Spin

Dug up a bit more background on this one - I had thought, watching the video that he was dropping pretty fast on downwind, putting him in a position of not much airspeed, very little height and possibly not too many options either right where he began his turn onto runway heading. I now read that he had been doing rolls behind the tug and had ended up with slack in the tow rope and deployed the airbrakes right before he released. They remained extended for most of the downwind run, hence the steeper glidepath, not sure if that was intentional but whatever, the nett result was insufficient surplus energy at the base turn and the inevitable bang, much like the classic stall-spin in a botched forced landing. I wonder whether the unusually high ground speed on downwind caught him out?

Welcome aboard Glint, 47 would make you one of the youngsters on the site:oh yeah:, plenty of us living out much delayed childhood dreams. Whereabouts are you doing your flying? Cheers Carl

Not too different to a Drifter, or even a trike and I like them both. Not sure that this is something I would want for myself though, 200hp is going to take some feeding n watering and in this day and age I'd probably prefer a 912 powered aircraft. Good to see people doing something different though. Last Breezy I had anything to do with came 2nd in a dispute with powerlines.

Should answer your question Maj - not pretty!

Certainly pushing the envelope, although probably mild in comparison to some of the manouvering those aircraft were subject to when there were missiles and other unfriendly objects in the air! I don't think the two engine pass was ops normal, but I've seen only slightly more restrained displays on several occasions. Nothing quite like a quartet of large radials......:thumb_up: I'll have to go looking for some of my own video.

Oops wrong thread.

And I bet the foul fiend had exceeded 60 deg of bank too! That sequence of photos is amazing, all the more so when you consider that the pilot got away with a cracked vertebra and made a full recovery - something to be said for a good composite airframe perhaps?

Nice find, thanks Ian. I enjoyed seeing the Ju-52 in the opening sequence as well, I have very fond memories of a ride in the back of that and of being able to wind the cabin window down like an old motor car. Not a single photo unfortunately, my camera was stolen before I even had the film developed:crying:

Well done Virago, I still haven't had a chance to crawl all over one of them, but those that have are very complimentary. Dunno if it's just me but I can't see your pic? Look forward to following the build on the forum.

Further update on the current adventure, I woke up to find the boys had landed safely in Cape Town sometime before midnight AEST. As they put it, "The Bullet is back!" I scoured the SA sites looking for photographs, but suspect that most people are still engagegd in an almightly P*%$ up at Stellenbosch Flying Club, where the welcome party was planned. Prelim advice is that they left Rio with 770l of fuel aboard, 300 odd kg over gross and did the crossing in a bit short of 27 hours, landing with around 4 hours of fuel in reserve - all in a stretched LSA type with a Rotax 914 up front. Approaching CT International, mountains of the Cape Peninsula in background Arrival at Stellenbosch. The aircraft in the background is also interesting, a Ravin 500 which is an SA designed and built composite rework of the original Piper Comanche. There is at least one flying in Aus and several in the US I believe, powered by a variety of aero engines as well as Chev LS1 conversions. One is also serving as the flying test bed for a new aero engine design from SA. Photo courtesy of "elbow" from avcom.

Now there's a challenge! Sadly the copy I read was a public lending library edition, probably long since discarded - can only hope it ended up in appreciative hands.

Turbo, I think you're crediting them with a hell of a lot more planning and effort than ever occurred. Someone probably talked them into presenting a filler spot, couple of likely suspects were lined up to do the talking and the footage was spliced together from whatever the cameraman could get in an afternoon's flying, with an emphasis on whatever looked the most dramatic. I doubt the RA participants had much say if any at all in the choice of footage, or even what part of their interview was broadcast. As for potential candidates being scared off by a few wingovers, steep turns call them what you will - I very much doubt it. Joe Public is so accustomed to seeing aeros in videos etc that there is nothing at all unusual in their eyes with a steep turn. Sitting inside the aircraft is another thing and white knuckles will soon be in evidence. As far as actually reporting the pilot for what was done - seems petty I'm afraid, why worry about the greenies shutting us down, we'll do it all on our own with this sort of infighting.

I remember reading the book about the Airtourer circumnavigation as a kid - wouldn't mind getting my hands on it now again, certainly was a fantastic feat.

I'll leave it to the fling-wing drivers to explain why, but I understand that some choppers are flown from the LHS and some may be flown from either, depending on the intended task.

Little Nellie. I find them fascinating machines, aside from anything else they seem to be one of the most practical trailable aircraft and don't take up a great deal of room in a hangar either. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJdi-rNcEVc

Thanks for providing the link cficare, reading some of the posts here I got the impression that el presidente had the starring role and had written, directed and produced the feature as well - kind of disappointing to find that his was only one of several interviews in a pretty positive little piece. Maybe a little cement sprinkled on the morning porridge would be helpful.....?

I've just had another look at The Airplane Factory website and see the loons are 2 plus hours into their final lap - a direct flight from Rio to Cape Town! Expected flight time 27h50mins, talk about developing corns on your tail bone. Quite interesting to go into the live track map, it even gives you current speed and altitude. I must say that little aircraft and the 914 have been an eye opener to me. They apparently took off from Rio with 820 l of fuel aboard - I wonder how far over gross that put them, considering the quoted useful load is about 450kg.

I would say that in the right circumstances (and hands) this could be a win, win situation. I haven't done anything like this with an aircraft but had an informal arrangement with a boat owner that I'd check on his pride n joy on a regular basis, as well as taking her off the mooring, running the motor, using the winches and airing the sails while he was away on an extended holiday. Worked well, but then I was a regular member of the racing crew and familiar with both owner and vessel. Same with a sports car that I garaged for the owner, I probably put 500km on it in the 6 months that it lived with me, but I made dammed sure that I was on the insurance before I turned the key and to be honest it was a bit of a relief to hand it back intact and without any new stone chips in the paintwork. BUT - I spend my daylight hours unravelling messes where people assumed (makes an ass of u & me?) that certain factors had been taken care of and ended up with a lot of bent machinery or broken bodies lying around, not to mention scary bills to pay. Make sure that you are both clear on who is doing what and who is responsible. I've known a friendship to come to an end over a $350 4x4 tyre that got cut and needed replacing - what is going to happen if a worn aircraft tyre gets punctured, are you as the pilot looking for free or cheap flying going to pay for the repair/replacement? Your definition of being at fault may differ from the owner's. What about that tank of stale ULP, remember by the time the average aircraft owner is ready to hand over his pride n joy to you, it has probably been sitting around for a good while already and may not be in perfect mechanical condition . Or hypothetically Mr Jabiru owner tosses you the keys and says go for it. What happens when it eats a valve, a through bolt breaks - we all "know" that these things aren't exactly unknown, but even if you land without damage, there is an aircraft to recover and the sticky situation of a motor needing repair. It's not something insurance will cover. Even if it did, excesses on aircraft are often high, who is going to pay that? Don't take it for granted that people are reasonable when the chips are down either - a good friend ended up spending several times the value of a trike that got broken, on legal fees after he came up against someone who was completely pig headed - and wealthy. They eventually agreed to go their own way after 18 months of fighting, but the lawyers still needed paying. I'm not saying don't do it - far from it, I'd be happy to do it myself, just don't go into it without some thought and discussion, because the cost of getting it wrong could pay for many years of aircraft hire!

I've gone on record often enough supporting RA-Aus, but in this instance the explanation offered by management stuck in my gullet. Then I've never had much time for collective punishment, seems like an admission that they are unable to police things adequately. By all means jump on those who don't play the game, but allowing some aircraft grandfather rights and preventing any further registrations of the same type is downright silly imo. The notorious RV-7 is a case in point, surely they could refuse to reissue a registration pending having it reweighed.

Interesting little nugget there, the C172 is one type which positively prohibits slipping with full flap - and is probably responsible for most of the half digested opinion that holds that slipping with flap is a bad idea on all types. Contrary to popular belief it is nothing to do with strain on flap tracks/hinges, but is due to what Cessna calls the possibility of a cyclical nodding motion (the flap can partially blanket the horizontal stabilizer at certain attitudes). Fortunately RAA instructors that I've dealt with seem more comfortable with slipping than many of their GA counterparts who seem to want to fly everything as if Messrs Boeing and Airbus were the manufacturer.

I would suspect that you're going to have to pull a truck load of weight out of the back to keep W&B within limits, or extend the nose:oh yeah:, the O-200 installed is going to outweigh a 912 by a good 15kg from memory. Also, hasn't RAA done the old group punishment drill and stopped us from registering anything like a 150 as recreational ever again?

http://www.avcom.co.za/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=52004 Link to the original South African discussion. The short story is that it is the result of quite a bit of comparative testing with several aircraft and on a hard surface. Feedback since it was published is that it is pretty accurate, but errs on the pessimistic side, ie. you may beat the figures with good technique.

I was originally taught (in GA) to extend during the turn and as facthunter pointed out, it is helpful to prevent the usual attitude change during deployment. It is a subject which some instructors have strong feelings about and I've also been subject to a finger wagging lecture on the subject. I always get a bit of a grin when instructors thump the table about this sort of thing, knowing full well that other, equally qualified people teach the opposite.

Thanks for the video link RR, I hadn't seen the other photos in the series - wonder whether the photog made any money from those? I found a copy of the RV-12 shot which copied the pose in #1 - seems some of the same team from SA Flyer were responsible.

That's great Dave, wondered how you went with the aircraft. I could quite easily have stuck around for another couple of hours, but had stupidly made other plans for the afternoon. Maybe just as well I didn't though - Summer is certainly on the way and I got well fried about the neck!