Tex

Damn I want a 912 Fisher so BAD now!

 

 

Thanks all, the SB surely has to be slippery compared to the WB. I really want a SB for cruising at (slightly) higher speeds but also really want VERY good STOL so wondering about configuration, that probably needs a different thread.

 

IF you are too light you are supposed to add weight in the seat cushion. Nev

That won't be a problem

 

 

WB Drifter Versus SB Drifter.Nev,Have flown SB Drifters,two completely different machines,heavier and more dragy than the WB,couple with two heavy guys and you are right.

 

Frank

I know this is an old thread just browsing on a Drifter search but SB drifters more draggy than the WB?

 

 

Go to your account... "videos" hit the select box next to your video "Actions" "Delete"..... BUT just leave it up for a while as they might open the video with the soundtrack deleted... :thumb_up:

 

 

The long awaited video of the test flight has finally been edited - thanks GayGirl, and uploaded to Utoob.Check it out here

 

Blocked by Warner Music Group....

 

 

anti-gravity device, look like F350 flares on a Lada:roflmao:

I hate these elaborate prototype promos, they are just looking for more cash to have some fun with ... not a single proof of concept video ... not much in there about fuel consumption... only 4 turbines :blink:There goes it's pay load in about 15 minutes Silent as a hot air balloon

 

 

Yep that one (two) was 2009 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-01-20/pilot-killed-in-light-plane-crash/271360

 

 

I have a Fisher Mk1 and had the same problem, being 6"2' dosent help, i tried ducking out of the air flow enough to make clear transmissions, now i am in a colder area, i have installed a clear canopy that goes over my head and it works a treat, no wind noise at all.

Patrick was it just a case of ordering one and installing or does Wayne need to to do other mods/testing etc ?

 

 

Constant and the same problem here Geoff, I tried putting tape on one side of mic, no help, thicker foam, no help, haven't used a wind dam or larger visor (though was just shopping the net last night for something suitable, except I like the taste of bugs so am reticent) had some success with just ducking low behind the wind shield...

 

 

Very hospitable Noccundra Hotel, see my blog below Moorabbin to St George for a pic. just fly in, taxi to the Bar get out of the plane and the XXXX beer is cold .

Getting a park can be difficult!

 

 

 

Fly a plane with tandem seating arrangement, problem solved

 

 

Life...

 

 

Your buttons getting stuck Cfi? Is that 3 questions or just one

 

 

All good Frank... same, same.... it is the T for terminal that makes the A relevant for aerodrome as you say anyway... same result :big_grin:

 

 

T but remember ATIS QNH is not the area QNH - the A stands for aerodrome.

A is for 'A'utomatic Frank.

 

perhaps EVERYONE is sending based on standard with calc occurring at RX.Interesting!

So this IS the way it works. Great discussion! :big_grin:

 

 

If you are used to reading the official weather reports, you may notice that there is often several divisions within an "Area" with different QNH. The BOM is required to indicate divisions where QNH differs by 3hp (equating at about 90'), so using local QNH is fine locally, but if you fly further afield, then you may wish to adjust your alitmeter subscale to the Area QNH for that locale. Of course you can always ask CENTRE for the QNH for a location.

Sure, often associated with a trough line or front. Don't get me wrong I will reset as required from any info I can get...but none of this helps nunans as he still doesn't have a sub scale.... just set local and away you go.

 

From my understanding a mode c transponder transmits your alt based on 1013.2 and is not set by the pic or am I wrong? This is from the pilot guide for the garman I have fitted to the Hornet.ALT 

 

Selects Mode A and Mode C. In ALT mode, the transponder replies to identification and altitude interrogations as indicated by the Reply Symbol ( ). Replies to altitude interrogations include the standard pressure altitude received from an external altitude source, which is not adjusted for barometric pressure. The ALT

 

mode may be selected in aircraft not equipped with an optional altitude encoder; however, the reply signal will not include altitude information.

 

Scotty

Yeh looks like it Scotty... but it does say received from 'external alt source' and you have to wonder why it would be changing that data back to standard if it was already set to QNH... perhaps EVERYONE is sending based on standard with calc occurring at RX. No encoder no alt TX...

Interesting!

 

 

As i understand it, it depends on the type of transponder.... you need Mode C for CTA ops. If you are requesting a clearance for controlled airspace you will have to identify the ATIS and that also means setting the area QNH. I thought when set to alt the Mode C transponder displayed the alt from your altimeter (or encoder) as set by you, not just to 1013.2. If you are outside controlled airspace or Class E running a squawk on 1200 the same will occur (depending on transponder and alt setting), and they advise any 'controlled traffic' flying there of third party 'unidentified' traffic at a 'reported' altitude. I think that is how it works...

 

 

Exactly Nev

 

There is an allowable tolerance for an altimeter to be considered serviceable/unserviceable. Nev

100' I believe.

 

 

and Local QNH is good for a 5 mile radius...but.....not much else.

Where is that from CFI?

Local QNH is generally sufficient and you can not expect to get an accurate area QNH (quite different to the airfield you are sitting at) given that it is a forecast average with a validity period over a big area and not particularity relevant to many localities that we tend to fly (perhaps outside the J curve). If you are using the AWIS then you are getting the local QNH sub scale setting anyway. So if someone is on an area QNH from an ATIS and someone is on the AWIS local QNH they could be cruising at different levels... but they are both valid in RAA ops outside CTA.

 

Moot for nunans purposes anyway with no sub scale... local QNH is sufficient, perhaps not acceptable to some but plenty sufficient.

 

QFE...is only good if u have a certain accent.....

I don't get it

 

 

That's how I understand it. So knowing the elevation of my location on the ground I would adjust my altimeter to that elevation which would be QFE by default even though you could not actually read the QFE without a subscale.David

If you know the field elevation and set that while on the ground then you are setting QNH if you are on the ground and set ZERO on the alt you are setting QFE.

 

 

Wing over? Knife-Edge? Anyone who suggests it has no idea what they are talking about Hyperbole!

 

 

You would have to do a lot more investigation with the manufacturer, if that is possible. Even though it is just 'material' it does add significant structural integrity to the airframe. It may be possible to overcome that, I don't know how, as you are essentially building and flying a whole new completely different untested plane. Scratch build mentality... FWIW :big_grin:

 

 

This comment should be moderated :hittinghead:

covert

 

 

The most moderated thread on Recflying ever?

This comment should be moderated :hittinghead: