Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


kgwilson last won the day on April 16

kgwilson had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,135 Excellent

About kgwilson

  • Rank
    Well-Known Member
  • Birthday 02/19/1950

More Information

  • Gender
  • Aircraft
    Morgan Sierra 100. C172, PA28-181
  • Location
    Corindi Beach
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

399 profile views
  1. I never rely on fuel gauges. Fuel tanks in wings are very wide and shallow so any slight parking angle will give erroneous results even on the dipstick let alone the gauge. I set my fuel sender float arm length according to the VDO manual for the depth of my main tank when I installed it. All well & good but the gauge read is based on the linear value provided by the float position. The problem is that most fuel tanks are not perfect cubes or rectangles so the reading will only be perfectly accurate at empty and full. This is why you should have a placard with the actual fuel amounts and the gauge reading on the panel. When you are flying it isn't much use having the placard in the manual as it was in this case. I also sympathise with the pilot as he would have got back if he had 182 litres on board instead of 144. The only issue was that he'd have used about half of his reserve getting back. As he was using a higher power setting than normal running in the engine at 2500rpm fuel consumption would have been higher than at a standard cruise of around 2350rpm. At that rpm he would most likely have got back with 144 litres and with 182 litres with the 45 minute reserve intact Now of course the reserve has been lowered to 30 minutes & the controversial Fuel Mayday introduced. Stupid rule IMHO. I still stick with the 45 min reserve.
  2. Other than the long grass it was a great place to land. Huge flat paddock with a single tree in the middle. That is usually a magnet for aircraft & he missed it.
  3. Facts and industry knowledge do not apply to opinion though. Example is putting blame on the poor training standards of so called "3rd world airlines". Ethiopian has an excellent safety and management record
  4. The problems reported by 4 US pilots did not involve runaway trim attributed to the MCAS system with faulty AOA indication. They disengaged the autopilot & continued the flight. Training may be an issue with some of the "3rd world" airlines but the captain of the Ethiopian aircraft had over 2000 hours though the first officer only 200. They have a good safety record and a category 1 rating with FAA allowing them to fly to the US & have EASA certification for Europe. They have the largest fleet in Africa operating both 787 Dreamliners and A350s.
  5. It's all about money. A new design would have cost an enormous amount of money and taken some years to get certified. More cost. Meanwhile the A320 NEO family's share of the market skyrockets. The Boeing accountants win & say fix the existing design. So they make changes, self certify as approved by FAA and don't tell pilots much about the MCAS system as their Max upgrade is just a couple of hours on an ipad. They get 5000 orders as the MAX is well priced & they are back in the race. Then the excrement hits the proverbial fan. 2 crashes & over 300 deaths, all Max's grounded, share price plummets, orders stop, production is slowed and the recriminations have hardly begun. The accountants will be passing the buck to the engineers who will blame the certifiers who will blame the software etc and it goes on. The cost has probably already surpassed the option of the new design. A billion or so for the deaths, but the big costs are going to be the claims for parking, maintenance & loss of income from the 54 operators of about 350 planes for however long they are on the ground.
  6. Easy, turn your phone off &/or delete every social media account you have or ever had, block all email addresses except those you explicitly trust & these aren't your bank, accountant, friends, lawyer, or anyone in business, i.e withdraw from the modern world.
  7. Thread drift including Jabiru bashing yet again.
  8. When the ATSB released its interim reliability report in 2014 Jabiru failure rates were somewhat higher than Rotax. Interestingly due to continuous improvement the Jabiru rate decreased and the Rotax rate increased by the time the final report was published. ALL engines have their problems and modifications and upgrades are done to rectify these. Continental & Lycoming have been around for many more years than Jabiru and the failures and faults have been met with appropriate mods and upgrades just as Jabiru and indeed Rotax have. I have a Gen 3 3300A & don't know of any failures of this model. Many of the original issues (other than the well publicised through bolt, valve sticking and gudgeon pin circlip issues) originated from poor maintenance routines & the failure to treat the engine like an aero engine. A theory of mine is that Jabiru opened up aviation to many who had always thought the cost prohibitive but then they failed to understand that you can't treat a lightweight air cooled aero engine like a car engine. The Rotax on the other hand with its partial liquid cooling and Skidoo origins is more forgiving to poor treatment as well as having had a lengthy development period to sort out the bugs. Rotax though also has issues, is far more complex and requires plenty of attention to it's extensive plumbing. It is your choice as to what engine you fly behind. I am more than happy with mine. I can fly all day a full throttle if I wish. Rotax is a maximum of 5 minutes. Cost was 20K installed compared with 35k plus for the Rotax with 20 less HP. Our local school has always maintained its engines strictly in accordance with the Jabiru manual. The first engine had a top end done at 1000 hours & replaced a 2000 as it was cheaper & quicker than an overhaul. The second was traded on a new one at 1000 hours when it was due for the top end because the overall cost of ownership was less.
  9. In that situation the trim wheels are almost impossible to turn manually unless pressure is relieved by pushing the nose down. The assumption is that they did not follow this recommended procedure as they did not have the luxury of altitude. They were at almost 500 knots heading towards the ground at 40 degrees nose angle when the trim was switched back on with less that 2000 feet of altitude. All the armchair experts saying they should never have retracted the flaps when there were indications of abnormalities not long after takeoff are not helpful. The pilot was very experienced with an excellent record. There was never any time in the entire flight to get the manual out & start working through options.
  10. I came across this documentary originally filmed in 2002 regarding 2 Boeing whistle blowers. They had found that the supplier of fuselage ribs AHF Ducommun were supplying sub standard parts for the new 737 NG & Boeing sent these people after pressure from employees to audit Ducommun. Instead of CNC & CCM manufactured parts as specified by Boeing they found the equipment in poor condition and the parts being made by hand, hence the fact that holes didn't line up, material was thinner than specified etc. Boeing management & FAA clammed up & eventually the 2 employees went to the Justice dept. Their names were leaked & they lost their jobs. Boeing & FAA hushed it up & did nothing. Three 737 NG aircraft all 8 years old overshot runways injuring people & killing 1. The fuselages of all 3 broke up in the same places that the Ducommun parts are used. Lawyers & ex Boeing employees agreed back then that Boeing was self certifying & desperately trying to regain lost market share from Airbus. One person reckoned the FAA should be renamed BAA (Boeing Approval Agency) This story is interesting in that it went nowhere at the time, the certification issues were known back in 2002 & probably earlier and to date nothing has been done except the Max groundings.
  11. I've watched them all. More succinct and easier to understand than the mentour guy.
  12. All good information but the only way to be sure when there is no cellular coverage is to call centre & request the current status of a restricted or danger area.
  13. The evidence is 100% compelling that it is fake. Be great to hear the newspapers response.
  14. if you are in uncontrolled airspace call centre on the frequency for that area & ask for the status for the restricted area. If you can't remember the number just quote the location. For example the Evans Head bombing range has 3 restricted area numbers. so the simple options is to say "Brisbane Centre, Jabiru 1234, Request status of Evans Head Restricted areas" They will just respond "Jabiru 1234 Evans Head restricted areas not active" (unless they are & you will have to go somewhere else).