Admin

Pitot tubes are crucial components onboard aircraft used to measure a range of important data. The tubes are popularly known as speedometers, giving pilots a gauge on their airspeed, and also measure altitude and altitude trend. Pitot tubes are usually found along the front fuselage or along the wing of an aircraft. What exactly are pitot tubes? Pitot tubes aren’t just inventions innovated for aviation; they’re also commonly found in industrial machinery, boats and even Formula 1 cars. A pitot tube is essentially a flow sensor instrument. Simple pitot tubes have one hole at the front; however, planes will often use pitot-static tubes with two openings rather than separate pitot tubes and static ports. Pitot-static instrumentation on an aircraft. Photo: Getty Images A simple pitot tube can measure stagnation pressure only due to its single opening. The advantage of a pitot-static tube is its ability to measure static pressure in addition to stagnation pressure. Static ports along the side of the pitot tube give it this all-in-one capability, meaning there is no need to install separate static ports elsewhere. How pitot tubes work Pitot tubes work as flow sensors to measure the speed and pressure of air, liquid or gas. These readings allow pilots to gauge airspeed and altitude and have a wide variety of applications in other equipment. The tubes can usually be spotted beneath the cockpit on the front fuselage or along the wing. Pitot tubes clearly visible on a 737NG. Photo: Simple Flying/Dylan Ashe The pitot-static tube has two openings, one in the front and one along the sides, used to measure air, gas or liquid flow. This system involves placing a pitot tube inside another tube with static ports. The front hole measures the stagnation pressure, while the side openings (static ports) gauge static pressure. The difference between these two measurements is called dynamic pressure – this is what is used to calculate airspeed. Pitot tubes are critical instruments Measuring airspeed is an indispensable part of flying and essential for all pilots to keep a gauge of. Pitot tubes provide indicated airspeed (IAS), based upon measuring the dynamic pressure. This is different from groundspeed, as planes can encounter resistance during flight, such as headwind and air density. Pitot tubes provide pilots with vital data on airspeed and altitude. Photo: Getty Images Planes flying too slowly won’t generate enough lift and risk spiraling into a stall, while aircraft flying too quickly risk damage as they aren’t built to withstand certain speeds. Airspeed is also vital in estimating flight length – inaccurate estimations may cause pilots to run out of fuel mid-journey if the flight goes on longer than expected. Incidents involving pitot tubes As a critical part of an aircraft’s instrumentation, pitot tubes have been at the center of several accidents. As the tubes are exposed to the elements, they are in danger of icing over, which has led to several fatal accidents. Pitot tube failures will always force a plane to divert – in October, an Airbus flight over Russia was forced to land after its pitot tubes were not heating up adequately. Testing the pitot-static system is important for ensuring safety. Photo: Lufthansa In one case, wasps nested inside a pitot tube, which later led to a fatal crash onboard Birgenair Flight 301. The aircraft had been grounded for 20 days and its pitot tubes were left uncovered, allowing wasps to burrow inside. Australia is to this day combating nuisance wasps that are nesting inside pitot tubes. Another high-profile case involved a disgruntled American Airlines mechanic tampering with a pitot tube, which led to an emergency landing.

It’s no secret that aviation is one of the biggest contributors to the planet’s carbon deposits. If left unchecked, research shows that aircrafts will have generated over 43 metric gigatons of carbon emissions by 2050. The same study notes that aviation is also one of the fastest-growing sources of carbon in the US. In order to create a more sustainable industry, local aeronautics specialists are doubling their efforts to make flight more eco-friendly. One solution they found, of course, was to switch planes’ fuel motors with electrically charged ones. For years, the venture seemed fruitless—but NASA is proving that nothing is impossible. The X-57 Maxwell is NASA’s first fully electric experimental aircraft. It was first released as a concept last year, but the government agency is conducting its first tests this month. Powered by two 400-pound lithium-ion battery packs, the X-57 Maxwell skilfully addresses the biggest hurdle faced by electric-powered aircraft: weight. Innovative propeller technology An aircraft is very heavy, which is why it takes a lot of energy to keep it in the sky. Yet, on the flip side, the majority of a plane’s weight is the machinery that powers the aircraft. Due to an increase in accessibility of “light yet reliable” high-lift motors and motor controllers, NASA has been able to solve the weight issue. Electronic manufacturers were able to calculate their PCBs’ stackup impedance to ensure enough signal layers in every power path. As a result, all the machine’s components get enough electricity between the ground and power planes, enabling each motor to work with minimal sag or droop. On each of X-57 Maxwell’s wings, six of those electric-powered motors are built-in for each propeller, theoretically allowing the plane to fly. An ultra-light aircraft NASA didn’t actually build the X-57 Maxwell’s body. The base used was a Tecnam P2006T—an aircraft built by Costruzioni Aeronautiche Tecnam from Italy. This plane continues to be the lightest twin-engine aircraft available, which made it the best starting point for NASA’s aircraft. Furthermore, the X-57 Maxwell’s wings are at least 58% smaller than regular wings. NASA claims that not only will this reduce the overall weight, but also lower the drag. This will prevent the aircraft from expending too much power. Where is the X-57 Maxwell now? NASA recently completed the plane’s Low-Speed Aeroacoustic Wind Tunnel (LSAWT) in Hampton, Virginia. They exposed the hardware to wind speeds from zero to over 90 knots for 14 hours. The results were very positive. The LSAWT test took over two weeks during October. “The X-57 project is using these tests to determine the as-built performance versus our models, so that we have high confidence in the performance of these propellers when we get to flight,” mentions Nick Borer, Advanced Concepts Group Lead for NASA Langley’s Aeronautics Systems Analysis Branch. Once the X-57 Maxwell successfully takes off, it’s going to be proof that zero-emission air travel is possible. NASA just needs to perform a couple of other tests and we’ll hopefully see the aircraft in the sky in the near future. Indeed, the future is bright for sustainable aviation.

On June 30, 1943, Flight Sergeant Colin Duncan and his squadron of Spitfires took off on a mission to intercept Japanese aircraft over Darwin. But while the ensuing battle has for decades been marked in folklore, the whereabouts of Duncan's shot-down plane has, until now, remained a mystery. The Spitfire A58-2 Duncan was flying caught fire, engulfing the cabin in flames and sending the aircraft plummeting towards the ground in a spiral dive. Desperate to escape, the rip cord to release his aircraft canopy failed, leaving Duncan scrambling to force it off and struggle out of the aircraft to parachute to the ground. Flight Sergeant Colin Duncan defied death to make it back to Darwin.(Supplied: Australian War Memorial) But his battle was only just beginning. Duncan was stranded with severe burns in tough Top End terrain, alone and with minimal supplies, and it would be another five days before he was rescued. Bombing of Darwin: 70 years on On February 19, 1942, Japanese forces launched air raids on Darwin. Hundreds were killed in the attack. This compilation of videos, pictures and recollections take a look a of the most significant moments in Australian history. Seventy-six years since that fateful flight, Colin Duncan's grandson has visited the wreckage of his grandfather's plane for the first time. As he walked through the untouched debris of the Spitfire's final resting place, Duncan Williams was left shocked. "It's a genuine time capsule," he said. "I didn't expect it. I don't know what I was expecting really. Mr Williams said he was amazed his grandfather managed to escape alive. On viewing the wreckage, he remarked on how the Spitfire hit the ground with such force it left only a mangled mess of metal. "He was very lucky to get out alive," Mr Williams said. "Here we've got the cannons. You can see the angle the plane hit the ground. The aircraft wreck is now protected under the Northern Territory Heritage Act.(ABC News: Ian Redfearn) The remote location in Litchfield National Park, about 110 kilometres south of Darwin, means the Spitfire has remained undiscovered until recently. And with the crash site immensely difficult to reach and only accessible by helicopter, the plan is to preserve the wreckage at its final resting place. 'This is our Pearl Harbour' The RAAF has handed ownership of the wreckage to the Northern Territory Government in the hope it will help tell the story of Darwin's role in World War II. According to RAAF Air Commodore John Meier, the new find in the Top End outback is testament to the Darwin's often forgotten place in modern wartime history. Hundreds were killed in air battles over Darwin during World War II.(ABC News: Ian Redfearn) "We only had a few Spitfires in Australia, and this one is of major significance because it was lost in the battle of Darwin," he said. "If you compare it to Pearl Harbour, that everyone knows about, this is our Pearl Harbour, and it's not particularly well known by the Australian population." Colin Duncan continued flying Spitfires in the war, and later played cricket for Victoria as well as running a successful building company. He died in 1992 from cancer, leaving behind his wife and two daughters.

Before the glamorous flyers of the 1930s like Amelia Earhart, “Chubby” Miller and Nancy Bird Walton, another woman opened the way to the skies — and were it not for a tragic twist of fate, her name might now be just as familiar. Her name was Millicent Maude Bryant, and in early 1927, she became the first woman to gain a pilot’s licence in Australia. She was also first in the Commonwealth outside Britain. Millicent Bryant c.1919. Portrait by Monte Luke. Author provided A boundary-pusher who met an untimely end Millicent was born in 1878 at Oberon and grew up near Trangi in western New South Wales. Her family, the Harveys, moved to Manly for a period after a younger brother, George, contracted polio (one of the treatments was “sea-bathing”). She met and married a public servant 15 years her senior, Edward Bryant. They had three children but the couple separated not long before Edward died in 1926. Later that year, Bryant began instruction with the Australian Aero Club at Mascot in Sydney. At the time, the site of the current international airport was just a large, grassy expanse with a few buildings and hangars. Bryant was accepted by the Aero Club’s chief instructor, Captain Edward Leggatt (himself a noted first world war fighter pilot), soon after the club had opened its membership to women. Even then, though, she was unusual: here was a 49-year-old mother of three taking up the challenge of flying which, in the 1920’s, was still as dangerous as it was exciting and glamorous. Millicent Bryant (second from left) with other aviators beside her De Havilland Moth. Author provided courtesy of Mary Taguchi. She quickly progressed, ahead of two other younger, women students, and made her first solo flight in February, 1927. By this time, newspapers all around Australia were following her story, and in late March she took the test for the “A” licence that would enable her to independently fly De Havilland Moth biplanes. She passed, and with the issue of her licence by the Ministry of Defence, Bryant was acclaimed as the first woman to gain a pilot’s licence in Australia. Millicent Bryant’s training certificate from the Aero Club of Australia (NSW Section). Her ‘A’ Licence was issued by the Department of Defence in April, 1927 Why, then, isn’t she better known in our day? While Bryant immediately began training for a licence to carry passengers and flew regularly in the months that followed, it was her particular misfortune to step onto the Sydney ferry Greycliffe on its regular 4.14pm run to Watson’s Bay on November 3, 1927. Less than an hour later, she was among 40 dead after the ferry was cut in half off Bradley’s Head by the mail steamer Tahiti. It was Sydney’s worst peacetime maritime disaster. Bryant was still only 49. Her funeral two days later was attended by hundreds of people and accorded a remarkable aerial tribute, as the Wellington Times reported: Five aeroplanes from the Mascot aerodrome flew over the procession as it wended its way to the cemetery. As the burial service was read by the Rev. A. R. Ebbs, rector of St. Matthew’s, Manly, one of the planes descended to within about 150 feet of the grave, and there was dropped from it a wreath of red carnations and blue delphiniums … Attached to the floral tribute was a card bearing the following inscription: 5th November, 1927. With the deepest sympathy of the committee and members of the Australian Aero Club — N.S.W. section. A pioneer in life as well as the sky Bryant’s story quickly lapsed into obscurity. Fortunately, some 80 years later, the rediscovery in the family of a collection of letters and other writings has enabled Bryant’s life beyond her flying achievement to be rediscovered. The letters were — and are still until they are added to the collection of Bryant’s papers in the National Library — held by her granddaughter, Millicent Jones of Kendall, NSW, who rediscovered them in storage at her home. The main correspondence is a conversation with her second son, John, in England. It covers the period she was flying, though it only moderately expands on the flights recorded in her logbook. However, her letters and writings reveal much more about Bryant herself, her relationships, her feelings and her leisure, business and political activities. And they make it apparent that she was as much a pioneer in life as well as in the sky. A clipping from The Bulletin, February 24, 1927. The Bulletin., Author provided For one, flying was not Bryant’s only unconventional interest. She was also an entrepreneur, registering an importing company in partnership with John, who went on to become a pioneer of the Australian dairy industry. She opened a men’s clothing business, Chesterfield Men’s Mercery, in Sydney’s CBD. However, disaster struck when it was inundated with water mere weeks after opening, following a fire in the tea rooms upstairs. Bryant then became a small-scale property developer, buying and building on land in Vaucluse and Edgecliffe. She’d been well tutored in this by her father, grazier Edmund Harvey (a grandfather of billionaire Gerry Harvey), whose own holdings eventually included a large part of the Kanimbla Valley west of the Blue Mountains. An excellent horsewoman, Bryant was also an early motorist who had driven over 35,000 miles around NSW and who could fix her own car. She was a keen golfer and reader and even a student of Japanese at the University of Sydney. A key writing fragment by Millicent Bryant (c.1924). Author provided Several fragments of a family saga she planned to write, based on her own life, are among her papers. One sheet, entitled “A Life”, summarises in a series of rough notes rather more than she might have told anyone about her inner world. Marriage – mistakes – children – despondency. Ill-health. Great desire to “live” and create things… She notes that a trip abroad was a complete success but it furnished a heart interest which lasted for fourteen years until hope died owing to a marriage. This fragment provides some background to her taking, in her forties, the unusual step at that time of leaving her marriage and family home to start life afresh with her sons. This was not long before she took her first flight, probably with Edgar Percival, a family friend and later a successful aircraft designer whose planes won air races and were noted for their graceful lines. Vigour, values and conflicts Growing up in the NSW inland late in the 19th century, Bryant would have begun with a fairly traditional view of what it meant to be a wife and mother. However, her early life was also “free-spirited” (as one newspaper described her upbringing) and her determination to make decisions and shape her own life put her on a collision course with gender role expectations common at the time. Learning to fly, especially in middle age, was a breakthrough she pursued perhaps even more keenly after being denied work with the Sydney Sun newspaper solely because she was married. Bryant clearly came to hold strong ideas about what a woman could and couldn’t do, and her life shows a determination to make her own path, despite confronting obstacles that are still familiar in our own time. Bryant is not just a figure in aviation history. Her life — spanning the colonial period, the newly-federated nation and the tragedies of World War I — came to reflect the vigour, values and conflicts of Australia in the early 20th century. In 2006 a new memorial to Millicent Bryant was placed in Manly (now Balgowlah) Cemetery. It was dedicated by the late Nancy Bird Walton, pictured with Gaby Kennard (left) the first Australian woman to fly a single-engine plane around the world, and (right) a great-great-granddaughter of Millicent Bryant, Matilda Millicent Power-Jones. Author provided, Author provided

Queensland motorists could get a rare glimpse of two vintage Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) planes as they are escorted by police convoy on a 1,600-kilometre road trip across Queensland. The Mirage fighter jet A3-55 and Winjeel Trainer A85-403 started their journey just after midnight Friday from the Amberley RAAF base. The restored aircraft were expected to arrive in Townsville on Sunday to go on permanent display at the RAAF's Aviation Heritage Centre, ahead of next year's Air Force Centenary. The convoy will be stopping about every two hours with overnight stays in Banana and Moranbah. Other towns that are expected to see the aircraft include Toowoomba, Dalby, Chinchilla, Miles, Wandoan, Taroom, Theodore, Dululu, Dingo and Charters Towers. Planes restored 'to former glory' The Mirage, or French Lady, was a single-seat frontline fighter that flew between 1967 and 1987, capable of a speed of more than 2,000 kilometres an hour and was armed with guns, missiles and bombs. The Winjeel — an Aboriginal word for 'young eagle' — was a basic flight trainer that flew between 1958 and 1975. They have been restored by members of the Amberley RAAF Base's Air Force History and Heritage Branch. Warrant Officer Mike Downes has joined the convoy and said it was a unique spectacle of aviation history. An historic photo of the Mirage fighter jets in flight.(Supplied: Department of Defence) "I'm a bit of an aviation nut, I love my aircraft," WOFF Downes said. "The interest level has been generated in places like Claremont and Moranbah and Banana. "People say I used to work on that or my father flew them." Part of the restoration included clearing out the cockpit and a new lick of paint. "We've painted the aircraft in the colours of number 76 Squadron so it represents the colours that that aircraft operated in back when it was flying," WOFF Downs said. Winjeel Trainer A85-403 left Amberley on Friday and is expected to arrive in Townsville on Sunday.(Department of Defence) 'It will take up most of the road' WOFF Downes said it has taken about a year to organise the logistics, including police escorting the Mirage. "We've taken the wings off the Winjeel so it's quite a narrow load," he said. The wings of the Winjeel have been removed.(Supplied: RAAF) "The Mirage is a different story completely, it's actually 8.2 metres wide from wingtip to wingtip so it will take up most of the road." He said flying the aircraft to Townsville would have required a rebuild. "It would be a mammoth task to make it air-worthy," he said. "This aircraft has been turned into a static display aircraft so we've removed the engine and a lot of the other equipment." The Mirage will be escorted by a police convey for the entire journey. The two aircraft will meet up in Charters Towers before heading to their final destination.

Australian company AMSL Aero has unveiled what it claims to be the world’s first electric air ambulances, launching the first prototype aircraft in Sydney on Wednesday as part of a partnership with air-rescue organisation CareFlight. The Vertiia prototype has been designed to take-off vertically, like a helicopter, but once airborne, flies with the aid of fixed wings, in the same way as a plane does. AMSL Aero says that this combination provides the aircraft with significant flexibility in where it can land, while also providing greater speed and energy efficiency. The company says that the aircraft would reach a cruising speed of up to 300 km/h and a range of up to 250km as an all-electric model with batteries, and a hydrogen fuelled version achieving a range of up to 800km. The aircraft was launched by deputy prime minister and transport minister Michael McCormack, who welcomed the prospect of an all-electric aircraft that had the ability to access difficult areas. “I remember growing up and watching the Jetsons and marveling at that futuristic technology. It’s right here, right now and it’s happening,” McCormack said. “What an exciting day to think that we’ve got a what will be a carbon neutral plane taking off, landing, in sites where there’s a mass casualty or indeed a hospital where somebody’s young, or somebody not so young, needs urgent medical retrieval and in sometimes even country areas, you can’t get to places easily” AMSL Aero CEO Andrew Moore says the vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) allows the aircraft to access areas without the need of a runway, and it had entered into a partnership with CareFlight for the development of an “electric aero ambulance”, that could provide crucial medical support to regional communities. Deputy prime minister Michael McCormack, with AMSL Aero co-founders Andrew Moore and Siobhan Lyndon. “Vertiia will instantly enable greater access to medical services for vulnerable remote, rural, and regional communities, offering new models of care through rapid and low-cost connectivity,” Moore said. “Unlike aeromedical planes that require a runway, Vertiia will carry patients directly from any location straight to the hospital, significantly reducing the complexity and time transporting vulnerable patients. “It will also be quieter and safer than helicopters, and will eventually cost as little as a car to maintain and run, transforming aeromedical transport into a far more affordable, accessible, safer, and reliable option.” CareFlight’s medical director Dr Toby Fogg said that the organisation had been attracted to the Vertiia aircraft, as its efficiency and lower operational costs, while providing the same flexibility as a helicopter, meant that it could potentially deploy more aircraft for the same cost, reaching more people needing assistance. “Initial scoping and modelling suggest that with Vertiia we would be able to reach more Australians. For example, the price point of operating Vertiia versus helicopters and fixed wing aircraft would mean we can purchase a much larger fleet aircraft, by several multiples. The lower operational costs would allow us to hire more doctors, nurses and paramedics,” Fogg said. AMSL Zero was founded in Australia in 2017 by co-founders Andrew Moore and Siobhan Lyndon with the initial versions of the aircraft having the ability to carry a pilot, a medic as well as transporting a patient. The partnership between AMSL Aero and CareFlight is being supported as part of a $3 million Cooperative Research Centres Project grant, and would include the University of Sydney and autonomy and sensing specialists, Mission Systems as part of the collaboration. CareFlight pilots will be involved in the design of the Vertiia aircraft, ensuring it meets the needs of medical services and could see electric air ambulances deployed within the next few years. The company already has its eyes set on the creation of a commercial version of the aircraft having the capacity to transport up to four people. Both the all-electric and hydrogen fuelled versions of the aircraft have the potential to operate with zero associated greenhouse gas emissions. A prototype of the Vertiia aircraft was unveiled at AMSL’s aerodrome located at Bankstown Airport in Sydney, where the aircraft has been undergoing construction. The aircraft is expected to undertake test flights from a facility at Narromine Airport, just outside of Dubbo. The Vertiia aircraft is being touted as one of the world’s most energy efficient aircraft and has the potential to be deployed in a range of applications, including commercial transport and flying taxis.

Bundaberg’s Jabiru Aircraft has created face shields with the help of 3D printing to provide extra protection for frontline workers dealing with Covid-19 cases. Bundaberg’s Jabiru Aircraft Pty Ltd, whose business usually focuses on producing light sport aircraft and engines, has responded to the current pandemic crisis by creating face shields utilising 3D printing technology to provide extra protection to frontline health workers dealing with Covid-19 cases. With these efforts Jabiru Aircraft joins other manufacturing entities and individuals around the world in producing emergency Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) during a time of global shortage. Jabiru Aircraft Business Manager Sue Woods said last Friday she and an employee, engineer Alex Swan, were looking at ways to support health care workers during the current public health situation, and with a little ingenuity and the help of a 3D printer they were able to design and commence the manufacture of the PPE. Sue said they were very concerned for the wellbeing of paramedics, GPs and medical personnel who were most at risk of contracting the virus. They hoped the extra layer of protection offered by the face shield would keep these essential people healthy. Both Sue and Alex have family members who work in healthcare, and they were on the same path of thinking – wanting to ensure not only their loved ones stayed safe, but also others facing the Coronavirus firsthand. 3D printers used to create face shields “I came to work one day after watching footage on the shortage of PPE and thought ‘what can we do'?” Sue said. “Alex experimented with cutting the visor section until we had the right shape and he modified the headband 3D file to accommodate glasses underneath. “We then had both a local dentist and a local doctor try the face shields, and check with sterilising products, and we had good response.” Jabiru Aircraft Pty Ltd has designed and manufactured emergency Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) during a time of global shortage in result of the Covid-19 situation. Two 3D printers are used by Jabiru Aircraft to create the head band for the face shield and the transparent polycarbonate for the visor is cut to shape with a flatbed CNC router. “Our engineer Alex Swan has been very motivated with this project and volunteered much of his own time, getting up in the middle of the night to keep the 3D printers going 24/7,” Sue said. “We have two 3D printers and Alex took them home so he could get up at 2am to press the button to start the next headband.” Sue said it took less than a week to develop the idea and start production of the face shields, and they hope to have 100 finished and shipped to paramedics in Western Australia by Monday. She said the slowest part of the production was the 3D printing and she was thankful for the support from other local organisations who offered assistance. “To increase our production rate of the 3D printed component, CQUniversity Bundaberg and Gladstone and Makerspace Bundaberg and Hervey Bay, along with CQUniversity Makerspace have jumped on board very quickly, and we now have several additional 3D printers in action,” she said. “We are also getting offers of assistance from schools in the local community.”

Time has flown by with November 23 marking the 90th anniversary of the first flight from what was the Western Junction Aerodrome and is now the Launceston Airport. The first flight in 1930 was undertaken by pilot Joe Francis in the Gipsy Moth VH-ULM, leased by the Defense Department to the Tasmanian Aero Club. Club historian Lindsay Millar said the first flight was crucial to aviation in the state. "That first flight really marked the beginning of permanent commercial aviation in Tasmania." "From that very beginning, that first flight here at this airport on November 23, 1930, that was the catalyst for everything." The flight led to the formation of Tasmania's first air service, Flinders Island Airways, which eventually, after many different changes and amalgamations, became Australian National Airways, one of the world's largest airlines. Mr Millar said the anniversary crept up on them. "It is amazing and I have been privileged to belong to the Aero Club since 1956. I have been able to share the history of that club in that period," he said. The plane that made the historical first flight is also, once again, touring the skies. The restoration of the plane was started back in 2002 and was completed in 2012 with the original Aero Club colours. The VH-ULM after its restoration was finished in 2012. "The incredible thing about the flight VH-ULM is that the aircraft still exists and is now flying in Queensland," Mr Millar said. "That aircraft after being in private hands for some years and then in a a museum, it's back in the air again, better than brand new." The Tasmanian Aviation Historical Society president Andrew Johnson said it was remarkable the plane was still running. "This aircraft has been restored and looked after and still flying. That makes the whole story really special." Lindsay Millar with model of first flight plane. Mr Johnson said the first flight was the start of quite a significant aviation story in Tasmania. "That first flight led to numerous other flights and to individuals who were pioneers in aviation taking up the concept of flight and developing it from, I suppose a bit of a novelty idea, to commercial flying." "It did pave the way for others." On November 23, the Tasmanian Aero Club rooms will host a special function to recognise the anniversary of the flight and celebrate how far aviation has come because of that moment. "We believe it's an important story and that's why the [TAHS] was formed - to shine some light on it and I think that's the start of it," Mr Johnson said. "From now on we will start to really recognise the events and the significant dates of aviation in Tasmania."

Packing for travelling light Always a problem – so many compromises have to be made. The old adage, "If in doubt, leave it out ...", needs to be applied often, but there's still lots of pondering, hefting, agonizing, and re-packing. I've gone through the process dozens of times over the years, preparing for long backpacking and motorbike trips, and now ultralights. It does get easier, especially with the lightweight gear now on the market, and I have learned a few tricks that I'll pass on to anyone interested. As you'll see, I like my comforts as well, and have found ways to bring them with me, folding chair included! First of all, I would never leave my self-inflating mattress behind. It's 3/4 length, 25 mm thick when inflated, rolls up to a small bundle deflated, and weighs very little. You'd think that thickness (thinness) wouldn't be of much use, but it does wonders for a comfortable sleep! If the cost seems too much (about $90 when I got mine), then at least get one of those blue foam mats. Even 8 mm thickness of that blue foam is enough to make a really big difference on cold, hard ground, and cut down to 3/4 length also weighs very little. To carry the mattress on the aircraft, I use a couple of short pieces of light bungee cord (3–4 mm diameter) tied in loops like strong rubber bands to keep the mattress rolled-up, then another couple of loops of the bungee tied around a convenient tube on the aircraft, and just slip the rolled mattress under these loops — nothing to tie/untie every time, and very secure. Inside the wing would be a good place, if you have access on your aircraft. A sleeping bag is the next obvious necessity for camping out. There are lots of options here, but I find that combining a light-weight sleeping bag with lots of cold weather flying clothing gives the most flexible combinations for all-weather flying and camping at minimum weight. So let's first have a look at flying clothing. Flying warm Having been raised on the central plains of Canada, then spending months at a time living on motorcycles in all weathers has taught me a bit about dressing to survive the cold. I did a lot of suffering in those early days before I learned better. Let's start at the inside, where you can make the biggest gains in warmth. I really don't understand why long underwear gets the jokes and ridicule that it does. It's by far the most effective warm clothing of all, for it's weight. The polypropylene thermal underwear available these days is soft, form-fitting and stretchy, and easily fits under other clothing. It wicks moisture away from the skin and provides a layer of warm air next to the skin, just like I would imagine the layer of fur does for a cat! When not being worn it packs into a soft bundle and weighs very little. The jeans and shirt going over it provide very little warmth for all their weight; far warmer and more comfortable is to travel in a track suit. Over the shirt go a couple of lamb's wool sweaters. These are the soft, fluffy, 'lounging' sweaters, either V-neck, or crew neck to your preference. Two (or more) layers like this is much, much, warmer and lighter than one heavy jumper, and more flexible and comfortable. When not needed they stuff easily into your travelling bag. When your flying jacket goes over all this fluffy bulk you'll feel like a fat teddy bear, but at least you'll be a warm and cosy bear! The sweaters are for sale in 'recycled clothing stores for a couple of dollars each, so not a cost problem, but get a larger size for comfort. (I actually bought a couple of them in Narromine one time, when ferrying an open ultralight from Geelong, and a freezing cold front caught me unprepared; nice and warm all the way after that.) If you wear a flying suit then your legs are already covered, but if you wear a flying jacket, then you need some outer pants – it's no use being a cosy bear on the top while losing all your body heat from your legs. Those insulatedski pants are ideal. They're wind-proof, warm, light-weight, and come well up under the jacket for a good seal. But this isn't all that you can do; don't forget those cold feet. I carry several pairs of light wool socks, and wear two or three pairs at once on a long, cold flight, with another couple of dry pairs to change into at fuel stops. Another important bit of clothing is a scarf, to seal around the collar of your jacket, and protect the back of your neck. I just use a T-shirt for the purpose, since it can double as a spare shirt as well. Even more effective is a balaclava, which will seal in the whole head and neck. For the hands, ski gloves with the tips of the fingers cut off, work well for me – warm and still have good dexterity. Dress like this and you won't be cold, regardless of the conditions. I know that all this seems like a lot of stuff, but the extra, besides what you would wear anyhow, doesn't weigh much at all, and much of it will double for your sleeping gear as well. Of course, the other advantage of all these layers is that you can arrange them to suit the conditions at the time, whereas if you depend only on a very warm flight suit, it can be stifling on a hot day, and yet too bulky and difficult to pack away. Sleeping Sleeping warm So I just carry a lightweight summer sleeping bag all year. But a roomy one, because inside it I wear as much of the flying clothing as is necessary for the temperature of the night. I don't know where the myth comes from about it being warmer in a sleeping bag with your day clothes off — I find just the opposite, and I've had many teeth-chattering nights to put it to the test. There are several advantages to wearing lots of clothing inside a sleeping bag; not the least of which is, if you need to get up in the middle of the night for whatever reason, it's no sense exposing any more skin than necessary to that chill night air! As a minimum I use my thermal underwear as pyjamas, and if the night is cold enough, then my track suit pants and a jumper as well. The track suit pants are the ones with two layers of light fabric rather than the thick fleecy ones — lighter and easier to pack away. Then when I get up in the morning to stir up the fire, I'm already dressed enough to be comfortable, without having to get into cold clothes. If it's a really freezing cold night then I'll wear everything (except jeans, they're just too uncomfortable), including flying jacket and ski pants, not forgetting a couple of pairs of dry wool socks and the T-shirt wrapped around my head. With all these options I can be comfortable anywhere from the tropics to the frosty high plains. The sleeping bag should have a hood to keep your head warm, since 20% of body heat is lost there. And it must not have a fleece lining — the fleece feels nice on bare skin but it drags on your clothing when you roll over, and collects every bindi [burr] in the west if it gets a chance. Sleeping really light The next essential for lightweight camping is a 'space blanket' (that may be a trademark name, but I'll use it anyhow). It's also an essential part of any survival kit so I have a space blanket permanently in my aircraft, even for local flights; once again it weighs little and is held in by a couple of loops of light bungee cord around a convenient tube. When camping really light, I use the space blanket as a ground sheet, pulled partly over the sleeping bag on the side which any draught is coming from. Stopping that draught from getting at your back makes a really big difference to staying warm at night. Putting another space blanket right over the sleeping bag sure is nice and warm, but condensation will wet parts of the sleeping bag — but if it's raining it's still a lot better than cold rain soaking the bag. If the second space blanket is set up like a lean-to, with a fire in front, it's like a reflector oven and is the warmest camp of all! Avoid the cheap imitation space blankets on the market, made of that blue tarpaulin material aluminized on one side — they're much heavier and stiffer than the original brand 'Space Blanket', and not nearly as useful. One last essential for sleeping out is a mosquito net! It only takes one persistent mossie at 3 a.m. to ruin a good sleep (and if there's one buzzing around you, others will hear the buzz and come over to get their share). The lightest solution that I've found is to carry one of those fly nets that fits over a hat. So I sleep under my hat and try to tuck the net into the bag — it's awkward and prone to coming loose if I roll around to much, but sure is better than trying to breathe inside the sleeping bag on a tropical night! Five star accommodation Of course the way to really beat the mossies, and get a whole lot of other comforts as well, is to have a tent. And that's possible these days with the light-weight tents on the market. Mine weighs just 2 kg, and is a great little 'cocoon'. It not only keeps the mossies well away, but it stops that chilling draught, keeps the dew off, and provides shelter to keep my gear and boots dry if there's rain in the night. I used to 'sleep rough' with only a ground sheet and sleeping bag, but now I'm hooked on the comforts of my little tent. So what doall those 'very littles'add up to? The flying clothing — ski pants, track suit pants, 2 sweaters, T-shirt, gloves, 5 pairs socks, and thermal underwear — weigh 3 kg. (The flying jacket is so much a part of me that I consider it as part of my personal weight.) The sleeping bag, mattress, and 2 space blankets add another 3 kg, and the optional tent is 2 kg. Stuff it all into a light-weight sports bag (along with a small pillow for real comfort) and that's9 kg — not too bad for a kit that's sufficient for flying and sleeping-out in just about any weather, and in reasonable comfort. Basic survival gear Every aircraft should always carry some basic survival gear, even on short local flights. That may seem a bit extreme to most casual fliers, but let's have a think about it, and maybe you'll decide to carry at least the basics in future. Hopefully it'll never be needed for a critical 'survival' situation, but much more likely just an unplanned night spent out somewhere, due to bad weather or mechanical failure. Water In this hot, dry Australian land it's really amazing to see fliers ignoring all lessons of common sense by flying off without any water at all on board! Even without the possibility of being stranded by an emergency landing, it's really nice to have some good drinking water at hand. I always have at least two litres of water in my aircraft — one litre bottle right handy for a refreshing drink whenever it suits, and another litre bottle secured in the pod. That's enough, if used sparingly, to make a really big difference if I get stranded somewhere overnight. Two litres is the absolute minimum, but if you're going away from the settled coast and the weather is really hot then of course much more is required. To carry more water the best containers these days are those tough nylon water 'bags' sold by good camping stores — much easier to pack into corners of the pod, or wherever, and easier to tie down than hard containers. They're also handy for trimming the balance of an aircraft (seems ridiculous to see some aircraft with a lump of lead permanently in the tail, when a few litres of water would have the same effect, and be a handy reserve as well!) Space Blanket This is the most useful survival equipment you can carry; it could save your life in either hot or cold conditions. I have one permanently secured in my aircraft. It weighs less than very little and is easy to roll up and tie to some tubing somewhere out of the way. One of the most likely causes of being forced down is due to bad weather, and that might well mean being caught out in cold rain for a couple of days or more. No shortage of water, but without shelter it could easily get to hypothermia. In extreme cold, wet conditions it's best to crouch down, or sit in the aircraft seat, with your knees against your chest, trying to be as small as possible, with the space blanket over your head and around you like a shawl. This way you best contain your body heat and shed the cold rain. It gets pretty cramped and uncomfortable, but you can at least survive in some really cold conditions this way. If you have the means of lighting a fire and keeping it going, then the the space blanket rigged as a lean-to can turn a survival situation into real comfort. In the event of being stranded in hot weather, the space blanket once again is a saviour. If you have limited water, then it's very important to reduce the losses. Watch kangaroos for a good lesson on how to manage these conditions. During the heat of the day, especially in drought conditions, they select the best shade they can find and then just lie there without moving at all — same should go with us. Chasing around looking for bush tucker or digging for water is usually a complete waste of precious energy. Tie the space blanket over some low bushes, crawl underneath with the water you have, and lie absolutely still. Try to 'slow down' and get into a state of slumber, breathing as slowly as possible through the nostrils, and stay that way; you can survive much, much longer in this state of suspended animation than if you were up and moving around. Let's hope it never comes to this extreme for any of us, and it shouldn't if you carry an ELT, but it's good to know, just in case ... Fire lighters I always keep at least two of those gas cigarette lighters on hand, one inside the rolled up space blanket, with another one always in the shoulder pocket of my flying jacket. Some purists insist on matches, but my experience indicates that the lighters are much better than even the best 'waterproof' matches — with those lighters that have an adjustable flame it's like lighting a fire with a blow-torch! In Australia it's nearly always possible to find enough suitable wood to light a fire, and that fire can be really essential for survival. With the space blanket rigged as a lean-to in front of a good fire, you can be dry and cosy. Light the fire against a log, with a couple of heavy bits stacked across on top, and it reflects the heat into the lean-to as well as protecting the fire from the rain. VERY IMPORTANT! A campfire isn't all that visible from the air unless it has a good plume of smoke in daylight or a flare-up at night. So if you're depending upon an aerial search (due to your ELT signal of course), then keeping a good fire going is essential. Have a bundle of foliage ready to throw on to make lots of smoke in the daytime, or a big bundle of light branches on hand to make the fire flare up quickly at night, in case you should hear an aircraft approaching. Mirror Another way to assist a search aircraft, or even possibly attract the attention of any passing aircraft, is with a signalling mirror. A bright, persistent flash from the ground really catches the attention, and that's easy to do if you have a mirror on a sunny day, and know how to use it. The plastic ones from camping supply are light and easy to carry, so is a CD; mine lives in the map pocket, but inside the space blanket would be good. It should have a hole in the middle; if not then drill an 8mm hole. To use it, hold the mirror against your eye with the reflective side away, peeping through the hole at the aircraft. Reach out with the other hand as far as you can, holding a finger tip in line with the target, and adjusting the angle of the mirror to shine the reflection onto the finger tip. Practice it with a friend at your airfield and you'll see how brilliant and distinctive the flash is, even at a great distance. ELT Well of course every aircraft should carry an Emergency Locator Transmitter. The little pocket ones are excellent, and affordable — no logical reason not to carry one these days. They're really effective, as I've proven a couple of times — both times I could have been rescued really quickly if the emergency was real. Those false alarms were just embarrassing, but it's very consoling to know that the system works so well. But the ELT must 'live' in the aircraft at all times, even for short local flights. Work out some form of mounting so that the ELT is permanently near at hand, but can be quickly removed if a speedy exit is needed. Food Food is certainly the most over-rated item in most survival manuals. All that talk of chasing around looking for little bits of 'bush tucker' and trapping animals is nonsense — far better to just lay still and conserve the reserves of energy your body already has in store. We can all go for a couple of days without any food at all, and some could even benefit from the enforced diet! Some care also needs to be taken in selecting food to carry along. For example, the often recommended 'beef jerky' would be absolutely the worst selection I could think of — not only is it a desiccated product that needs water to reconstitute, and salty that needs water to balance, but all such meat protein foods need even more water for the digestion process. It's not as if we need body-building protein in that situation — we need energy, easily digested energy. So I carry tubes of Nestle's sweetened condensed milk! Yes, it's by far the best 'survival' food that I can find. It has heaps of sugar for that instant energy, and milk for sustained energy, and the little bit of fat and protein that makes the stomach feel like it's had at least a bit of a feed. If you also have a little billycan hidden away in the aircraft, then Nestle's milk in hot water makes a very warming and sustaining drink on a cold, wet night. In a pinch you can just suck it out of the tube, along with comforting memories of childhood. So, inside my rolled up space blanket I also carry a tube of Nestle's, just in case ... I usually have several muesli bars stashed away in a pocket under the seat of my aircraft. They're for snack food and 'flying breakfasts', but would make good survival food — if enough water was at hand. Repellant Last, but not least, I reckon insect repellant is an essential to good survival. Not only do mossies drink your precious blood, but a night spent fighting them means the next day being so tired that you can't even think straight — and sufficient rest for clear thinking really is an essential for survival. Many survival crises have been made much worse by muddled thinking and panic, often brought on by exhaustion, so this is important. Just the smallest bottle available, or those individually packaged 'wipes', is all that's needed. Clothing Shouldn't even have to mention this, but a hat can make a real big difference for comfort, and even the chances of survival in either cold rain or hot sun. If you don't wear a hat regularly, then at least include one in the survival kit. My insulated flying jacket comes with me in the aircraft all the time, winter and summer. My ski pants are stashed out the way in the wing all the time. With the jacket and ski pants and the space blanket, and a good fire, I can be pretty comfortable on even a very cold night. So the minimum 'survival kit' that I reckon should be in any aircraft, all the time, (space blanket, lighters, mirror, repellant, ELT ) weighs less than a kilo, plus two kilos of water. So that's 3 kg for enough gear to survive for a day and a night without too much distress – sure sounds a lot better to me than being out there with nothing! STRICT COPYRIGHT JOHN BRANDON AND RECREATIONAL FLYING (.com)

