sfGnome

You last that long? Lucky sod...

Yep, Hildy. Same plane that I was talking about. As for the glide approaches, I'll bet that most of your approaches are already 'glide'. How much do you fiddle with the power? Probably not much if at all. The best landings come from a nice clean set-up in the first place. The only difference with a glide approach is that you're missing your security blanket.

As of this morning, I've decided that you can't generalise about models (well, Der! took me a while ). I've been alternating between a J160 and an LSA-55 and found the LSA to be a fairly sweet little thing, but this morning I took out a different one and it was a pain in the backside to fly. So, when someone tells you that one model is better than another, ask 'em which particular plane they're talking about...

Good stuff Tomo! :thumb_up:

Yen: Yep, the thread started with a discussion of an extra couple of $ per year, but it pretty quickly degenerated into how everyone is being forced into these newfangled restrictions at great cost, and I just can't see how anyone is begin forced to do anything. I assume that there's something I'm missing because I wasn't around then. Methusala: Again, I don't understand. You do have the freedom to fly without ASIC and ADSB. You can fly without a Radio. What freedom don't we have that you're wanting?

Can I ask a serious question? I'm not trying to be controversial - I really don't know the answer. If I wanted to fly a minimal a/c at low heights in the back blocks never straying too far from home, then I'd have to pay my RA membership & Rego. I wouldn't have to pay for any radios and transponders, etc. How is this different from the old 300' and never cross a road rules of the old days? How have the costs for minimal a/c increased?

I can still remember the day I finally remembered to add carby heat without being reminded. Why is that the hard one to remember?? Now you've got me intrigued. What possible job is there that could be better than flying? I've got a great job, but if flying paid the bills then work wouldn't see me for dust! p.s. Back on your gps logging question, I should have mentioned that while gps is remarkably accurate in the horizontal plane, it is much less so in the vertical. Large absolute errors and variations over time are common in the elevation, so even if you wanted to review that aspect, it just isn't worth it. The only value I've found in looking at the elevation trace is to count the number of circuits I did...

Oops! Sorry. How embarrasment...

I recall back when I was an apprentice, one of the engineers telling stories of his mini cooper which was tuned for Avgas (he was a keen skydiver, so just filled it up once a week at the airport). Apparently his favourite trick was to take Yank servicemen our here on R&R for a drive through the mountains. Not only had they never seen a car that small, they'd never gone around a corner that fast either...

Yep, what Neil said! :thumb_up:

Hey Rach, just do the Jimmy Choo / sneaker shuffle. Wear the pretty watch until you get in the plane, and then do the quick swaperoo to the functional one (which at my age is one with nice big numbers... )

Folks, have a look at what Hildy said in his first post. "If you look at the track side-on in google earth...". He isn't using GPS to as a navigation tool in the circuit, he's using it to review his flight performance back home in the comfort of his computer chair. I did (and still do) exactly the same thing with a small portable GPS recorder that sits tucked out of the way, silently remembering what I've done. When I was learning circuits, it taught me that those nice 90deg turns were anything but, and these days I still review every flight later that night for track and altitude accuracy. Hildy, the most likely reason that your altitude track doesn't look as expected is that the GPS will be 'smoothing' the recorded path - it assumes that a sudden change in direction (ie no longer descending) must be wrong, and so it continues your downward path for a little while. You may be able to remove the smoothing if you dig around in the configuration of the GPS or in the program that you use to upload the data, but I wouldn't worry too much. You know with much more accuracy whether you hit the ground hard or rounded out too high than any GPS recorder ever will. (p.s. I just looked at your track. Given that I can see where you wandered around in the instructors office and when you did the pre-flight check, I'm guessing you were using a sports gps watch. Right? :thumb_up:)

I just went straight to work. Borrrrrring...

Two solos in one day - bet it was nice to know that the first one wasn't a fluke!

I'm with you Nev. I'd love to be building, but I like doing things like that with other people. So far I've built 2 houses and assisted on two others, and I built 2 Minis from wrecks in my younger days (yep, Darky - real Minis, none of this pretend stuff ). Yep, I reckon if I wasn't flying then I'd be building - well, if someone would deposit large sums of moolah in my bank account that is!

Can't see why not. From the evidence in your picture it's a single prop A/C, so unless it exceeds the RA weight limits you should be fine...

Hey, forget the auto pilot! I want details on the porta-potty

Good on ya Stewy. My eldest loves it, my middle kid can take it or leave it, and my youngest won't go near the thing. Mind you, they're all adults...

Thanks very much for all the help & ideas. I particularly like the idea of Chird's temporary garage - I could put something like that up in the back yard without having to worry about council permission, and affecting eventual resale on the house. Yes, you and I might like a house with a whacking big shed taking up most of the back yard, but we're probably few and far between. Besides, I'd be able to explain to the bride that it's only temporary (for about 5 years... ). Might be a bit cold in winter and stinking hot in midsummer, and I'd have to sort out a reliable electricity supply, but that's all possible. Yes! The dream lives on to fight another day.

Just how much space do you need to construct a home-built? Some of the photos that I've seen lately are in sheds bigger than my home (lucky sods!). Clearly, there's not much use in starting to follow the dream if step #1 requires moving house first! I presume that the initial phases (fuse, wings, tailfeathers, etc) don't require as much space as when it all starts to come together, so what do you think are the minimums you'd require (ie X metres x Y metres) for both the early and later phases?

Could the difference be just that a droop down is more likely to suffer tip drag during landing, but provides a slightly better view either side the rest of the time?

I heard a bloke talking about time he spent in Mongolia. He said even out on the steppe, everyone had mobile phones, even though the network was a bit iffy. Apparently the recommended technique for getting an SMS out was to throw the phone as high in the air as possible, and by the time it came down, the message was sent...

Thanks JG. Well written and informative - that one's going in the hope chest.

...and now you can truly say you're one in a million! :big_grin: