spenaroo

nah, they are similar to trains now. run electric propulsion through the azimuth pods. use a turbine to generate the electricity.

Speak for yourself, where's the fun if the the wheels aren't spinning as you exit the driveway. but yes, there is differences with the constant RPM and varied load

id like to make a point that Ive made before when talking about re-purposing existing engines. we use hours not distance travelled. but its fairly similar. lets say a harley-davidson averages 50km/h. it needs a new crank at 100,000kms so 100,000, divided by 50 = 2000 therefore the engine life in time is about 2000 hours. which to my understanding is similar to an air cooled aero engine. I know the flight school I learned in worked of the budget of 1 Jabiru engine failure per 1000 hours. and later swapped to Rotax. which brings up another point, how many cars do you see by the side of the road with mechanical issues... but you would expect a car from the 70's to be more likely to break down then a car built in that last 10 years. wouldn't the same case exist with aircraft... only id argue we have an older average engine age then that of cars on the road currently

I feel like the "those noisy airplanes" argument is somewhat redundant these days. when was the last time you were in a building and heard an aircraft overhead that wasn't a low level police helicopter? jets are getting quieter all the time, not louder

Can we all just agree that we should have the option to go back to the old shotgun cartridge starter (coffman starter). so much lighter and portable. plus it has that satisfying bang and smoke as a bonus would probably clear the runway of any wildlife too

No different to Gun reform.... would take some politicians ready to fall on the sword, knowing they wont be re-elected. knowing it will take years afterwards for the public to acknowledge it was the right thing to do If only we had an opposition that needs to re-invent itself, and is pretty much guaranteed not to get in next election so can go hard and call the government out on all this......

not necessarily, there is a Chinese cultural issue around "used" things having little to no value. there is a lot of apartments for example in the docklands that are bought by Chinese and left empty. because if someone moves in then it is no longer a new apartment, and in their eyes devalued.

This turned up on my facebook page, captioned as "RSF-1 Aerosub. In 1964, Donald Reid dove it 6.5 ft below the surface, then flew 33 ft high." further googling makes me believe it should actually be called the RFS-1, but the rest is correct. used scuba gear when underwater. (imagine the limitations with pressure density at altitude) who knew there was a submarine in the sky?

A bomber in general seems to go against the the whole ethics of our military. I remember Matt Hall talking on a podcast about having to sit out on certain missions when he was flying the F15 with the USAF, as they violated Australian laws on warfare (assassination's, bombing the building when the target is inside)

I like the idea of reading out aloud what the status is. I.e. oil is 100psi, fuel is 3/4 of a tank, parking brake is off. instead of the quick, yep that's where its meant to be

2 seat, side by side. with the fuel in the wings is probably the majority of RAA aircraft. which brings the question of what weight moment can you change? if its under MTOW then that's pretty much all you can do. (excluding the small overnight bag you may be able to sneak in if your not at MTOW with full fuel load) I know the J160 couldn't take full fuel with two 90kg people. all the added load of fuel and people was under the wings (center of lift) Vixxen was similar, but might have the ability to take some sandwiches and water bottles too. The other aircraft I have flown in RAA is a tandem seat with the fuel in front of the firewall. once again question is how heavy is the back seater. cant change where the weight is, and no room for more then an overnight bag. I was taught it all as the theory course I did was mixed with RPC/RPL students. but with the RAA aircraft it was a question of fuel load, possibly passenger and the density altitude. MTOW was achieved well before needing to look at balance.

mid flight over the ocean.... don't think that will be an issue does pose the ethical question, in an emergency do you leave it on or turn it off?

I'm curious at what point was it too late to go around? when the aircraft struck the runway - we have all done a go-around after the flare but before touching at some point in training

Personally I see the title effects as a plus. Still believe they should swap the oxygen system for sleeping gas. Id pay extra to sleep the whole way

Germany during ww2 (mmm panzer chocolate) USA post war (anyone want some CIA experiments with LSD)

What car is that? love the off-road ABS button in my Amarok, all the power slides. especially going down hills where it brakes one wheel at a time

We are all waiting for scrappy's wing to be on a production aircraft

true, but it was by design https://www.flyingmag.com/aircraft-robohorse/ great story of aviation history. basically the test pilot was added later as insurance against losing the only remaining prototype.

Why didn't anyone tell me that riding a UAV like a motorcycle was an option

Deleted

there is something on this in the first chapter of the Barefoot Investor, something to do with superannuation and guarantee future earnings. I know the book says you need to contact the Super fund and request it, it also requires more payments - but is better then a life insurance policy been a while since I read it

Branson's Biography is worth the read, awesome mindset. each company is its own business, just shares an initial source of investment and branding. that way if one thing fails it doesn't domino. and the idea of being the peoples champion, find out what people want and meet that expectation. especially if its an industry that has high customer dissatisfaction (phones, banks etc..) the story behind virgin Australia is great, One of his executives who he had success with left and returned to family in Australia, drawing a basic business plan on a napkin over dinner. (really wanted to foster the culture of people bringing him ideas. and ensured that anyone who left was on good terms to contact him as a partner if they saw a future opportunity) He had enough trust to let let him run it, all. from memory it was a small initial investment of 1 million dollars? literally the smallest amount possible, as they leased everything in the beginning. Branson calls it his best investment decision.

Just did a quick look, pre-covid Qantas reckons they did 55 million passengers. so that's roughly 50c per ticket straight to the CEO's pocket

yes, but the fact she is female means that it cant be a jobs for the boys situation. not saying at all that her gender has anything to do with the capability and qualifications. I don't think it makes any difference with her appointment. But can already see in the BBC headline that its being used as a selling point