One of my early instructors was a highly pessimistic individual, always muttering about 'What if this bit fell off, how would you cope with it?" and other such comments full of joy. Over the years however, I have come across a number of incidents where things have fallen off, with widely differing results. A few years ago a gliding friend suffered a failure of an aileron quick-release control rod which caused the free aileron to flutter. An uncomfortable but still somewhat controllable situation. Unfortunately when she tried to turn the glider the loose end of the rod jammed in the structure and resulted in a high speed fatal descent. Another friend found himself at the top of a glider winch launch with no elevator control and escaped by parachute from only 600 feet. A third gliding friend flying a Nimbus 3 (an 87 feet span monster with several flap/aileron sections) aero tow-launched after a servicing during which the controls 'adjusted'. The test flight revealed the glider would only circle to the left despite full right aileron and rudder. After an interesting launch, where the tug pilot managed to turn and climb at the best rate for the glider, he was dropped off tow high enough to bale out. By experimenting with various speeds, flap and airbrake settings he managed to control it just enough to return to the airfield. By having a sound knowledge of the aircraft and approaching the problem in a calm efficient manner this pilot recovered a situation which might have ended very differently. The aim of this article is to encourage pilots to think about how they might cope with a control problem, and what aspects of the aircraft behaviour might be of assistance. While most control failure problems can be avoided by suitable maintenance there is always the possibility that one day you may find yourself with such a challenge. The key to surviving such an experience is a thorough knowledge of the handling characteristics of the aircraft, particularly the secondary effects of controls. Control failure modes Control failures, be they caused by mechanical failure, collision or structural failure will probably result in one or more of the following: restricted or no movement of the control surface surface floating free and probably fluttering to some extent surface missing completely, or connected by control cables and probably flailing around behind the aircraft major application of one or more controls to remain in a desired attitude/heading. Pitch control Perhaps the most critical control and also the one with most options, as most aircraft can be controlled in pitch in a number of ways. Adjusting the power setting will usually result in a trim change. Coarse or gentle applications of power may have different effects on attitude, descent rate and the all-important airspeed. Varying the power will also adjust torque and slipstream effect, thus assisting, to a small degree, with roll control. Aerodynamic trim tabs (those that sit on the trailing edge of the elevator) may be of some use. If the surface is jammed the tab will work like a small, albeit not very effective, elevator, although the lever must be moved the opposite way to the control column. (Trim lever forward will raise the nose). If the elevator is floating free (and not fluttering) the trim lever may be used in the same sense as the control column. Bank angle is an effective way of controlling pitch. We all know that as we enter a turn the nose tends to drop unless we counter it. It is possible to use bank angle to lower the nose and hence control the speed. You will of course be in some sort of (probably descending) turn but the turn will be partially controlled and that is better than spinning or stalling. The steeper the bank, the more the nose pitches down. By adding pro-turn or anti-turn rudder more control is available. This method gives you a reasonable degree of control over speed, in return for some height loss and the increased risk of a cross-controlled stall. Centre of gravity. If your aircraft has more than one tank and you can transfer fuel you may be able to adjust the attitude by moving fuel. Even leaning forward or back will have some effect. It's not much but it's better than nothing. A Miles Messenger escaping to England during WW2 lost its entire engine after one propeller blade was shot away while crossing the Channel. The family aboard all piled into the front seats and the aircraft glided just above the stall to shore and a successful landing! Several aircraft have approach control devices such as flaps or spoilers. These controls usually have some sort of trim change associated with their operation. Some higher performance gliders use flap settings even more than the elevator for controlling pitch, relegating the elevator to little more than a trimming device for much of the time. Roll control In the event of loss of the ailerons some degree of roll control is available by using the secondary effect of rudder. While not an efficient way to turn the aircraft you should have at least some directional control. Short or rapid bursts of power may increase the effectiveness of the rudder to some degree. Power, in the form of torque and slipstream effect may also be of use. Yaw control Loss of the rudder, as long as the aircraft is kept away from a stall/spin poses the fewest problems as long as the effects of power and adverse yaw are understood. Bank angle can be used to counter any yaw tendency (from torque or a damaged fin while in flight) and care must be taken to allow for adverse yaw when entering or exiting any turns. Effect of airspeed The various trim changes associated with controlling the aircraft change with the airspeed. Adverse yaw for example, decreases with an increase in airspeed. The aircraft should be flown at a speed safely above the stall but no faster, unless the increase in speed provides more control. If a control surface is floating free it will tend to flutter and the violence of the flutter will increase with speed. Other methods Some aircraft have doors or canopies fitted which if opened in flight may well provide some sort of trim change. It may or may not be of use but it is worth considering. If the aircraft is approved, the manufacturer may be able to supply information on what happens when a door is opened in flight. Unless the door is approved for opening in flight it should not be practised, but in an emergency ... Control on the ground If possible try to find somewhere to land which is large, long and flat, and as into wind as possible. On the ground the ailerons (or more accurately, adverse yaw) can be used to aid in directional control. (Use left aileron to turn right). Those with differential brakes can make use of them for some directional control. As many of us fly taildraggers with single brake controls, use brakes only gently and while travelling straight. Heavy braking when the aircraft is starting to swing will accelerate the impending ground loop. Considerations When faced with some control problem you should endeavour to place the aircraft in a reasonable attitude with sufficient speed for normal flight or as near as possible to it. Assess the failure as to what type (whether the failure is a structural or mechanical one and whether the surface is still there, fluttering etc.), which control(s) are affected and the various secondary effects that can be used to help. In the event of a structural failure or collision the airframe integrity will already have been compromised and so the aircraft should be landed as soon as possible, once some manner of control has been established. Extending flaps or spoilers, or opening doors on a damaged airframe may compromise the structure further so, unless control is inadequate, leave flaps where they are. If the control surface or the structure is fluttering, once again, land as soon as control is established. Flutter can be very violent and destructive, and will increase dramatically with airspeed, so aim to fly at the minimum speed where you still retain sufficient control. If the control failure is a restriction or loss of movement and you have the aircraft under sufficient control, it may be flown to a more suitable area for landing. However, continue to monitor the problem and be prepared to land immediately if there is any sign of the problem compounding. All of the above methods of alternative control, even those that only provide a small measure of assistance, may well add up to the difference between surviving a control problem or not. Even if you never have a control failure, considering the above methods will hopefully make you more aware of the aircraft's habits and so improve your flying skills. Many of these methods may be practised safely at a suitable height. For example, trim the aircraft to fly "hands off' and try a number of climbing and descending turns, rolling out onto specific headings, using rudder and effects of power. With an aircraft as responsive to secondary effects as a Drifter it is possible to fly entire circuits without touching the stick, but it is best to practise this with an instructor. Hopefully none of us will ever have to cope with a control failure but it would be nice to know how the aircraft (and the pilot) might react to one. After all none of us want to have an engine failure but we all practise in case we get one (don't we ... ?). Read the article 'Rooted' in the May – June 2004 issue of CASA's Flight Safety Australia magazine.

