nong

A. Spring tab Spring length changes more at high speed due to increasing aerodynamic load. Useful for limiting structural loads at higher speeds by moderating the effects of overzealous pilot input.

G'day. I've got a question from my Aerody exam that has me and a few others stumped, ill put the question and answers up and see what you guys think

You have a form of tab that as speed increases travel decreases. What is this called

 

A. Spring tab

 

B. Servo

 

C. Balance

 

D. Anti balance

The key word is "dual" control. There's ONE stick and your arm has to be right behind it. Gives the instructor a bit of difficulty. If we place the dual throttles in the centre on the dash, both pilots have easy access to them. This is the "normal" way, rather than having two sets of "organ stops " near each door. Perhaps have a Y shaped control stick? You need to place these things carefully. I'm highlighting the problem. Not giving all the answers..Twins can be more to manage than a single. Nev

The problem is people taking cheap shots at other people who are tackling serious engineering puzzles.

Any yobbo can carp on about real or imagined 'problems'.

If you have no solution to offer, why carry on?

By the way...... This is a development aircraft.

Hi please dont incriminate yourself or anyone else.But it seems like the more people i hear from about these the more it seems like lots of people who fly them disregard the 544 /600 limit. And fill them up with fuel upto about 650kg.

 

Now i know what the rules say and i know its technically not safe to do so. But if everyone is doing it, perhaps it is safe to do so.

 

I would appreciate peoples comments , but please dont lecture as i know what should happen. Ta.

There is overload as an engineering and performance consideration.

Yes, Jabirus are often flown overgross, in a legal sense.

The outdated RAAus rule set presents a real temptation for pilots of certain Jabiru models, that are known to be engineered to operate at up to 700kg. Let your attitude to our poorly constructed laws be your guide! Bad law-making usually receives the observance and respect it deserves!!

Operating beyond the engineered weight, as ag pilots do, involves a whole lot of other considerations. I can only suggest that you refrain from this.

As an interesting aside...... In New Zealand, the Fletcher FU24 is typically and routinely operated on top-dressing work at design gross (4,860 lb) plus 31% (6,366 lb) or more.

Imagine the effect of this, on the undercarriage and centre section, when doing maybe ten take-offs per working hour off rough air-strips. The pilots and operators generally accept the risks and associated failures in the interests of greater productivity per flying hour.

This is such a bad distraction. We should tell CASA, firmly and with a smile,"NO". I would prefer that RAAus advise CASA that we will no longer accept Commonwealth money. I would further advise that we would be prepared to carry on, but that we cannot administer their SMS.

If your 172 is lightly loaded in thick air it doesn't matter if you ignore the book and use flap for take-off.

If you're hot, high 'n heavy, ignore the book at your peril.

Same here Phil. It's not all gloom and doom. Had 2 youngsters on work experience last week - took them out for a TIF.....both loved it, and one has begun studying already. Each year we TIF each member of the local Defence Force Cadets - some 35-40 of them. Several of them have returned to us and are doing their PC or PPL as a result of just one good TIF. Obviously, that TIF is really important, and needs to be 'tailored' to how you, (as the instructor), read the person. Some we do steady,steady - others just love a little bit more DYO flying, and some like to experience a little more exuberance. The more TIF's that we do, with teenagers especially, the better the future for flying.

Cost is always a concern. However, we have 4 people learning who are u/18, and contributing to their familys' financial underwriting of the flying. Two of them have gained small, but important, scholarships which spurs them on. I'm of the opinion that these small scholarships, (say <$2500>) are great as this provides just that extra incentive.

 

happy days,

Anyone can loaf along on a scholarship. When the dough runs out, often, so does the student's feigned interest.

Not an expert, but i didnt realise that an 0540 would need a redrive? Prop size a factor?edit: ad to that i know nothing about ag trucks

Good to see some real aviators in action.

Do the children really have to fly? The answer might be yes. It might not.

I guess the next question is how can the taxman condone an activity that's deemed illegal by casa , another gov . department ?When push comes to shove .

And since when is the taxman allowed to knowingly tax illegal activity?

 

Still confused Mike.

Our B1-RDs had the twin cylinder cuyuna UL2-02 donks and we remember them fondly as being easy to live with. One of the Cuyunas had deep gauging on the front cylinder as a result of the B1-RD spinning in and impacting the bitumen of Elizabeth Ave, at the entrance to Forest Hill Aerodrome. Didn't seem to worry it.

