in fear" "Pilot wrestling with the controls" "Cessna" "CASA are investigating". 😄

Petrol has gone through a big variety of constituents in its formula since 1999 - it contains a different range of chemicals today, as compared to 1999 petrol. The oil company chemists keep on "tweaking" the chemical ingredients to provide lower emissions, and better performance in modern engines, and to meet Govt fuel quality specifications. Petrol is a particularly complex mix of hydrocarbons, and chemists find new hydrocarbon chemicals regularly, to add to it. Petrol primarily comprises isoalkane and aromatic hydrocarbons. Alkanes (Paraffins) = 4-8% Alkenes (Olefins) = 2-5% Isoalkanes (Isoparaffins) = 25-40% Cycloalkanes (Naphthenes) = 3-7% Cycloalkenes (Cycloparaffins) = 1-4% Total aromatics = 25-50% Then, individual oil companies add their own "proprietary" chemical additives to try and boost performance, clean out combustion chambers, and to provide so-called "improved fuel economy". This gives them the ability to add a fancy name to their fuel brand, to try and differentiate it from the mundane start-up brand names. Benzene was largely eliminated from petrol decades ago when TEL was introduced (subject to refining processes, as some benzene always gets through the process) - but it has been re-introduced as TEL has become banned.

A student must be the PIC, once the instructor steps out of the aircraft. How could an instructor regain control from a student committing errors, if he's on the ground? The instructor is reliant on the student following instructions and his training methods, once the instructor departs the aircraft. The insurance policy terms are supplied in the Product Disclosure Statement (PDS), which is one of the most important documents you could ever read. A good flying school would make sure the student is fully conversant with the terms and conditions of his training contract - and it is a contract, even if nothing is supplied by a legally-deficient school - and a good school would provide a copy of the insurance PDS, ensuring the student is fully aware of when he's liable, and under what circumstances. The grey areas would start when a student trains under a "self-employed instructor" who is not a flying school employee - or where a student employs an instructor individually, and hires an aircraft to train in. These two situations would become an insurance minefield.

Get a U.S. transhipping address, such as Planet Express, and then organise to ship them to your Planet Express address. Plus, Planet Express offers reasonable shipping charges and a choice of shippers.

It should be itemised in the T's & C's of the training agreement. As the trainee is renting the aircraft, I would expect the same rules apply as hiring a car or truck.

Nah, keep posting, don't get upset, I was just having a shot at you. I like the vintage films, too - it's amazing to see the conditions on the Clipper, as compared to todays sardine cans.

Fancying a trip to Honolulu to meet some Wahines, Brendan? Just remember, a ticket on a cross-world jaunt on a Clipper, cost the equivalent of $35,000! The Pan Am facilities such as the Hotels on Midway and Wake didn't fare too well, thanks to the Japanese invasion. Neither did the people Pan Am left behind. 😞 https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/pan-american-airways-on-the-wwii-home-front-in-the-pacific.htm

Back to school for you, Spacey, you must have failed arithmetic! 100mph is 161kmh.

.......smeared from the shoulder to the end of the sleeve, so does that mean you've gained a "stripe"? E P looked in horror at the huge streak from shoulder to the end of his sleeve, it was obvious the sleeve had draped itself into the pan when he was unloading the "goods", and he hadn't noticed - so that explained the smell that seemed to be following him. "Well", said the bloke behind E P, "I've heard of Chocolate Bombs on Masterchef, but this takes it to a whole new level, and..............

Hmmmm........ QUOTE: "First, the water ski maneuver itself requires no real talent."....... https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2022/june/pilot/dogfight-airplane-water-skiing

.....of stolen coins from parking meters - mostly 10c and 20c coins. Pae Mee Nao made a rush for the spilt coins, just as.......

....eyes - and those eyes were getting slittier by the moment, as the dreadful urgency of the moment started to become an unsustainable pressure, which was.......