7.2.1 Maintaining preparedness Flight planning When planning a cross-country flight some essential actions are required to minimise both the possibility of power loss and the consequences of such: Construct a safe route. Calculate the fuel needs. If using a GPS in flight planning be aware the GPS does not take into account the type of terrain or the height of terrain — the GPS indicated route might be over 'tiger country' (e.g. heavily wooded) or straight through a mountain. Warning: the GPS 'GO TO' function is an emergency use feature only — it should not be used as a substitute for proper route planning. Prior to take-off I suggest you review the groundschool module 'Take-off considerations' before continuing with this section. Check the stopping distance required. The pilot should know the distance required to reach flight speed and then bring the aircraft to a halt. It may be necessary to abandon the take-off shortly after lift-off, due to power failure or just doubtful engine performance or other event — this is particularly important in short field or 'hot and high' take-offs. If take-off and landing distance (over a 50 foot screen) charts are available then the total distance needed to take off, abort at 50 foot, land and bring the aircraft to a halt is just the sum of the charted density altitude take-off and landing distances required. If the distance available is insufficient to take off, reach 50 feet, land and safely bring the aircraft to a halt at the departure, destination and en route airfields, then maybe the planned flight is really not a good idea. Before taxiing ensure all extraneous objects in the aircraft are secured adequately so that they cannot foul the control lines or rudder pedals or become missiles in the event of an emergency landing. In addition you must ensure there is no possibility of anything becoming loose and wrapping around the tailplane, or passing through the propeller disc of a pusher-engined aircraft. Always check the fuel tanks for water, don't change tanks just before take-off, and taxi out and take off on the fullest tank. Always do an engine run-up before take-off which, as well as the usual engine checks, is of sufficient duration to ensure fuel is flowing properly throughout the system. Always plan to gain greatest altitude possible before reaching the airfield boundary, so take off into wind; don't do an intersection take-off; use all the distance available — runway behind you at the start of take-off is an asset stupidly thrown away. If the area outside the airfield boundary is rough, plan to climb out at Vx rather than Vy, and maintain full power until a good height and cruise speed is reached. The extra height gained with distance flown may be very handy if the engine fails. Whether operating from a familiar or unfamiliar airfield, you must have some knowledge of the terrain surrounding the airfield and the position, slope and condition of likely forced landing sites plus associated hazards. If the airfield is unfamiliar then you must ascertain escape routes, potential forced landing sites and hazards during the initial overflight or by ground inspection. After completing your take-off engine and cockpit checks, have a good look at the take-off path and rehearse your emergency procedure for any situation that may occur before you are established at a safe height. 7.2.2 Engine failure after take-off or a go-around Pilots should always be prepared for the possibility that the engine will lose partial or total power during the take-off and climb-out; or, for that matter, at any other time during flight. But, if there is even a suspicion something is not quite right during the initial ground run, the take-off should be abandoned immediately and the aircraft returned to the hangar area for a ground check. It is most unwise to continue the take-off if the engine falters and then picks up, or even if you are just not fully confident about its behaviour. When total or near-total power loss occurs after lift-off the cardinal rule is to 'fly the aeroplane!'; i.e. maintain control of the aircraft. This initially implies quickly getting the aircraft into the right glide attitude and waiting until the speed rebuilds to the appropriate glide speed, then fine trimming. (When changing from climb to glide attitude, the nose has to be pushed down through quite a few degrees, which might feel excessive — particularly if the aircraft was not trimmed to the climb speed.) In circumstances like this, some say the second and third edicts should also be 'fly the aeroplane!' and 'fly the aeroplane!'. During the climb-out the aircraft is at a high aoa, producing very high induced drag — particularly so if climbing at Vx — and when the engine fails, speed decays very quickly, and even more so if the aircraft has a high parasitic drag. The pilot may take three to four seconds to react and move the control column forward, and the aircraft will then take a few seconds to rebuild a safe speed. During these periods the aircraft will be sinking, and if height and airspeed are insufficient the pilot is locked into an immediate and probably very heavy 'landing'. More turn-back information can be read in 'The turn back: possible or impossible — or just unwise?'; also read Mike Valentine's article 'The turn-back following engine failure'. On-field landing If the aircraft is very low when the engine fails the only option is to keep the wings level and land more or less straight ahead — which is no problem if the airfield area ahead is clear. There is little time to do anything but fly the aircraft and close the throttle and also switch off the ignition and electrics. Airspeed is likely to be very low so keep the nose down and the wings level during the descent, using gentle control movements if necessary to change direction slightly. Lower full flap but be prepared for the associated attitude change. You must avoid the possibility of a wingtip striking an airfield marker, fence post or other obstruction — or getting caught in long grass — and causing the aircraft to 'cartwheel'; also the possibility of wheelbarrowing is high. You must also avoid tripping over the boundary fence while airborne, so just get it down (not nosewheel first) and use whatever reasonable means is available to decelerate. Long grass will help slow the aircraft but if necessary, groundloop it to avoid major or expensive obstructions, like a row of parked aircraft. The groundloop is induced by booting in full rudder (and brake) on the side to which you want to swing and will probably result in some wing tip, undercarriage and propeller damage, unless you impact something other than the ground. Off-field landing If some height has been gained but there is no possibility of landing on the airfield then an off-field landing is mandatory. Look for somewhere to put it down but don't immediately fix on the first likely landing site spotted straight ahead of you; there may be a more suitable site off to the side. You have to rapidly assess your height, airspeed (i.e. your energy level) and the turn possibilities available at that height; i.e. can you safely turn through 30° or 45° perhaps even 60° using moderate bank angles and still make it to that much better looking site? Will the wind assist or hinder? It has to be a quick decision because at best you have just a few seconds available to plan the approach. If any doubt, go for 'into wind'. Do not choose the site at marginal distance, even if it's perfect. Close by is better because the height in hand can be used for manoeuvring the aircraft into the best approach position. Because you have no power available you must always have an adequate height margin to allow for your misjudgements, adverse wind shifts, sinking air, vertical gusts and other unforeseen events — and you can dump excess height quickly by sideslipping. Remember that the rate of sink whilst sideslipping is high and the slip must be arrested before the flare. Apart from being clearly within range the choice of landing site is affected by: wind strength and direction ground run availability and direction; a short into-wind site may be preferable to a longer but crosswind/downwind site for an aircraft with a slow stall speed; the reverse applies for an aircraft with a high stall speed. It all relates to kinetic energy and stopping distance approach obstructions; final approach may require some diversion around/over trees, under/over power-lines plus avoidance of other obstructions. Can the near-ground turns be handled safely? Is there sufficient margin for misjudgement and/or wind gusts? ground surface and obstructions, including livestock, during the ground roll. Can you steer to avoid them? Are livestock or kangaroos likely to take fright and run into your path? the energy absorbing properties of the vegetation ground slope: the possibilities of landing downslope may range from difficult to impossible; moderate upslope is good if the pre-touchdown flare is well judged. There is a much greater change in the flight path during the flare; for example, if the upslope has a one in six gradient (about 15°) and the aircraft's glide slope is 10° then the flight path has to be altered by 25° so that the aircraft is flying parallel to the upslope surface before final touchdown. A higher approach speed is needed because the increased wing loading during the flare (a turn in the vertical plane) increases stall speed. If the wind is upslope then a crosswind landing may be feasible if a rural road is chosen can you avoid traffic, wires and poles, particularly in a crosswind situation? a final approach into a low sun should be avoided so that vision is not obscured. All of this is impossible to assess in the few seconds available, hence the need for prior knowledge of the airfield environs and a pre-established emergency procedure for any situation that may occur before you are established at a safe height. As height increases, the options increase for turning towards and reaching more suitable landing areas, making a short distress call and doing some quick trouble shooting. Trouble-shooting When trouble-shooting full or partial power loss remember the first edict — constantly 'fly the aeroplane!'. If the engine is running very roughly or died quietly (i.e. without obviously discordant sounds associated with mechanical failure) and time is available, then apart from the engine gauges, the obvious things to check or do are: Fuel supply: switch tanks (making sure you haven't inadvertently switched to the 'fuel off' position), fuel booster pump on, check engine primer closed. Air supply/mixture: throttle position and friction nut, throttle linkage connection and mixture control position. Apply and maintain carburettor heat (while engine is still warm), setting the throttle opening at the normal starting position. Apply carburettor heat or select alternate air to bypass the air intake filter — which could be blocked by grass seeds or a bird strike. Ignition: position of ignition switches — and try alternating switches in case one magneto is operating out of synchronisation. Or: reverse the last thing you did before the engine packed up. And then: try a restart. There is no point in continuing with a forced landing if the engine is really okay. Cockpit check prior to touchdown Pilot and passenger harnesses must be tight and maybe remove eyeglasses. Seats should be slid back and re-locked in place (if that is possible without adding to the risk) but be aware of the cg movement. Advise the passenger of intentions, warn to brace for impact and advise evacuation actions after coming to a halt. Unlatch the doors so that they will not jam shut on impact. If the aircraft has a canopy or hatch take similar safety action, if that is possible without the canopy affecting controllability or detaching and damaging the empennage. If equipped with a retractable undercarriage, leave the wheels down unless surface conditions indicate otherwise. To minimise fire risk turn the ignition, fuel and electrics off. Handling the approach Once the landing site is decided then choose the ground path for the landing run and select an initial aiming point up to halfway along it. (Once it is clear that the aircraft will reach or overshoot that safety point, then a second point located between the aircraft and that initial aiming point will become the touchdown target with the application of flaps/sideslip.) Continue tracking down the approach path, whilst correcting for any crosswind component, and watching the position and apparent movement of the aiming point relative to the windscreen. Avoid premature use of flaps — although partial flap does help low-speed manoeuvrability and reduces stall speed at the expense of a steeper descent path. At each stage of the approach the aircraft should be re-trimmed to maintain the desired airspeed — and keep it balanced. Watch the top of the highest obstacle along the approach path. If the vertical distance in the windscreen between the top of the obstacle and the aiming point is widening you should clear the obstacle, if it is narrowing you may not. You then have to decide whether you can: (a) accept to hit that obstacle; or (b) safely turn a little onto another landing path; or (c) lower full flap and/or start a full sideslip so that touchdown is made before the obstacle and into vegetation with more suitable energy-absorbing properties. Be aware that dead trees poking above the general tree level may be very difficult to see, particularly if the sun is in an unfavourable position. If the aiming point appears to be moving down the screen you are overshooting (too high) and will touchdown past the target. Lower first-stage flap or start a gentle sideslip and check the result. If you are still overshooting and will safely clear the approach obstacles use second-stage or full flap, or full sideslip (or both if necessary) to steepen the descent path. Prepare for flare and touchdown. If the aiming point appears to be motionless in the screen, the approach slope is good and touchdown would be close to the initial aiming point. At an appropriate position lower full flap, and prepare for flare and touchdown prior to the initial aiming point. If the aiming point appears to be moving up the windscreen you are undershooting (too low) and will touchdown before the initial aiming point. This is no problem if it appears that the touchdown point will still be within the target area — just continue the approach and lower full flap prior to touchdown. If, however, it appears that touchdown will occur before the target area, then lower full flap and head towards the softest vegetation or the most unobstructed area. Whatever you do you must hold the glide attitude. Do not raise the nose until rounding out and never think you can 'stretch the glide'; although ground effect (or water effect) can stretch the float a little. Make a firm touchdown to avoid floating and after touchdown keep the control column fully back. Very severe jolting will make it difficult to hold the feet on the rudder bar but try to maintain steerability, using rudder and brakes, to avoid the worst obstacles and preserve the occupant zone. If appropriate use maximum braking — but avoid locking a wheel — it may not ride over the smaller obstructions. Be prepared to evacuate the aircraft quickly and to grab the fire extinguisher. After evacuation keep well away from the aircraft until any fire risk has abated. If you have a handheld transceiver, broadcast that you are safe or need assistance. Activate your distress beacon if considered appropriate. Partial power loss 1. If loss of thrust is accompanied by extreme vibration or massive shaking of the aircraft (probably due to a propeller blade failure) it is important to immediately shut down the engine to avoid it departing from its mountings. 2. If the engine does not fail completely but is producing sufficient power to enable level flight at a safe speed, then it may be possible to return to the airfield. Make gentle turns, maintaining height if possible without the airspeed decaying, and choose a route that provides some potential landing sites in case the engine loses further power. It's a judgement call whether you should take advantage of a possible landing site along the way because the off-field landing is almost certainly going to damage the aircraft and possibly injure the occupants. But that must be weighed against the chance of further power loss before reaching the airfield, producing a much more hazardous situation; it is usually considered best to put the aircraft down at the first reasonable site. If there is insufficient power to maintain height then you must set up an off-field landing. Read the article 'Piper Worrier' in the January–February 2003 issue of Flight Safety Australia. 3. If the engine is producing intermittent power it is probably best to use that intermittent availability to get to a position where a glide approach can be made to a reasonable off-airfield site. Intermittent power negates the ability to conduct a controlled approach and could get you into a dangerous situation. So having achieved a position where you can start the final approach then shut down the engine by switching off fuel and ignition or, at least, fully close the throttle. Fully shutting the engine down early means the engine will be cold at touchdown, which reduces fire risk. 7.2.3 En route emergency procedure While en route at an appropriate cruising altitude you must maintain the habit of continually assessing wind velocity at cruising altitude and the best general areas for possible landing sites — taking into account the wind and glide distance and not forgetting to take note of what is right below. If the engine should fail, or give concern, first head directly to that general area at Vbg; or if it is very close then use Vmd and aim to make a spiral descent over that area. Trim to the chosen speed and maintain balanced flight; slip/skid increases drag. If you are more than 2500 feet agl you will have ample time available to make choices and the following procedures may be appropriate: Do the troubleshoot checks described above and configure the aircraft for minimum drag, i.e. flaps and wheels up. Ease the nose down a little when selecting flaps up to avoid stalling the aircraft. Try to stop a windmilling propeller, but if you don't succeed with the first attempt forget it. Change to fully coarse pitch (the minimum rpm position) if the propeller is adjustable in flight. Make a distress or urgency call and, if equipped, set the transponder to squawk 7700. Pick a first choice landing zone: something large, flat and firm, with few obstructions (which allows a circling approach and a multiple choice of landing runs) would be ideal. You will have to consider many factors and combinations thereof; for example, a site that provides a long ground run but which entails a downwind landing compared with a shorter, into wind and downsloping landing path, or an obstructed approach but clear landing path compared to a clear approach but obstructed surface. If you have been caught out in heavily treed hilly country the only options may be to: (a) land in a creek bed; (b) land along a ridge top; or (c) fly along a valley line then turn to land upslope onto the tree tops. In the latter case the airspeed would need to be greater than Vbg to provide sufficient energy to execute the turn and the subsequent flare to follow the upslope without stalling. Whatever alternative is chosen is high risk, but easily avoidable by not overflying such terrain at insufficient height to glide clear. Ground obstructions — stumps, roots, rock outcrops, boulders, termite mounds, ditches, potholes, old farm machinery, fences and power-lines — may not be visible until closer, so select an alternate landing zone nearby in case the first choice proves not so good. ('Single wire earth return' power-lines are near impossible to see — particularly if it's oxidised copper.) You can probably afford to change your choice once, but not twice! If landing in an obviously ploughed field try not to land across the furrows, particularly in a nosewheel aircraft; close to a fence the furrows generally parallel the fence line. If possible, avoid surface water. Estimate your height above the site by reference to the contour lines on your WAC or VNC and the altimeter. Airborne time available is height divided by the known Vbg descent rate, but flight into sinking air will reduce this. Decide on the general approach pattern and aim to fly as near a normal glide approach as possible, starting with the base leg. Do not plan to fly a normal square circuit; rather, plan a descending spiral that keeps you equidistant from the site. Decide on a base leg positioning location and aim to be at this location at a glide approach height that would allow one minute on a nominal base leg and one minute on final; say about 800 feet agl if your Vbg sink rate is 400 fpm. Avoid a long, straight final approach — it allows too much exposure to unfavourable atmospheric conditions, particularly sinking air and turbulence. Depending on height, distance and wind velocity (remembering the friction layer effect on the vertical wind profile) decide an approach to get down to that positioning location so that the landing zone is always in sight and always within easy reach — which allows the surface, the wind and final approach paths to be rechecked. The approach path should be planned starting with the ground run and working back. The approach path can be widened if far too high — otherwise medium S turns, flaps or sideslip might be used to descend to the positioning location, but flaps should be retracted before reaching there. Flaps probably won't be used again until well established on a final approach. In some aircraft S turns are not that effective in getting rid of excess height. If you feel you are in sinking air or battling a headwind, increase airspeed to a better 'penetration' airspeed above Vbg. Start the base leg from the positioning location and adjust the track and the turn onto final to compensate for the wind, height and/or misjudgements. While flying the base leg finalise the intended ground path for the landing run and select an initial aiming point about halfway along it. You may have to plan for a dogleg during the ground roll. Then carry out the final cockpit check, approach and landing as in 'handling the approach' above. The diagram below illustrates an approach pattern allowing multiple choice of final approach and landing run. The wind is estimated to be in the north west quadrant. Path A is the planned approach and landing run from a base leg positioning location, paths B, C and D show alternate paths which either delay or bring forward the turn onto final to cater for height, wind or positioning differences. Paths E and F show the possibilities for a turn onto a landing path if it is required to do so before reaching the base leg positioning point. Mike Valentine, the late RA-Aus Operations Manager, had a few very relevant comments: The turnback part of the (Coping with Emergencies) series is particularly timely in view of the Skyfox accident last October and the Bantam accident three weeks ago, both of which involved engine failures and attempted turnbacks. It is an old problem and seems to be one that won't go away. In view of this, I hope you don't mind if I offer a comment on a particular point in post-engine-failure training. My main background is in gliding (47 years), with about 30 years GA and 7 years ultralight instructing (Drifter, Gazelle, Skyfox) to add to the mixture. In gliding, we had a persistent problem with loss of control following a winch-launch cable-break and attempted turnback, a situation which is directly analagous to the problem which is plaguing us now. Most, if not all, such accidents were fatal. As Operations Director of the Gliding Federation of Australia, I had to try to address this problem and see if we could tame it. Rather than get involved here in a detailed analysis, I will just give you the bare bones of our efforts. In researching accidents of this kind over a 30 year period (world-wide, not just Australia), a couple of common threads emerged. Firstly, in many cases there was never any need to turn back — there was ample strip ahead and all the pilot needed to do was to establish a safe speed, adjust the approach path with spoilers/airbrakes and land ahead. This is a crucial point and is often overlooked. Secondly, and of equal importance, is the fact that, although a pilot may lower the nose after an engine failure, as briefed, the same pilot may not hold that attitude for a while and allow the speed to increase and stabilise. A glider in the full climb phase of a winch-launch is generally a fair bit steeper than an ultralight in the climb attitude, but the principle is no different (nor is the outcome, when the energy runs out). We did the trials in representative types of training glider, from the 400 kg Kookaburra (33 knot stall, 20:1 L/D) to the 590 kg IS-28B2 (35 knot stall, 35:1 L/D) and the results were remarkably consistent. From a full climb attitude at 55 knots IAS, the cable release knob was pulled, simulating a wire-break. As one pilot immediately took recovery action, using strong nose-down stick movement, the other pilot started the stop-watch. From the time the 'wire-break' occurred at 55 knots to the time 55 knots once more appeared on the ASI was a consistent 6 seconds. This is the amount of time needed before a pilot can make any attempt to manoeuvre the glider. In the types of glider we are talking about, 55 knots is about 1.5 Vs and is regarded by the GFA training system as a 'safe speed near the ground'. I have found that the above figures apply equally well to a Drifter. However, with gliders we then went one stage further. We did it because we were dealing with aircraft which were fully approved for spinning. We tried simulating a winch-launch in free flight by diving to 80 or 90 knots and pulling up to an approximate winch-launch angle, then when the speed fell to 60 knots we lowered the nose and immediately applied aileron and rudder to commence a turn. The result was consistent spin departures, not necessarily immediately but certainly before reaching 180 degrees of turn. All this means that lowering the nose after an engine failure is not the complete answer. If a pilot is not taught that the lowering of the nose should be followed by DOING NOTHING, just holding the new attitude and waiting for the speed to stabilise at the new figure before deciding what to do, he/she will not be protected from loss of control. All this led to a change in training emphasis in the GFA training system. (For an expansion of the foregoing read Mike Valentine's article 'The turn-back following engine failure'.) When preparing this module I asked the late Tony Hayes — a very experienced, enthusiastic and highly respected AUF CFI — a few questions. The following was his response: "I do not actually teach engine failures in the traditional sense of yank the power and "What are you going to do now?" type of thing. That is not teaching, it is checking correct response to something already taught. That is a bit of a non-event with my students as I expect the aircraft to be continually positioned so it has an escape route, if it is not so positioned then I work on the area via fundamentals of positioning rather than alarming and depressing demonstrations of why it is wrong! So my actual 'emergency training' happens in separate areas that include circuit planning, speed management, theory and practical glide appreciation. The whole lot revolves around one single concept that I would very much like the AUF to adopt as standard (it is standard in the gliding world) and that is 'safe speed near the ground'! In the theory area (which I do quite early as part of the fundamentals of control) I use the total drag curve rather than the more abstract polar curve. The interaction between parasite and induced drag is quite clear and the most energy efficient airspeed is clearly understood. To this is then superimposed the speed loss from an abrupt power failure and the average reaction time of a pilot at normal flying arousal levels. On a Thruster this is about 7 knots. 48 + 7 = 55 knots (which is also close to the aircraft's normal conditions approach speed). This is the 'safe speed near the ground' and I insist it is present at any time we are at or below normal circuit height. This is effectively an insurance policy. The aircraft may now sustain a total power failure and will automatically start returning to maximum efficient airspeed by itself, while the pilot wakes up, and so conserves height. This also ensures that there can be no loss of control. The alternative is a probable climb on the low speed side of the drag curve with increasing sink rates and decreasing glide angles. More to the point is that diving the aircraft to get airspeed back will dump height alarmingly fast. What I need to get across is a clear concept in the student's mind that the energy level in low-inertia, high-drag machines is equally as critical as positioning. A well positioned aircraft flown at the correct airspeed can recover. If flown too slowly at the point of failure, even though the angles and distance are right, the dive to recover airspeed will put the aircraft too low and may make recovery impossible! Those speed differences are not terribly alarming in themselves — just 5 or 6 knots is all it takes; which is probably one reason GA pilots get into trouble with ultralights. Once in the undershoot situation from a botched recovery then the scene is set for an attempted 'stretch the glide' and the consequent classic stall/spin. That is also important. Actual sink rates are only really apparent near the ground and the pilot is instinctively going to start pulling back to ease sink, still with a substantial amount of turning to do, and flying too slowly in the first place. The next major step after energy management is beginning to develop is a lot of passive instruction on circuit positioning via observation rather than being involved in actual circuit planning. I do a lot of control and direction refinement at a very early stage while flying the standard circuit pattern but not have the student even aware of what a circuit actually is. Once I come to circuit planning I can then quickly establish the reasons for distance/angle relationships for the type being used and the student is already well used to looking at them. Once we arrive at the point that engine failures are normally 'taught' then instead of teaching them, per se, I teach 'glide appreciation'. This validates the circuit pattern positioning. It is fully briefed on a whiteboard and the student is then pre-warned in the air. There is NO surprise element at all! The student then (with a clear mind) soaks in all the clues and retains them. Rather than becoming a sweaty terrified mess with a clear impression there is hardly any time to do anything, I find my students really enjoy putting their skills to use and everything clicks into place. Still not really finished yet though. When teaching circuit re-joins I instill the concept that while the prime interest is how to get down at a strange airfield (and we do take students to other local airfields 10 minutes flying away) they should deliberately do one extra orbit for the express purpose of looking at the 'way out' when they leave. And that, in my book, is the real key to emergencies – total situational awareness and then controlling the situation! Fly defensively (without huge effort but as a consequence of sound training so you do it automatically). Last year one of my students on 3rd solo had a major engine failure on climb out — which was bloody tough luck but underlines that it can happen. He was correctly positioned, at the correct energy level, and recovered back onto the airfield from a cross wind landing — no problems and no further damage! Knowing your aircraft, taking the time to consider conditions and study a strange airfield, having then a pre-prepared 'what if' game plan in advance will all result in pre-made decisions that only have to be refined if something does happen. This will control over 90% of engine failure drama. STRICT COPYRIGHT JOHN BRANDON AND RECREATIONAL FLYING (.com)

The first three modules in this "Coping with emergencies" guide deal with the circumstance where: an immediate landing is forced upon the pilot in command because of engine/propeller failure or fuel starvation/exhaustion or carburettor icing the aircraft remains under control, at least up to the initial impact with the terrain, trees or a water surface all efforts are primarily directed to avoid/minimise injury to persons rather than trying to minimise damage to the aircraft or other property. Skill in forced landing approaches is a vital asset that can only be developed, and maintained, by regular practice and self-assessment. There is no economic way for a pilot to practise vehicle control following first impact on rough terrain. However, competence in accurate handling of the aircraft in adverse conditions, at least up to the final stages of the approach, can be achieved by regular simulations of engine failure from all flight states. Low flying training for the final stages of the forced landing approach — where to survive the pilot may have to manoeuvre an aircraft without power at slow speed around trees or under powerlines — is best undertaken with an experienced bush pilot. See the Safety brief: loss of control in low-level turns. There is some element of chance in every emergency landing (Murphy's Law proposes that what can go wrong will go wrong, and at the worst possible time) but being well prepared is by far the most important factor in deciding the outcome. The main constituent of that preparation is for the pilot to know the aircraft and – faced with the situation where there is no option but to put it down immediately — keep cool, maintain command of the aircraft, decide the landing site (if this is an option) and fly the approach by maintaining a suitable flight speed, and touch down at the lowest controllable vertical and horizontal flight speeds with the wings level and the aircraft in a nose-up attitude — even if landing in tree-tops. That is, the pilot must maintain complete control of the flight path, airspeed, sink rate and attitude right up to the point of first impact. A bit of fear is normal — even desirable — but excessive stress may cause the pilot to concentrate on very few features of the situation to the detriment of other equally important features. Panic or acceptance that there is nothing much she or he can do about the situation will not improve the outcome, but applied knowledge will ensure the best possible result. Before continuing with this page I suggest you review the document 'Airmanship, flight discipline and human factors training'. 7.1.1 Know the best lift/drag ratio L/D and the angle of attack The maximum L/D ratio (pronounced "L over D") for light aircraft — a measure of the aerodynamic efficiency — is usually between 6 and 12. However there is a very wide range; that for a powered 'chute is probably about 3 while some of the recreational aircraft designed with wide span, high aspect ratio wings — to provide soaring capability — have much higher maximum L/D. For example, the Alpin TST-3 motor glider achieves an L/D of 33 when the engine is stowed within the fuselage and can achieve a minimum sink rate of only 150 feet per minute. However, when the elastic breaks most powered recreational aircraft exhibit the flight characteristics of a very low-performance glider — or worse. (Surprisingly perhaps, most Boeing and Airbus jet transports have maximum L/D around 17–18; better than their piston-engined predecessors.) Maximum L/D usually occurs at an angle of attack between 4° and 5° or where the CL is around 0.6. — L/Dmax is sometimes termed the glide ratio because for light aircraft it is just about the same ratio as distance covered/height lost in an engine-off glide at the optimum still-air gliding speed. For example, if L/Dmax = 8 then the glide ratio is 8:1 meaning the aircraft might glide a horizontal distance of 8000 feet for each 1000 feet of height lost, in still air with the wings held level. We can use the '1-in-60' rule to calculate the angle of the glide path relative to the horizon, for example L/Dmax = 10 then 60/10 = 6° glide path angle. If the aircraft is maintained in a glide at an airspeed higher or lower than L/Dmax then L/D will be degraded and the glide path will be steeper; for example if L/D is degraded to 8 then 60/8 = 7.5° glide path angle. Because of the slight flattening of the curve around L/Dmax, the aoa — and thus the airspeed that will provide maximum air distance travelled from the potential energy of height — is more akin to a limited range rather than one particular best glide speed. An aoa either side of that top arc of the curve results in higher drag and thus a decrease in L/D and less air distance travelled without power. However, we may also need to glide at a speed that results in the lowest rate of sink (the vertical component of the velocity vector) so providing the longest time in the air from the potential energy of height. The lowest rate of sink occurs at the minimum value of drag × velocity and the corresponding minimum descent airspeed may be around 80% of the L/Dmax speed. So, the aircraft is moving rather slowly and will not cover as much distance as when moving at the best glide speed, but will take a little longer to lose height. See the speed polar diagram in section 1.2. Forces in the glide In a gliding descent, the forces are as shown in the diagram on the left. In the case of a constant-rate descent the weight is exactly balanced by the resultant force of lift and drag. From the dashed parallelogram of forces shown it can be seen that the tangent of the angle of glide equals drag/lift. For example, assuming a glide angle of 10°, from the abridged trigonometrical table the tangent of 10° is 0.176, so the ratio of drag/lift in this case is then 1 : 5.7. (This is a little little more accurate than using the '1-in-60' rule but inconsequential anyway.) Conversely we can say that the angle of glide is dependent on the ratio of lift/drag at the airspeed being flown. The lower that ratio is, then the greater the glide angle — and consequently the greater the rate of sink and the lesser the distance the aircraft will glide from a given height. The rate of sink is the resultant of the gliding angle and the airspeed. Be aware that the aircraft manufacturer's quoted L/Dmax may be overstated and generally will not take into account the considerable drag generated by a windmilling propeller so, for glide ratio purposes, it might be advisable to discount the quoted L/Dmax by maybe 20%. But the best option is to check it yourself. 7.1.2 Know the best glide and minimum descent airspeeds The aoa associated with maximum L/D decides the best engine-off glide speed (Vbg) according to the operating weight of the aircraft. There are two glide speeds that the pilot must know and, more importantly, to also be familiar with the aircraft attitude — in relation to the horizon — associated with those airspeeds, so that when the engine fails you can immediately assume (and continue to hold) the glide attitude without more than occasional reference to the ASI. • Vmp — minimum power — the speed that results in the lowest rate of sink in a power-off glide, providing the longest time in the air from the potential energy of height. The lowest rate of sink occurs at the minimum value of drag × velocity and may be around 80% of Vbg. Vmp is the airspeed used by gliders when utilising the atmospheric uplift from thermals or waves. This is the airspeed to select if you are very close to a favourable landing site with ample height and a little more time to plan the approach would be welcome. It is also the airspeed you should reduce to in the last stage of a forced landing in order to minimise both vertical and horizontal velocities, and thus impact forces. Vmp decreases as the aircraft weight decreases from MTOW, the percentage reduction in Vmp is half the percentage reduction in weight. So, if weight is 10% below MTOW then Vmp is reduced by 5%. Vbg is also reduced in the same way if weight is less than MTOW. • Vbg — the best power-off glide — the CAS that provides minimum drag thus maximum L/D, or glide ratio; consequently this provides greatest straight-line flight (i.e. air) distance available from the potential energy of height. The ratio of airspeed to rate of sink is about the same as the L/D ratio, so if Vbg is 50 knots (5 000 feet per minute) and L/Dmax is 7 then the rate of sink is about 700 fpm. This 'speed polar' diagram is a representative plot of the relationship between rate of sink and airspeed when gliding. Vmp is at the highest point of the curve. Vbg is ascertained by drawing the red line from the zero coordinate intersection tangential to the curve: Vbg is directly above the point of contact. Stall point is shown at Vs1. Much is said about the importance of maintaining the 'best gliding speed' but what is important is to maintain an optimum glide speed; a penetration speed that takes atmospheric conditions into account; for example, sinking air or a headwind. The gliding community refers to this as the speed to fly. The normal recommendation for countering a headwind is to add one third to one half of the estimated wind speed to Vbg, which increases the rate of sink but also increases the ground speed. For a tailwind, deduct one third to one half the estimated wind speed from Vbg, which will reduce both the rate of sink and the groundspeed. Bear in mind that, for safety, it is better to err towards higher rather than lower airspeeds. To illustrate the speed to fly, the polar curve on the left indicates the optimum glide speed when adjusted for headwind, tailwind or sinking air. For a tailwind the starting point on the horizontal scale has been moved a distance to the left corresponding to the tailwind velocity. Consequently the green tangential line contacts the curve at an optimal glide speed that is lower than Vbg with a slightly lower rate of sink. This is the opposite for a headwind — shown by the purple line. For sinking air the starting point on the vertical scale has been moved up a distance corresponding to the vertical velocity of the air. Consequently the pink tangential line contacts the curve at a glide speed higher than Vbg. If you want further explanation of speed polar curves (with excellent diagrams) read this article on glider performance airspeeds. The foregoing does not apply to a powered parachute as the glide speed is normally fixed at the aircraft's designed speed. 7.1.3 Know the effect of a windmilling propeller The angle of attack of a fixed-pitch propeller, and thus its thrust, depends on its pitch, the forward speed of the aircraft and the rotational velocity. Following a non-catastrophic engine failure, the pilot tends to lower the nose so that forward airspeed is maintained while at the same time the rotational velocity of the engine/propeller is winding down. As the forward velocity remains more or less unchanged while the rotational velocity is decreasing, the angle of attack must be continually decreasing. It is possible (depending on the particular PSRU, blade angle etc.) that at some particular rpm, the angle of attack will become negative to the point where the lift component becomes negative (reverses) and the propeller may autorotate; in effect, driving the dead engine as an air pump. This acts as greatly increased aerodynamic drag, which adversely affects the aircraft's L/D ratio and thus glide angles. The parasitic drag (including the 'reversed thrust') is greater than that of a stationary propeller. The engine rotation may cause additional mechanical problems if oil supply is affected. In the diagram, the upper figure shows the forces associated with a section of a propeller blade operating normally. The lower figure shows the forces and the negative aoa associated with the propeller now windmilling at the same forward velocity. Thus both Vbg distance and Vmp time are adversely affected by the extra drag of a windmilling propeller, which creates much more drag than a stopped propeller following engine shut-down. If the forward speed is increased, windmilling will increase. If forward speed is decreased, windmilling will decrease. Thus, the windmilling might be stopped by temporarily reducing airspeed possibly to near stall — so that the reversed thrust is decreased to the point where the engine airpump torque and friction will stop rotation. This is not something that should be attempted without ample height. However, do not attempt to halt a windmilling propeller unless: (1) you have more than ample height to recover from a possible stall; and (2) stopping it will make a significant difference to the distance covered in the glide. Sometimes it may not be possible to stop the windmilling. Never be distracted from the job in hand by trying to stop a two-blade propeller in the horizontal position in order to minimise propeller damage during the landing. Should the PSRU fail in flight, the propeller is thereby disconnected from the engine and may 'freewheel' rather than 'windmill'. A variable-pitch propeller may have a feathering facility, which turns the blades to the minimum drag position (i.e. the blades are more or less aligned fore and aft) and thus stops windmilling when the engine is no longer producing power. Such a feature is not usually fitted to a single-engine aircraft, but a few powered recreational aircraft are designed with very low parasitic drag plus wide span, high aspect ratio wings that provide L/D ratios around 30:1, and thus have excellent soaring capability. Propeller parasitic drag will have a relatively high effect on the performance of such aircraft so they are usually fitted with a feathering propeller. The image at left is from a FAA Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (please read) and shows the change in equivalent parasite drag for both a windmilling propeller and a stationary propeller at blade angles from fully flat to feathered. It can be seen that, in this particular case, the windmilling propeller produces more drag than the stationary propeller up to blade angles of 18 degrees or so. It can be inferred from the preceding material that the windmilling vs stationary drag characteristics for aircraft/propeller combinations will be subject to considerable variation. 7.1.4 Know the practical glide ratio and terrain footprint For accuracy you should measure (preferably by stop-watch and altimeter) the actual rate of sink achieved at Vbg with the throttle closed (engine idling), and from that you can calculate the practical glide ratio for your aircraft. The practical glide ratio is Vbg (in knots multiplied by 100 to convert to feet per minute) divided by the rate of sink (measured in fpm). For example, the glide ratio when Vbg is 60 knots and actual rate of sink is 750 fpm = 60 × 100/750 = 8; thus in still air that aircraft might glide for a straight line distance of 8000 feet for each 1000 feet of height. These measurements should be taken at MTOW and then, if a two-seater, at the one person-on-board [POB] weight with the reduced Vbg. The airspeed used should really be the TAS but, if the ASI is known to be reasonably accurate, using IAS will err on the side of caution. Also with the engine idling, a fixed-pitch propeller will probably be producing drag rather than thrust, so that too will be closer to the effect of a windmilling propeller. You should also confirm the rate(s) of sink at Vmp. Having established the rates of sink you then know the maximum airborne time available. For example, if the rate of sink at Vbg with one POB is 500 fpm and the engine fails at 1500 feet agl then the absolute maximum airborne time available is three minutes. If failure occurs at 250 feet whilst climbing then time to impact is 30 seconds — but 3 or 4 seconds might elapse before reaction occurs plus 4 or 5 seconds might be needed to establish the safe glide speed. Read the section on conserving energy in the Flight Theory Guide. Following engine failure it is important to be able to judge the available radius of action; i.e. the maximum glide distance in any direction. This distance is dependent on the following factors, each of which involves a considerable degree of uncertainty: the practical glide ratio the topography (e.g. limited directional choice within a valley) the height above suitable landing areas turbulence, eddies and downflow conditions manoeuvring requirements the average wind velocity between current height and the ground. The footprint is shifted downwind; i.e. the into-wind radius of action will be reduced while the downwind radius will be increased. The wind velocity is going to have a greater effect on an aircraft whose Vbg is 45 knots than on another whose Vbg is 65 knots. Atmospheric turbulence, eddies and downflows will all contribute to loss of height. Rising air might reduce the rate of descent. Considering the uncertainties involved (not least being the pilot's ability to judge distance) and particularly should the engine fail at lower heights where time is in short supply, it may be valid to just consider the radius of the footprint as twice the current height — which would encompass all the terrain within a 120° cone and include some allowance for manoeuvring. The cone encompasses all the area contained within a sight-line 30° below the horizon. If you extend your arm and fully spread the fingers and thumb the angular distance between the tips of thumb and little finger is about 20°. There is a drawback, in that total area available from which to select a landing site is considerably reduced; the area encompassed within a radius of 60% of the theoretical glide distance is only about one third of the total area. For powered 'chutes the radius of the footprint might be equivalent to the current height, providing a 90° cone from a sight-line 45° below the horizon. 7.1.5 Know the height lost during manoeuvres Any manoeuvring involved in changing direction(s) will lead to an increased loss of height and thus reduce the footprint. This reduction will be insignificant when high but may be highly significant when low. The increase in height loss during a gliding turn is, of course, dependent on the angle of bank used and the duration of the turn. Properly executed, gently banked turns that only change the heading 15° or so produce a small increase in rate of descent and a slight reduction in the margin between Vbg and stalling speed. Steeply banked turns through 210° will produce a significant increase in rate of descent, and a major reduction in the margin between Vbg and stalling speed. It is height loss per degree turned, rather than sink rate, which is important. So, you should be very aware of the height loss in 30°, 45° and 60° changes of heading because they are representative of the most likely turns executed at low levels. Just because an aircraft has a good glide ratio does not mean it will perform equally well in a turn; it may lose more height in a turn than an aircraft that has a poorer glide ratio. For example, a nice slippery aircraft with a glide ratio of 15 may lose 1000 feet in a 210° turn, whereas a draggy aircraft with a glide ratio of only 8 might lose only 600 feet in a 210° turn. Of course, the radius of turn is greater in the faster, slippery aircraft. Steepening the final descent path If it is necessary to steepen the descent path to make it into a clearing, it is recommended using full flaps and/or a full sideslip, and a sideslipping turn from base. A series of 'S' turns will reduce the forward travel. These techniques are certainly not something tried out for the first time in an actual emergency; they should only be used after adequate instruction and adequate competency has been reached — and maintained. The use of full flaps plus full sideslip may be frowned upon by the aircraft manufacturer, but in an emergency situation use everything available. Except for 'S' turns, these techniques are not available with weight-shift aircraft. For powered 'chutes braking both wings simultaneously will slow the aircraft and increase rate of sink but excessive braking may stall the wing. Please read the 'Safety brief: loss of control in low-level turns' section of the Flight Theory Guide before continuing. 7.1.6 Know the height loss in a turn-back following engine failure If the engine fails soon after take-off the conventional and long-proven wisdom is to, more or less, land straight ahead — provided that course of action is not going to affect others on the ground — for example, put you into a building. If the engine fails well into the climb-out one of the possible options is to turn back and land on the departure field. If the take-off and climb was into wind and a height of perhaps 1500 feet agl had been attained (and the rate of sink is significantly less than the rate of climb) then there would be every reason to turn back and land on that perfectly good airfield. There might be sufficient height to manoeuvre for a crosswind landing rather than a downwind landing. On the other hand, there will be a minimum safe height below which a turn-back for a landing in any direction could clearly not be accomplished. To judge whether a safe turn-back is feasible the pilot must know the air radius of turn and how much height will be lost during the turn-back in that particular aircraft in similar conditions, then double it for the minimum safe height. Such knowledge can only be gained by practising turn-backs at a safe height and measuring the height loss. Turning back to land on, or parallel to, the departure runway requires a turn through maybe 210° onto an intercept path for the extended runway line. At interception a small opposite direction turn may be needed to align with the selected landing path. If the take-off has a crosswind component, the initial turn should be conducted into the crosswind so that it will drift the aircraft back toward the extended runway line and reduce the ground radius of the turn. If the take-off has been downwind then the minimum height for a turn-back would be greatly increased. Any doubt whatsoever — do not turn back. Of course, if you have departed from a large aerodrome rather than a small airstrip then there is ample cleared area available for a landing; there is no need to opt just for a runway. Radius of turn and height loss In a turn-back to land on the departure runway it is important to minimise both the distance the aircraft moves away from the extended line of the runway and the time spent in the turn. The slowest possible speed and the steepest possible bank angle will provide both the smallest radius and the fastest rate of turn. However, these advantages will be more than offset by the following: When the steepest bank angle and slowest speed is applied, the necessary centripetal force for the turn is provided by the extra lift gained by increasing the angle of attack ( or CL) to a very high value. Also, due to the lower airspeed, a larger portion of the total lift is provided by CL rather than V². Consequently the induced drag will increase substantially. When turning, it is not L/D that determines glide performance but rather the ratio to the drag of the vertical component of lift [Lvc] that offsets the normal 1g weight, or Lvc /D. Thus, due to the increase in induced drag, Lvc /D will be less than normal L/D, resulting in an increase in the rate of sink and a steeper glide path. Lvc /D degrades as bank angle in the turn increases. See the diagram 'turn forces and bank angle' and read the text that follows it. The stall speed increases with bank angle, or more correctly with wing loading; see wing loading in a turn. Thus the lowest possible flight speed increases as bank in a gliding turn increases. Any mishandling or turbulence during turns at high bank angles and low speeds may result in a violent wing and nose drop, with substantial loss of height; see 'Safety brief: loss of control in low-level turns'. Choosing the bank angle In some faster aircraft it might be found that the turn-back requires a steep turn, entered at a safe airspeed (e.g. 1.2 × Vsturn), where the wings are slightly unloaded by allowing the nose to lower a little further throughout the turn. Then, having levelled the wings, convert any airspeed gained into saving altitude by holding back pressure until the airspeed again nears the target glide speed. The bank angle usually recommended is 45°, because at that angle the lift force generated by the wing is equally distributed between weight and centripetal force, although the Vsturn will be increased to about 1.2 × Vs1. Thus the safe airspeed would be 1.2 × 1.2 × Vs1 = 1.44 Vs1. (The speed 1.5 Vs1 is usually accepted as a 'safe speed near the ground' for gentle manoeuvres.) If the aircraft has a high wing loading, the sink rate in a steep turn may be excessive. Refer to 'turn forces and bank angle'. For aircraft at the lower end of the performance spectrum it may be found that a 20° to 25° bank angle provides a good compromise, with an appreciable direction change and a reasonable sink rate. There may be other techniques for an aircraft fitted with high lift devices. All of this indicates that performance will vary widely, and you must know your aircraft and establish its safe turn-back performance under varying conditions — otherwise don't turn back! More turn-back discussion can be read in 'The turn back: possible or impossible — or just unwise?' STRICT COPYRIGHT JOHN BRANDON AND RECREATIONAL FLYING (.com)

