spenaroo

question: how does an electric aircraft do PFL's I assume unlike a normal engine. the prop can be completely stopped as there is no "idle" setting

Always liked the fact that thunderbirds 4 tail was painted black when they flew F4's as it would get covered in soot when slotted behind the lead

technicians.... the wheel one is pretty common. plenty of people with special lug nuts - who have no idea why they give you a socket and don't leave it in the car My Ducat runs a 55mm double hex head (12 point) rear wheel nut.... not the easiest socket to find, only 2 local shops have one. (I know to call ahead and ask before booking it in - made a puncture repair last year an issue till I figured out who were the Ducati specialists in the area)

replacement instead of reconditioning has been the go to for years, we live in a disposable society how many engine and transmission shops do you see now? its a lost art. I know when I was working with Jet-Ski's there was only a handful of guys left that could bore a cylinder block. and they weren't using new machines. only reason we were boring is new jugs weren't available look at what the guys in the USA are doing with Holley carburetors, bolt on fuel injection kits is now the go-to instead of a rebuild. as for pricing, that's where I used to earn my $$$ as a Parts Interpreter. a good guy can cross reference and get alternatives "same, same but different"

as technology changes so does the generation. take a car to a normal mechanic and see if they can do points and carburetor tuning. they are much more familiar with pugging a scan gauge into the OBD2 port and reading/clearing fault codes. they find fuel injection far easier to work with and repair. I think that aviation has stalled with technology for a long time, and is only now starting to have the generational shift. and I think its simply down to my generation aren't going to accept points, carburetors and steam gauges. And the guys who are buying the points and distributors probably aren't going to be continuously buying new aircraft.

yeah, had an instructor sit me down a few flights ago, and really helped my mindset. was stressed and making mistakes, which lead to more mistakes etc... trying to chase what was the standard in my head. He reinforced that my own plan was to purely be a recreational once a month flyer.... so my focus should be on that, and as such they are looking for the safest choices, don't focus on the mistakes, don't worry about trying to save things. if its not comfortable then breathe, reset and go again. starting to feel tired and stressed - call it a day, there is no point in flying if I don't enjoy it. And the instructor I was with yesterday reinforced that with a great pre-flight brief. we are never in a rush in aviation - we do things quickly and efficiently, but never rushed

got up in the air yesterday, nice little birthday present to myself. weather was absolutely spectacular hadn't flown in 6 months, or with this instructor. or the aircraft - normally fly its sister though so wasn't unfamiliar so did some upper air work and then back to the circuit for some touch and go's. Instructor was pretty hands off, made a few corrections mostly just talking me through things id forgotten or was rusty on (radio calls). and once we had done stall's basically said as I'm licensed - it was all my choices how to return and join the circuit etc.. still cant believe they trust me to fly an aircraft. (I haven't actually done any solo time since getting my RPC - the next endorsement is the achievement to fly for) instructor reckoned I was doing well, have a good feeling of the aircraft. just need practice to help with the procedural and mindsets

added stress, less finances, less free time. I have stopped flying because A.) I cant afford it. B.) I feel too stressed with work/home life I have a "training flight" booked for my birthday this month - it will just be to get up and fly around the coast with an instructor making sure I dont kill us both. I know I'm not keeping up my skills. and wouldn't be safe flying solo at the moment. haven't been up in 6 months

sorry, but I still find the shoe such an ugly design

yeah, but the pots make no sense to me. used to keihn/mikuni with the needle and jet. got a local mechanic whos willing to take the job, but is waiting on a new bead blaster. idea being that if we are going to do it - may as well clean it all up and make it nice

anyone want to rebuild my SU carbies?

the weight balance just looks like it shouldn't fly with those wings so far back. always thought it was a cool plane, but little information on it. same with Have Blue built with leftover tooling from the C5, landing gear from an F5, engines from a T2 and fly by wire system from an F16 too bad both were lost in crashes

this is the Yamaha product I mentioned earlier. works very well, unlike the sprays - not cheap though https://www.citywestyamaha.com.au/product/yamaha-yamalube-carburetor-cleaner-dip-bottle-946ml-motorcycle-maintenence-etc/

that looks like a warplane. some fighters are sleek and almost beautiful.... that just looks aggressive. you just hope its on your side when it flies over

