M61A1

Based on that, you might well discard your CO monitor. Just make sure your exhaust doesn't leak. The whole purpose is redundancy. The float bowl gasket is only one place leaks can occur. If the aircraft has pod filters the float bowl vent line is tucked in under the retaining clip. If the float bowl overfills for any reason (vibration or debris) it can leak directly on to the exhaust and you would never know unless you saw it or caught fire. I have also heard of pressed in pins in the float bowl coming loose allowing fuel to escape. The drip trays are a Rotax part. I'm guessing that they didn't make them for no reason.

I think the floats on the Bing 94s that Jabiru use have the floats as a one piece unit like the motorcycles use. I don’t think these suffer the same issues as the two individual floats as used on Rotax.

I know...It's the frustration of watching a slow motion train wreck, with people in the carriages cheering it on.

Is this to prove your own point? BTW......That is not the same logic, not even close. I'm not anti-mask for the record, just anti-pointless memes. I have not seen one pro-lockdown post here that actually addresses any of the points made by those that think there could be an alternative.

Take great care putting the O-ring on the idle jet. A special tool is useful, I made one after breaking an O-ring. The O-ring is very small but is required to stretch a fair bit, and when you that and slide it over the thread it, will often break with the combination of stretch and the thread nicking it. There are also some good youtube videos about rebuilding Bings.

There is good reason GFA membership is in decline and it's not about money. If GFA people got in RAAus I fear the result will be the same as GFA has. Mind you, RAAus may also be heading that way anyway.

And what other conditions did he have? Without that information your statement is pointless, and just scaremongering.

Absolutely...even then the measure of success will depend on who's yardstick is used. And yet, the biggest risk is letting them in....

Yes, that's the reason most helis prefer to start up into wind. if you start with a tailwind, you get a cockpit full of exhaust fumes.

What country has done well will still be a matter of opinion, those with a left wing leaning think NZ is a model, there are many different things tried by many different countries. Many have ended up with similar results, but over different timeframes. Sooner or later NZ will have to open up, and I would think that it's quite likely that they will see similar things to Melbourne (and other countries) when they do. Yes, it is very infectious, but it's not particularly deadly. Yes, Nev the medicos are heroes, what good are entertainers and baristas now? Why the idea that you can only have two states...completely unchecked or completely eradicated? There is middle ground. Below is a link to a BBC article, who are by most standards a leftist paragon, but are still more intellectually honest than our ABC. Perhaps it might clarify things a little. We are clearly looking at this from different viewpoints and as such find different outcomes acceptable. I do not support the "safety at all costs" culture, and my expectation is different to yours. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51979654

Many people have provided alternative methods but you discard them immediately, because they come from from "ultra right wing" sources or "non-medical experts" or some other excuse. Your mind is made up.

That's exactly the point.....Many people are infected...very few die. Of the older that die, most would have died in the next 12 months and most of those will have preventable health conditions that were a result of their own lifestyle. We are destroying the lives and livelihoods of many for a few that weren't interested in taking care of themselves to start with. Even with the many cases in Melbourne, hospitals are far from overrun. Flightrite is correct. Though, your mind is made up, your facts address different points and some are a matter of viewpoint. Sure NZ is doing well by your standards, but If they dare open the borders they will very quickly have what we have in Melbourne. So, either we are going to have to learn to live with it, or we will just have to keep locking down until we are a third world country and hope an effective vaccine is found before we get there. Melbourne has shown just how difficult it is to keep people isolated, so unless they are forcibly quarantined (which goes against Melbourne's Woke culture), you have virtually zero hope of containing this, especially since some of the people there will see it as a personal challenge, and some will want to keep it going because of the cash benefits with the very low risk of dying. The laws will only affect honest people.

I think it's absolutely hilarious that you think that this will change anything. Fining these people will achieve nothing except wasting police time and effort. If they really want these sort of people to self isolate, they will need to physically lock them up. It's hilarious because Victoria and in particular Melbourne pride themselves in being ultra woke and diverse and in doing so, have created most of their own problems. On the other hand, it scares the hell out of me, not because I'm worried about covid, but because as it leaks out of Victoria, other states may try the same approaches as Dan. You keep telling us Dan isn't in charge, so don't blame him. He put these people in charge and he can have them stand down, so he is in charge. That's why it's his face on the telly every bloody ten minutes. I am more concerned about our response to the disease than the disease itself. Previous generations were fighting possible invasion by a capable enemy that was more than happy to enslave or kill everyone, today we are fighting a virus that might kill a small percentage of older people who generally speaking, didn't bother to look after their own health, and now wan't to call others "selfish" if they don't give up everything they've worked for. Yes it occasionally gets someone younger, but these are outliers. Future generations will look back at our response to to covid and and think WTF?

Do you honestly believe that the sort of people breaking curfew/other rules are actually going to pay those fines?

"As soon as possible" is the same as immediately , a paddock , road, or whatever is available, essentially for when failure may be imminent . "As soon as practicable", means land as soon as you have somewhere suitable to land. Perhaps if you look at it like this...... 1. A fire in flight..Land as soon as possible, you don't care where, as long as you aren't in a burning missile. 2. Your oil pressure is not normal, but there are no other indicators of a problem, head for the nearest strip, to "Land as soon as practicable" but be ready to land ASAP if things worsen. Or you could use your computer to find the following. AS soon as possible It often takes the form as soon as possible, meaning at the earliest possible moment, as in He'll finish the work as soon as possible. This expression employs possible in the sense of “if it can or could be,” a usage dating from the late 1600s. Definition of As soon as practicable As soon as practicable means as soon as possible and practical taking into account all of the facts and circumstances in the individ- ual case.

Apologies Nev, I was thinking from a maintenance view rather than a pilot's and misinterpreted what you were getting at. along a similar line...some pilots have trouble with the interpretation. For example there is a significant difference between "land as soon as possible" and "land as soon as practicable". Those who misinterpret "as soon as practicable" often create logistical nightmares, but never suffer any criticism.

They still get documented, and the necessary inspections are carried out in accordance with the manufacturer’s publications. The point was that it’s not completely black and white, there are degrees. For the record, I have flown in nearly all the aircraft I have performed such inspections on. I would happily fly in any of them, but some I am not permitted to..

Actually for some there are degrees up to a point. Some will have limits based on how much and for how long you had the over speed, same for over torque and over temps. in the case I mentioned there was much consulting with Bell. They decidedthat they had never tested any of the components to that point and recommended replacement, but had it been minor there were different components to replace or inspect depending on the degree of over speed.

I will assume you were flying a Huey. Sounds like a massive over reaction. I have had to help sort out an actual overspeed an a B206. The power turbine governor did fail(resulting in an STI to inspect all of them). The instructor pilot took over and landed the aircraft on a ridge. there were no data recorders other than CVR, which they used to determine main rotor frequency. From memory, they figured that it had exceeded 420 rotor rpm, a considerable overspeed from mid 300's. The whole driveline was replaced, including the engine and rotors. N2 is usually the power turbine and directly related to Nr or rotor speed. N1 or Ng is the gas producer speed, But you know that....just for clarity for others.

And double f*ck all is still f*ck all.

Yes, there's value in testing, but no value in spouting off about how many you've done, and that was the point being made.

There are quite a few military jets that go faster than bullets.

I think that depends on whether the seats a designed to withstand 20G or absorb 20G. Big difference... I see many helicopter seats that designed to absorb the load making the vertical impact more survivable. I'm fairly sure there are some design criteria for this on a certified aircraft. You could reasonably assume that all bets are off in regards to seat survivability on experimental aircraft.

One might also argue that if you get yourself into a spin while “mushing “ , maybe flying isn’t for you. ( this particular aircraft) It would also be interesting to find out what the descent rate in a spin is. It may well be survivable. in any case, I don’t really see the point in using either the BRS or mushing while you still have control, other than a situation where you know your are about to lose control.

But....if your descent rate is slower than a BRS descent, and you have nothing to lose? The likelihood of carrying out such a manoeuvre is extremely unlikely when you consider that the main reasons you would pull the chute is structural failure or complete loss of control, in which case this won’t help.