Thruster88

It is in the RAAus data base, the pilot no doubt submitted a factual report, we just have to wait for that report to go thru the head office rewrite using non aviation language so we can guess as to what happened 😁😂🤔😎😥🙄

The words open and closed are doing my head in regarding the Bing "choke". Choke on or off would be better. When the Bing choke is on the fuel enrichment valve is OPEN, it is closed when flying.

The ATSB could, should have done a quick investigation just so this accident is on the record. No need to examine the wreckage, nothing to learn there. Just the ADS-B or flarm data if any and the CTAF comms which would be recorded since Gympie has landing fees..

Congratulations Skippy, I am sure we would all be interested in reading some pilot reports as you get to know your aircraft.

The book says 0 to .004 with a service limit of .006 inch. So not much clearance at all. I think lycoming rings are tapered so not sure how it is measured. Pistons on lycoming and Continental are definitely not slotted, they are built like an old mack truck.

Let's not forget we RAAus members have had the message from management saying that any pilot using a screen for traffic awareness is a complete idiot and a danger to airspace. I read it in the sport pilot mag.

The ATSB did a comprehensive investigation into the Mangalore mid air and issued some recommendations that have been ignored so why do a repeat? The ATSB also strongly encourages the fitment of ADS‑B transmitting, receiving and display devices as they significantly assist the identification and avoidance of conflicting traffic. The continuous positional information that ADS‑B provides can highlight a developing situation many minutes before it becomes hazardous – a significant improvement on both point‑in‑time radio traffic advice and ‘see‑and‑avoid’. The ATSB also notes that ADS‑B receivers, suitable for use on aircraft operating under both the instrument or visual flight rules, are currently available within Australia at low cost and can be used in aircraft without any additional regulatory approval or expense. It is also important to recognise however that ADS‑B cannot be relied upon to display all nearby traffic so effective use of radio remains a primary defence in avoiding mid‑air collisions. In that context pilots need to make all required broadcasts detailed in the Aeronautical Information Publication, even if there is no known traffic, and respond to broadcasts if a potential traffic conflict is identified. Above from the ATSB, my take is ADS-B could be relied upon if all aircraft were equipped with a SkyEcho2 or better.

You could move the start button between the park brake valve and the choke. Fingers on the choke, thumb on the start, other hand on throttle. Problem solved. Got a pic of the entire panel layout?

Setting static rpm with a fixed pitch propeller also needs to consider the max cruise for the aircraft. I believe Van's RV aircraft with the same 0-320 lycoming as my slow beech 23 will only achieve about 2000rpm static versus 2300 for the beech. 100 v 150 knot cruise.

Ex soar bristell? Propeller appears to have been turning at impact.

All fixed pitch propellers will increase in rpm as speed rises. Static rpm will be found in all certified aircraft Pilot Operating Handbooks, POH or flight manual. It is a sure fire way to know the health of the engine, not making static rpm, something is wrong. An interesting thing is static rpm is not dependent on altitude, or density altitude. With increasing density altitude the propeller becomes easier to turn at the same rate the engines ability to turn it decreases. For the Beech 23, 160hp fixed pitch static is about 2300rpm, in climb at 78knots about 2500rpm, straight and level full throttle about 2700 rpm which is the red line. Normal cruise at 75% about 2450rpm.

I don't think that is it, your typical lycon is probably more rich at low power setting unless the pilot leans on the ground.

I have seen about 20 lycoming/ Continental pistons following cylinder removal due low compression. Non have had stuck rings if I remember correctly. What is the difference with these engines designed to and all would have been run on avgas.

I made this comment based on what I saw in the initial video. Sadly not far from the mark. I like Juan Browne and watch all his vids, his summery of what happened is a polite version of what Dan Gryder said recently. The important thing is to learn from all accidents. This morning flying the RV (total rocket ship) I felt vulnerable making the turns in the circuit.

I agree that screens in cars are should never have been allowed for adjusting things like A/C. Fines for holding or touching mobile phones while driving need to be higher. Two hands on the wheel and two eyes on the road makes crashing almost impossible. It is only a few seconds from all good to impact. Aircraft are completely different. Even if we look at our screen for 30 seconds while cruising we don't crash. Have done a lot of low level navigation with maps in the past and have no desire for more. A few years ago flying into William Creek an hour before sunset with limited forward vision due sun and not many landmarks and only 60 mins of fuel remaining I said to my co pilot, glad we are not doing this with a map. With the screen we could give our 10 mile inbound call with confidence and could even see some of the traffic that we were hearing on the ctaf. I reckon we had eyes outside more than if we had been using a map due to unfamiliarity with the area. Screens are the best thing to happen in aviation ever, each to their own.