Yamaha used to do a carby cleaning product that was the sh%T. just fill an ice cream container and drop the carbies in overnight, loved by bike mechanics everywhere. these days we used ultrasonic cleaners: https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/295183469452?chn=ps&_ul=AU&_trkparms=ispr%3D1&amdata=enc%3A1hVujQU3FQDy6fJ9MzxSIzg46&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=705-139619-5960-0&mkcid=2&mkscid=101&itemid=295183469452&targetid=1598469861838&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=9070901&poi=&campaignid=19657035767&mkgroupid=143201283022&rlsatarget=aud-1175687084793:pla-1598469861838&abcId=9305369&merchantid=7364522&gclid=Cj0KCQjwvL-oBhCxARIsAHkOiu2kAeputT-OjtX-PVg7yFY88_2Z4xbdTeOC-QDxktyh-3KHqqd_3aYaAm4VEALw_wcB might have to run it through a few times. especially if running mogas, it isn't what it used to be. we noticed the fuel doesnt go off so much as turn to jelly now.

lets get facts right here. that was a mechanical failure. was an overly complex powertrain design. that they knew was flawed, didn't trust - but test flew anyway. the controls worked until it was below the stall speed, and the pilot didn't drop the nose “Clutch slippage occurred on the forward engine, causing a loss of power at a critical stage of the flight, making it impossible for the pilot to recover despite the best possible efforts he made.” The fateful flight was filmed by a chase helicopter, adding to the trove of information available to investigators. The Bugatti 100P was powered by two engines connected to a pair of counter-rotating propellers at the nose of the aircraft. The power trains were complex, including drive shafts, gear boxes, and clutches for each engine and propeller, and the team had experimented with different designs. Both the NTSB and the team, dubbed Le Rêve Blue, conducted detailed and meticulous analysis of the data including control positions and instrument readings captured by video cameras in the cockpit. Just after liftoff, Wilson raised the landing gear and the rpm surged on the engine powering the forward propeller. Investigators estimate that the airplane reached a maximum altitude of 80 to 100 feet. Based on cockpit video of the control inputs, the team believes Wilson was very much aware of the power loss, and the critically low airspeed and altitude. The team concluded, in the report written by van Dalen, that Wilson made a conscious decision to attempt to clear the airport fence despite rapidly decaying airspeed: “We do not know for a fact why he made that decision, but the most likely explanation is as follows. Had he dropped the nose sufficiently to maintain airspeed above 70 (knots), his descent rate probably would have made it impossible for him to clear the fence. He would have been forced to belly land inside the fence, to cross uneven ground as he traversed the inside road, ploughed through the fence and then traversed the outside road. The uneven ground and the fence itself would have likely broken the fuselage and exposed him to the whirling drive shafts—a dreadful scenario that he referred to on several occasions. In short, it is likely that he consciously reduced airspeed below the stall limit because he judged it as the lesser of two evils. He must have decided that he might be able to belly land safely in the field beyond the fence.” As airspeed decayed below stall speed, the airplane rolled “uncommanded,” first to the right and then left through inverted, the NTSB report states: “As the airplane rolled through 90 (degrees) of left bank, the pilot placed both hands on the control stick and commanded a right roll with a positive pitch attitude. The airplane continued to roll left, the nose dropped, and a green field came into view out of the front of the windscreen.” The wreckage came to rest inverted in a bean field less than 2,000 feet from the runway’s displaced threshold, about 1,000 feet from the nearest paved surface. A post-crash fire destroyed much of the aircraft, though data was recorded from all six cockpit cameras, with complete recordings from five of them. It is not clear why Wilson did not add more power to the rear engine, which might have resulted in a positive rate of climb, but van Dalen noted that clutch slippage problems that the team had encountered during the development and test program might have undermined Wilson’s confidence that the power train, particularly the chain drive, would have held up under the increased load. It was also a decision made during just a few seconds that elapsed between liftoff and the crash. “In case Scotty had decided to accept the risk of a chain drive failure and had applied full throttle on the rear engine, my performance estimation shows that a climb rate of 390 ft/min would have resulted,” van Dalen wrote. source: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2017/november/30/power-loss-preceded-bugatti-crash

The Celera 500L is in testing pretty close looking

oh you just reminded me of the Astronaut who got arrested, after driving 14 hours in a nappy to confront her lovers new partner

of course the disney cartoon talespin may have had an impression on me. its the earliest show I remember watching. can still remember the theme and baloo's voice clearly

not to mention the windscreen. but I think they are the best looking planes. evoke a sense of class and adventure

I think its the streamlined look actually. that era of aerodynamics being about it looking right, more so then tested and crafted in a wind tunnel

there is just something so majestical about seaplanes

ww2 was an immense time of development. lets not forget that at the start it was common to have fixed gear fabric Bi-planes still in service. and ended with alloy Jets.

So what's this classified as?