Tales are legion of aviators who rose to a mighty challenge. But those annals are incomplete unless you include the inspirational stories of a courageous cadre of contemporary fliers known as the Able Flight pilots. Able Flight, based in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, is a charitable organization founded in 2006 by nonprofit executive and aviation media figure Charles Stites “to offer people with disabilities a unique way to challenge themselves through flight and aviation career training, and by doing so, to gain greater self-confidence and self-reliance.” As Able Flight’s executive director, Stites designed a scholarship program to make that challenge available to people with disabilities by offering joint flight training courses with Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, and Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio. The Able Flight class of 2020 consisted of 10 individuals from around the United States—some of whose long-awaited opportunities to fly have been further complicated by an unforeseen adversary: the coronavirus pandemic. As the nation celebrated the thirtieth anniversary of the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act in July, we checked in with past graduates of Able Flight’s scholarship program in hopes of hearing a shot of news from aviation’s front lines and some words of inspiration to share with others who may be trying to map out life’s plan in light of a life-changing event. We were not disappointed. Sean ODonnell of Pennsylvania and Justin Falls of North Carolina are Able Flight alumni who earned their pilot certificates and are forging into the future—two adaptive-aviation pioneers whose efforts to fulfill their dreams have blazed a trail for others to follow. Sean ODonnell, Class of 2007 Any FBO or flight instructor should pay attention and probably take notes when ODonnell, who took his Able Flight training in 2007, talks about giving a passenger a ride in his two-place tandem light-sport pusher-prop-driven Sky Arrow with adaptive hand controls—because what he is describing is the perfect introductory flight. Not just the route, the length of the flight, and the sightseeing selections he uses—the intro starts on the ground and covers all the bases in an easy-to-process presentation to make the passenger feel involved and at ease. ODonnell gauges how much interest the passenger has in the nitty-gritty, and if it seems appropriate, he will demonstrate some mild maneuvers and perhaps cap the flight with a power-off landing. He’s always on the lookout for negative small-airplane myths to dispel—and when he spots one, he is “more than happy to engage that person,” he said, adding, “All fear stems from lack of knowledge.” ODonnell was the second Able Flight scholarship award recipient and the second recipient to earn a pilot certificate. For many years he worked as the director of distance learning education at his alma mater, Villanova University, where he also created an award-winning distance learning program (making him an expert in a field many individuals and institutions are discovering on the fly these days because of the pandemic). ODonnell, who as a high school senior had suffered a paralyzing injury when a car pulled out in front of his motorcycle, also founded Philly Sport Pilot, a training facility for sport pilots that included serving people with disabilities. “Before COVID, [distance learning] was a debate,” he said, noting that much of the know-how now urgently being sought by institutions large and small was known in the 1990s, long before distance learning had overcome the considerable resistance that has still not entirely disappeared. “Now everyone is making the shift,” added ODonnell, who now works in the software industry as a product manager, having “dabbled” in the field for years. He continues to consult with numerous universities on distance learning concepts. “It’s not flying but it’s great,” he said, confiding that he harbors hope of one day having the opportunity to “travel and promote aviation in any way I can.” It will be aviation’s gain when he does. Justin Falls, Class of 2016 Falls says it was worth the time it took to tweak the hand-control modifications of his Zenith 750 light sport airplane now that he can make slick landings like this one in Jefferson City, Missouri, on a cross-country flight. But there’s something Falls likes even more about the modified factory-built LSA he bought from Zenith owner Sebastien Heintz in 2018: Now other people with disabilities will be able to train to become pilots in his airplane. The Able Flight Class of 2016 pilot became quadriplegic as a result of a neck injury when he was in college. As a pilot he appreciates that he never has to take his hands off the controls during flight thanks to a working collaboration he forged with Zenith to design and refine the control system. He also likes the easy access the aircraft provides him, and he values its capacity to transport his wheelchair to his destinations when he launches from his home base in at Lincolnton-Lincoln County Regional Airport. Inspired by the access to aviation that the Able Flight program provides, it is especially meaningful to him that other student pilots will be able to receive dual instruction in the airplane, following two participants who have done so to become sport pilots. “I wanted to continue that,” he said. Flying was “nowhere on my radar” when Falls was recovering from his injury. But as he began to look into how to get involved in adaptive sports—now he is a competitor in wheelchair rugby and tennis—“I realized that there are a lot more things that you can do in an adaptive capacity,” he said. Having grown up near a general aviation airport and attending many airshows there, the idea of flying came to mind. He found videos online of “guys flying with hand controls,” and his web searches brought him into contact with Able Flight. The big moment came in 2016 when he became an Able Flight scholarship recipient about the same time he began to put his academic endeavors to work as a pharmacist at the Frye Regional Medical Center in Hickory, North Carolina. The medical center encouraged him to fly and gave him time off to get his pilot certificate. “That year alone, the job, flying—I was on cloud nine, just like another level,” he said. “I felt like I could do anything.” Flying for fun continues as time permits for the busy pharmacist, who as a health-services professional sometimes endures hardships imposed on the health care sector by the coronavirus pandemic, including coping with shortages of medications for patients. Falls recently took a passenger on a flight to Gilliam-McConnell Airfield in Carthage to enjoy open-air barbecue at an airport restaurant. He is discovering, as all pilots do, that each flight delivers a unique lesson. On the Carthage run it was experiencing unusual in-flight visibility conditions caused by a Saharan dust plume that had been blown across the Atlantic Ocean to envelop parts of the east coast in late June. Falls encourages any person with disabilities who longs to fly to check out the success stories of pilots with a wide range of disabilities on the Able Flight website, and he thinks most viewers will find the results promising—and perhaps even prompt a scholarship application. Next, he said, a prospective pilot should make inquiry at the local airport and take action to go up with an instructor on an introductory flight. Get a clear idea of what is involved in learning to fly, he said, because although it is fun, “this is hard work.” It may take time to locate or develop an adaptive aircraft that suits an individual’s unique needs—in his own experience, getting the hand controls ironed out took two years—but patience and diligence can pay off. Then, if after laying the groundwork everything looks right, “Go for it, absolutely, 100 percent,” he said.

Wingsuit flying certainly captured folks' attention when it first hit the mainstream around the turn of the millennium, sparking a wave of GoPro and Red Bull videos. Human flight had never been so personal or so physical as these intrepid maniacs half-fell, half glided through rocky gaps and mountain passes like turbocharged flying squirrels. The name of the game quickly became to see how close you could fly to things without hitting them, in search of the ultimate rush and the biggest view counts. But these devices were limited in that your only source of acceleration was gravity itself, and your flight profile could only ever take you downward. No longer. Stuntman Peter Salzmann had been thinking for years about how to add some sustainable propulsion and climbing ability to the wingsuit experience, and he hooked up with creative consultants at BMW's Designworks studio to create a chest-mounted set of electric impellers and a wingsuit that would work with them. At first, he wanted to mount the props in a backpack arrangement, in longer tubes capable of generating more thrust. But the most advantageous airflow would be in front of him, and he found the initial design too heavy. So a chest mounted system it was, with two 5-inch (13-cm), 25,000 rpm impellers in a relatively compact but still pretty chunky unit that has a bit of a submarine kind of look to it. The wingsuit was designed to incorporate air inlets for the propulsion system. There's an on/off switch, a two-finger throttle and a kind of steering facility, as well as a cutoff switch for emergencies. Otherwise, she's even more of a physical thing to fly than a regular wingsuit; you need plenty of core and limb strength to fight the wind and control your motion in the air. The props put out a relatively modest combined 15 kW (20 hp) for around five minutes, but the results are pretty epic; a regular wingsuit's most horizontal glide ratio drops around a meter for every three meters traveled horizontally, and speed tops out around 100 km/h (62 mph), but when Salzmann hits the electric boost, he can hit speeds over 300 km/h (186 mph), and actually gain altitude to fly upwards instead of constantly dropping. After wind tunnel testing, both in BMW's more auto-focused facilities and in a specialized wingsuiting wind tunnel in Stockholm, and around 30 test jumps, it was time for a public demonstration. The initial plan was to demonstrate the suit's climbing capability by taking it to Busan, Korea, and flying over a group of three skyscrapers, in which the final one was much higher than the first two. COVID-19 put paid to that aspiration, so Salzmann settled for something prettier and closer to home, lining up the Del Brüder peaks in the Hohe Tauern mountain range, part of the Austrian alps. Salzmann and a pair of buddies kitted out with regular wingsuits went up to 10,000 feet (3,050 m) in a chopper, counted down, and jumped. The others are there to act as a reference point, and the three hold formation until Salzmann hits the juice and blasts forward. Where his friends have to split off and fly around the final mountain peak, the electric wingsuit allows him to accelerate up and over it. It's not going to blow Yves Rossy's skirt up; the Swiss "Jetman" has four incredibly powerful jet turbine engines on his extraordinary full carbon jetwing design, which allow him to blast off vertically from the ground with computer-controlled stabilization, and shoot vertically upwards like a rocket as well as swooping and soaring like a 400-km/h (250-mph) eagle. But jet turbines are insanely expensive, and so noisy that they rattle windowpanes from miles away. The average wingsuit pilot's chances of ever flying one are very limited. Salzmann's design, on the other hand, looks much more promising. The electric wingsuit has had the full BMW design touch applied to it; it looks very nicely put together, and, dare we say, much more like a product than a prototype. Nobody's saying anything about these things being for sale yet, either now or into the future, but a small electric propulsion unit is not going to cost jet turbine money, and it's hard to imagine an adrenaline-fueled wingsuit pilot in the world that wouldn't be interested in getting that little bit closer to the Icarus dream of soaring through the sky, rising and gliding at will. Indeed, the main issue may turn out to be whether a company like BMW wants its logo on a product that potentially makes its owners go splat. It's one thing to be making promo videos for world-first innovations like this, and another altogether to release these tools into the hands of extreme sportsfolk where the difference between successful and unsuccessful flights can be so gruesome. Things have come a long way since the first "wing suit" flight – a brief and messily fatal leap off the Eiffel tower by Franz Reichelt in 1912 – but wingsuity types don't seem to be able to get their pulses racing without cutting things really fine. Still, I think we can all rest assured that we'll see more of Salzmann and this device as things develop, and that consumer-grade electric wingsuits will soon be a thing, and that this public debut is a significant moment in personal flight and extreme sports. Enjoy the video below.

