motzartmerv

I will rest easy knowing at least, finally, someone, somewhere is trying to fix the problem.

Well, I say not a day too soon...maybe we finally have a CEO with a pair hey?

See...Steps:) the wheels turn slowly, but they turn..

Distracted from turning the fuel on? You wont get to experience that too many times.

Generally speaking, carb ice range is -10c to +30c. Not really.. The earth moves around the sun which presents to the sun at an inclined angle. The earth centered universe went out of fashion many years ago :) All jokes aside, teckair is right, cold air is much drier than warm air. The poles are the driest places on earth:).. Ahhh, I love science...

I hope for all our sakes you're right! We live in carby ice land down here and have experienced it with the jab engines countless times. But total loss of power would require some significant ice. Possible I Spose, and the conditions look good for it. I just wanna know how he got a jab started when it was 9 deg's!!!

Yes they stop very quickly when running dry. Lucky to get a splutter.

Icing is not simply a temp related thing. Saying its likely because it was cold is not telling the full story. There's much more to it then that. I'd be very surprised it it was ice.

Anybody tried to use the fuel gauges in jabs lately/ Before chucking stones (or selling aircraft) we need the facts before calling people stupid. The jab guages are Sh!t, just as Sh!t as most other gauges ive seen. Ive read several crash comics where the pilot invariably said " Geees, the bloody guage said it had plenty".. Its even caught seasoned Instructors out. So dont go pointing too many fingers just yet. The lessons we can take from this are clear, and if I can just interrupt the name calling and jabiru marketing manager for a moment I might offer some tips. Never, ever, ever rely on a fuel gauge to determine total fuel quantity. If not sure, give it more!!! Use ALL the info available to determine fuel status, both on the ground AND inflight. Info such as: -Fuel quantity added -Flight time since last refuelling multiplied by known fuel burn, Plus a bit for sh!ts and giggles -Indicated amount, by dipping AND using the gauges, although dipping in some types, the j170 included is not overly helpful -And my old favourite, rocking the wings and listening. You will soon notice if theres bugga all on board. Inflight use: - Gauge indications - Flight time multiplied by fuel burn rate (plus a bit for bob) Importantly, use real numbers..ie, i dipped and got 50 litres, I added 20 litres, the gauges are showing 65 litres. Ive been flying for 1 hour at an average fuel burn of 18 litres / hour, I should have approx 45-50 litres of fuel on board. Does that x check with fuel guage indications? Over burning is not likely with our engines, but always add a bit incase your tuning is off or she's just having one of those days!! Finally, get a placard next to your fuel gauges stating: Only trust a fuel gauge when its giving you bad news!!!

Was this a school aeroplane?

God I hope not.

Great job. Couldnt ask for a better outcome. Pilot deserves a beer I reckon.

.......

As usual, a very thorough investigation and report from the ATSB. Theres a couple of things that really stick out for me in this accident. Pots has covered most of them above. The biggest lessons to come from this accident (I feel) are for Instructors. The Instructor involved with this accident had almost 4000 hours, quite a reasonable amount of experience by anybodys standards. Its appears he was bitten by a cranky 'type' during a critical phase of flight and was unable t0 recover the aeroplane in time. The sad thing is, it looks like it was 'almost' recovered. Something I talk about with other instructors quite often is the fact that experience does not always work for you, it can work against you. The captain of the Titanic, had crossed the Atlantic literally hundreds of times in his long career. He knew the waters well, he knew the weather well. But he didnt know 'his machine'. The Titanic was a beast of a thing to turn, normally when an ice burg was spotted, they would manourvre around it. But on the night of the sinking, a few things worked against them. But the last line of defence, the turn to avoid, was simply impossible due to the turning radius of the massive ship. The captain was chosen due to his vast experience and knowledge of the waters. He had driven full speed across the berg field many many times before, so thats what he did this time. When flying any new type, it would be easy for an experienced instructor to fall victim to the same thinking. Yea sure, when doing a conversion he/she may do a few stalls, a few steep turns etc. And the other edge of the sword is, the guy checking HIM out on the new type would know hes experienced and any conversion would be likely to be more of a pleasure flight with a stall or a glide chucked in. And to be honest, in MOST types of training aircraft ( the types where most Instructors spend the majority of those thousands of hours) this perfectly fine. But in a type like this, there are demons lurking just beneath the surface. An example. A lot of people take some flap before turning base. In cessnas and pipers etc. Fine, no dramas. But if you do that in a type like this, and you dirty up just before turning base, you could easily be behind the drag very quickly as the attitude changes due to flap, AND you crack on a turn. Thats just an example of ' negative transfer' from one benign type to another. A less experienced pilot, would maybe have that little element of " hhmmm, she feels different this one" and may be less likely to allow things to get out of hand. I once flew with a nervous young (low time) instructor who was so jumpy and nervous, but he wold react with lightening speed if I got 1 knott slow, or went to take flap when the white arc wasnt quite reached. The hardest part of the instructing, IMHO is warding off complacency. Its so so easy to fall into a lull, a false sence of security. A real " ive done this sequence thousands of times, this one will be no different".. Theres a real lesson for ALL pilots but particularly Instructors in this accident. The other factor I see being significant is the way stalling is handled 'in general" and how it very rarely relates to a stall thats likely to kill us. We climb up high, we do some checks, we crack idle and try and remain level etc. Advanced stalling we may use power and flap, And maybe even try it in a turn...Scarey hey? But who ever lost control at 3500 feet and spun in while flying the mother in law around looking for whales.? Its the slow, mushy, out of balanced turn onto base and final that kills people. And the thing with this type of stall, is the nose is almost invariably "DOWN" as the stall is encountered. Not pitched up like pilots are shown in " stalling'. Very very confusing, and by the time the pilot works out hes in a spin, its well too late. I believe that 10 hours would be sufficient time on type for an experienced instructor PROVIDING a good portion of that time was spent in the "nasty zone" and actually spent getting to 'feel' the aeroplane.

Ive had word. Told to look at this. https://www.raa.asn.au/documents/airworthiness/Bowden%20Cable%20bulkhead%20nuts%20bulletin%2021072014.pdf

True, and none are wrong all the time either..

Id rank my RAA certificate Higher than my CPL... Its certainly been more usefull!!

Point in Case hey Daffyd:).. Surely you dont disagree with everything ive ever said..Unless of course you are just disagreeing because of who's saying it:).. You wouldnt do that now would you?...

Information is king. Theres nothing wrong with people knowing the back ground of the person they are talking to. Doctors still hang their degrees on the wall behind them:) Context is EVERYTHING.

yes. Horrible. Theres many factors the investigators will be considering. Both experienced, one with in excess of 20,000 hours, aerobatic, test pilot of all sorts of weird and wonderful contraptions, including a flying saucer, ground effect ferries, and every make and model you could think of. The sequence being a review, knowing the way the Instructor generally did things, the timing is perfect for the upper air work component of the review. (stalling etc) The fact the aircraft was reasonably low time post build. No mayday call given I can assure you, the RAA will be doing their absolute best to get to the bottom of this. Not only due to the seemingly "clear blue sky' component and the implications of that, but also the fact these are a common kit aircraft and the questions about a failure will need to be addressed, only AFTER and IF its proven to be the case.

Im not aware of any ATSB involvement at this stage. Im not involved with the investigation tho, so im only going off hearsay from those close by. The wreckage was recovered and the second pilot was also found. A little bit of good news for the family i spose. There is a significant amount of pictures posted on a news site of the recovered wreckage which i wont link here, its not hard to find. As expected, there isnt much we can go on, I looked over the pictures for hours locating the control surfaces etc, all of which I could see except for the rudder. This doesnt mean much as far as it being missing, but it is significant in the fact all the flying surfaces seem to be located (bar the rudder) The vertical stab seems relatively unscathed. I am confident that at least some educated guesses will come from the investigation.

arielle. Thank you for the advice, and Im very aware of what the thread is about. What perspective am i missing mate? If you want to put sh!t on my mate, and his chosen career path, as well as many others who devote their lives to teaching, before hes even been buried, then you my friend are going to have to deal with me im afraid. Im very aware also that there were two pilots killed in this accident, does that make it ok to only bag out half the crew? I put up with a lot of ill informed, rubbish, but I wont put up with this . So yes, stick to the topic, please.

"He who feels the need to bag out educators, in a thread about a dead instructor, is a lowlife" Andrew Campbell While im sure the family of the deceased Instructor really enjoy the clever, cute little cliche's bagging out his chosen career path, perhaps you can start another thread entitled " My ignorant and obnoxious views on other peoples jobs."

Exactly Nev. The sentiment behind the analogy was that it doesnt matter what you have gotten away with in the past, your odds are the same EVERY time you fly. You cant carry odds over.

No offence taken. I spoke not of probability for a very good reason. I dont think my post was missleading at all, if you understand the message behind it, which I think most people do. No offence intended:)