Even though there are more Rotax 912's flying in oz than Jabiru's I am very sure less money was spent on Rotax rings in the last year. Have never seen a Rotax with less than 78/80 on a differential compression test.

NTSB preliminary report. https://www.facebook.com/100063068507532/posts/pfbid0rPkNCtBUa4vpdEAJwstXnQZbWd9u9Ws9kvGEksqAXqTUrF7CaSwZQYccMWCmE9a9l/?mibextid=Nif5oz From Aviation Accidents / This day in history on Facebook. - NTSB issues (the most disappointing preliminary report of the year) into the November 12, 2022, collision between a Boeing B-17G Flying Fortress (N7227C) and a Bell P-63F Kingcobra (N6763), that occurred during a fly-by at the Wings Over Dallas Airshow at the Dallas Executive Airport (RBD/KRBD), Dallas, Texas: On November 12, 2022, about 1322 central standard time, a Boeing B-17G airplane, N7227C and a Bell P-63F airplane, N6763, collided in midair at the Dallas Executive Airport (RBD), Dallas, Texas. A post impact fire ensued. The pilot, co-pilot, and three crewmembers onboard the B-17G and the pilot of the P-63F were all fatally injured. There were no ground injuries reported. Both airplanes were operated under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 in the Wings Over Dallas Airshow. The P-63F was number 3 of a three-ship formation of historic fighter airplanes and the B-17G was lead of a five-ship formation of historic bomber airplanes. According to the recorded audio for the airshow radio transmissions and Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) data, the air boss directed both formations to maneuver southwest of the runway before returning to the flying display area, which was the designated performance area. He directed the fighter formation to transition to a trail formation, fly in front of the bomber formation, and proceed near the 500 ft show line. The bombers were directed to fly down the 1,000 ft show line. The 500 ft show line and 1,000 ft show line were 500 ft and 1,000 ft respectively from the airshow viewing line behind which the audience viewed the airshow. There were no altitude deconflictions briefed before the flight or while the airplanes were in the air. When the fighter formation approached the flying display area, the P-63F was in a left bank and it collided with the left side of the B-17G, just aft of the wing section. Both airplanes broke up in flight and impacted terrain in a grassy area on airport property south of the approach end of runway 31. A fire ignited in the wing center section of the B-17G as it descended to the ground. The B-17G exploded upon ground impact The debris field was generally aligned on a magnetic heading of 320°. Documentation of the accident site found all major flight control components for both airplanes located in the debris field. Both airplanes were equipped with ADS-B. An Avidyne IFD540 unit from the B-17G and a Garmin GPSMAP 496 unit from the P-63F were recovered and submitted to the National Transportation Safety Board Vehicle Recorders Laboratory. The IFD-540 contained position information relevant to the accident; however, the GPSMAP 496 did not record any information for the accident flight. The wreckage of both airplanes was retained for further examination.

I feel RAAus is taking a correct and well articulated position in relation to fatal accident investigations. MEMBER COMMUNIQUE 29 November 2022 Dear Members, It is important to share with you an update on RAAus’ recent decision to not investigate a fatal accident that occurred at Kybong in Queensland involving an RAAus registered aircraft and a VH- Registered Glider, resulting in the death of two Australians. In recent years, as a result of the ATSB choosing not to investigate sport aviation fatal accidents, RAAus has played a crucial role in formally supporting state police and Coroners, to assist them in understanding the circumstances around how/why an accident occurred. An artefact is that our participation has masked the fact that the ATSB have not been involved. Because of this our staff have endured WHS risk associated with deploying to accident sites, our reputation has at times been tainted due to our inability to share the reports we write as they ‘belong’ to the Coroner thus impeding the safety benefits for all aviators, and our members have funded a function that is not a core activity of RAAus. Moreover, this activity is one that is funded for other airspace users while our members are excluded from such safety dividends while contributing to the funding of the ATSB via the tax system. We have also been subjected to strong criticism due to the lack of independence in our findings despite us being faced with little alternative but to investigate our own. Nevertheless, we are proud of the significant work performed over the years to improve safety and provide some degree of closure for the loved ones of fatal accidents. During recent discussions with the ATSB Chief Commissioner we were informed that the decision as to whether or not to investigate lies within the ATSB prioritisation system. That is, where can they focus their efforts (and funding) for the ‘greatest public benefit’. For the recent accident at Kybong we contend that in applying their prioritisation system, the ATSB should have investigated this accident given the high airspace risk that is evident and that an investigation would yield significant benefits for ALL airspace users, not just sport aviation organisations. RAAus is strongly of the view that an independent understanding of the circumstances into this accident is essential and that the ATSB is best placed to do this. This is a view shared by many others in the industry. The ATSB enjoys a host of protections under the TSI Act 2003, whereas RAAus does not. It is for this reason and those mentioned above that we have made repeated (unsuccessful) representations to the ATSB Chief Commissioner and that we will once again be making representations to the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport to seek the appropriate level of funding for the ATSB. This would mean that RAAus members are afforded the same status that is given to other aviators and transport users in our community in recognition of the role we play in the sector and our position in the industry as Australia’s largest cohort of private aviators. The Board has therefore resolved that RAAus’ default position will be to not deploy staff/investigators to future fatal accidents, irrespective of ATSB’s position, to ensure we protect our people and the organisation. The CEO has been charged with making the assessment on our level of involvement which may still involve deployment however the role we would play will be significantly different from what we have done previously. We remain committed to supporting police, local authorities and Coroners wherever we can. There will be further work done on this matter including the continued seeking of legal advice. Should we shift our position in the future we will advise members accordingly. Michael Monck Chairman (for the board)