You'd only need a floating piece of driftwood and the story and video would be a whole lot different scenario. Ask any barefoot skier about the deadly danger of floating, almost-submerged objects in the water.

And a chilly trip, too! For $350,000, I'd at least want an enclosed cabin! I suppose he does have the comfort of engine redundancy! https://isurplus.com.au/product/lockwood-aircam/?srsltid=AfmBOoqXTP-AQnqQ0HyfUNltdr18AamzK4_2cPDJdRDWx_fLiPTGjoOb

......commotion as the Delegate yelled out, "Those photos are FAKE!!!" - resulting in an uproar as everyone jumped to their feet, with some protesting they were genuine, and others protesting they were AI-generated. But the transformation of the Delegate went almost unnoticed during the uproar and commotion. But the signs were all there - the sudden appearance of epaulettes, where there were none formerly - the shirt turning from checked flannelette to crisp white cotton, and............

The saga of this crash continues, and the pilot still lives in a fantasy world, where you obey no laws and are answerable to no-one. But he's found out, that isn't quite the case. He fronted court today (Tuesday 27/05/2025) to face a committal hearing regarding 17 aviation charges against him, including operating and maintaining unregistered aircraft dating back to 2011, and failing to surrender his pilot's licence. But he continually interrupted the magistrate and the court proceedings, claiming that he had no charges to answer, as the aviation laws only applied to commercial pilots and aircraft, and not to him or experimental aircraft. When his arguments failed to convince the magistrate (and the fool was unrepresented in court), he walked out of the court, having failed to request extension of his bail. He was immediately re-arrested on the footpath out front of the court and returned to court, where his bail was was extended - and he was committed to stand trial on the 17 charges laid. He claims the Civil Aviation Act 1988 is unlawful, and the courts have no power over him, as he's a "sovereign citizen". I think he's going to find out that none of his arguments hold any water, and I think we can look to see him facing some serious penalties, maybe even some jail time. Not a single one of these so-called "sovereign citizens" has ever successfully argued their cases in any Australian court, that Australian laws don't apply to them. I'm surprised the relatives of the gent killed haven't sued him for his death, as it appears a pretty clear-cut case to me. And I'm surprised that the Police have failed to pursue this pilot for manslaughter. The simple fact that he failed to replace faulty seat belts and the passengers belt snapped in the crash, seems like a straightforward case of negligence, or failing to take due care, to me. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-27/ball-bay-crash-pilot-arrested-after-walking-out-of-court/105344884

No, I don't dislike them, that's just your opinion you've formed. I simply said the new Kawasaki engines are high-revving screamers, so they'll have a high-pitch noise problem. Kawasaki engines didn't win the War for the Japanese - it was P&W, Merlin, Allison, and Wright that won the War for the Allies. Kawasaki reformed after the War when they weren't allowed to build anything aviation-related, and one of the companies to come out of the reformation (amongst others) was Fuji Heavy Industries, maker of Subarus. But the Subaru engines have their problems, too.

Ahh, yes - powered by the "notoriously unreliable" Ha-40 inverted V12 engine - a licence-built version of the DB-601A. The Japanese tried to improve it, but even then it was a POS. Let's hope they do better, second time around. 😄 http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/H/a/Ha-40_aircraft_engine.htm

I'm pretty familiar with big Jap motorbikes and I know 8,500RPM isn't high-revving for them. I also have my ears assailed daily by Jap motorbike riders wrapping on the throttle. I can well imagine the outrage of the non-flying set when they hear aircraft with Kawasakis doing 8,500RPM at WOT on takeoff and climb. There's enough complaints now with the current providers of engines. I have yet to see an exhaust system that can keep a high-revving Jap motorbike engine quiet. BRAAP motorbikes didn't develop their brand name just on wordplay.

High quality or not, an engine in an aircraft, doing 8,500RPM at full throttle is going to annoy a lot of people.

8,500RPM!! Wow, what a bunch of screamers! I trust they also develop good sound-proofing and engine noise reduction!

Spacey can remember when he was paid in groats. 😄