Teaching oneself to fly was common during the ultralight craze. It was achievable because of the aerodynamic, stability and control characteristics of machines like the B1-RD.

You ain't gunna pull it off in a Jabby!

The Powers and Bashforth B1-RD looked remarkably like the Santos Dumont Demoiselle of 1910.

RussThe J160 was nicknamed the fatboy and was produced to accommodate comfortable flying for the bigger people like myself at 6ft and 100kgs. The cockpit is slightly wider than the J170 so if you are after room then the J160 is the pick. The empy weight of the J160 is around 320kgs and the MTOW is 540kg. The J170 is slightly narrower in the cockpit and has longer wings as Keith has mentioned which can be a little tricky in windy conditions but if you get the approach speed right use the correct technique you will be ok. Both models have 135ltr fuel capacity but the J170 is around 340kgs with an MTOW OF 600kg. So if you are after extra take off capacity then the J170 is the choice. The cruise speed of both models is 100kts and both use around 15lt/hr and 2850rpm with the 4cyl 2200 motor.

Both Models are great so it is up to you want you need in a plane.

 

Good luck mate.

 

Safe Flying

 

JabSP6

Information postFor those members who are not familiar with the principles of a SMS, the ICAO SMS Implementation Training Course (which I have attended, prior to introducing a SMS into my organisation) has a reasonable presentation about SMSs. It can be viewed at http://legacy.icao.int/anb/safetymanagement/training/presentations/ICAO SMS M 08 – SMS planning (R013) 09 (E).ppt.

 

It may look like a load of waffle, but if implemented correctly, such a system would provide enormous benefit to our organisation. I have seen firsthand the substantial benefits of a successful system within an aviation organisation.

SMS is likely to be an intolerable burden for a typical small, one or two staff member, RAAus school. It is all very well to spruik on about how you introduced an SMS into your organisation, but you did not state the approx dollar turnover per annum, the number of employees or give a fair breakdown of the dollar cost of compliance.

How much extra are you prepared to pay for your training or next BFR? SMS won't be free. The cost to schools will be passed on, plus a margin, plus GST.

Oscar was also a Japanese fighter aircraft (land-based Zero) that couldn't take a hit and came apart easily if hit by allied fire..........LOL.........Maj.................

This is such a piece of a) cynical, and b) short-sighted commentary, that it hardly beggars commentary. However, lest it be taken as intelligence it needs a response.No system will eliminate willful stupidity. No regulation intended to prevent foreseeable eventualities will succeed in the face of willful non-observance. No amount of peer-pressure good advice will prevent willful disregard. How many experienced aviators were present at Natfly last year when a couple took off at last light - and died shortly thereafter?

 

What an SMS WILL do, is assist in the prevention of accidents resulting from genuine lack of knowledge. By at least reducing the 'unknown' danger factors, aviators have better information on which to base their decisions. Ultimately, the decision to take off, to press on into adverse conditions, to attempt to land, is up to the PIC - but at least, if provided with the best-available information, their choice to take an action is at the least, an informed one.

 

The principle of accessibility to critical information is well-established. For instance, Material Safety Data Sheets are provided for a vast range of products, so that users can be aware of any dangers inherent in using that product. You can argue that this is another version of '****-covering' - but those sheets allow end-users to at least be aware of any risks they take in using the product. You cannot buy a ladder without a placard that says; 'do not step above this height - you may lose your balance' - yet around 20 deaths and over 1,000 injuries a year are related to ladders.

 

Users of ladders are not regarded by society as 'risk-takers'. However - how often do you see a report in the media of a death from a ladder accident? Yet every fatality - or even incident - regarding an aircraft gets media attention.

 

The bottom line is: our activity NEEDS an effective SMS, to demonstrate that we are, as a group, not just aware but pro-active in trying to improve our safety standards. We NEED a demonstrable standard by which the actions of the individual can be judged to be either consistent or inconsistent with a reasonable expressed standard of safety. If you wish to call this '****-covering', you are entitled to so do - but if you want to beable to enjoy the support of the general community for things like saving local airports from developers, then we NEED the '****-covering' of expressed safety standards with which to defend our activities from the prejudice of a community response that we all a pack of death-wish loonies that they don't want near their community.

