Student Pilot

Normally laminar flow aerofoil sections are thicker further back, the thickest section of the aerofoil is a third or further back. The usual clark Y and a lot of NACA sections it's around a quarter chord.

Couple of things, firstly I have been using GPS (For work) since they came out commercially available, only once has it stopped working, just after they first started being used, that was for half an hour. That's since around 1991. Next VFR flying is just that, looking out the window. If you are worried about flying into rising ground then knowing LSA won't have any impact, you shouldn't be flying that low. Yes I know weather can throw curved balls, training should cover this.

Agreed, use maps as well. LSAT has no place in VFR really, if it's non VFR then no fly.

Boeing will get rewarded for it's bad behaviour just like banks did in the last world financial crisis. Trumpf will step in and bail them out, one hand on the bible will make it all OK

Never used 1 in 60, I look out the window and use maps before GPS. Now just use GPS.

Hunsta, like your Avatar

Prop feathered/prop windmilling can make a BIG difference. Plus it's a big difference sitting comfortably tapping on a putor to sitting in in the aircraft making actual real world decisions. What do those religous types say? (liberty taken) "Let who is without any expirence or idea cast the first aspersions". Here enduth the lesson.

Try OXY but use an oxidising flame.

The quote of pilot loss is 18%, I have seen 20% quoted before. The losses of Australians in 77 squadron in Korea were 25%, 1 in 4 were lost.

Gasless tig? Mebe gasless mig but fluxcore makes a mess and weld quaility is nowhere near gas sheilded.

Several things Yes aircraft are paid for standby, the alternative is not to have those aircraft available. Current situation an example, Victorian aircraft could be utilised in NSW which would make them unavailable for dispatch in Vic. Not sure where you got your figures from but SEATs are getting less now than they were 10 years ago and certainly less than you quote, would you recommend to cut costs and maintenance on aircraft that work so hard in hostile conditions? Obviously you don't fly on fires going by your conjecture. Just say your idea is valid that aircraft are useless in most fire situations. Leaving aside attacking the fire. From personal experience I have seen on many occasions where aircraft have been utilised on direct attack on vehicles and assets under a dire threat. Calls have been from people in vehicles for drops on vehicles, I have seen both foam and retardant used for this, depends whatever the aircraft has on board when the threat is called in. The events I've seen there was no other choices for ground crew intervention. How would you suggest to have aircraft ready for such situations without a standby? Again I don't know where you get your information from, aerial drops are authorised from the fire ground controller on the fire who is also controlling crew, or from an air attack supervisor flying over the fire who is in contact with fire crew and the fire ground controller. NOT from a command centre many kilometres away. If there are no ground crew the aircraft pilot has authority to drop after the usual checks and inspections are made. Aircraft DO NOT just go in willy nilly and drop without checking out the area.

In 5 years if Indonesians have bought 7 Canadairs for roughly 200 million, they (the aircraft) will be U/S and in need of rebuilds, that's if they crew them with expats. If they crew them with local pilots there will be no aircraft left in 5 years.

You really have to make your mind up S, either the water evaporates and is useless or it hits hard and does damage, which one is it? There are standard operating procedures for water bombing, drops are OK'd from the ground after ground crews cleared. Have you had any "Actual" experience with aerial ops? As far as Canadairs go, they carry 6000 litres for 24 million each!!!! 802's carry 3000 and usually work in Pairs dropping 6000 in one pass, these are privately owned at no expense to Governments except when used.

What a great idea, worked rooly well with the banking enquiry...............................what's happened since? SNAFU

Yoo an experienced bouncer Yen?

?

Looks Pazmany but not

If they are anywhere near a CTAF Bombers will communicate their intentions, if there is no confliction they will get on with their business. Fire CTAFs are on a different frequency and normal fire opps are low level except with a major fire where 6 or 8 aircraft may be stacked at different levels. A major fire would have lots of smoke or a pyrocumulus as a warning for private aircraft to stay away. If fire aircraft are working from a town airstrip they will use the allotted frequency as normal aviation practice, they may however arrive and depart with non standard proceedures working in and communicating with local traffic.

Variation of Stolp Starduster

Australia currently has enough contracted aircraft without using untrained military. Backburning is good, if done correctly and weather cooperation. Last few years there has been very small windows of optimum times to hazard reduce. It's been too wet to burn then after a couple of days of hot weather it's too dry, States now have don't anywhere near enough manpower on the ground with Parks/DELWP to do anything like meaningful reduction. Depots that used to employ 50 full time staff now have 3. CFA average age would be in the region of at least 55? With paperwork outweighing productive time by 2 to 1 and more people actually leaving, it's only going to get worse. On bad days all the planning and preparations are not going to be enough, look at Black Saturday fires, there were something 200 fires in Victoria from SA to the NSW border. Embers were spotting 40 K's away. You do what you can and get on with it.

Normally work on a fire CTAF plus RFS/CFA radio plus monitor 126.7 or local CTAF if working close. Usually turn 126.7 down because most airfields have this as a CTAF, enough to listen to with FCTAF and Fire radios without listening to every aircraft with 150 miles making a call every leg of the circuit.

Must be a pretty strong onshore wind with that beach take off

https://www.airforce.gov.au/news-and-events/news/australian-defence-force-supports-fire-fighting-efforts-nsw-and-qld Military are participating

You are mistaken Split S, firebombing aircraft were used on black Saturday, they were ground for an hour but after a wind change they were back at it again. Hundreds of fires from the west of Hamilton and Horsham through to Mallacoota and North to the high country. There were that many fires that no amount of ground crews could get around them. Of the fires I have seen first hand in the last week ground crews could only reach a couple and there were restrictions because of terrain, aircraft were used to work with ground crews containing fire edges. A couple of years ago there were bad overnight fires in the Hamilton area on St Pats day, caused by powerlines blown over. The fire front was that big and extended there was no way ground crews could get to half let alone all the fires. There are times when aircraft work well, everything from a Jet Ranger with a bucket through to a DC 10 have a task when used to their advantages. That article you quote is American, a totally different perspective when it comes to resources. What would you suggest to do with wildfires in remote country with scattered populations? Leave them burn?

I wonder how many pages (of legal speak with no clear definition) are added to the regs each year?