Organiser calls chance to land at big international hub ‘a childhood dream’ The scarcity of commercial flights landing at Sydney airport has been a disaster for airlines and workers, but for hobby pilots the pandemic has provided the opportunity of a lifetime. The quieter than usual runways mean private pilots have been given the chance to land at the international airport for the first time. When the Sydney Flight College club captain, Tim Lindley, put out a call he received an overwhelming response. He eventually organised for 14 light aircraft to fly into Sydney airport on Sunday with 40 people involved. “For a lot of the pilots involved, including myself, it was a childhood dream to land in a big international airport like that – like the airliners,” Lindley said. His group took off from Bankstown airport, where many private pilots usually fly from, came in over Sutherland and landed at Sydney airport. Although the runways weren’t busy, Lindley and his crew still had to navigate some huge aircraft. “Lots of the pilots had passenger jets waiting on the side of the runway, which must have been really funny to watch, with these small little planes coming in,” he said. “When I was taxiing, I had a Jetstar Airbus in front of me and an Air China 767 behind us, and we were all waiting for another one of the club’s aircraft to land.” Lindley – who was flying a Cessna 182 with three passengers on board – had worked with airport staff to make sure the pilots knew what to expect and how to approach an airport of such size. “Coming in to land at an airport like that … there are lots of optical illusions because it’s such a long runway, and because it’s so wide,” he said. “The thing is, the airport is designed to have the pilot sitting 30 feet in the air, so we’re sitting in a little aircraft, and you’re sitting maybe one foot off the ground, none of the signs are aimed at you, so it’s actually incredibly disorientating.” A hobby pilot prepares to land his light aircraft at the quieter than usual Sydney airport on Sunday. Photograph: Lorenzo Hariman The main runway stretches for nearly 4km – far longer than smaller aircraft need to land. Australia’s largest airport usually has a crammed schedule, making it almost impossible for private pilots and hobbyists to land. Some private planes have landed there in the past, but the airport’s airfield operations supervisor, Nigel Coghlan, said the pandemic had allowed the runways to be opened up like never before. “As our airfield is much quieter than usual due to Covid, we’ve been able to review each request and grant access, which for a lot of hobby pilots is a once in a lifetime opportunity,” Coghlan said. “We’ve been able to open up conversations with light aircraft pilots because our airspace is much quieter than usual.” The airport is experiencing 60-90 plane movements a day at present, a huge drop from the 800-900 that ordinarily use the runways. That “significant drop” has had a huge impact on the aviation industry, Coghlan said. For Lindley, it was about making the most of a difficult period. “It was really about turning lemons into lemonade,” he said. “It’s such a horrible situation with Covid, and it’s a really challenging time in aviation, and I just wanted to turn that into something a little bit positive, to keep people flying and keep their dreams alive.” Pilots had to submit a flight plan and book a landing spot. Coghlan and his team then had to adapt to the smaller aircraft and guide them in unfamiliar territory. “We’re certainly not used to the smaller aircraft, so they really keep us on our toes when they arrive,” he said. “Being smaller means they’re harder to see than the jets and turboprops and they don’t make as much noise. It creates a positive challenge for all of us on the airfield.” For some of the hobbyists, he acknowledged, “we’re literally making their dreams come true”.

When the light sport aircraft idea first broke ground 20 years ago, the idea was a new class of airplanes bridging between so-called “fat ultralights” and standard-category airplanes whose inflated prices made them unaffordable save for the wealthy few. Two decades later, has the experiment paid off? Yes, but with some qualifications. Light sport airplanes were supposed to be simpler to build and certify— they are—and although the original design brief didn’t specifically say so, it was assumed they would be cheaper to buy. They are that, too. But only relative to new, standard-category airplanes and not compared to any of dozens of legacy two- and four-place airframes with similar or greater capability. So, are LSAs cheaper to own than equivalent legacy airplanes? The answer depends on how you crunch the numbers, but if investment costs are tallied, the answer is no. If operating costs alone are considered, light sport airplanes look attractive against both legacy airplanes and definitely any new standard-category aircraft. Compared To What? Why do people buy light sport airplanes? Probably for exactly the purpose they were intended: Remaining in the flying game with modern airframes with modest performance. Although light sports haven’t been a runaway sales success, the total population of aircraft totals about 4000 airframes, according to www. bydanjohnson.com, which tracks production by models. And don’t look now, but sales of LSAs have recently accounted for between 19 and 21 percent of all piston aircraft sales, according to Johnson’s site and GAMA reports. (That includes ELSA kits, but not gyroplanes.) In 2018 and 2019, the LSA segment registered 219 and 233 aircraft respectively, against total GA piston sales of 1137 and 1324 for the same years, according to GAMA. Those totals include 80-plus airframes from the five manufacturers who are GAMA members: Icon, Pipistrel, Tecnam, CubCrafters and Flight Design. The rest are from non-GAMA companies. Johnson warns because of fuzziness in the data, a precise market-share calculation is elusive. Still, LSAs have measurable presence. The venerable Aeronca 7AC Champ is the hands-down best value in legacy LSAs. And good luck putting a CTLS on skis, as owner Pete Burns has done with his Champ. As we’ve reported before, the LSA market is nothing if not lousy with variety. Dan Johnson’s site counts a dozen manufacturers delivering modest volume. Recent market leaders include Zenith, Kitfox, Van’s, Rans, Pipistrel, Icon and Progressive Aerodyne. Flight Design once topped the market, but it’s now clawing back after financial retrenchment. The typical price of a well-equipped LSA—and few buyers skimp on options—is north of $150,000. For our survey group of a dozen owners, the average price was $117,000, but some of the owners bought used airframes. The high price was $175,000. At this juncture, you can slice the loaf two ways by asking what else $150,000 buys or what would an equivalent two-place airplane cost? This produces radically different outcomes. The 150 large would get you a nice late 1980s Mooney, a late 1990s Skylane or an early 2000s Skyhawk, for example. But it appears that buyers shopping LSAs don’t engage in that kind of calculus. They aren’t looking for price-value, exactly, as much as they are simple, easy-to-fly and easy-to-maintain airframes. Many of them are stepping down from more capable aircraft, including piston twins and even turbines. If cheap is the overarching driver in a two-place airplane, the pickings, while not necessarily slim, are vintage, not to put too delicate a point on it. Consider the last model year of the Cessna 152, 1986. Find them in the low- to mid-$40s to as much as $90,000 for a fully restored airframe. Piper’s two-place trainer, the Tomahawk, goes for a song and a parsimonious one at that: $14,000 to $20,000. The Beech Skipper is another possibility that’s a better flyer for around $16,000. And don’t forget the venerable forerunner of the 150, the 120/140 series. Again, prices for these are in the $25,000 to $35,000 range and some have been nicely restored. There’s also a passel of Pipers to pick from, including the J-3, the Super Cub, the Colt and even the Tri-Pacer if you want a backseat. The immediate downside of these is most are standard-category airplanes and thus require the pilot to have a medical. While some thought BasicMed would decimate the light sport segment because pilots would have no worries about the medical issue, this is evidently not the case or at least is far less influential than we imagined. Several owners told us medical certification—or lack thereof—was a consideration in their purchase of an LSA and that BasicMed didn’t change that. Cost Of Money Van’s RV-12 has become a popular E/S-LSA. Ian Heritch’s example has flown coast to coast and was purchased new three years ago. For our email survey of a dozen LSA owners, we asked about purchase price, insurance, fuel and hangarage costs and maintenance. But first, let’s dispense with the largish pachyderm on the premises: depreciation. This is always a slippery number, even for legacy airplanes and it’s all but impossible to calculate a meaningful average. For one, there aren’t enough sales of these airplanes to establish take-it-to-the-bank trends and for another, ultimate value is determined between the buyer and seller the moment the check is signed. But let’s do some for instances. A CubCrafters Carbon Cub bought new in 2015 for $200,000 depreciated to $165,000 four years later or about 18 percent. Call it $9,000 per year. A Flight Design CTLS retailed for $156,500 in 2015 and now, according to Aircraft Bluebook, it’s typically worth about $115,000 for a depreciation of 27 percent or about $10,000 a year. For a longer timeline, consider Tecnam’s P92 Super Echo. It sold new in 2008 for $115,000 and now retails for about $45,000 for a loss of 61 percent value over 11 years or a decline of $6000 a year. These exact values matter less than the fact that newer airframes will depreciate more than older ones will and it’s a real part of the cost of ownership. Older airplanes, say ragwings like Cubs and Champs or vintage Cessna 150/152s, will depreciate less or not at all. Some even appreciate slightly with market swings. Although many owners seem to purchase airplanes without financing, if a loan is required, the cost of that money should be added to depreciation. Tallying It Up Apart from purchase, depreciation and cost of money, the next largest expenses will be either fuel or insurance, according to our survey. That’s dependent on how much you fly, but the owners we surveyed averaged about 70 hours a year and reported an average of $19 an hour for fuel. Using those numbers, fuel totals about $1330 a year. Much of the LSA fleet is powered by Rotax 912-series engines and although they’ll burn 100LL, they’re a lot happier on unleaded mogas. Many owners use that or, often, a mix. This may have a slight advantage in conferring better aging of the fuel, but even 50 hours a year on mogas is unlikely to cause varnish or deposit issues. Rotax recommends a shorter oil change interval when avgas is used: 25 hours if 100LL is used 50 percent of the time versus 100 hours if unleaded fuels are burned. Most owners stick to 50 hours or less for oil changes, whether flying with a Rotax engine or a legacy Lycoming or Continental. Insurance is becoming a sticky point for owners and with the market hardening, it may be getting stickier yet. The average insurance cost among our dozen-owner survey was $1534. The highest was $3200 on a recent vintage Flight Design CTLS, the lowest $909 for an RV-12. Straight-up comparisons against legacy two-seaters are difficult because insurance on a Cub, a Champ or a Cessna 152 can cost just as much, depending on hull value. The bigger driver may be pilot age. As the market hardens, more insurers are raising premiums on older pilots, if they’re not turning them down entirely. “Insurance has been $1100 a year. For the May 2020 renewal, it will be $1700 a year for a hull insured at $89,000. Time to lower the value,” said Flight Design owner John Horn. At these prices, more owners may be considering self-insuring the hull or entirely. Operating Costs Bill Spencer in his Legend Cub. “The LSA rules have allowed me to own and fly beautiful and well-equipped new airplanes.” If anything is a constant in aviation, it’s that’s bigger, faster airplanes burn through money at a faster rate and the near-ruinous annual is always in the offing. In that respect, legacy two-seaters and LSAs are definitely less money hungry, starting with annuals. Owners in our survey reported the average cost of an annual as $529. That requires amplification, however. Two of the owners in our survey group invested in a two-week course for the Light Sport Repairman Maintenance rating, which allows them to repair their own airplanes, including annual inspections. While IAs can’t be fashioned in two weeks, we think this rating is a terrific idea. It costs up to $5000, but the real value is in engaging an owner in understanding the airplane, inspecting it for faults and repairing it when needed. In our view, that’s not just a cost benefit, but a safety enhancer, too. We asked owners if they had experienced any unusual maintenance issues, costs or problems that hadn’t been expected. None had, and all said the maintenance expenses were about what they expected or a little less. None had any complaints about the Rotax engines that power most of these aircraft. There were no reports of maintenance disasters such as corroded spars or major, timed-out parts. What to compare the Rotax to? We can think of only three possibilities: the Continental A-65 found in Cubs and Champs, Lycoming’s O-235 or the Continental O-200, the lightened version of which is used in a few LSAs. The A-65 is on par with the Rotax for fuel burn, but the O-200 and O-235 are a tad thirstier. All three legacy engines are stone-age throwbacks compared to the Rotax, which has electronic ignition. The 912 iS also has fuel injection. The Rotax is cheaper to overhaul. Dean Vogel at U.S. Rotax distributor Lockwood Aviation says the base overhaul price for a 912 ULS is $13,500, assuming a good core. A factory-new engine costs $19,000. The price delta between a new O-200 and an overhaul is larger and you can’t even get a new A-65, although new cylinders are available. The A-65 remains a serviceable choice, but overhauls are in the $15,000 to $18,000 range. Vogel told us Lockwood advises owners of high-time or high-use aircraft to make the overhaul decision 500 or so hours before TBO. He said the engine can be sold on the used market to a homebuilder and the owner can then buy a factory-new engine, applying the considerable proceeds from the used engine sale. Tying it Up Owners who bought new or recent used light sport airplanes seem satisfied with the purchase and operating costs and report no unpleasant surprises, nor regrets in having made the purchase. These owners were a mix of step-down buyers and bucket listers who always wanted to own an airplane and found the ability to do that in an LSA. “From my experience, LSA has become an accepted and somewhat vigorous part of U.S. general aviation,” said RV-12 owner Ian Heritch. “Wherever I go, I get only compliments and questions from onlookers. I have experienced no hostility for operating in the airspace system. While not the super-robust category that many were unwisely expecting, LSA has safely, smoothly and successfully joined the U.S. aviation family,” he adds. “If you want to keep flying, this is the way to go,” adds CTLS owner Ben Short. But the design brief is to determine whether an LSA is cheaper to own and operate. It can be, if it’s bought right. If you don’t factor in the steep depreciation a new aircraft suffers the day after you take delivery, then new and used are comparable. “Bought right” to us means an airframe that’s had the painful part of the depreciation already squeezed out of it. That means at least five years old, but 10 would be better. There are bargains out there. A 2006 Flight Design CTSW is still perfectly serviceable and supported with a typical values in the mid-50s. Newer ones with glass panels aren’t much more. Even at the higher purchase price, ownership costs would be competitive with a legacy two-seater. If you can’t find or afford a hangar, a glass airplane can live outside or in a shade hangar, which a ragwing— vintage or newer—cannot. Speaking of ragwings, the Cubstyle airplanes appear to hold value better than other LSAs. Specifically, a five-year-old Carbon Cub still commands $165,000, according to Bluebook. Arch competitor Legend shows similar price stability, making them a good choice if short-term ownership is envisioned. You can get in and out without losing much. That’s true of all of the legacy models that qualify for LSA operation, too. They’ve reached rock-bottom value and aren’t likely to depreciate much at all, if that’s a buying consideration. Some parts for older aircraft are hard to come by, but owners tell us they remain supportable. Just make sure the pre-buy filters out expensive gotchas.