 

OK, call it '****-covering'. However, without it, we stand a very real chance of having our arses run out of too many towns because 'the local community' doesn't believe we are a safe and reasonable activity in their locale. It isn't just CASA's imperative at work here - it's our survival.

Your suggestion that an SMS will prevent accidents "resulting from a genuine lack of knowledge" or will reduce " 'unknown' danger factors" is lamentably incorrect. In fact, student training is guided by multiple syllabii. The CFI ensures that these syllabii are taught. Also, each student's grasp of required knowledge is tested.

It is interesting to note that both myself, and another CFI posting on this thread, broadly share the same professional opinion of the proposed SMS.

Good morning Sue,I will follow up the template situation, for the next week work is in the way, however with some careful planning that will not be a problem.

Hazards:- I have a problem with them.

 

One day this was explained to me like this:- This gentleman said facing a cricket ball doing 110 kph is not hazard he loves doing that and I say that is dangerous.

 

It is what we perceive as a hazard. What one deams life threatening and an another calls it childs play. (For me it is the cricket ball story.)

 

So after that bit of woffle it boils down to training and training for scenarios and staying within the envelope.

 

Regards

 

Keith Page

Thanks, old mate, for clearing that up.

But don't worry, my students will be getting less personal attention soon, as I will be spending the time on your on your beloved SMS paperwork.

There is still a handful of Drovers around.

Its called subtle racism, you don't realise what your saying because you've held that belief for so long it just seems natural. You probably don't even think of yourself as being racist, more of a realist.

Low-down on Korean pilots struck me as being a well detailed account written by an aviator who had genuine concerns.

I have been testing Ray White's newly completed 601 Zodiac this week. Engine-wise it has been very unexciting. It starts easily. Then it runs smoothly. The sustained climb performance indicates that the claimed power is there. All temps, including gearbox are in the 'no sweat' range.

Possibly we are first airborne in Aust. At this stage, I can only speak highly of it's performance in all respects.

Yeah, road racing at the weir, being taken out head-on by a drunk in a Valiant, flipping the RD in front of the pub.......

Sailing the Laser, so easy to rig...

Robertson B1-RD is a strong challenger. One afternoon, I trained two pilots from scratch. No dual of course. They would just pull up every few minutes for further instructions. One of these pilots handled an engine failure the next morning, correctly swooping under the power line that was in his way. He died of natural causes after twenty years of hobby aviating. His mate is still going strong, with twenty three years accumulated.

I

Or you could try having a look around the parking area for any rubbish, building materials potholes etc which might cause injury to visitors or their children, where appropriate buy a $10 speed sign for the entrance, have a couple of warning signs put up (which you are currently obligated to do by the State Worksafe body anyway.You may be obligated to have handicapped toilets now, or maybe since you are not offering a service which a person who needs a handicapped toilet can participate in (unless you offer handicapped controls) you may be exempted from that.

 

If you operate at night, you will require lighting in the car park (but you do now under Worksafe.)

 

You could contribute to fixing the current Human Factors syllabus, which in my opinion was written by an introverted diver, and put some real meat into the course, which you know will save lives.

 

Not much cost in all that; it's just a matter of how to approach your risks, which you may be doing very well now, in which case you may have to do very little.

 

But if you don't want to put your neck on the block for a guaranteed claim against you for negligence, a safety system is a safety net, your proof of duty of care.

RAAus is now in the full grip of the BUREAUCRATIC IMPERATIVE. Considering this, all members will pay more for the privilege of wading through more paper.

ISO was a financial disaster for the AUF. It was a scam designed to enable consultants to scoop a heap of easy dough, and they did.

Today, an operator in another field, told me that he spends one day per year carefully filling out all the safety system paperwork that is, supposedly, a daily chore. It has to be done carefully, to allow for such things as public holidays, but doing it this way does limit the damage to one wasted day per year.

I am expecting to charge $350.00, or more, per hour, for training in the Jab. After all, I will need to pay for the required four man safety committee, because no one in their right mind will volunteer. The hangar and parking will need to meet retail standards, such as a bitumen car park and disabled dunny. Lets call that $200k. I guess I could scrimp on maintenance to help pay for these new 'core' safety requirements. No biggie. We already force students to study "human factors", thus diluting their limited study time. Much more useful than discussing, say, how pilots get suckered into loosing control at low level.