derekliston

This whole thread has been fascinating. It has really made me think about my landings, of which there are lots because I mostly fly circuits solely to improve my landings. Sometimes I am completely happy with them, most times they are Ok but could have been better. The biggest problem I had way back when learning to fly was different instructors with different ideas about how things should be done. Would have been better to stick with one instructor but mostly that doesn’t seem possible. Some were of the select a landmark variety, some of the relative geometry type. I actually use the relative geometry method, seems to work at any airfield then. Actually after reading all of this I tried to analyse my landing style and can’t, I just do it, no two landings are ever identical because of wind, sun in your eyes, or whatever. If you ever read the Bush Fliers Down Under stuff you will see that tailwind landings are sometimes necessary on one way strips. I think it is useful to have done a few just for experience sake. My CH701 needs about 100 metres to land (with this pilot!) and here at Warwick I have 1700metres of runway, so on light traffic days (that is most weekdays!) It is safe to practice. Quite surprising how much more difficult it is, can be quite difficult to get down even with the engine at idle. I have been flying since 1969 but due to commitments and finances over the years am still and always will be a low hours pilot.

Find it totally amazing that the entire concept of passenger airships was abandoned after a total loss of life considerably less than one airliner disaster, MH370 as just one example!

Interesting side note. If you read the history in depth of those two airships, R100 was a private enterprise machine built I believe by Airspeed which was at that time owned by the author Neville Shute (A Town like Alice!) while the R101 was designed and built by a government corporation and had a lot of problems in the design and building stage. R100 was actually a successful machine but was blighted after the crash of R101.

Kenlsa, if you look at my previous posts on this topic you will see that I have stand alone glass!

All of these very interesting takes on this theme are quite fascinating, everything from total technophiles to utter technophobes. You have seen my previous comments but just to elucidate a little. When I was building I was not at all sure whether to go for the traditional ‘steam’ instruments or glass. I didn’t know how well I would go with glass. My eventual decision was made because the Dynon Skyview was cheaper overall than a set of instruments, it was a lot lighter and possibly a simpler installation. I really didn’t find it difficult to make the transition and now would not swap it.

Just to bring it back on track. I have only a 10 inch Skyview and wouldn’t swap it. In front of me I have all of the normal parameters plus Tas, GS, wind speed and direction, cross wind factor and then GPS speed and altitude.

Severe case of thread drift on this!

A pity more councils don’t take that approach. Our council actually chains and padlocks the terminal gates. Really encourages visitors!

‘Death Barrel Roll’? ‘Fully 90degrees’? ‘Nose dived but belly landed’? Why oh why can’t we get some accurate reporting of these accidents?

Swings and roundabouts I think. I built a Zenith CH701 and registered it VH experimental because I already had a PPL. One time registration cost with no annual fee and being transponder equipped I am not excluded from CTA (I don’t go there, but can if I want) Medical cost was reasonable, once every two years until I had a heart attack, now they want an annual medical with a stress echo-cardiogram, so cost has increased significantly. I console myself that a) CASA still let me fly and b) It is not a bad idea to have an annual heart health check-up anyway for my own peace of mind. I am currently 71 years old, have been retired for almost nine years, so not sure how much longer I shall remain an active pilot. Physical health is currently excellent, financial health??? Sometimes think it would actually be good to know the future date of one’s death just to know how long the money has to last!!

Well there you go. Learn something every day! Just have to try to remember now.

Nev, if it was Miles it wasn’t a Monospar, that was General Aircraft. Are you sure it wasn’t a Miles Gemini? It had twin DH Gipsys.

Wassmer Baladou?

Two comments, 1) Someone has suggested an annual ‘BFR’ that would make it an ‘AFR’ since the B in BFR means biennial! 2) I believe, certainly in the case of a PPL, you cannot ‘fail’ a BFR. The examiner can recommend further practice but cannot suspend your licence. Don’t know about RAAus though!

C310, prettiest light twin ever.

For me the Hawker Seafury comes close to perfection, the aesthetics of the clipped wing Spitfire with the beautiful purr of a big round engine!

I’ve long been of the opinion that an aircraft designer, having come up with a design, consults another designer who says “ Mate, a LAME could fix that, go and redesign it until he can’t” Case in point, PA38 Tomahawk elevator cables. One of them travels forward from the control column, down around a pulley before making it’s way aft. I am convinced that the factory instal that before fitting the firewall because changing it is as close to impossible as any job I have ever had to do. Used my entire vocabulary of swear words and probably coined a few more!

I was never taught to sideslip and that is going back as far as the UK in 1970’s. Taught to spin and recover, but never taught to slip. I have asked several instructors but none have ever accepted. Fortunately, with my very draggy little CH701 I can get away with just putting the nose down until I get the height I need and then the speed bleeds off really quickly as I cross the threshold. I’d still like to learn though!

Yes mate, realised after I posted that it wasn’t the Luton Major!

Luton Major?

(Totally tongue in cheek in case anyone thinks I’m serious!) You shouldn’t need to pump the water if the pipeline is coming from the North because it is downhill!!!

Used to be fun in the UK years ago when you needed three sets of spanners , imperial, the sizes of which made no logical sense, AF and Metric. Not quite so bad nowadays but the plans for my Zenith CH701 did suggest I would need ‘an 8ft metric tape rule!!!’

Not wishing to be rude but people either don’t read or don’t listen, the Trident 3b had a boost engine which was shut down after take-off as well as an APU!!!

Picture of a Trident 3b, note the RB162 (I think!) booster engine above the centre engine, so including the APU it really was five engined! No photo because I can’t figure how to post a picture with this new format!!!

True in most cases, but in the case of the Trident, I think the mark was 3b, it really was a boost engine, the APU was a separate entity. Google it!