Incapacitation is extremely rare in pilots with a class 1 medical. Loss of situational awareness is relatively common, even with experienced crew. One of Dan Gryder's recent videos is about the crash in the USA that resulted in the 1500 hour rule for ATPL's in the USA. Both pilots flying a dash 8 aircraft failed to notice the airspeed bleeding off, the aircraft stalled and crashed. I will admit to having had loss of situational awareness, 99.99% of the time we get way with it.

A good operator never blames his tools, or battery. We need more information.

Perception and reality may be different with regards Australian fuel quality. “The majority of the BMW Group Australia fleet, including our range of new models, has been certified to run on Euro 6 fuel standards for some time now. Locally delivered engines in BMW and Mini models achieve the required power, efficiency, and emissions figures when using Australian fuel without any issues,” Ms Blanckenberg said. “While we would certainly welcome a lift in fuel standards and quality in the future, we are able to provide our customers with vehicles that perform to an optimal level with the current (fuel) offering.” BMW said recently that although it was prepared to offer electrified vehicles across its range as soon as was required, it was in no hurry to abandon development of its combustion engines and was confident customer demand will continue into the future. But for Mercedes-Benz, impending Euro 7 emission standards were already sounding the death knell for many of the combustion engines offered in its range. Mercedes-Benz chief operating office Markus Schafe recently told British publication Autocar that the brand “will reduce the number of engine variants, going through Euro7, by about 50 per cent”, but said it would only completely cease development and production of the combustion engine “where market conditions allow”, and possibly by as soon as the end of the decade. The German manufacturer has already announced plans to end production of its V8 and V12 engines, switching to high-output and electric-assisted four-cylinder units across much of its future range – including the next generation AMG C63 sports sedan, a crowd favourite in the Australian market. Despite the gloomy news, Australian consumers can rest easy in the knowledge that the current crop of Mercedes-Benz passenger vehicles already provide the best environmental performance possible, with Mercedes-Benz Cars Australia media relations and product communications manager Ryan Lewis telling GoAuto that the quality of Australian fuel was not a limiting factor in meeting the latest Euro 6 emissions equivalent. “Currently, every Mercedes-Benz passenger vehicle sold in Australia is fitted with a Euro 6 compliant engine, and all are suitable for use with today’s Australian fuels,” Mr Lewis said. The Grattan Institute suggests capping vehicle emissions could be another strategy that would set Australia on the road to net-zero emissions but states that better quality fuel is required to help achieve that target. https://www.goauto.com.au/news/conflicting-claims-about-australian-fuel-quality/2021-11-01/86245.html

Electric model aircraft have reached a very high percentage of the market with zero government incentives. GPS autosteer has become universal on farm machinery with zero government incentives. The cheapest electric car in Australia costs about 60k, someone who can afford a 60k car doesn't need a government hand out. The fuel quality article was written by a snake oil salesman, it might be very good snake oil.

The SAAA has information about getting flight instruction in an amateur built experimental aircraft in the latest email update. It is legal according to CASR 91.880(h) regardless of whether you built or bought the aircraft. Not sure why RAAus would make rules to make it more difficult than it needs to be. As they say it is up to the instructor/ flight school to say yes or no.

It would seize but unlikely to hole the piston. The piston crown is weakened due to excessive temps with a lean mixture, a hole soon follows.

Because I live on a farm, for the last 39 years I have used 205l drums to refuel the thruster. Vented drum pump so not sealed. Could be up to 3 months old. Zero issues with any rotax 2 stroke. Never had a problem starting a honda single cylinder industrial engine even if they had been sitting for 6 months with out adding fuel. The SES chain saw most likely holded the piston due lean mixture caused by carburetor fault, hard diaphragm in the pump or metering section etc.