spenaroo

rule of cool, like the Mooney

also it struts..... or an unconventional Bi-plane, as I assume they would produce lift too

just nice to see the T tails make a comeback

They build awesome trucks. at one stage they dominated the Dakar rally before the Kamaz took over

the answer is that Qantas had good PR, but the record isn't exactly matching. Virgin Atlantic have had 2 major incidents but both aircraft are still flying and haven't had a fatality. Hawaiian airlines has been flying since 1929 with no hull losses. QANTAS has never had a fatal jet accident, But they were crashing seaplanes and DH. 84's into the 50's they just happen to have built this reputation thanks to a movie line a few decades ago. in fact of the list of Airlines that have never had a fatal accident.... QANTAS doesn't appear (except as JetStar) Air Berlin Air Europa AirTran Airways Allegiant Airways Cape Air Chautauqua Airlines CommutAir DragonAir Easyjet Emirates Era Alaska Expressjet Airlines Frontier Airlines GoJet Airlines Hainan Group Hawaiian Airlines Horizon Air Jazz air Jet airways JetBlue Jetstar Lion Airlines Mesa Airlines Olympic Airways Oman Airways Pinnacle Airlines Qatar Airways Republic Airlines Ryanair Shenzhen Airlines Shuttle America Southwest Airlines Spirit Airlines Swiss Trans State Airlines Transaero Airlines Ukraine International Airlines Vietnam Airlines Virgin Atlantic Virgin America Virgin Australia Vueling Westjet

One of the most amusing things for me is Qantas has been known as the preferred option for safety.... When Virgin (both the English and the Australian company) have such a clean record, and are arguably the biggest competitor

leaving out the best part, from Wikipedia: Noise The XF-84H was almost certainly the loudest aircraft ever built, earning the nickname "Thunderscreech" as well as the "Mighty Ear Banger". On the ground "run ups", the prototypes could reportedly be heard 25 miles (40 km) away.[17] Unlike standard propellers that turn at subsonic speeds, the outer 24–30 inches (61–76 cm) of the blades on the XF-84H's propeller traveled faster than the speed of sound even at idle thrust, producing a continuous visible sonic boom that radiated laterally from the propellers for hundreds of yards. The shock wave was actually powerful enough to knock a man down; an unfortunate crew chief who was inside a nearby C-47 was severely incapacitated during a 30-minute ground run. Coupled with the already considerable noise from the subsonic aspect of the propeller and the T40's dual turbine sections, the aircraft was notorious for inducing severe nausea and headaches among ground crews. In one report, a Republic engineer suffered a seizure after close range exposure to the shock waves emanating from a powered-up XF-84H.

I feel like this is the same debate as is going on in the USA with classified documents.... If its classified, and it doesn't need to be there is no repercussion's. if its not classified, and it should be its a career ender with possible jail time. feel like if this pilot had called Pan, and something went wrong in landing, they would be crucified. where as right now its just a "better safe then sorry" plus we have all done the exam questions and know it can be fairly vague and up to the pilots interpretation of risk.

had a guy cut across the circuit at circuit height on the weekend at Aldinga. took off from a private strip the other side of the main road that's normally used as a landmark for circuits. turn across the front of me as I was crosswind - I busted altitude before turning downwind to avoid him. then he flew right over the airfield. at circuit height, all with zero radio calls @2pm ish on a Saturday. to make it better, there was 3 helicopters less then a 1km away over the town/beach that had cleared the airspace for a life saving exercise (500ft, 2000ft, 4000ft from memory). the guy did it again crossing over the field and doing a steep just past it while I was taxiing after landing

....... "standard call" in my limited experience there is no such thing.

don't crash but on a more serious note, dont be afraid of being a nervous fool. we all were I was talking to myself out loud all flight and did a go around or two because I wasn't comfortable. don't be focused on getting it perfect mistakes happen, fix it and move on. dont try to fix a bad landing set-up. make your judgment point and stick to it, if its floating down the runway go-around

Caproni Campini N.1

yeah... but there is also the whole rule of, straight in approaches give way to aircraft in the circuit. I have zero helicopter experience, but seems like there was no circuit. I feel like time will be a factor, trying to get the quickest turnaround.

oh, and just for good measure there is a third pad, that is just above where the image in my previous post is cut off.

interesting to look at the location of the landing pads in that article, looks like the one climbing was from the water pad (inside the park gates), and the one landing heading to the pad marked in the car park (outside the park gates)? wonder if its possible there was confusion and the pilot on climb was expecting the one on descent to use the now vacated pad. I think we have all been on final and expected an aircraft to vacate or taxi across the runway before we land. or vice versa

Bingo, quick google - rego shown in crash removal photos is VH-XH9, Rego check shows it registered as a EC130. and the Wikipedia article on this type contains this "Dependent on customer demand and role, tactical instrumentation and equipment consoles may also be installed in the cockpit. Typically the cockpit is configured for single pilot operations, the pilot being seated on the left-hand side of the forward cabin to reduce the risk of passenger interference with the controls posed by a right-hand position"

wonder if they had a second pilot in the rh seat, I know the last time I was in a chopper on a tourist flight in Vanuatu, they were using the other front seat to train a new pilot. not pilot training, but the operator familiarizing with the area and flight details.

In answer to the original question. basically its a flight to ensure you are within standard and competent from walk around to shut down. I did mine 12 months ago and went like this: pre-flight, take-off, radio calls. climbing to a height to do stalls (doing the correct precautionary checks) into steep turns holding altitude and finishing at the correct heading. start heading back with an PFL performed at some point. once again making sure that you select an appropriate field, do the checks and importantly can make it - (apparently this is what causes the most failures on first try). then back into the circuit, with the correct join procedures. and do the different types of landing, flapless/half-flap/full-flap/glide. along with a 50ft pass. idea is that its to test competence, not looking for perfection but that its all done without the instructors input - they will be walking you through the order of tasks and what each step is. and my understanding is if you fail at one part of the flight. you can then come back and fix that part to pass, don't have to repeat the whole flight

that is the most self contradictory article I have read. sinking isnt minor damage, forced landing isn't plummeting

8mm is equal to 5/16 its the most common size fuel line used on motorcycles should be able to walk into a Bursons to get them. though these days everyone has swapped to the crimp style

https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/arrest-warrant-issued-for-outback-wrangler-reality-tv-star-matt-wright-over-northern-territory-helicopter-crash-that-killed-costar/news-story/709a475c1eb3a5c29d0928b1a3c0adc0?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQy5_JlYCUl9UkGLyciP3V38HBlAEqEAgAKgcICjDNtZILMOT5pwM&utm_content=rundown&gaa_at=la&gaa_n=ATKjfPH0Yb3eQx4dRYiISeVRINFhVcXIcHgOPU3PHWtEc62DP7WBamgwJLICv0MQs_uSndNDS-WunQ%3D%3D&gaa_ts=63842e3d&gaa_sig=ypwS7DpPx0RH86A3VAXQL7ZKqqbjJ2E9_w5hkAr0g9I3fNm-Nygl_t4lQ2H7T8okBHkxIpiQnezncH4RVOtc8g%3D%3D sounds like a whole lot are going down in this. with no shortage of evidence Disconnecting hour meters and falsifying records when your flights involve people taking pictures and videos of everything is a dumb move. as is trying to get the pilot involved in the crash, to falsify records from his hospital bed. I imagine he was all too happy to tell the investigators everything probably recorded the calls

common saying we used to say with motorcycles is: there are those who have crashed, and those who haven't crashed yet. its just a matter of time Mistake are inevitable, all we can do is reduce the risk with the variables we control. some would say with that many hours he was overdue an incident - he just never got the chance to fix this one we all have heard the old saying, Pilots learn from others mistakes, as they might not get to learn from their own.

Always disliked that in the Jab, felt like there was too much movement between controls - glad I never short fielded it. with dumping flaps on touchdown and applying brakes. there is a lot going on in a small area in the center. especially when you consider the trim is there too. almost guaranteed the hands are getting crossed over at some point. the manual flaps on the roof of the Vixxen was a revelation. as was the trim setting next to the throttle. and the LHS throttle of the champ even nicer

well if its a first solo - isn't the instructor still technically the pilot in command? remember hearing something like this when filling out my logbook after first solo

from one of tapped calls to his wife. "no one is going to jail ... we say 'alright we've been naughty boys',"